No abstract

Mathematics has long been known to be problematic for university engineering students and their teachers, for example Scanlan [1]. This paper presents recent data gathered from interviews with engineering students who experienced problems with mathematics and their lecturers during their transition through the first year in different programme contexts. Our interviews with the students reveal how they understand the relation between engineering and mathematics and we draw on the concept of 'use-and exchange-value' to explore this relationship more fully. This paper challenges both the pedagogical practice of teaching non-contextualized mathematics and also the lack of transparency regarding the significance of mathematics to engineering. We conclude that the value of mathematics in engineering remains a central problem, and argue that mathematics should be a fundamental concern in the design and practice of first year engineering.

We address the current concerns about teaching-to-the-test and its association with declining dispositions towards further study of mathematics and the consequences for choice of STEM subjects at university. In particular, through a mixed study including a large survey sample of over 1000 students and their teachers, and focussed qualitative case studies, we explored the impact of 'transmissionist' pedagogic practices on learning outcomes. We report on the construction and validation of a scale to measure teachers' self-reported pedagogy. We then use this measure in combination with the students' survey data and through regression modelling we illustrate significant associations between the pedagogic measure and students' mathematics dispositions. Finally, we discuss the potential implications of these results for mathematics education and the STEM agenda.

This paper examines ‘resilience’ of mathematics students in transition from a sociocultural perspective, in which resilience is viewed as relational and in particular as a function of the social and cultural capital students may bring to the new field. We draw on two students’ stories of transition, in which we recognise elements traditionally viewed as ‘risks’ for mathematics students in transition into institutions where new demands are made. However, in each case it seems that some of their apparent background ‘risk factors’—coming from poorer socioeconomic backgrounds and disadvantaged schools—have come to serve to constitute capital, buttressing their particular resilience, as they provide a crucial kind of autonomy that is particularly valued in the new institution. We identify the learners’ reflexivity as having been crucial to this accumulation of capital and we discuss some educational implications.

No abstract