Department of Mathematics
 Search | Help | Login | pdf version | printable version

Math @ Duke





.......................

.......................


Publications of Jack Bookman    :chronological  alphabetical  combined listing:

%% Papers Published   
@article{fds374498,
   Author = {Akin, V and Bookman, J and Braley, E},
   Title = {Modeling Active Learning in Professional Development for
             Teaching},
   Journal = {The journal of faculty development},
   Volume = {37},
   Number = {3},
   Pages = {28-39},
   Publisher = {Magna Publications},
   Year = {2023},
   Month = {September},
   Key = {fds374498}
}

@article{fds355420,
   Author = {Schott, S and Slate Young and E and Bookman, J and Peterson,
             B},
   Title = {Evaluating a Large-Scale Multi-Institution Project:
             Challenges Faced and Lessons Learned},
   Journal = {The Journal of Mathematics and Science: Collaborative
             Explorations (JMSCE)},
   Volume = {16},
   Number = {1},
   Year = {2020},
   url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.25891/5e14-nf34},
   Abstract = {SUMMIT-P consists of nine participating institutions working
             toward common goals but from unique perspectives. Evaluating
             such a large-scale project with diverse stakeholders has
             presented challenges. For one, evaluation on this scale
             necessitates a team effort rather than a single evaluator.
             Communication is key among the evaluators as well as among
             the project players at large. Participation and reliable,
             timely feedback from participants are perhaps the most
             important issues while also posing some of our greatest
             challenges. We present strategies we developed to counteract
             these challenges. In particular, we discuss the development
             of an assessment tracking system used to not only monitor
             responses but to also promote an increase in on-time
             responses. We conclude with a discussion of some lessons
             learned about evaluating large-scale, multi-site projects to
             share with other evaluators and PIs alike.},
   Doi = {10.25891/5e14-nf34},
   Key = {fds355420}
}

@article{fds355422,
   Author = {Bartlett, KW and Whicker, SA and Bookman, J and Narayan, AP and Staples,
             BB and Hering, H and McGann, KA},
   Title = {Milestone-Based Assessments Are Superior to Likert-Type
             Assessments in Illustrating Trainee Progression.},
   Journal = {J Grad Med Educ},
   Volume = {7},
   Number = {1},
   Pages = {75-80},
   Year = {2015},
   Month = {March},
   url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.4300/JGME-D-14-00389.1},
   Abstract = {BACKGROUND: The Pediatrics Milestone Project uses behavioral
             anchors, narrative descriptions of observable behaviors, to
             describe learner progression through the Accreditation
             Council for Graduate Medical Education competencies.
             Starting June 2014, pediatrics programs were required to
             submit milestone reports for their trainees semiannually.
             Likert-type scale assessment tools were not designed to
             inform milestone reporting, creating a challenge for
             Clinical Competency Committees. OBJECTIVE: To determine if
             milestone-based assessments better stratify trainees by
             training level compared to Likert-type assessments. METHODS:
             We compared assessment results for 3 subcompetencies after
             changing from a 5-point Likert scale to milestone-based
             behavioral anchors in July 2013. Program leadership
             evaluated the new system by (1) comparing PGY-1 mean scores
             on Likert-type versus milestone-based assessments; and (2)
             comparing mean scores on the Likert-type versus
             milestone-based assessments across PGY levels. RESULTS: Mean
             scores for PGY-1 residents were significantly higher on the
             prior year's Likert-type assessments than milestone-based
             assessments for all 3 subcompetencies (P < .01).
             Stratification by PGY level was not observed with
             Likert-type assessments (eg, interpersonal and communication
             skills 1 [ICS1] mean score for PGY-1, 3.99 versus PGY-3,
             3.98; P  =  .98). In contrast, milestone-based
             assessments demonstrated stratification by PGY level (eg,
             the ICS1 mean score was 3.06 for PGY-1, 3.83 for PGY-2, and
             3.99 for PGY-3; P < .01 for PGY-1 versus PGY-3).
             Significantly different means by trainee level were noted
             across 21 subcompetencies on milestone-based assessments (P
             < .01 for PGY-1 versus PGY-3). CONCLUSIONS: Initial results
             indicate milestone-based assessments stratify trainee
             performance by level better than Likert-type assessments.
             Average PGY-level scores from milestone-based assessments
             may ultimately provide guidance for determining whether
             trainees are progressing at the expected
             pace.},
   Doi = {10.4300/JGME-D-14-00389.1},
   Key = {fds355422}
}

