 |
Florida Section Newsletter The Mathematical Association of America October 2002 Volume 24, Issue 1 |
|
|
Florida Section Newsletter The Mathematical Association of America October 2002 Volume 24, Issue 1 |
President's MessageByDavid Kerr
|
 |
If someone had said the words “assessment” to me ten years ago, my first thoughts would have been of tests and quizzes - things we use to “assess” a student's knowledge. To me, that is what we do, we determine a students understanding of the course material by what we say, by the grade we assign.
Today, however, the word assessment carries a very different meaning. Now we are being asked by parents and administrators (and required by accreditation agencies) to prove the actual effectiveness of the educational experience we provide. Is the student really mastering the skills and thought processes that our rhetoric says they are?Each of us is heavily involved in this assessment process - trying to develop internal and external measures, to set departmental goals and to develop objective ways to determine if these goals are being met. For the mathematics major, there are some national tests - the ETS Major Field Test, for instance - that can be used to measure the effectiveness of the major but for calculus, to the best of my knowledge, there is no readily available national test to measure the effectiveness of our calculus instruction. I suppose that schools could require each Calculus II student to take the AP Calculus B/C exam upon completion of the course but for most schools this would be cost-prohibited. The same can be said for the first actuarial exam but here things are even more complicated because the first actuarial exam now includes material from Calculus III and Linear Algebra.
Hardly a day goes by that we don’t read something about assessment. For instance, in next months issue - November 2002 - of the Notices of the American Mathematical Society, there is an article on assessing undergraduate research in mathematics. And, just this month, the MAA has published a new book - MAA Notes #61 - entitled Changing Core Mathematics. This book is, essentially, about an assessment process that has already taken place and which has led the authors to believe that a fundamental change in the first two years of collegiate mathematics is needed.
In his presidential remarks a year ago, Chuck Lindsey said that next year “you’ll have Kerr to look forward to” - maybe not such a wise thing for Chuck to say as I want to publicly admit that I often have trouble deciphering these reports and articles about assessment. I enjoy the elegance by which they are written but I am never quite sure how I can adapt any of it to my situation, with my students.
Today, though, my remarks are not so much about the intricacies of assessment as they are about the final stage of the process. The bottom line - to look at what we do, determine its value, and change it, if necessary, to make it better. To me, the key to this is “self-assessment,” the process by which each of us looks at how we do things and continually evaluates and questions its effectiveness.
And so, I want to address some ideas that my own self-assessment journey have brought to me. These comments are certainly not the thoughts of every member of the Florida Section of the MAA, or even any member other than myself. I also want to be clear that I am not speaking for either of my two employers - Eckerd College or USF. If nothing else just consider these the ramblings of a person who has now taught mathematics for 24 years at the university, college, community college and high school levels.
First off, I am not going to offer independent study courses during the regular semester anymore. I’ve offered countless of these in the past and I know that the student has good intentions. I, too, have good intentions at the start of the course but for me, I am just not as rigorous with the independent study course as I am with a regular class. From now on, I am just going to encourage students to enroll in regularly scheduled classes - even if this means losing a few majors or minors.
Secondly, I am going to try to find new ways to offer courses that would support (and appeal) to biology, chemistry, economics, and geology majors. These are areas in the undergraduate curriculum that should be quantitative - are quantitative at the graduate level - but still, for the most part, require only the most elementary of mathematical material (Calc I, sometimes Calc II) for the baccalaureate degree. We have for a long time done a good job supporting physics but to create a new emphasis in biology, chemistry, economics, and geology could have profound effects. Here, I do not mean courses like - “calculus for the life sciences” - but instead, think that we should develop sophomore, junior level courses that would provide strong mathematical exposure for students taking, for instance, Physical Chemistry or Geophysics. This action would be in consonance with some recent recommendations from the National Research Council and the Howard Hughes Medical Institute which have called for more mathematics instruction in biology and the life sciences. This may mean that some of the developmental math is going to have to give way to make room for these new course offerings but I think that we expend too much energy on developmental math programs anyway. In my own self-assessment journey, I am constantly asking myself - is all this developmental math really serving anyone?
