The impact of NSC mathematics on student performance in mathematics in first-year engineering programmes:

Where does the gap lie?

Brandon Collier-ReedNicky Wolmarans, Reneé Smit

Centre for Research in Engineering Education

18%Students who achieved more than 50% for Mathematics I in mid-year in 2009

2008First cohort of learners matriculate under the new NSC

The staffroom chatter

Poorly prepared at school

Paper 3!!

How critical is the role of inflated/undiscriminating schoolmathematics results in understanding this 18%?

Is th

is

the

Gap???

Matric: SC and NSC learners Matric + Gap International Repeat

Constituting the class

Mathematics I

400%

2005 2007 2009

Sample Size 99 74 105

Number of passes 33 30 43

Pass rate (%) 33 41 41

Mean (%) 44 45 46

Standard deviation (%)

17 17 18

The stability of the course

The International cohort

Inferential statistics: samples comparable

Course can be compared over time

2005 2007 2009

Matric

Int Matric

Int Matric

Int

Sample Size 259 99 296 74 451 105

Number of passes 103 33 70 30 81 43

Mean (%) 47 44 38 45 36 46

Pass rate (%) 40 33 24 41 18 41

Standard deviation (%)

17 17 17 17 16 18

Introducing the other

The Matric and International cohorts

Distribution of Matric marks

Matric Matric+Gap

International

Repeat

Full class size

380 26 133 131

No DP 115 (30%) 6 (23%) 27 (20%) 11 (8%)

Sample size 265 20 106 120

No of passes 140 15 79 91

Pass rate (%)

53 (37+DP) 75 75 (59+DP) 76 (69+DP)

Mean (%) 47 57 55 54

Std Dev (%) 18 19 17 15

The DP factor

What’s happening in 2010?

37

59

Does this talk to an improvement in the approach to teaching and learning?

Discussion

Gradual deterioration of preparedness Serious issue of maths T&L at school level HEMIS data: We select from <5% possible There is a significant (growing) tail - 63%

fail Manipulation of pass rates for progression? International lessons – pre-calculus, etc. Content and learning environment change? The “entry requirement” red herring // NBT We must respond to this “gap”