Mathematics Education in the Time of COVID-19
By: David Bressoud @dbressoud
David Bressoud is DeWitt Wallace Professor of Mathematics at Macalester College and Director of the Conference Board of the Mathematical Sciences
Links to resources and information posted by the member societies of CBMS are available at https://cbmsweb.org/covid-19.
I was going to use this column to briefly introduce some of the many important reports that have just been released, but we are living through extraordinary times that will almost certainly have a lasting impact on mathematics education. I cannot ignore the need to say something about this first, but I will also give a short description at the end of this article, alerting you to five recent publications that deserve your attention. Several of these will be subjects of later, more in-depth, columns.
We are now heading into a recession that will further strain resources that had already seemed too meager. Teachers at all levels have been forced into greater familiarity with technologies and methods of online instruction. Even though most courses will return to physical presence, the pressure to do more with less will accelerate the movement toward greater use of technology and the internet.
Inequities will be exacerbated. It is not just a question of access to the internet and technologies, though those are proving to be a huge obstacle for many from under-resourced communities. There are a host of advantages that accrue to children in financially secure homes with educated parents who can promote activities that facilitate continued learning. I was struck by the New York Times article, “College Made Them Feel Equal. The Virus Exposed How Unequal Their Lives Are” nyti.ms/39CsszO, illustrating the disparities of the impact that college closure has on students of means as opposed to those from struggling families. It is not that we did not already know this, but examples of real people drive it home.
At the May meeting of the Presidents and Executive Directors of the professional societies that belong to the Conference Board of the Mathematical Sciences, we will be breaking into small groups to discuss the longer-term implications of the current crisis. The following themes will be addressed, and I hope to summarize the concerns and insights that arise in a later column.
Equity. As instruction goes online, access to the internet and technology becomes more critical than ever before. How do we ensure that those from under-resourced or otherwise challenged communities continue to have access to quality education?
Pedagogy. Social distancing and greater reliance on online learning and assessments seem to work against the imperative to bring more student-centered and active learning into the classroom. How do we continue to work toward the vision of a classroom in which all learners are actively engaged in constructing their understanding of mathematics?
Assessment. How do we ensure the availability, security, and flexibility of online formats for certification and assessment? There are (at least) two ways to think about assessment in this context. 1. How can we (or even should we) maintain our long-established habits for how we do assessment? 2. What are optimal means for authentic assessment, both online and in other environments?
Support. What is being, can be, and should be done to support our professionals who must operate in this new world?
Technology. What are the technologies with which our members need facility? What are the promising technologies that need to be more widely distributed? Where are the greatest technological needs?
If you have thoughts on these themes that you would like to share, please email them to me at bressoud@macalester.edu, subject line Launchings.
Five recent and important publications
Talking about Leaving Revisited: Persistence, Relocation, and Loss in Undergraduate STEM Education. Elaine Seymour and Anne-Barrie Hunter, Editors. Spring-Verlag. 2019. This is the long awaited sequel to the 1997 Talking about Leaving: Why Undergraduates Leave the Sciences, documenting that the primary factors driving students out of STEM careers were aspects of the students’ learning experiences, not personal inadequacies when faced with intellectual challenges. The current volume is the result of a multi-pronged study into why students choose a STEM major, their experiences in the major, and their reasons for staying or for leaving. While the price is high ($150 at Springer, $126 on Amazon), it is an essential resource for anyone concerned about undergraduate STEM education. https://www.springer.com/gp/book/9783030253035
Launch Years: A New Vision for the Transition from High School to Postsecondary Mathematics. The Charles A. Dana Center at the University of Texas, Austin. 2020. I touched on a piece of this effort in my February column, Rethinking Algebra II. This is a call to action to address three serious problems around the transition from high school to college mathematics:
Students experience inequitable opportunities to learn.
Mathematics is misused in college admissions criteria.
Postsecondary readiness policies are inconsistent and misaligned.
The report describes specific proposals. The Launch Years project is more than a catalog of desiderata. The Dana Center is currently working with K-12 and postsecondary mathematics education leadership in Georgia, Texas, and the state of Washington, helping them to craft these recommendations into forms suitable for their own situations and needs. Those who are interested can follow their progress and download this report at the Dana Center website, www.utdanacenter.org/our-work/k-12-education/launch-years.
Go Figure: Exploring Equity in Postsecondary Math Pathway Choices. Rogéair Purnell and Pamela Burdman. Just Equations. 2020. This report focuses on the California Community College and the California State University systems to examine the actual effect of policy changes designed to address the third point of the Launch Years project, that postsecondary readiness policies are inconsistent and misaligned. Specifically, this document reports on the results of a study to determine what information students are given and how they are counseled in considering appropriate math pathways, how much authentic agency students have in choosing their pathways, and which intentional strategies lead students to pathways that foster the rigorous development of quantitative skills and lead to successful completion. justequations.org/resource/go-figure-report/
Promising Practices for Addressing the Underrepresentation of Women in Science, Engineering, and Medicine: Opening Doors. National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2020. This extensive report provides an analysis and synthesis of research into the factors that drive gender disparities in recruitment, retention, and advancement of women in STEMM (Science, Technology, Engineering, Mathematics, and Medicine). Among its conclusions:
underrepresentation of women, especially women of color, is real and prevalent at most institutions
bias, discrimination and harassment of women are major drivers of this underrepresentation
effective and evidence-based strategies do exist that improve the recruitment, retention, and advancement of women
among the institutional resources that are required are committed leadership at all levels, dedicated financial and human resources, and accountability supported by data collection
Active learning narrows achievement gaps for underrepresented students in undergraduate science, technology, engineering, and math. Elli J. Theobald et al. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, March 24, 2020, 117 (12) 6476–6483. In their 2014 PNAS article, Freeman et al. performed a comprehensive search of the literature on the use of active learning in undergraduate STEM courses and presented clear evidence of its effectiveness for all students. It has frequently been suggested that active learning is especially beneficial for students from underrepresented groups. This is the focus of this literature search and analysis. The authors demonstrate that this is, in fact, the case and point to evidence of the importance of two factors that influence the efficacy of active learning. The first is the extent of and fidelity to active learning. The second is the effort taken to counter stereotype threat by creating a classroom culture that promotes self-efficacy, identity as a scientist, and a sense of belonging in STEM. www.pnas.org/content/117/12/6476
Download the list of all past Launchings columns, dating back to 2005, with links to each column.