The Quantitative Reasoning for College Science (QuaRCS) Assessment 2: Demographic, Academic and Attitudinal Variables as Predictors of Quantitative Ability

Abstract

In this article, we explore the ability of demographic and attitudinal variables to predict student scores on the Quantitative Reasoning for College Science (QuaRCS) Assessment. Variables measured by the assessment include: students' academic choices and plans, attitudes and perceptions regarding mathematics, self-reported effort level, and basic demographics such as age, race/ethnicity, gender and disability status. As in previously published numeracy studies, we find significant score deviations according to gender, race/ethnicity, and disability status; however, the effect size of these correlations pale in comparison to the effect size of affective/ attitudinal variables on QuaRCS score. A large number of variables with significant effects on QuaRCS score make the data well-suited to dimension reduction, and Factor Analyses reveal that a majority of affective variables can be collapsed into three underlying factors, which we call numerical self-efficacy, numerical relevancy and academic maturity. These three composite variables alone account for 32.4% of the variance in QuaRCS score. Two additional affective variables -self-reported effort and calculator usage -add 15.9% to the regression model. Together, these five variables account for nearly half of the variance in QuaRCS score. In contrast, academic and basic demographic variables, account for only 0.3% and 0.1% of the remainder, respectively. Furthermore, most demographic variables (including race and gender) do not have a significant effect on the regression model once affective variables have been accounted for. Kate Follette is a NASA Sagan Postdoctoral Fellow at the Kavli Institute for Particle Astrophysics and Cosmology at Stanford University. This work was begun as a graduate student at the University of Arizona, and was supported by an NSF Transforming Undergraduate Education in STEM grant (NSF-DUE # 114-0398) and an NSF Graduate Research Fellowship. She taught general education astronomy courses as an adjunct instructor at Pima Community College from 2009-2014, and will be an assistant professor at Amherst College beginning January 2017. Her science research focuses on finding and characterizing young extrasolar planets, as well as the disks of gas and dust from which they form.Sanlyn Buxner is an assistant research professor in the Department of Teaching, Learning and Sociocultural Studies at the University of Arizona. She teaches introductory science and research methods courses and supports institutional assessment of graduate and undergraduate programs. Her research includes examining science literacy and quantitative literacy in undergraduate science students and studying the impact of research and industry experiences for K12 teachers on classroom practice and student outcomes.This article is available in Numeracy: http://scholarcommons.usf.edu/numeracy/vol10/iss1/art5Erin Dokter is an associate professor of practice in the Office of Instruction and Assessment at the University of Arizona, where she serves as the Coordinator for th...

Early Warning Signals from Automaticity Diagnostic Instruments for First- and Second-Semester General Chemistry

“…Instructors should introduce more problems into their assessments that require student to use QL and QR to evaluate. Today’s understanding of QR is more detailed as found in the Quantitative Reasoning for College Science study, , which includes specifically targeted skills (e.g., interpreting graphical data, reading tables, using estimations and probabilities, and being ability to use dimensional analysis to solve problems like those so commonly found in general chemistry). QR skills include proportional, probabilistic, and correlational reasoning that might not improve linearly with increased exposure to short-term instruction in science and/or mathematics courses .…”

“…However, still today, how many times does a student express, “I got this answer because it’s what my calculator says.”? To succeed in general chemistry, a grasp of both algorithmic and conceptual problem-solving ability is needed. , Poor quantitative skills are barriers to success in many STEM courses. , In addition, it is becoming evident that quantitative literacy (QL) and quantitative reasoning (QR) abilities that require students to logically determine desired outcomes is garnering importance across many STEM and non-STEM curricula. Greater than 80% of general chemistry students in this study expressed interest in becoming STEM majors.…”

“…1,2 Poor quantitative skills are barriers to success in many STEM courses. 3,4 In addition, it is becoming evident that quantitative literacy (QL) and quantitative reasoning (QR) abilities that require students to logically determine desired outcomes is garnering importance across many STEM and non-STEM curricula. Greater than 80% of general chemistry students in this study expressed interest in becoming STEM majors.…”

Quantitative Literacy in the Affective Domain: Computational Geology Students’ Reactions to Devlin’s The Math Instinct

“…This view is supported by studies indicating that a student's experiences with mathematics in 7 th -10 th grade classes influenced how they performed in mathematics in the 12 th grade, which in turn influenced whether they chose to be a science, technology, engineering, or mathematics major in college (e.g., Wang 2013). The choice, in fact, may be due to how mathematics is taught and used in the United States (e.g., Follette et al 2017). …”

Using Meta-Analysis to Assess Affective Outcomes in a Multi-Course QR Module Intervention

“…Many of these demonstrations necessarily occur in quite specific local environments, with published assessments often based on carefully scripted and controlled interventions implemented in single courses, departments, or institutions. Collecting multi-replication and multiinstitutional data from diverse samples (e.g., Sundre and Thelk 2010;Gaze et al 2014;Follette et al 2017) is one of several ways in which scholars establish the reliability and robustness of their findings and build confidence among prospective adopters.…”