Third, I have, in conjunction with my departmental colleagues, conducted a review of our catalog offerings and have deleted every course that we do not offer on a regular basis. Here, “regular” includes every semester, every year, every other year or every fourth year but, at a minimum, all the courses are scheduled and we can tell prospective students exactly when a particular course is coming up in the rotation. I think this is good because it eliminates false advertising and padding of our course offerings.
Fourth, I am not going to tolerate the mistake (a + b)2 = a2 + b2 any longer and will deduct 75% to 100% of the problem’s credit every time I see it (which for me is 15 to 20 points out of 100 off). I think that it is only this tough grading that will develop the “attention to detail” that I want to foster in my students. They do grumble about this but they also learn quickly and don’t make the mistake on future tests. Please see the December 2001 issue of FOCUS for more discussion on the issue of “partial credit.”
Well there are some of my ramblings. This certainly isn’t an exhaustive list but it is some of the recent things I have done to become a better teacher/professional. I want to encourage everyone in the Florida Section to look at “how you do things” and think of ways to make them better.
Not having been to a summer meeting in several years, I was delighted to attend the meeting in Burlington. The program was full of interesting talks and outstanding invited lectures. And Burlington itself was a treat!
The Annual Meeting of Section Officers
There is a yearly meeting of Section officers at the summer Mathfest, and the section governor and one other representative from each section generally attend. This year, our Governor, Marilyn Repsher, and I represented the Florida section. What follows is a brief description of the meeting.
Sections were reminded that they may invite national MAA officers to be speakers at section meetings, and that there are also opportunities for national support for workshops or panels at section meetings. For speakers, more information is available on the MAA website; for workshops and panels, contact Herb Kasube (hkasube@hilltopbradley.edu).
Gavin LaRose reported that Project NExT (New Experiences in Teaching), a professional development group for new and recent Ph.D.’s in mathematics and mathematics education, has funding available for sections to initiate Section NExTs.
Tina Straley reported that there are plans in the works to seek funding for a joint AMATYC and MAA NExT-like program that targets new faculty at two-year institutions. Because the most important aspects of such a program would most likely happen at the section level (rather than the national level), Tina is soliciting input from the sections, and asked that comments and suggestions about such a proposal be directed to Micheal Pearson (pearson@maa.org).
Tina also announced that the MAA was planning a study tour of Greece for May and June of 2003. More information will be available in the October FOCUS.
Last year, two MAA sections held meetings jointly with their regional AMS counterparts. Those sections reported on the logistics, as well as the pros and cons of joint meetings. Overall, both sections were happy with the programs that resulted from meeting jointly, and were encouraged by stronger attendance than usual, but noted that planning took a lot of time and cooperation, as well as many financial compromises.
Advantages and disadvantages of electronic newsletters were discussed at length, and David Stone pointed out that if sections want to email something to everyone in the section, it can be forwarded to Gretchen Brown at the MAA and she can forward it to the section list. Some sections are actively selling advertising in their printed newsletters ($100-150 a page for colleges advertising graduate programs or for job openings, $100 and "more" for publishers).
In the past, MAA governors have sent representatives to the Board of Governors Meetings and those representatives have been allowed to vote. Evidently this violates the MAA bylaws, and there was discussion about whether or not the bylaws ought to be changed, whether or not there were legal issues involved in this practice, and whether or not the practice should continue. Nothing was resolved.
Finally, the Pacific Northwest Section announced that its June 2004 Section meeting would be in Alaska and issued an open invitation to all MAA members to attend. Representatives of the section also asked if other sections would be willing to announce the Alaska meeting in their newsletters, to which there was a generally positive response.
Other Mathfest Activities
The meeting of section officers was interesting, but the real fun was in the great talks that filled the three days of the meeting. I heard a number of excellent presentations in contributed paper sessions, and was thoroughly impressed by the student paper session I attended. The invited talks included a lecture series on graph theory by Laszlo Lovasz from Microsoft Research, as well as lectures on random matrices, "Fun and Games for Teaching Statistics," and "Fermat’s Artihmetic." Perhaps the highlight of the meeting for me, though, was the Leitzel memorial lecture "The Mathematics Education of Teachers," which was given by Jim Lewis, someone who had a tremendous influence on my career path in mathematics. Catching up with Jim and his wife, as well as some graduate school friends and other former colleagues, was an added bonus.
