Article Contents
Article Contents

# Design and implementation of multi-purpose quizzes to improve mathematics learning for transitional engineering students

• For students who are academically ineligible to enter a bachelor program in engineering but still want to upskill their knowledge in engineering, many universities provide an associate degree program in engineering to these students. The higher achievers from the associate degree program can transfer to a full degree program in engineering. Mathematics courses in such associate degree programs are often challenging to both the teachers and students due to various reasons. This paper presents a small part of a mathematics revitalization project on pedagogical adjustment to scaffold mathematics learning for students in an associate engineering program at Central Queensland University (CQU), a regional university in Australia, from 2018 to 2020. The design and implementation of the online multi-purpose quizzes (MPQ) to improve both the learning environment and outcomes for the engineering students from 2018 to 2020 are reported in this work. Statistically, the online MPQ empowered students to achieve their best possible outcomes by attempting the questions with time flexibility, on a confined set of topics, and with more chances of amending errors than the traditional written assessments. Hence, their performance in the online MPQ was consistently better than that in the written assignments in 2018-2020. The weaknesses of the online MPQ are also discussed.

 Citation:

• Figure 1.  Examples of MPQ for TM

Figure 2.  Examples of online MPQ in TM

Figure 3.  Part of the summary after completing one attempt to online MPQ in TM

Table 1.  Weekly topics in TM prior to 2018

 Week Topic 1 Basic algebra and operations 2 Geometry and trigonometric functions 3 Inequalities, functions and graphs 4 Factoring, quadratic functions 5 Oblique triangles and vectors 6 Ratio, proportion, graphs of trigonometric functions 7 Exponential and logarithmic functions 8 Systems of linear equations, matrices and determinants 9 The derivative 10 Applications of derivative 11 Integration and applications 12 Introduction to statistics

Table 2.  Assessment scheme for TM prior to 2018

 Assessment Topic Due Weight Written Assignment 1 Topics covered in Weeks 1-4 Week 5 25% Written Assignment 2 Topics covered in Weeks 5-8 Week 9 25% Written Assignment 3 Topics covered in Weeks 9-11 Week 12 10% Exanimation All topics Week 14 40%

Table 3.  The new schedule of weekly topics covered in TM in 2018 and 2019

 Week Topic 1 Basic Algebra (Ⅰ) 2 Basic Algebra (Ⅱ) and Basic Geometry 3 Inequalities and Sequences 4 Functions and Graphs 5 Polynomial Functions 6 Exponential and Logarithmic Functions 7 Triangles and Trigonometry 8 Trigonometric and Hyperbolic Functions 9 Essentials of Differentiation 10 Applications of Differentiation 11 Integration 12 Applications of Integration

Table 4.  New assessment scheme for TM in 2018 and 2019

 Assessment Topic Due Weight Online quizzes Algebra, inequalities, sequences, linear & quadratic functions covered in Weeks 1-5 Week 6 20% Written assignment 1 Triangles, exponential, logarithmic, trigonometric functions covered in Weeks 6-8 Week 9 20% Written assignment 2 Calculus covered in Weeks 9-11 Week 12 20% Exanimation (invigilated) All topics Week 14 40%

Table 5.  Statistics of results from the first two assessments in Term 1 of 2018 and 2019

 Year Number of students OQ WA1 Mean SD Mean SD 2018 29 18.345 3.687 15.862 3.729 2019 26 18.923 1.294 14.827 3.564

Table 6.  The t-test results between OC and WA1 for TM in 2018 and 2019

 Year d.f. Critical t-value (α = 0.025) t-value for OQ-WA1 2018 56 ±2.003 2.550 2019 50 ±2.009 5.508

Table 7.  Statistics of results from OQ, WA1 and WA2 for TM in Term 2 of 2020

 Number of students OQ WA1 WA2 Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD 21 19.476 0.981 17.047 3.232 15.690 3.376

Table 8.  The t-test results between OQ and WA1 or WA2 for TM in Term 2 of 2020

 Year d.f. Critical t-value (α = 0.025) t-value for OQ-WA1 t-value for OQ-WA2 2020 40 ±2.021 3.296 4.947

