| Over the past decade mathematics education has undergone significant changes. The mathematics reform movement in K–12 and two-year college mathematics was institutionalized with the publication of The Curriculum and Evaluation Standards for School Mathematics (NCTM, 1989) and Standards for Introductory College Mathematics Before Calculus (AMATYC, 1995). Pedagogies required for implementing mathematics reform tenets differed significantly from those traditionally used in mathematics classrooms. Thus, the need existed to provide mathematics educators at all levels with assistance in implementing the new pedagogies into their teaching.; Studies addressing Standard-Based Professional Development (SBPD) activities for K–12 instructors have shown that activities of this type were beneficial in implementing mathematics reform tenets into their teaching philosophies, instructional practices and assessment methods. However, insufficient research had been conducted to indicate whether the same was true for two-year college mathematics instructors.; The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of SBPD participation on mathematics instruction at two-year colleges in New Mexico. The study was conducted through an online faculty survey, to determine the level of SBPD participation of New Mexico two-year college mathematics instructors, interviews with 12 survey participants from four levels (No, Low, Medium and High) of SBPD participation during the time period 1998–2002, and surveys with students of interviewed instructors.; Interviewed instructors in this study who participated in SBPD activities, by either directly attending SBPD activities or indirectly attending through networking with colleagues who had attended, used teaching philosophies, instructional practices and assessment methods which included hands-on activities, cooperative group work, writing mathematics and/or the use of technology to explore and investigate concepts at varying levels. They used lecture sparingly and required that students be actively engaged in their learning. Their assessment methods evaluated understanding of concepts as well as proficiency with calculations and procedures.; Interviewed instructors who had not attended or did not value SBPD participation conducted their classes using primarily lecture, board work and drill and practice. Assessment methods for these instructors consisted primarily of homework, quizzes and exams that evaluated students' ability to use algorithms and perform calculations. |