Outside of the meeting, Burlington is a lovely college town, and I enjoyed the sunset from the lakeshore, a dinner cruise on Lake Champlain, and the local microbrews in the charming outdoor mall near downtown. After three days of good math and visits with colleagues, I wished I could have stayed, but it was time to get back and prepare for classes starting later in the month. My relatives will appreciate my trip when the holidays roll around… they will be getting jugs of pure Vermont maple syrup in their stockings!
I am looking forward to next year’s Mathfest in Boulder, Colorado.
Mathematics in the Sun First Annual Retreat was held on the Tarpon Springs campus of St. Petersburg College September 27-28. The retreat, coordinated by several officers of FTYCMA (Florida Two Year College Mathematics Association), focused on the creation of a developmental mathematics program for the State of Florida that would better prepare our students for college mathematics. Approximately 70 participants enjoyed sharing ideas on a more up-to-date curriculum, teaching strategies, testing and assessment issues, as well as ideas to improve success and retention. Recommendations stemming from this retreat will be presented at the Joint Meetings of the Florida Section of the MAA and FTYCMA, to be held in Jacksonville in February 21-22, 2003.
By popular demand, next year's retreat will most likely focus on College Algebra. Information will be posted on the web sites of the MAA and of FTYCMA.
People in mathematics and mathematics education will generally know about the Florida Association of Mathematics Educators (FAME) that meets at the annual Florida Council of Teachers of Mathematics (FCTM) meetings. For those of you who don't, here's what has been happening.
FAME was created in order to give us a stronger voice when the government comes up with some of its ideas that affect mathematics education in the state of Florida. Often we will need a group that will generate a letter that suggests changes in what the DOE or the legislature is planning to do. We meet primarily to communicate the issues that are coming up at the state level and subsequently act upon them.
Sometimes we can discuss amongst ourselves to determine the best possible solutions that involve community colleges and 4-year institutions in teacher education. Of late, our state has provided permission to allow our community colleges to give more in the way of handling teacher education. All of the state's 67 counties have had to design an alternate certification program. We discuss the qualities and elements of these programs, too. Anything to do with the teaching of mathematics comes under our scrutiny. If interested, the dues are $10 a year, but the most important thing is your participation in the discussions we carry on. I'm in the college of education from a 4-year institution. I will have different ideas than the members of the mathematics department in a community college. We need to hear all of the issues and weigh those in terms of what the state is planning to do. We need all of the help we can get.
Enough said. Note in your program for the FCTM when the next FAME meeting is to be held. We'd welcome all of you who are willing to participate.
There is some good news on the federal front, and now is another good time to contact your representatives and senators to comment on issues of interest to mathematicians.In July the House passed and sent to the Senate a "Technology Talent Act of 2002" (H.R.3130) and the Senate Education Committee reported favorably on a version of it. A copy of the Committee's press release is attached.
The same Senate committee also reported favorably on what is now called the "NSF Doubling Act" (S.2817.IS).
But Don't Celebrate Yet
However, it would be premature to celebrate. These bills are not yet law, and the NSF Doubling Act is an authorization bill, not an appropriation bill. Such authorization bills are not, strictly speaking, necessary: indeed, many federal agencies function without them.There is a long way to go before any of this legislation is finalized. Now would be another good time to write to your Senators and Representatives with your comments, particularly if they serve on the one of the appropriations committees.
How to Track Legislation's Progress
There is a very convenient way to track legislative proposals through the Washington process, and to see exactly what is being proposed. Go to the website http://www.thomas.loc.gov where you will find a search engine. You can ask for bills by key words such as "Technology Talent" or "NSF Doubling", or by bill reference numbers such as the ones given above.Some Items in the NSF Doubling Bill
As its name suggests, the NSF Doubling Act proposes a time line that would, if implemented, double the NSF budget over the next five fiscal years. It also lays out certain policy directives that would govern NSF. One is that NSF should seek to balance "the Nation's research portfolio among the life sciences and fundamental disciplines in mathematics, the physical sciences, computer and information sciences, geoscience, engineering, and social, behavioral, and economic sciences that are important for ...sustained international competitiveness." It would be important to determine what this means in terms of recent policy discussions in Washington about an apparent funding shift away from basic research and toward applications-linked research. A legislative liaison, as proposed for the MAA by the Science Policy Committee, could ferret out this information for the Association.Also noteworthy in the light or recent rumors from Washington is that the "NSF Doubling Bill" proposes steady increases in NSF funding devoted to education and human resources. The NSF re-authorization bill does not make it clear whether these are net new funds, or funds associated with the transfer of certain educational programs to NSF from other agencies.
