MathGear Progress

1. Sergey Sosnovsky, Saarland University / DFKI
MathGeAr Progress
3 June 2015, Batumi, Georgia

2. Project Profile
• Full
Title:
Modernisation
of
mathematics
curricula
for
Engineering
and
Natural
Sciences
studies
in
South
Caucasian
universities
by
introducing
modern
educational
technologies
• Funded
under
Tempus
IV
program
(6th
call)
• Overall
budget:
1,078,292.50
€
• Start:
01/12/2013
• Finish:
30/11/2016
• 10
UniversiRes
• 2
Research
InsRtutes
• 2
Government
Agencies
• 1
NGO
15
partners:
• 5
from
EU
(FI,
FR,
DE)
• 6
from
Georgia
• 4
from
Armenia

3. Engineering students often develop
little professional identity in the
beginning of their studies
Project Motivation: Key Challenges in Engineering Education
Responding
to
the
changes
in
global
context
Improving
perception
of
Engineering
subjects
Retention
of
Engineering
students
Engineering knowledge and
competencies evolve with
increasing speed
Nature of technical problems
is changing, as technology
penetrates more of society
The global
environment
requires
changes in
Engineering
education
Engineering professions
are not regarded as money
making or societally
Engineering disciplines
are often often perceived
as difficult and boring
Drop out rates in
Engineering
programs are very
high
Deterioration
of
Engineering
education
in
post-­‐soviet
independent
states
Lack of funding
during the crisis
of 1990s
Inherited
fragmented
education systems

4. Role of Math in Engineering Education
❖ Math is the key subject for all engineering disciplines
❖ Basic math competencies are prerequisites for many technical skills
❖ There is a big difference between school and university mathematics
❖ Lack of engineering students and demand for more engineering graduates
forces universities to lower entrance math standards
❖ Students tend to underestimate the volume of mathematics in technical
studies
❖ Study after study show that the level of math knowledge is the primary
factor for success/failure in university-level technical education

5. Project Structure
Phase1: Best
practice
exchange and
pedagogical
preparations
Phase2:
Curricula
reforms and
capacity
building
Phase3: Pilot
implementation
and evaluation
We are here

6. Phase 1: Activities
❖ 21 colleagues from GE/AM participated in 3 study visits
and learnt about
EU best practices
in math education
❖ 17 pairwise comparative analyses between the EU and the
GE/AM courses according to the defined methodology
University Courses
GTU Calculus (1,2,3); Probability theory and statistics (1, 2); Discrete math
UG Pre-calculus (Bridging course); Calculus (1)
ATSU Modeling and optimization of technological processes; Calculus (1)
BSU Calculus 1,2; Linear algebra and analytic geometry
NPUA Theory of probability and statistics (1, 2); Calculus (1)
ASPU Linear algebra and analytic geometry; Calculus(1)

7. ❖ No significant differences, when it comes to:
❖ Learning content (courses and topics)
❖ Number o credits (ECTS),
❖ Course compositions (lecture/practice/independent work)
❖ Course size and teacher availability
❖ However, the current trend on reducing the amount of math
hours in GE/AM can soon put these countries at disadvantage
Phase 1: Similarities

8. ❖ In EU, the system is more elastic:
❖ universities have more freedom in terms of modifying their
courses if necessary;
❖ there is a standard practice of student-based course evaluation,
which provides constant and timely feedback.
❖ In EU, the universities also phase the problem of low math
competencies of new students, but
❖ there is common solution - Bridging Courses
❖ In EU, usage of e-Learning technologies and tools is much broader
❖ In EU, math for engineers is taught in a much more applied way:
❖ focus is made on learning how to use math as a tool when
solving practical engineering problems, not on theorem proving
Phase 1: Differences

9. Phase 2: Plan
❖ We cannot address all problems, we have chosen 2:
❖ Modification of course material to focus on more applied
competencies
❖ Introduction of
e-Learning
technologies:

10. Phase 2: Implementation
University Courses
GTU Calculus 2; Statistics and Probability; Discrete mathematics
UG Pre-calculus; Calculus 1
ATSU Calculus 1; Modelling and optimisation for Technological Processes
BSU Linear Algebra and Analytic Geometry; Discrete Mathematics
NPUA Probability Theory and Statistics 2; Calculus 1
ASPU Linear Algebra and Analytical Geometry; Calculus 1
❖ List of course to modify:
❖ In July 2015, in Saarbrücken - Math-Bridge training workshop
❖ In September 2015, in Kutaisi - first results of new courses,
localised Math-Bridge platform

11. End of the
project
Phase 3: Large-scale Evaluation
now
Fall, 2015 Fall, 2015
teach the selected
course in the
traditional way
teach modified
versions of the
selected course
implement updated
courses within
Math-Bridge
compare student
performance, analyse the
results and verify the
impact of the modified
courses

12. The Book: Table of Contents
1. Introduction
2. Case Study Methodology
3. Overview of Math Education for STEM in GE
4. Overview of Math Education for STEM in AM
5. Overview of Math Education for STEM in EU
6. Case Studies of Math Education for STEM in GE
❖ The case of Georgian Technical University
❖ The case of University of Georgia
❖ The case of Akaki Tsereteli State University
❖ The case of Shota Rustaveli State University
7. Case Studies of Math Education for STEM in AM
❖ The case of State Engineering University of Armenia
❖ The case of Armenian State Pedagogical University named
after Kh. Abovian
❖ The case of Institute for Informatics and Automation
Problems
8. Overview of the results
9. Recommendations
Modern
mathematical
Education for
Engineering
curricula
in Georgia and
Armenia

13. Consortium Structure
Consortium
Management
ANQA NCEQE
Quality
Control
and
Accreditation
GEAM
TUT
UCBL
TUC
SEUA GTU
ASPU UG
ATSU
BSU
Pedagogical
Expertise
EU
AM GE
DFKI
IIAP GRENA
Technical
Expertise
EU
AM GE
USAAR
Coordinator
Project(Coordina.on(Board(

14. Website,
Twitter
• www.mathgear.eu
• https://twitter.com/MathGeAr