Computer-Based Algebra Instruction:
Mayhem or Miracle?
National Council of Teachers
of Mathematics
Western Regional Conference
Phoenix, AZ
October 6, 2006
Computer-Based Algebra Instruction: Mayhem
or Miracle?
Presenter Information
Pat Perdew, Associate Professor of Developmental
Mathematics, Austin Peay State University,
Clarksville, TN, perdewp@apsu.edu
Kay Haralson, Associate Professor of
Developmental Mathematics, Austin Peay State
University, Clarksville, TN, haralsonk@apsu.edu
Shirley Hagewood, Associate Professor of
Mathematics, Austin Peay State University,
Clarksville, TN, hagewoods@apsu.edu
State supported liberal arts 4-year institution
Located in Clarksville, Tennessee
Approximate enrollment of 9000 students
900 students tested into developmental
mathematics Fall 2006
No community college in immediate area
Computer-based Course Development
 Controversial decision to convert to computerbased delivery
 Controversial implementation of computer-based
delivery
 Other institutions using similar methods of
delivery were observed before a program was
chosen.
 Addison-Wesley text chosen based on
“packaged” computer-based options; used for
both courses
 Text packaged with computer code providing
access to Course Compass website
 Courses utilize MyMathLab resources
Computer-based Course Development
 Students required to enroll in developmental
courses during their first semester
 Students registered for assigned class times
 Class attendance required, even though courses
are predominantly on-line
 A “coordinator” course was developed for each
course to serve as a “master” course to copy for
individual class sections
 For the first semester, faculty were assigned 30
lab hours weekly, no specific sections
 Faculty served as facilitators to students in the
computer classrooms
Computer-based Course Components
 Announcement page for each section,
customized with links to course syllabus,
schedule, objectives, DSP placement criteria,
course materials, gradebook, etc.
 Video lectures on computer or through web-site
 On-line textbook, solutions manual, graphing
calculator manual
 TI-Smart View demonstration screen fed to
student computers through Net-Op program
 On-line homework; problems chosen by faculty
from a computer bank of problems
 On-line examples within homework assignments,
with view an example option
Computer-based Course Components
 On-line practice tests for each test and final exam;
developed by faculty
 On-line multiple choice quizzes, tests, and final
exam; developed by faculty using Test Gen
 MyMathLab Gradebook available for students to
view grades and review quizzes and tests
 Study Plan available through Gradebook to
identify concepts still to be mastered
 Course Evaluation Survey, developed by faculty,
completed before Final Exam
 Instructor Homepage and Course Management
Screen to edit computerized course components
 Instructor Gradebook of student grades, grade
distributions, item analysis of test questions
Home Screen/Announcement Page
Course Schedule
Course Documents Screen
On-line Textbook
On-line Graphing Calculator Manual
TI-SmartView Graphing Calculator
Homework Screen
View an Example Screen
Practice Test Screen
Quizzes and Tests Screen
Take a Test Screen
Student Gradebook
Student Study Plan
Link to Problems Needing More Work
Course Evaluation Survey
Instructor Home Page
Instructor Course Management Page
Instructor Gradebook
Instructor Gradebook
Course Components Specifics
Video Lectures
 15-20 minutes per section
 30 to 60-second clip for some practice problems
 Personal headphones needed
On-line Homework
 Chosen by faculty, does not count in course grade
 Help me solve this feature
 View an example feature
 Textbook pages for the section
 Audio-video animation on some problems
 Students can view homework score in Gradebook
Course Components Specifics
On-line Practice Tests
 Five practice tests, highest grade on each counts
10 points for course grade
 Created by faculty from problem bank
 No password required, can be taken multiple
times, from any computer with required plug-ins
Quizzes, Tests, and Final Exam (password
required)
 Ten 10-point quizzes, 20 min each, taken in class
 Four 100-point tests, 55 min, taken in class
 Comprehensive Final Exam,100 points, 2 hrs,
taken in class
Course Components Specifics
MyMathLab Grade Book
 Shows grades on homework, quizzes, practice
tests, and tests
 Shows date and time spent on each activity
 Creates a study plan based on objectives not
mastered on quizzes and tests
 Study plan is linked to homework problems similar
to un-mastered objectives
 Provides access to review tests and quizzes taken
Course Modifications Since Inception
Fall 2005 - Initial Semester of Computer-Based
 Self-paced schedule, with minimum deadlines,
designed for students to complete work early
 Course delivery solely through Course Compass
 Faculty provided no lecture or additional materials
 Faculty were not assigned specific sections
 Two attempts allowed on tests
 Practice tests and homework were very long
 Watching video lectures was encouraged, but not
stressed
Course Modifications Since Inception
Spring 2006 - Changes based on faculty/student
feedback
 Faculty assigned specific sections (5)
 Faculty allowed to give a brief lecture over daily
material
 Faculty distributed handouts, power point material
 A review before quizzes and tests was provided
 Only one attempt allowed on tests; 2nd attempt on
tests replaced with 10-point practice tests
 Last day of class used for makeup or retest on one
test
Course Modifications Since Inception
Fall 2006 - Changes by administration or faculty
 Faculty assigned specific sections (8)
 Lecture portion modification discontinued
 Internet links to handouts and power point material
encouraged
 The review before quizzes and tests was continued
 Video lectures strongly recommended
 Class attendance mandatory, over 3 unexcused
absences results in an F for the course.