The draft bill includes some specific program targets for NSF that might be of special interest to mathematicians. These include a program to promote research in mathematics, science, and engineering, that makes specific mention of undergraduate research programs. The draft also directs NSF to run a scholarship program for mathematics and science teachers, a program of mathematics and science partnerships aimed at elementary and secondary education, a grant program to help secondary schools promote mathematical and scientific literacy, and a grant program aimed at increasing the number of undergraduates who study science and mathematics.
Also of potential interest to MAA members is Section 7 of the bill, which directs NSF to make competitive awards to support research in cognitive science, education, and other fields about the teaching and learning of science and mathematics, and to develop ways that such research can be used in low-performing elementary and secondary schools to improve the teaching and learning of science and mathematics.
Next Stop
The next stop for the NSF re-authorization bill is the Senate Commerce Committee, and then the Senate floor. The House has already passed an NSF re-authorization bill (H.R.4664) and if the Senate approves its own bill (described above) the two would need to be aligned in a conference committee. Stay tuned for future developments, and look for the more important appropriations bills, yet to come.
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: September 6, 2002
CONTACT:
Casey Aden-Wansbury (Lieberman) 202-224-0975
Amy Hagovsky (Mikulski) 202-224-8879
Ernie Blazar (Bond) 202-224-5721
Margaret Camp (Frist) 202-224-5401
Chris Gallegos (Domenici) 202-224-6621Senate Education Committee Approves Version of Bipartisan Tech Talent Bill Model grant program included as part of NSF Reauthorization plan
WASHINGTON - The sponsors of the Technology Talent Act today applauded the Senate Health, Education Labor and Pensions (HELP) Committee for unanimously approving legislation yesterday that is focused on increasing the number of math, science, technology and engineering undergraduates in the U.S.The HELP Committee included a version of the Tech Talent proposal - sponsored by Senators Joe Lieberman (D-CT), Christopher Bond (R-MO), Barbara Mikulski (D-MD), Bill Frist (R-TN), and Pete Domenici (R-NM) - as part of legislation to reauthorize the National Science Foundation (NSF) and double its budget.
Like the Technology Talent Act, the NSF Reauthorization bill passed Thursday establishes a multi-year "Tech Talent" competitive grant program, that would award performance-based grants to institutions of higher education to increase the number of students studying toward and receiving undergraduate degrees in science, math, engineering, and technology disciplines. Recipients would be held accountable for increasing the number of students receiving degrees in these fields.
The NSF reauthorization bill now awaits consideration by the Senate Commerce Committee, and the Senators said they will continue to push for a strong Tech Talent program.
Lieberman, long a supporter of R&D efforts, praised both the doubling of the NSF budget, and the inclusion of the Tech Talent grants as coming just at the right time. "The reality is that technological innovation is now widely understood to be the major driver of economic growth, not to mention a critical factor in our military superiority," Lieberman said. "The Tech Talent grants included in this legislation will help give universities and colleges in Connecticut, and nationwide the tools they need to boost our domestic pool of brainpower - the next generation of people who will incubate and implement the next generation of ideas to expand our economy."
"We don't have a worker shortage in this country, we have a skill shortage," Mikulski said. "And we will continue to have a skill shortage unless we act now. We need to make sure America is ready for the new high-tech economy. The opportunities are tremendous to use science, math and engineering to greatly improve our lives, but we need to engage the next generation in these studies in order to ensure America's success. This grant program is an investment in our nation's future."
"Our nation's innovation capabilities are at risk of falling behind other industrial nations if we do not aggressively increase the number and quality of our technologically-trained workforce," Bond said. "This program is an important step in ensuring our nation's future innovation and success."
