Spring 2022

I continued to teach MA 232 in roughly the same way as previous semesters, continuing to emphasize real-world applications and the use of technology. This semester, students were able to do their quizzes and exams in class, though I continued to use the Pearson platform for homework and practice.

I approached MA 220 from a project based perspective. Students were given short homework assignments and quizzes to check their baseline knowledge, and then longer form homeworks involving applications and 3 group projects which tested deeper, more involved applications of the material. These projects were individualized and students were required to both write up their solutions and present them to the class.The projects consisted of using specific construction tools to achieve a non-trivial geometric effect, using trigonometry to solve land surveying problems, and applying the principles of perspective to fully analyze pieces of perspective artwork.

Just as in previous semesters, a detailed syllabus and schedule were handed out to students at the start of the semester and I kept the Nuoodle course up to date and organized. With MA 220, I did not have all of the materials created ahead of time, so especially in the last third of the semester I was updating the material about a week before we covered it in class. The first quiz of the semester was once again a syllabus quiz.

In MA 232 I assigned weekly homework through Pearson, gave weekly quizzes on Nuoodle, and we had 3 exams and a cumulative final exam. For each class day I prepared note outlines for the sections that were broken into theory and example portions. The idea was to do a mini-lecture on the big idea of the section and then let students work in groups or pairs on the examples. We would then come together as a class and discuss the problems. This worked well for at least one student who wrote on the course evaluation:

“His pacing was good - one can take notes, while still getting through a lot of material every class.”

Before each exam I made sure that practive tests and formula sheets were available to the students. I encouraged students to complete the practice exams by giving them bonus points on the exam for completing the practice.

For MA 220, I provided students with note outlines for each day of class, and then after we completed a unit I would post complete notes for the topic. In a typical week students we assigned a long homework (due at the start of the next week) which consisted of an applied problem that would take some time to solve, a short homework (due Thursday night) reinforcing the lecture with multiple choice or fill in the blank questions, a skill check (due Friday night on Nuoodle), and a reflection prompt (also due Friday night). Students had unlimited attempts on the short homework, the long homework and skill check were graded for completeness and correctness, and the reflection was a participation grade.

There were also three projects assigned throughout the semester, two of which were group projects and one of which was individual. Students had to both write up their projects and present them to the class. Their project scores were then a combination of the peer evaluation of their project and my evaluation. Both the peer score and my score came from a rubric of completeness, correctness, and clarity. To balance the group work aspect of the projects, I also had students give their team mates a score of 1 – 5 indicating how well they participated. I then used that score to modify the group project score and assign individual grades.

Finally, when it became clear that the class had uniformly struggled with some of the long homework assignments, I created 3 bonus long homework opportunites that students could use to replace their lower scores. This at least had a positive impact, with one student reporting

“The other thing that was very helpful is we were always giving ample opportunity to improve our grade by doing bonus homework. Even though it was more homework, I was grateful to have this opportunity.”

Fall 2021

continued to iterate on my course design for MA 101, expanding on the elements of formative assessment in the course and refining the choice of projects. We continued to use real world inspirations for all of the projects, and the quizzes were done mastery style. One change I made was that students had to clear certain criteria in order to turn in their projects. Specifically, they had to have reached a certain quiz average for the unit and they had to have made a rough draft of the project.

For MA 306 I designed the course around in-class presentations of proofs, quizzes, and a proof portfolio. Each week students were assigned a unique problem relating to the material. They had three weeks and two revision attempts to make a final draft of their proof/solution. Through this the students learned the LaTeX typesetting language and they were forced to improve their mathematical content and their writing style.

As in previous semesters, I provided a detailed syllabus and a calendar at the the start of the semester listing the topics and assignments we were going to complete. I clearly labelled the Nuoodle site with what was due/available when and I kept the Nuoodle gradebook up to date. In MA 306 I had students make their own OverLeaf account for submitting proof portfolio pieces and I communicated feedback to them through their individual proofs.

We were able to meet in person for most classes this semester. To facilitate the class I distributed note outlines with placeholders for the terms we were going to define and the examples we were going to cover. I split the note outlines into a short lecture portion and then a worksheet of activities meant to reinforce the lecture. The students would work on the activities in groups or pairs and then we would discuss them as a class. After we finished a section, I would post the complete lecture notes for students that either missed class or had a hard time taking notes in the moment.

Both MA 101 and MA 306 had weekly quizzes/skill checks and opportunities to retake a modified version of those skill checks. These skill checks were graded without much opportunity for partial credit, but the opportunity to retake meant that students could improve their scores by looking at their feedback and trying again. I also continued my habit of having the first quiz be a syllabus quiz.

Homework consisted of weekly suggested practice prolems and then a reflection assignment where students reported back what they tried, what they succeeded at, and what they struggled with. I then used this feedback to help steer the course discussion and review topics.

For MA 101, the majority of their grade came from the projects, similar to spring 2021. I added options for the projects, so students could choose between 1 of 2 prompts. In addition to requiring students to check in about their projects, I also mandated that they maintain a certain quiz average in order for me to accept their submission. If a student had not maintined their quiz average, I would take the opportunity to meet with them one on one, schedule them to retake the relavant quizzes, and given them an extension on the project. This came with a 10 point penality on the project, but ultimately improved their course grade and ensured that the project earned a higher grade than it would have on their first attempt. As evidence that this policy helped I refer you to the following student comment on the course evalution:

“I didn't feel the class was very useful to me and I shot myself in the foot with that mentality, but at the end of the day Professor Holshouser didn't give up on me and hung with me till the end.”

In MA 306, in place of exams I had students create proof portfolios over the course of the semester. Each week they were given a unique prompt. They then had three weeks to create their final submission to that prompt and share it with me on overleaf. If they shared it earlier I would look their submission over and provide feedback, simulating the role of a reviewer for a journal. If at any point I declared the proof “accepted” they would earn an A on the proof. Otherwise I applied a rubric accounting for the completeness, correctness, and clarity of the proof. Students responded well to this, saying in the course evaluation:

“I liked the no exams, it was helpful to learn what I did wrong and then get to fix it instead of just getting bad grades. Holshouser was very available if the students needed help and I always left office hours with no problems.”

To assist students in learning LaTeX, the first proof portfolio assignment was simply to recreate a sample pdf using links to the tutorials on overleaf.

Navigate to 2020 Reflections | 2022 Reflections