Table 9.  The t-test results between OQ for TM in 2018 and OQ in 2019 and 2020

 Year d.f. Critical t-value (α = 0.025) t-value for Q-Q 2018-2019 53 ±2.006 -0.758 2018-2020 48 ±2.011 -1.368
•  [1] Mestre, J., Hart, D.M., Rath, K.A. and Dufresne, R., The effect of web-based homework on test performance in large enrollment introductory physics courses. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 2002, 21(3): 229-251. [2] Cole, R.S. and Todd, J.B., Effects of web-based multimedia homework with immediate rich feedback on student learning in general chemistry. Journal of Chemical Education, 2003, 80(11): 1338-1343. http://doi.org/10.1021/ed080p1338doi: 10.1021/ed080p1338. [3] Beatty, I.D. and Gerace, W.J., Technology-enhanced formative assessment: A research based pedagogy for teaching science with classroom response technology. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 2009, 18: 146-162. http://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-008-9140-4doi: 10.1007/s10956-008-9140-4. [4] Cohen, D. and Sasson, I., Online quizzes in a virtual learning environment as a tool for formative assessment. Journal of Technology and Science Education, 2016, 6(3): 188-208. http://doi.org/10.3926/jotse.217doi: 10.3926/jotse.217. [5] Dizon, A.C.O., An, S., Lubguban, A.A. and Suppes, G.J., Online quiz methods for remedial learning in chemical engineering. Education for Chemical Engineers, 2018, 23: 18-24. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.ece.2018.04.001doi: 10.1016/j.ece.2018.04.001. [6] Gamage, S.H.P.W., Ayres, J.R., Behrend, M.B. et al., Optimising Moodle quizzes for online assessments. International Journal of STEM Education, 2019, 6: 27. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-019-0181-4doi: 10.1186/s40594-019-0181-4. [7] Dimas, D.J., Jabbari, F. and Billimek, J., Using recorded lectures and low stakes online quizzes to improve learning efficiency in undergraduate engineering courses, in ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, 2014. [8] Tisdell, C.C., Embedding opportunities for participation and feedback in large mathematics lectures via audience response systems. STEM Education, 2021, 1(2): 75-91. https://doi.org/10.3934/steme.2021006doi: 10.3934/steme.2021006. [9] Romero, E., García, L. and Ceamanos, J., Moodle and Socrative quizzes as formative aids on theory teaching in a chemical engineering subject. Education for Chemical Engineers, 2021, 36: 54-64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ece.2021.03.001doi: 10.1016/j.ece.2021.03.001. [10] Martins, S.G., Weekly online quizzes to a mathematics course for engineering students. Teaching Mathematics and its Applications: An international journal of the IMA, 2017, 36 (1): 56-63. https://doi.org/10.1093/teamat/hrw011doi: 10.1093/teamat/hrw011. [11] Notaroš, B.M., McCullough, R., Athalye, P.S. and Maclejewski, A.A., New partially flipped electromagnetics classroom approach using conceptual questions. International Journal of Engineering Education, 2019, 35(4): 1215-1223. [12] Gyllen, J.G., Stahovich, T.F., Mayer, R.E., Entezari, N. and Darvishzadeh, A., Priming productive study strategies with preparatory quizzes in an engineering course. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 2021, 35(1): 169-180. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.3750doi: 10.1002/acp.3750. [13] Torun, A.R., The effect of weekly distributed mathematics homework and quizzes on the learning performance of engineering students. International Journal of Engineering Education, 2019, 35(5): 1561-1565. [14] Gero, A. and Stav, Y., Summative assessment based on two-tier multiple-choice questions: Item discrimination and engineering students' and teachers' attitudes. International Journal of Engineering Education, 2021, 37(3): 830-840. [15] Sun, G., Cui, T., Guo, W., Beydoun, G., Xu, D. and Shen, J., Micro learning adaptation in MOOC: A software as a service and a personalized learner model. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 2015, 9412: 174-184. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-25515-6_16doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-25515-6_16. [16] Garshasbi, S., Yecies, B. and Shen. J., Microlearning and computer-supported collaborative learning: An agenda towards a comprehensive online learning system. STEM Education, 2021, 1(4): 225-255. https://doi.org/10.3934/steme.2021016doi: 10.3934/steme.2021016. [17] Guo, W., Li, W. and Tisdell, C.C., Effective pedagogy of guiding undergraduate engineering students solving first-order ordinary differential equations. Mathematics, 2021, 9(14): 1623. https://doi.org/10.3390/math9141623.doi: 10.3390/math9141623.
Open Access Under a Creative Commons license

Figures(3)

Tables(9)