Instructional Format and Differences in Remedial Mathematics Performance for Community College Students: A Multiyear Investigation

Instructional Format and Differences in Remedial Mathematics Performance for Community College Students: A Multiyear Investigation

John Slate

Contact

Edrel Z. Stoneham

Contact

George W. Moore

Contact

John R. Slate

Contact

C. Martinez-Garcia

Contact

α to Ѡ

Sam Houston State University

Instructional Format and Differences in Remedial Mathematics Performance for Community College Students: A Multiyear Investigation

Article Fingerprint

ReserarchID

434F8

Instructional Format and Differences in Remedial Mathematics Performance for Community College Students: A Multiyear Investigation Banner

AI TAKEAWAY

Connecting with the Eternal Ground

Abstract

Differences in student success rates in remedial mathematics courses as a function of the instructional format (i.e., traditional face-to-face and computer-assisted) were investigated in this study. Data from the 2012-2013 through the 2014-2015 academic years from a single Texas community college were analyzed. For the 3 academic years examined, statistically significant differences were present in remedial mathematics performance by instructional format, with trivial to small effect sizes. Students had higher success rates in remedial mathematics courses in which a traditional lecture format was used than in computer-assisted courses. Implications and recommendations for future research were discussed.

References

29 Cites in Article

Reference Format

Michael Albright (1999). Teaching in the Information Age: A New Look.
J Ashby,W Sadera,S Mcnary (2011). Comparing student success between developmental math courses offered online, blended, and face-to-face.
P Bahr (2013). The aftermath of remedial math: Investigating the low rate of certificate completion among remedial math students.
Peter Bahr (2008). Does Mathematics Remediation Work?: A Comparative Analysis of Academic Attainment among Community College Students.
T Bailey,D Jeong,S Choo (2010). Referral, enrollment, and completion in developmental education sequences in community colleges.
T Brock (2010). Young adults and higher education: Barriers and breakthroughs to success.
A Brown (2009). Brothers gonna work it out: Understanding the pedagogic performance of African American male teachers working with African American male students.
J Cohen (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences.
David Fike,Renea Fike (2012). Mathematics: Gatekeeper for Hispanic Success in Health Care Professions.
L Howard,M Whitaker (2011). “Zahlenblickschulung” as Approach to Develop Flexibility in Mental Calculation in All Students.
R Johnson,L (2010). Educational research: Quantitative and qualitative approaches.
L Layton (2013). PISA Score (Average of Reading, Math and Science) and Income per Capita (2015).
Mcgraw-Hill (2016). Assessment and Learning in Knowledge Spaces (ALEKS): What is ALEKS? Retrieved from.
Michael Moore (1973). Toward a Theory of Independent Learning and Teaching.
C Mullin (2010). Doing more with less: The inequitable funding of community college (Policy Brief 2010-03PBL).
(2015). Hot topics in higher education: Reforming remedial education.
A On Wuegbuzie,L Daniel (2002). Uses and misuses of the correlation coefficient.
Judith Scott-Clayton,Olga Rodriguez (2012). Development, Discouragement, or Diversion? New Evidence on the Effects of College Remediation.
K Spradlin,B Ackerman (2007). The effectiveness of computer-assisted instruction in developmental mathematics.
Judy Taylor (2008). The Effects of a Computerized-Algebra Program on Mathematics Achievement of College and University Freshmen Enrolled in a Developmental Mathematics Course.
(2013). Rules applying to all public institutions in the state of Texas: Texas success initiative.
(2008). College readiness and developmental education.
Deborah Blackner (2006). Prediction of Community College Students' Success in Developmental Math with Traditional Classroom, Computer-Based On-Campus and Computer-Based at a Distance Instruction Using Locus of Control, Math Anxiety and Learning Style.
(1993). National Postsecondary Student Aid Survey, 1987.
R Vilardi,M Rice (2014). Mathematics achievement: Traditional instruction and technologyassisted course delivery methods.
Claire Wladis,Kathleen Offenholley,Michael George (2014). Leveraging Technology to Improve Developmental Mathematics Course Completion: Evaluation of a Large-Scale Intervention.
Barbara Canfield,John Gould (2012). A Phenomenological Study of the Persistence of Unsuccessful Students in Developmental Mathematics at a Community College.
C Zavarella,J Ignash (2009). Instructional delivery in developmental mathematics: Impact on retention.
B Zhu,G Polianskaia (2007). A comparison of traditional lecture and computer-mediated instruction in developmental mathematics.

Download References

Funding

No external funding was declared for this work.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Ethical Approval

No ethics committee approval was required for this article type.

Data Availability

Not applicable for this article.