@article{fds303524,
   Author = {Bookman, J},
   Title = {Why �False Implies False" is True - a Discovery
             Explanation},
   Journal = {The Mathematics Teacher 71 (November 1978):
             675-676.},
   Year = {2014},
   Month = {December},
   Key = {fds303524}
}

@article{fds303525,
   Author = {Bookman, J and Smith, DA},
   Title = {A Review of �The Electronic Study Guide: Precalculus
             Algebra},
   Journal = {College Mathematics Journal, June 1985},
   Year = {2014},
   Month = {December},
   Key = {fds303525}
}

@article{fds303526,
   Author = {Bookman, J},
   Title = {NSF Workshop on Assessment in Calculus Curriculum Reform
             Efforts},
   Journal = {UME Trends, October, 1992},
   Year = {2014},
   Month = {December},
   Key = {fds303526}
}

@article{fds303527,
   Author = {Bookman, J},
   Title = {Evaluation of Calculus Reform at Duke University},
   Journal = {UME Trends, March 1992},
   Year = {2014},
   Month = {December},
   Key = {fds303527}
}

@article{fds303528,
   Author = {Bookman, J and Friedman, C},
   Title = {A Comparison of the Problem Solving Performance of Students
             in Lab Based and Traditional Calculus},
   Journal = {in Dubinsky, E., Schoenfeld, A.H., Kaput, J. (Ed) Research
             in Collegiate Mathematics Education I. , Providence, RI:
             American Mathematical Society, 1994, pp.
             101-116.},
   Year = {2014},
   Month = {December},
   Key = {fds303528}
}

@article{fds303529,
   Author = {Smith, D and Bookman, J},
   Title = {Assessment in a Technological Age},
   Journal = {Proceedings of the Seventh Annual International Conference
             on Technology in Collegiate Mathematics (1996)
             Addison-Wesley 433-437},
   Year = {2014},
   Month = {December},
   Key = {fds303529}
}

@article{fds303531,
   Author = {Bookman, J},
   Title = {There’s Glory For You! - Why We Define Mathematical Terms
             The Way We Do},
   Journal = {Centroid, Spring 1996, 36-39},
   Year = {2014},
   Month = {December},
   Key = {fds303531}
}

@article{fds303532,
   Author = {Bookman, J and Friedman, C},
   Title = {Student Attitudes and Calculus Reform},
   Journal = {School Science and Mathematics, March 1998:
             117-122},
   Year = {2014},
   Month = {December},
   Key = {fds303532}
}

@article{fds303533,
   Author = {Bookman, J and Friedman, C},
   Title = {The Evaluation of Project CALC at Duke University 1989 -
             1994},
   Journal = {in B. Gold, S. Keith, W. Marion, eds., Assessment Practices
             in Undergraduate Mathematics, MAA Notes # 49, Washington DC:
             Mathematical Association of America, 1999: pp.
             253-256.},
   Year = {2014},
   Month = {December},
   Key = {fds303533}
}

@article{fds303534,
   Author = {Bookman, J},
   Title = {Program Evaluation and Undergraduate Mathematics Renewal:
             The impact of calculus reform on student performance in
             subsequent courses},
   Journal = {in Ganter, S. (Ed.) Calculus Renewal: Issues for
             Undergraduate Mathematics Education in the Next Decade, New
             York, NY: Plenum Press, 2000: pp.91 - 102},
   Year = {2014},
   Month = {December},
   Key = {fds303534}
}

@article{fds303535,
   Author = {Bookman, J},
   Title = {Duke University’s Mathematics Department Outreach to
             Secondary Mathematics Teachers: Problems, Potential, and
             Pitfalls},
   Journal = {Conference proceedings from the Invitational Conference on
             K-12 Outreach from University Science Departments, Raleigh,
             NC: North Carolina State University, 2000: pp.143 -
             145},
   Year = {2014},
   Month = {December},
   Key = {fds303535}
}

@article{fds303536,
   Author = {Bookman, J},
   Title = {Learning Mathematics Meaningfully � A Challenge to College
             Faculty},
   Journal = {Proceedings of First Annual Charleston Connections:
             Innovations in Higher Education Conference, Charleston, SC:
             The Citadel, 2001: pp.92 - 100},
   Year = {2014},
   Month = {December},
   Key = {fds303536}
}

