This qualitative study looked for barriers to curricular change in general education mathematics at a large public university (LPU) in the Western United States. The literature showed that a number of national organizations dealing in math education have recommended alternatives to the traditional algebra-intensive curriculum. LPU still relies predominantly on traditional College Algebra as its quantitative literacy (QL) course. With such an algebra-heavy emphasis, students may be missing more relevant and useful mathematics. In addition, the College Algebra course has a low success rate, which becomes a barrier to student retention and graduation. Interviews were conducted with 14 participants who included faculty, staff, and administrators. Analysis of the data showed 12 barriers that were grouped into four clusters: goals, control, quality, and communications. Finally, recommendations in each of the four clusters are offered for removing barriers, considering alternative curricula, and designing an intentional curriculum around QL learning outcomes.

This qualitative research used the tenants of phenomenological research to structure a study that begins to identify faculty coordinator’s decision processes in selecting a general education mathematics course. In this study, I examined the question if a faculty member's experiences or beliefs had any influence on the decision process. The interviews occurred with faculty in degree programs grouped by the following a) no specific mathematics requirements (e.g., Humanities) degree programs, b) mathematics-light degree programs (e.g., Social Sciences) and c) mathematics-intensive degrees (e.g., Computer Science). The results of this study are varied but suggest that faculty tasked making decisions on mathematics should understand current recommendations and trends in mathematics selection.