Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Physical Sciences and Mathematics Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Journal

Numeracy

2013

Assessment

Articles 1 - 2 of 2

Full-Text Articles in Physical Sciences and Mathematics

Measuring Habits Of Mind: Toward A Prompt-Less Instrument For Assessing Quantitative Literacy, Stuart Boersma, Dominic Klyve Jan 2013

Measuring Habits Of Mind: Toward A Prompt-Less Instrument For Assessing Quantitative Literacy, Stuart Boersma, Dominic Klyve

Numeracy

In this study, we offer a new “prompt-less” instrument for measuring students’ habits of mind in the field of quantitative literacy. The instrument consists of a series of questions about a newspaper article the students read. The questions do not explicitly solicit quantitative information; students’ habit of mind is assessed by their use of quantitative reasoning even when it is not asked for. Students’ answers were graded according to a modified version of the Quantitative Literacy Assessment Rubric (QLAR) published in this journal (vol. 4, issue 2). We applied the instrument and rubric to assess pre- and post-intervention habits of …


Using A Media-Article Approach To Quantitative Reasoning As An Honors Course: An Exploratory Study, Stuart Boersma, Dominic Klyve Jan 2013

Using A Media-Article Approach To Quantitative Reasoning As An Honors Course: An Exploratory Study, Stuart Boersma, Dominic Klyve

Numeracy

In this study, we investigate student performance on a basic skills assessment of percentages and ratios in two cohorts of students: the general (non-STEM) student body (cohort G) and (non-STEM) honors students (cohort H). Both cohorts used a media-article approach to the study of quantitative reasoning. A pre- and a post-intervention assessment were administered with a two-week intervention period consisting of critical analyses of the use of percentages and ratios in media articles. Using non-parametric techniques, no statistically significant improvement was measured in cohort G while cohort H students showed statistically significant improvement on several items.