@article{fds355423,
   Author = {Narayan, AP and Whicker, SA and Staples, BB and Bookman, J and Bartlett,
             KW and McGann, KA},
   Title = {Using an innovative curriculum evaluation tool to inform
             program improvement: the clinical skills
             fair.},
   Journal = {J Grad Med Educ},
   Volume = {6},
   Number = {1},
   Pages = {133-138},
   Year = {2014},
   Month = {March},
   url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.4300/JGME-D-13-00190.1},
   Abstract = {BACKGROUND: Program evaluation is important for assessing
             the effectiveness of the residency curriculum. Limited
             resources are available, however, and curriculum evaluation
             processes must be sustainable and well integrated into
             program improvement efforts. INTERVENTION: We describe the
             pediatric Clinical Skills Fair, an innovative method for
             evaluating the effectiveness of residency curriculum through
             assessment of trainees in 2 domains: medical
             knowledge/patient care and procedure. Each year from 2008 to
             2011, interns completed the Clinical Skills Fair as rising
             interns in postgraduate year (PGY)-1 (R1s) and again at the
             end of the year, as rising residents in PGY-2 (R2s).
             Trainees completed the Clinical Skills Fair at the beginning
             and end of the intern year for each cohort to assess how
             well the curriculum prepared them to meet the intern goals
             and objectives. RESULTS: Participants were 48 R1s and 47
             R2s. In the medical knowledge/patient care domain, intern
             scores improved from 48% to 65% correct (P < .001).
             Significant improvement was demonstrated in the following
             subdomains: jaundice (41% to 65% correct; P < .001), fever
             (67% to 94% correct; P < .001), and asthma (43% to 62%
             correct; P  =  .002). No significant change was noted
             within the arrhythmia subdomain. There was significant
             improvement in the procedure domain for all interns (χ(2)
              =  32.82, P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: The Clinical Skills
             Fair is a readily implemented and sustainable method for our
             residency program curriculum assessment. Its feasibility may
             allow other programs to assess their curriculum and track
             the impact of programmatic changes; it may be particularly
             useful for program evaluation committees.},
   Doi = {10.4300/JGME-D-13-00190.1},
   Key = {fds355423}
}

@article{fds296254,
   Author = {Narayan, AP and Whicker, SA and Staples, B and Bookman, J and Bartlett,
             K and McGann, KA},
   Title = {The Clinical Skills Fair - An Innovative Curriculum
             Evaluation Tool},
   Journal = {Journal of Graduate Medical Education},
   Year = {2013},
   Month = {April},
   Key = {fds296254}
}

@article{fds296253,
   Author = {Bookman, and Bar-On, R and Cooke, B and Schott, S},
   Title = {(Re)discovering SoTL through a Fundamental Challenge:
             Helping Students Transition to College Calculus},
   Journal = {MAA Notes: Guide to the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning
             in Mathematics},
   Year = {2012},
   Month = {October},
   Key = {fds296253}
}

@article{fds296260,
   Author = {Lardner, ED and Bookman, J},
   Title = {Lessons Learned in Interdisciplinary Professional
             Development Designed to Promote the Teaching of Quantitative
             Literacy},
   Journal = {Journal of Faculty Development},
   Volume = {27},
   Number = {2},
   Year = {2012},
   Key = {fds296260}
}

@article{fds296257,
   Author = {Varsavsky, C and Waldock, J and Harding, A and Jack Bookman and LS and Luaces, VM},
   Title = {Undergraduate mathematics around the world},
   Journal = {Delta Communications, conference proceedings of the Volcanic
             Delta ’11, the eighth Delta conference on the teaching and
             learning of undergraduate mathematics and
             statistics},
   Year = {2011},
   Key = {fds296257}
}