"Encouraging students in math and science is critical to strengthening our nation's future workforce," Frist said. "With technology changing everyday, we must be prepared to meet the challenges ahead, and the Tech Talent grants will help us do just that by supporting the efforts of universities and colleges to increase the number of students entering the fields of math, science and technology."
"We compete in the world economy by providing advanced high-tech products and services, developed through our industrial system which values and supports innovation," Domenici said. "The Tech Talent grants will provide tools for universities in New Mexico and across the country to increase the domestic supply of highly-skilled technical workers who provide that innovative talent to our nation. Our economic and military strength depends on the strengths of those workers."
The Senators first introduced the Technology Talent Act in October 2001, in an effort to stop the decline in our technical workforce, which is becoming a major U.S. economic problem. Recent studies project that the number of jobs requiring significant technical skills will grow by more than 50 percent in the United States over the next ten years. However, outside of the life sciences, the number of degrees awarded in science and engineering over the last decade has been flat or declining.
Under the NSF Reauthorization bill, undergraduate universities would be able to receive Tech Talent grants for a number of projects, including:
* Training for interdisciplinary instruction to improve college-level teaching;
*Undergraduate-conducted research to engage students in applied science;
* Mentor programs for students in groups historically under represented in the sciences;
* Internships with private industry to heighten the relevance of academic programs;
* Distance learning programs to further student access to science research.
Casey Aden-Wansbury
Deputy Press Secretary
Senator Joe Lieberman (D-CT)
202-224-0975 (office)
202-744-3769 (mobile)
202-228-4150 (fax)
|
The Awards Committee is seeking recommendations for two awards to be given at our state meeting in 2003:
Past award recipients can be found at http://www.spcollege.edu/central/maa/archives/. Please send your nominations by Friday, November 15, 2002 to the Chair of the Awards Committee:
|
The Nominating Committee is soliciting nominations, self or otherwise, for the positions of President-elect, Vice President for Programs-elect, and Vice President for Site Selection-elect.
Past officers can be found at http://www.spcollege.edu/central/maa/archives/.
Please send these nominations to the committee chair:
Chuck Lindsey
Past President
clindsey@fgcu.edu
The 2003 Joint Annual Meetings will be an exciting combination of how mathematicians learn, teach, research, and live mathematics. Three plenary speakers for the conference include Ronald Graham, Robert Devaney, and Tina Straley.
Ronald Graham is Chief Scientist at California Institute for Telecommunication and Information Technology, Cal-(IT)2, of UC San Diego and the Irwin and Joan Jacobs Professor at the Department of Computer Science and Engineering of UCSD. He is President-elect of the MAA and the Ex President of the International Jugglers Association. To learn more visit http://math.ucsd.edu/~fan/ron/.
Robert Devaney is in the Department of Mathematics at Boston University. His main area of research is dynamical systems, primarily complex analytic dynamics, but also including Hamiltonian systems, planar mappings, and computer experiments in dynamics. Lately, he has become intrigued with the incredibly rich topological aspects of dynamics, including such things as indecomposable continua and Cantor bouquets. He is the author of over seventy research papers in these fields. He is also the author or editor of ten books on various aspects of dynamical systems theory. To learn more visit http://math.bu.edu/people/bob/ .
Tina Straley is the Executive Director of the MAA. Before that she was the Associate Vice President for Scholarship and Graduate Studies at Kennesaw State University in Georgia. In addition, Dr. Straley served at the NSF as Program Officer and has continued to act as a consultant to the NSF. Some of the topics she speaks on include New Horizons for the MAA and the Mathematics Community; MathDL and the National Digital Library; and The Math Major in 2010.
In addition to these three plenary speakers, FL-MAA is sponsoring invited talks by John Thompson (UF), Siamack Bondari (SLU), Len Vacher (USF), Li Zhou (PCC), Peg Greene (CFCC), and a Statistics Workshop by Richard Sheaffer (UF). Finally, I am very excited to announce our banquet speaker, Erich Friedman from Stetson University with his talk entitled “Reptiles, Partridges, and Golden Bees --- Tiling Shapes with Similar Copies”.
Other events include:
|
More information on the program will be available soon.
