Research Findings Based on Assessment Data

Findings from Assessment of Student Work Prior to QuIRK

Among the most startling findings was how infrequently students used numeric evidence when such evidence would have powerfully set the context for an argument

The Use of Quantitative Reasoning across the Curriculum: Empirical Evidence from Carleton College (Acrobat (PDF) 72kB Oct26 09)

by Nathan D. Grawe and B. Greg Marfleet
We examine papers written by first- and second-year undergraduates for submission to a college writing portfolio, coding for the potential relevance of quantitative reasoning (QR) to the argument. (Note: We measure the potential relevance to the argument, not whether students realize this potential by using quantitative evidence.) We distinguish papers in which QR is central to the main thrust of the argument ("centrally relevant") from those in which QR would strengthen the argument by providing context, enriching description, or presenting background ("peripherally relevant"). We find extensive potential for QR instruction across the curriculum. In nearly one-third of papers, QR was centrally relevant and in another quarter of papers, QR was peripherally so bringing the total fraction of QR-relevant papers above 50%. Of equal importance, much QR-relevant writing takes place outside the natural sciences. Of papers for which QR is centrally (peripherally) relevant, around 50% (90%) were written outside STEM courses. Moreover, 35% of papers written in arts, literature, and humanities courses were QR relevant. These findings provide supporting evidence to theorists who have argued that quantitative reasoning can and should be taught throughout the curriculum.