@article{fds296258,
   Author = {Turner, DA and Narayan, AP and Whicker, SA and Bookman, J and McGann,
             KA},
   Title = {Do pediatric residents prefer interactive learning?
             Educational challenges in the duty hours
             era.},
   Journal = {Med Teach},
   Volume = {33},
   Number = {6},
   Pages = {494-496},
   Year = {2011},
   url = {http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21355697},
   Abstract = {BACKGROUND: The volume of information that physicians must
             learn is increasing; yet, trainee educational time is
             limited. Many experts propose using trainees' learning
             preferences to guide teaching. However, data regarding
             predominant learning preferences within pediatrics are
             limited. AIM: Identify predominant learning preferences
             among pediatric residents in a Residency Training Program.
             METHODS: The Visual-Aural-Read/Write-Kinesthetic (VARK)
             questionnaire and Kolb Learning Style Inventory (LSI) were
             administered anonymously to 50 pediatric residents. RESULTS:
             Learning style assessments were completed by 50 pediatric
             residents. Residents were significantly more likely to be
             accommodating on the Kolb LSI, which is consistent with an
             interactive learning preference (p < 0.01); 30%
             demonstrated a multimodal preference on the Kolb LSI (Figure
             1). VARK assessments demonstrated that 45 (90%) respondents
             were kinesthetic, which is also consistent with a
             significant preference for interactive learning
             (p < 0.01). Forty (80%) were found to be multimodal on
             the VARK (Figure 1). There was no association between
             learning preference and the residents' anticipated career
             choice or level of training. CONCLUSIONS: The predominant
             learning preferences among a cohort of pediatric residents
             from a single training program were consistent with a
             preference for interactive learning, suggesting that some
             trainees may benefit from supplementation of educational
             curricula with additional interactive experiences. Continued
             investigation is needed in this area to assess the
             effectiveness of adapting teaching techniques to individual
             learning preferences.},
   Doi = {10.3109/0142159X.2010.542524},
   Key = {fds296258}
}

@article{fds296259,
   Author = {Alison Sweeney, MD and Alyssa Stephany, MD and Shari Whicker and M and Jack Bookman and P and David A Turner, MD},
   Title = {"Resident Educators" - Senior Pediatric Residents as
             Teachers for an Innovative Multidisciplinary Mock Code
             Curriculum},
   Journal = {Journal of Graduate Medical Education},
   Volume = {3},
   Number = {2},
   Pages = {188-195},
   Year = {2011},
   url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.4300/jgme-d-10-00212.1},
   Abstract = {<h4>Background</h4>Resuscitation education for pediatric
             residents may be limited due to the low frequency of actual
             codes in children. Mock codes represent an opportunity to
             increase trainee education in acute resuscitations, and we
             designed a unique multidisciplinary mock code curriculum
             that uses senior pediatric residents as teachers.<h4>Methods</h4>A
             novel mock code curriculum was designed and integrated into
             an existing night-float rotation. Our 2-tiered curriculum
             not only focuses on improving teaching proficiency for
             resident educators (REs) but also includes separate goals to
             augment simulation-based resuscitation education for
             resident participants (RPs) and the multidisciplinary
             staff.<h4>Results</h4>Seventy-six residents (17 REs,
             59 RPs) and more than 75 nurses have participated in the
             curriculum. After participation, 100% of residents felt that
             this curriculum would improve the quality of actual
             resuscitations, and 94% of RPs reported receiving valuable
             feedback. Comfort with teaching and feedback increased for
             REs (P < .05), and comfort in resuscitation and crisis
             resource management improved for RPs (P < .05). The nursing
             staff also felt that communication, teamwork, and
             collaboration improved due to implementation of this
             curriculum.<h4>Conclusions</h4>A unique mock code curriculum
             can improve resident comfort with teaching, peer
             facilitation, feedback, and resuscitation. Curricular
             interventions of this nature may also be able to improve the
             balance between service and education within a residency
             training program. As we move toward a competency based
             training model within graduate medical education, further
             investigation is needed to link educational modifications of
             this nature to clinical outcomes and actual resident
             performance.},
   Doi = {10.4300/jgme-d-10-00212.1},
   Key = {fds296259}
}

@article{fds296261,
   Author = {Bookman, J and Ganter, SL and Morgan, R},
   Title = {Developing assessment methodologies for quantitative
             literacy: A formative study},
   Journal = {American Mathematical Monthly},
   Volume = {115},
   Number = {10},
   Pages = {911-929},
   Publisher = {Informa UK Limited},
   Year = {2008},
   Month = {January},
   ISSN = {0002-9890},
   url = {http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcApp=PARTNER_APP&SrcAuth=LinksAMR&KeyUT=WOS:000261592600004&DestLinkType=FullRecord&DestApp=ALL_WOS&UsrCustomerID=47d3190e77e5a3a53558812f597b0b92},
   Doi = {10.1080/00029890.2008.11920609},
   Key = {fds296261}
}

@article{fds296262,
   Author = {Bookman, J and Malone, D},
   Title = {Negotiating Roles and Meaning While Learning Mathematics in
             Interactive Technology-Rich Environments},
   Journal = {The Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and
             Learning},
   Volume = {6},
   Number = {2},
   Pages = {41-65},
   Year = {2006},
   Month = {October},
   Key = {fds296262}
}

