The Mathematics Department serves nearly the entire undergraduate population at Ohio University. All but a few students are required to enroll in at least one mathematics course during their college career. The undergraduate students served vary greatly in their interest and ability in mathematics and the reasons why they are enrolled in our courses. Some students are non-mathematics majors, seeking degrees from other departments that may or may not depend upon a strong knowledge of mathematics; some seek a bachelor’s degree in mathematics, to prepare themselves for a variety of careers. In addition, the department serves a graduate student population seeking to obtain Masters or Doctoral degrees in mathematics, often combined with a computer science component. The educational goal of the Mathematics Department for all these students is to provide an environment in which students are encouraged to acquire the analytical and quantitative skills necessary for success in dealing with the technical demands of the modern workplace and daily life, including the ability to expand those skills in the future. The department also strives to help students gain some appreciation for the beauty and utility of mathematics. In service of this primary educational goal, we have established four goals.

All students regardless of their major will receive high quality instruction, because student learning is directly related to effective instruction.

Mathematics is the language of science, and plays a very important role in the university by being central to the knowledge base required of a large number of students majoring in other departments. It is the mission of the department to teach these students the mathematical content and skills required for their degree programs and to promote mathematical literacy.

The bachelor’s degree in mathematics signifies that its holder has a solid foundation in the mathematical sciences. The major in mathematics will gain an appreciation for the applicability of mathematics, as well as for the beauty and power of abstraction. Holders of the degree will have analytical and quantitative skills which qualify them for careers in a wide variety of fields, including the actuarial sciences, teaching mathematics in middle and high schools, and the pursuit of graduate and professional degrees.

The master’s degree is a professional degree. It signifies that the holder of the degree has a solid understanding of mathematics and can apply this knowledge to solve problems. It also signifies that the holder of the degree can effectively communicate and transmit this knowledge. Holders of Master’s degrees will be prepared to enter teaching, a computer-related profession, or other professions that rely on mathematical expertise. Students will be prepared to assume administrative duties in their careers and/or continue their studies to obtain a Ph.D. in mathematics or computer science.

The Ph.D. degree is a research degree which signifies that its holder has mastered the advanced concepts of his or her field and has carried out original mathematical research. Holders of the Ph.D. degree in mathematics will contribute to society by becoming research mathematicians, highly qualified college-level teachers, or by entering a variety of careers in industry and government that demand creative problem solving.

These goals are based on a Mission Statement developed in 1997 as part of a Departmental Self-assessment, the evaluation reports of our graduate programs submitted to the department by external and internal review committees, goals cited in the 1996 and 1997 Assessment reports, and faculty suggestions. A Departmental Assessment committee, formed in January 1998, reviewed the aforementioned documents and drafted a set of goals and objectives (The objectives are described in section 2). In March 1998, these goals and objectives were submitted to the department chairperson and the department’s advisory committee for review and revised based on their input. In May 1998, the revised set of goals and objectives were submitted to the entire mathematics department faculty for comment. Each goal has associated with it a set of measurable objectives. The committee identified sources of information (some already in place and others that will need to be created) that would provide opportunities to collect and analyze quantitative and qualitative data as evidence of progress toward our goals.

Yes. As mentioned in "b" above, the goals of the previous Department Assessment reports were taken into consideration. Those goals were significantly revised in the light of the other documents and issues that came to light during the past year as a result of the external and internal review of our graduate programs.

In order to assess the extent to which we are meeting our goals, measurable objectives related to these goals have been established.

OBJECTIVES

4. Students who major in mathematics will be prepared to find appropriate employment inside or outside academia.
5. Students will receive appropriate advising about their current program and a variety of diverse career paths they might pursue as mathematics majors.

The assessment instruments described below were used to collect evidence about the extent to which we are meeting our goals.

Yes. The Exit Interview, the Praxis specialty exam, and informal input from alumni and faculty were the major sources of evidence for the Department Assessment report last year. We have greatly expanded these sources of evidence for this year’s report and plan to expand those sources even further in the future (see response to item 6b).