 Practice tests required before test day
 Decrease in length of practice tests and homework
 Increased the number of quizzes from 5 to 10
Difficulties with Computer-Based Courses
Technical Issues
 Internet problems with Course Compass website, campus
server, or bandwidth issues
 Loss of grades when submitted in Course Compass
 Iterations of Test Gen created tests produced problems with
incorrect answers, two correct answers, etc.
 Student format of homework and practice test answers not
matching computer’s expected answers
 Students unable to purchase text or computer code during
first few days have no access to the course
 Computer hardware, updates, virus problems
 Lack of computer labs on campus with necessary plug-ins to
work in MyMathLab
 Lack of computer services personnel to deal with problems
in a timely manner
Difficulties with Computer-Based Courses
Student Issues
 Absenteeism
 Unwillingness to watch video lectures
 Frustration with lack of real teacher instruction, no
partial credit on quizzes and tests
 Lack of exposure to appropriate mathematics
terminology
 Lack of motivation to take advantage of all
computer resources to be successful in the course
 Lack of proper classroom behavior
 Procrastination in completing work; getting behind
the expected schedule
Difficulties with Computer-Based Courses
Format Issues
 Implemented too quickly
 Infrastructure of campus internet service not
sufficient when transition was made
 No flexibility in delivery; students given no other
option
 Not enough faculty to adequately monitor or
facilitate learning of all students
 Faculty answer the same questions multiple times
for individual students, rather than the entire class
 Course is not easily adapted to visual or hearing
impaired students
Statistical Information
 Success rate in lecture-based Intermediate Algebra
(2004-2005) was 60.8%.
 Success rate in computer-based Intermediate
Algebra (2005-2006) was 41.4%.
 Success rate in lecture-based combined
Elementary/Intermediate Algebra (2004-2005) was
38.1%; both requirements finished in one semester
 Success rate in computer-based Elementary
Algebra (2005-2006) was 44.6%; only one course
finished in one semester
Statistical Information
 50.1% of all students finished all DSP requirements
in one semester with lecture-based courses (20042005, Intermediate Algebra, or Combined
Elementary/Intermediate Algebra)
 22.9% of all students finished all DSP requirements
in one semester with computer-based courses
(2005-2006, Intermediate Algebra only)
 64.9% of students completing DSP math Fall 2004
with lecture-based classes, passed CORE math
Spring 2005 (135 students)
 75.8% of students completing DSP math Fall 2005
with computer-based classes, passed CORE math
Spring 2006 (75 students)
Course Evaluation Survey Results
 Over 50% of all students indicated they disagree or
strongly disagree that learning mathematics in a
computer-based classroom was successful for
them.
 Over 39% of all students indicated they disagree or
strongly disagree that the computer-based course,
with the help of lab personnel, provided the
explanations necessary to successfully complete
the course.
 Less that 50% of all students indicated they watch
the video lectures for the courses.
 Only 56% of all students indicated they utilized the
instructor or tutor in the computer classroom.
Observations/Conclusions
Positive
 Some students find this delivery method meets their
needs very well
 Students are able to view video lectures, work online homework and access course resources from
their personal computers
 Students who successfully complete the computerbased courses learn self-motivation and discipline
 DSP completers of computer-based courses have
success rates in most CORE mathematics courses
as good or better than students completing a
lecture-based course
 Completers seem to be better prepared for other
math courses using computer formats
Observations/Conclusions
Negative
 Less successful – student success rates are less
than lecture-based courses
 Less efficient – fewer students complete both
courses in one semester, compared with completion
rate in combined 5 hour class previously offered
 Does not provide a choice of delivery methods
 Cost of delivering courses has not decreased
 Student satisfaction with course format is very low
 Frustration level of students is very high
 Frustration level of faculty is even higher!!
Suggestions for Improvement
 Management of DSP mathematics courses
should take place in mathematics department
 Smaller class size (currently 24/36 in two rooms)
 Faculty be responsible for fewer sections to allow
more one-on-one assistance
 Offer a hybrid course format- 1 day of lecture, 1
day lab; MW or TR; faculty available for individual
help on Fridays
 Offer an on-line format with no class attendance
for students who cannot take on campus classes
 Offer a combined Elementary/Intermediate
computer-based or hybrid course
Future of DSP in Tennessee and at APSU
 Uncertain if computer-format will continue
 Uncertain if DSP courses will be offered at 4-year
institutions
 Uncertain what will happen to under-prepared
students if courses are not offered
 Uncertain future for DSP tenured faculty
Computer-Based Algebra Instruction:
Mayhem or Miracle?
To obtain a copy of this power point
presentation go to:
www.apsu.edu/haralsonk
and click on Computer-Based Algebra
or email Pat at perdewp@apsu.edu,
Kay at haralsonk@apsu.edu,
Shirley at hagewoods@apsu.edu
Thank you for your attention!