|
VISUAL CALCULUS
TEX PREP SUMMER 2004 |
(There were 20 students in Team C and 21 in Team E taking the pretest and posttest in visual calculus)
Students from two classrooms were tested in their concept of visual calculus at the beginning and at the end of the semester. There was a statistical significant improvement from pre test (Mean = 13.37, SD= 14.94) to posttest (Mean= 58.07, SD=12.38) F (1, 39) = 313.24, p<.01. There was an improvement after instruction of visual calculus has taken place in both classrooms, however, these two groups performed differently. The students’ from the first classroom (Team C) had worse pretest scores (Mean=10.5 SD=9.16) than students from the second classroom (Team E) (Mean=15.87, SD=18.44). In contrast, Team C which unperformed Team E at pretest had a better improvement at posttest (Mean=61.35, SD=12.09) than Team E (Mean= 58.07, SD= 12.37). The interaction between tests (pretest and posttest) and the team was statistically significant F (1, 39) = 3.79, p<.05.
CONCEPT OF LIMIT
(There were 24 students in Team C and 20 in Team E taking the pretest and posttest in concept of limit)
Students from the two classrooms were also tested in the concept of limit at the beginning and at the end of the semester. There was a statistical significant improvement from pre test (Mean=45.43, SD=22.03) to posttest (Mean=60.72, SD=24.86) F (1, 42) =11.64, p<.001. There was an improvement after instruction of concept of limit has taken place in both classrooms, once again these two groups performed differently. The students’ from the first classroom (Team C) had worse pretest scores (Mean=39.79 SD=23.47) than students from the second classroom (Team E) (Mean=51.59, SD=18.98).
In contrast, Team C which unperformed Team E at pretest had a better improvement at posttest (Mean=67.21 SD=27.96) than Team E (Mean= 53.64, SD=19.16). The interaction between tests (pretest and posttest) and the team was statistically significant F (1, 42) = 8.64, p<.01.