Each member of the departmental assessment committee was responsible for obtaining and analyzing data from a particular set of assessment instruments. Each member contacted appropriate personnel from whom the data could be obtained (e.g., college of education, institutional research), reviewed the data, extracted information pertinent to various objectives, and summarized the data. For quantitative data, means, medians, percentages were calculated. For qualitative data, major themes and trends were identified and summarized. All evidence pertaining to each of the goals was discussed during committee meetings, clarified, and consensus was reached about what information would be included in this report.

Although some data indicates a level of dissatisfaction with the quality of instruction, students taking courses from the mathematics department seem in general satisfied with the quality of instruction.

On the end of year Course Evaluations, students were asked to respond on a scale from 1 to 5 (1=strongly agree, 5=strongly disagree) to positive statements about the course. The mean of the responses to all questions was 2.10, indicating general satisfaction with the quality of instruction. The mean of the responses to questions concerning instructional delivery was 2.12, the mean of the responses to questions concerning instructional design was 2.09, and the mean of the responses to questions concerning course management was 2.09. This indicates that students were generally satisfied with all aspects of the courses offered by the mathematics department. Ten graduating majors responded to the Senior Survey and rated the quality of instruction on a range from 1-5 (5 is best). The responses provided us with the following data

A few of the respondents to the senior survey felt that the instruction was inconsistent. Two of the respondents remarked that though the mathematics department has some very good teachers, it also some very bad teachers. On the One Year Survey, comparing courses to University and College norms, mathematics graduates ranked their satisfaction with major courses in mathematics below average.

Non-majors seem to feel that mathematics courses increased their appreciation for and knowledge and skill in mathematics. This is indicated by their responses to statement 7 on the student course evaluations: "the instructor helped increase my appreciation for, and knowledge or skill in, the subject matter.". The mean of all responses to this question was 2.51, indicating that general agreement with this statement. In the 100 and 200 level courses, the mean of the responses to this statement was 2.5. In addition, on the One Year Surveys, Chemical Engineering graduates were asked to respond to the statement "I learned sufficient material in Math 263A,B,C,D and Math 340 before senior courses." The responses were 24% strongly agree, 59% agree, 0% neutral, 12% disagree, and 6% strongly disagree." Of the other courses about which Chemical Engineering students were surveyed, the math sequence ranked 5th of 13 in student satisfaction. It ranked 1st of the 5 courses taught outside of the Chemical Engineering Department. Although the sample was small (18 respondents), it seems to indicate that the goal of quality instruction is being achieved.

Our mathematics majors seem to be obtaining the appropriate level of mathematical maturity. This was measured in part by question #3 "Can you indicate any concrete improvements in your problem solving skills...." on the Senior Survey. Six of the ten respondents answered yes, two answered no, and two did not know whether these skills had improved. In the One Year Surveys, compared with University and College norms, mathematics graduates rated OU above average in the preparation for further academic work. In this category, math graduates were especially positive. These results indicate that the level of our courses is sufficiently high to prepare students for careers which require analytic thinking.

Mathematics majors seem to be finding appropriate employment. Eight of the ten respondents to the Senior Survey indicated that they have secured employment for next year in fields related to Mathematics. One respondent indicated that he will be attending graduate school in Economics. The other respondent indicated that she is planning to take a year off before pursuing graduate school (probably in Mathematics). Mathematics graduates responding to the one year survey rated above average their satisfaction with their current employment, and, compared with University and College norms, they rated average their satisfaction in how well OU prepared them for their career goals. Mathematics graduates responding to the One Year Survey rated as above average their satisfaction with their current employment, and, compared with University and College norms, as average their satisfaction in how well OU prepared them for their career goals.

Mathematics majors expressed strong dissatisfaction with the quality of advising in our department. Respondents to the Senior Survey expressed particularly strong dissatisfaction with the quality of advising. Many remarked that the only career counseling they received was from the College of Business or the Actuarial Fraternity. None of the Senior survey respondents felt adequately informed by their mathematics advisors of possible career paths in mathematics. The following data were obtained (range 1-5, 5 is best):

Quality of advising: mean 2.4, median 2

Level of preparation for post graduate career plans: mean 3.2 median 3

Also responding to one question on the Senior survey, six respondents answered no as to whether the department has adequately informed them of career possibilities and four answered that they never got any advice because they never asked. On the Five Year Survey, the Mathematics Department was rated well below University and College norms in the area of academic advising.