@article{fds296256,
   Author = {Bookman, J and Malone, D},
   Title = {The Nature of Learning in Interactive Technological
             Environments: A Proposal for a Research Agenda Based on
             Grounded Theory},
   Journal = {Research in Collegiate Mathematics Education},
   Editor = {edited by Selden, A. and Dubinsky, E. and Harel, G. and Hitt,
             F.},
   Year = {2003},
   Key = {fds296256}
}

@article{fds296255,
   Author = {Winter, D and Lemons, P and Bookman, J and Hoese,
             W},
   Title = {Novice Instructors and Student-Centered Instruction:
             Identifying and Addressing Obstacles to Learning in the
             College Science Laboratory},
   Journal = {Journal of Scholarship of Teaching and Learning},
   Volume = {2},
   Number = {1},
   Year = {2001},
   Key = {fds296255}
}

@article{fds357990,
   Author = {Bookman, J},
   Title = {Program Evaluation and Undergraduate Mathematics
             Renewal},
   Pages = {91-102},
   Booktitle = {Calculus Renewal},
   Publisher = {Springer US},
   Year = {2000},
   ISBN = {9781441933348},
   url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4757-4698-3_7},
   Doi = {10.1007/978-1-4757-4698-3_7},
   Key = {fds357990}
}

@article{fds303530,
   Author = {Bookman, J and Blake, L},
   Title = {Seven Years of Project CALC at Duke University - Approaching
             a Steady State?},
   Journal = {PRIMUS, September 1996: 221 - 234},
   Volume = {6},
   Number = {3},
   Pages = {221-234},
   Publisher = {Informa UK Limited},
   Year = {1996},
   Month = {January},
   url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10511979608965825},
   Abstract = {Duke University was the site of one of the first large scale
             calculus reform projects funded by the National Science
             Foundation (NSF) in the post-Tulane conference era. In the
             seven years during which Project CALC has first taught, it
             has undergone numerous revisions. In this paper, we will
             discuss these revisions and the reasons behind them. In
             particular, we will describe the changes we have made over
             the last seven years in the: mathematical content; text;
             software and hardware; emphasis on computational skill;
             amount and nature of student writing; amount and nature of
             student homework; and grading, testing and assessment of
             student learning. The reasons for these changes include:
             examination of the results of our formal evaluation; the
             attitudes of students; and the attitudes of faculty. © 1996
             Taylor & Francis Group, LLC.},
   Doi = {10.1080/10511979608965825},
   Key = {fds303530}
}

@article{fds303010,
   Author = {Bookman, J},
   Title = {An Expert Novice Study of Metacognitive Behavior in Four
             Types of Mathematics Problems},
   Journal = {PRIMUS, September 1993: 284-313.},
   Volume = {3},
   Number = {3},
   Pages = {284-314},
   Publisher = {Informa UK Limited},
   Year = {1993},
   Month = {January},
   ISSN = {1051-1970},
   url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10511979308965710},
   Abstract = {The purpose of this study was to examine the differences
             between the metacognitive behaviors exhibited by experts and
             novices. Of particular interest was the degree to which
             subjects managed or controlled their behavior and the extent
             to which solutions, particularly by experts, were schema
             driven. Nine novices (college freshman) and six experts
             (first and second year graduate students in mathematics)
             were asked to think aloud while solving four mathematics
             problems: (1) a routine problem; (2) a problem with more
             than one obvious path; (3) a nonroutine problem that
             involved the use of the skills used in the routine problem;
             and (4) a problem with insufficient or contradictory
             information. The verbal protocols provide evidence that:1.
             experts in this study possessed and used schemas to solve
             problems but schema use did not fully or adequately
             characterize expertise; 2. of the two aspects of
             metacognition - beliefs about cognition and control of
             cognition - beliefs played a more important role than
             control; and 3. assessment of work is not in and of itself
             useful; assessments must be acted on. © 1993 Taylor and
             Francis Group, LLC.},
   Doi = {10.1080/10511979308965710},
   Key = {fds303010}
}

@article{fds325014,
   Author = {Bookman, J and Smith, D and Rossi, DE},
   Title = {Software Reviews},
   Journal = {The College Mathematics Journal},
   Volume = {16},
   Number = {3},
   Pages = {218-218},
   Publisher = {Informa UK Limited},
   Year = {1985},
   Month = {June},
   url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2686577},
   Doi = {10.2307/2686577},
   Key = {fds325014}
}

 

dept@math.duke.edu
ph: 919.660.2800
fax: 919.660.2821

Mathematics Department
Duke University, Box 90320
Durham, NC 27708-0320