How to Cite This Article

John Slate. 2017. \u201cInstructional Format and Differences in Remedial Mathematics Performance for Community College Students: A Multiyear Investigation\u201d. Global Journal of Human-Social Science - C: Sociology & Culture GJHSS-C Volume 17 (GJHSS Volume 17 Issue C1): .

More Citation Formats

Select Citation Style:

Download Citation

Download Article

GJHSS Volume 17 Issue C1
Pg. 95- 101

Explore Journals Explore Volume Read This Issue

Journal Specifications

Crossref Journal DOI 10.17406/GJHSS

Print ISSN 0975-587X

e-ISSN 2249-460X

Keywords

Not Found

Classification

GJHSS-C Classification: FOR Code: 970101

Submission ReceivedFebruary 9, 2017
Peer Review Double Blind
Handling Editor
Accepted March 1, 2017
Published March 15, 2017

Version of record

v1.2

Issue date

March 24, 2017

Language

Experiance in AR

Explore published articles in an immersive Augmented Reality environment. Our platform converts research papers into interactive 3D books, allowing readers to view and interact with content using AR and VR compatible devices.

View in VR

Read in 3D

Your published article is automatically converted into a realistic 3D book. Flip through pages and read research papers in a more engaging and interactive format.

View in 3D

Article Matrices

Total Score: 134

Country: United States

Subject: Global Journal of Human-Social Science - C: Sociology & Culture

Authors: Edrel Z. Stoneham, George W. Moore, John R. Slate, C. Martinez-Garcia (PhD/Dr. count: 0)

View Count (all-time): 156

Total Views (Real + Logic): 3745

Total Downloads (simulated): 1724

Publish Date: 2017 03, Fri

Monthly Totals (Real + Logic):

Month 1: 52 views
Month 2: 37 views
Month 3: 52 views
Month 4: 64 views
Month 5: 49 views
Month 6: 47 views
Month 7: 34 views
Month 8: 23 views
Month 9: 40 views
Month 10: 46 views
Month 11: 47 views
Month 12: 35 views
Month 13: 32 views
Month 14: 41 views
Month 15: 25 views
Month 16: 22 views
Month 17: 24 views
Month 18: 25 views
Month 19: 17 views
Month 20: 19 views
Month 21: 19 views
Month 22: 32 views
Month 23: 27 views
Month 24: 39 views
Month 25: 29 views
Month 26: 45 views
Month 27: 31 views
Month 28: 32 views
Month 29: 20 views
Month 30: 35 views
Month 31: 44 views
Month 32: 38 views
Month 33: 27 views
Month 34: 43 views
Month 35: 20 views
Month 36: 46 views
Month 37: 35 views
Month 38: 29 views
Month 39: 34 views
Month 40: 39 views
Month 41: 45 views
Month 42: 27 views
Month 43: 35 views
Month 44: 30 views
Month 45: 14 views
Month 46: 30 views
Month 47: 24 views
Month 48: 26 views
Month 49: 38 views
Month 50: 37 views
Month 51: 25 views
Month 52: 23 views
Month 53: 42 views
Month 54: 32 views
Month 55: 34 views
Month 56: 16 views
Month 57: 29 views
Month 58: 44 views
Month 59: 41 views
Month 60: 39 views
Month 61: 36 views
Month 62: 33 views
Month 63: 18 views
Month 64: 27 views
Month 65: 21 views
Month 66: 25 views
Month 67: 19 views
Month 68: 31 views
Month 69: 28 views
Month 70: 47 views
Month 71: 35 views
Month 72: 18 views
Month 73: 26 views
Month 74: 19 views
Month 75: 41 views
Month 76: 32 views
Month 77: 43 views
Month 78: 32 views
Month 79: 33 views
Month 80: 37 views
Month 81: 35 views
Month 82: 42 views
Month 83: 37 views
Month 84: 30 views
Month 85: 41 views
Month 86: 21 views
Month 87: 27 views
Month 88: 27 views
Month 89: 37 views
Month 90: 15 views
Month 91: 28 views
Month 92: 44 views
Month 93: 30 views
Month 94: 37 views
Month 95: 39 views
Month 96: 38 views
Month 97: 38 views
Month 98: 46 views
Month 99: 25 views
Month 100: 39 views
Month 101: 41 views
Month 102: 39 views
Month 103: 19 views
Month 104: 29 views
Month 105: 35 views
Month 106: 22 views
Month 107: 37 views
Month 108: 51 views
Month 109: 59 views

Total Views: 3745

Total Downloads: 1724

2026 Trends

Published Article

Our website is actively being updated, and changes may occur frequently. Please clear your browser cache if needed. For feedback or error reporting, please email [email protected]