Regarding students preparing to be teachers: Twenty-seven Ohio University students preparing to be mathematics teachers took the Praxis series exams between June 1, 1997 and June 1, 1998. On the General Knowledge exam, the median score for OU students was 667 as compared to a median score of 657 for all students taking this exam between October 1994 and July 1997. On the Professional Knowledge portion and the Mathematics specialty exam, the median score for OU students was the same as the median for the national sample (663 for professional knowledge and 610 for mathematics. ) On the mathematics specialty exam, four of our students (approximately 15%) scored above the national average range, i.e., these four students scored between 700 and 750 whereas the national average range is between 560-670 and 3 students (approximately 11%) scored below 560.

The Ohio Department of Education has set the passing score at 642 for the General Knowledge and Professional Knowledge exams and at 530 for the mathematics specialty exam. All of the students passed the General Knowledge and Professional Knowledge tests on their first attempt. Approximately 89% of the students (24 out of 27) passed the mathematics specialty exam on their first attempt. The remaining 3 students passed on their second attempt. We are adequately preparing our middle school and secondary teachers. We would like to improve student performance on the Praxis exams so that OU students outperform the national averages in all three exams of this series and that all students pass the mathematics specialty exam on their first attempt.

Teaching Assistants in the department of mathematics received very positive evaluations from their students. The mean of all responses on TA's student course evaluations was 1.9 (1=strongly agree, 5=strongly disagree) indicating that our TA's are doing an excellent job teaching undergraduate mathematics and service courses.

Students are required to pass a comprehensive examination in three different areas of mathematics in order to be admitted to candidacy for the Ph.D. in mathematics. From 1991 to 1997, 43 students attempted the exam, some repeatedly, and 27 eventually passed. Of the 11 in the latter group who passed by 1993, 9 have obtained their Ph.D. in mathematics, and of the other 16, one has received the doctorate and 14 remain in the program, making progress expected to lead to graduation. The Doctoral Theses and journal publications of our students provide ample evidence that they are competent research scholars of mathematics at the time of their graduation.

A Senior Survey was created. Students were required to complete it prior to participating in their exit interview.

The analysis of these data did not occur until May of this year, so these data were not used to improve the program during the current year.

We plan to address our deficiencies in academic advising by identifying ways in which we can better help students prepare a program of studies that meets their career plan requirements.

Members of the department will be asked to review this report and the feedback we receive from the University’s review committee to provide suggestions for how the Department Assessment Report Committee should revise this report for 1999.

Several additional objectives have been identified that could provide additional information about the extent to which the department is achieving its goals. These objectives are listed below.

At this point in time, it is not clear whether information can be gathered to measure them. Over the next year or so, the feasibility of gathering evidence for these objectives will be explored. Listed below are some possibilities:

Student Course Evaluations: For the 1998-99 year, some questions may be added to our standard student course evaluation form to address some gaps in our data collection.

Other Department Survey : Create a survey to be sent to other departments at OU who rely on our mathematics courses to prepare their majors. Questions would request feedback on the extent to which these departments perceive that our mathematics courses adequately prepare their majors.

Employer Survey: Create a survey and send it to employers of our graduates. Questions would request feedback about the extent to which the employers are satisfied with the job performance of our graduates.

Obtain Cooperating and Supervising Teacher Evaluations: All students preparing to be teachers are evaluated by their cooperating teacher (high school or middle school mathematics teacher assigned during student teaching) and by a university employed supervisor. Blinded reports will be sought from the College of Education.

Data Base: Possibly establish a data base to track our graduates with respect to employment, graduate school attendance, professional presentations, publications, and any other information we deem relevant to maintaining contact with our graduates as a source of information for this report.