Interventions to improve teaching and learning in first year mathematics courses

References

• Engelbrecht J, Harding A, Phiri P. Are OBE trained students ready for university mathematics? Pythagoras. 2010;72:3–13.
   Google Scholar
• Scott I, Yeld N, Hendry J. A case for improving teaching and learning in South African higher education. Pretoria: Council on Higher Education; 2007. (Higher Education Monitor No. 6).
   Google Scholar
• Benford R, Gess-Newsome J. Factors affecting student academic success in gateway courses at Northern Arizona University. Flagstaff (AZ): Center for Science Teaching and Learning, Northern Arizona University; 2006. (ERIC Document No ED495693).
   Google Scholar
• Boughey C. Lessons learnt from academic development movement in South African Higher Education and their relevance for student support initiatives in the FET college sector. Commissioned Report. Cape Town: Human Sciences Research Council; 2005.
   Google Scholar
• Cloete N, Bunting I. Higher education transformation: assessing performance in South Africa. Pretoria: CHET; 2000.
   Google Scholar
• Ogude NA, Kilfoil W, Du Plessis G. An institutional model for improving student retention and success at the University of Pretoria. Int J First Year High Educ. 2012;3(1):14. doi:10.5204/intjfyhe.v3i1.97.
   Google Scholar
• Dell S. South Africa: universities face more under prepared students. Business Day, Issue 45. 2010 [cited 2012 April 17]. Available from: http://www.universityworldnews.com/article.php?story=20100114190733824.
   Google Scholar
• Engelbrecht J, Harding A. The impact of the transition to outcomes-based teaching on university preparedness in mathematics in South Africa. Math Educ Res J. 2008;209(2):51–70.
   Google Scholar
• Akoojee S, Nkomo M. Access and quality in South African higher education: the twin challenges of transformation. S Afr J Higher Educ. 2007;21(3):385–399.
   Google Scholar
• Zewotir T, North D, Murray M. Student success in entry level modules at the University of KwaZulu-Natal. S Afr J Higher Educ. 2011;25(6):1233–1244.
   Google Scholar
• University of Pretoria. Strategic plan: the vision, mission and plan of the university for 2025. 2011 [cited 2014 June 9]. Available from: http://web.up.ac.za/sitefiles/file/publications/2012/eng/STRATEGIC_PLAN_(V11)_13%20Feb.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Lawson D, Croft T, Halpin M. Good practice in the provision of mathematics support centres. Learning and teaching in mathematics, statistics and operations research, 3/01. Coventry: LTSN Maths, Stats and OR Network; 2001.
   Google Scholar
• Anthony G. Factors influencing first-year students' success in mathematics. Int J Math Educ Sci Technol. 2000;31(1):3–14.
   Google Scholar
• Sutherland R, Dewhurst H. Mathematics education framework for progression from 16–19 to HE. Bristol: University of Bristol Graduate School of Education; 1999.
   Google Scholar
• Tinto V. Leaving college: rethinking the causes and cures of student attrition. Chicago (IL): The University of Chicago Press; 1993.
   Google Scholar
• Lemmens J. Students' readiness for university education [unpublished doctoral thesis]. Pretoria: University of Pretoria; 2010.
   Google Scholar
• Schlossberg NK, Waters EB, Goodman J. Counseling adults in transition: linking practice with theory. 2nd ed. New York: Springer Publishing Company Inc.; 1995.
   Google Scholar
• Bean J, Eaton S. A psychological model of college student retention. In: Braxton J, editor. Reworking the departure puzzle: new theory and research on college student retention. Nashville, TN: Vanderbilt Universities Press; 2000. p. 48–61.
   Google Scholar
• Conley D. Towards a more comprehensive conception of college readiness. A report prepared for the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. Eugene (OR): Educational Policy Improvement Center; 2007. [cited 2015 February 2]. Available from: http://www.smallschoolsproject. org/PDFS/meetings/conley_college_ready.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Braxton JM. Reinvigorating theory and research on the departure puzzle. In: Braxton JM, editor. Reworking the student departure puzzle. Nashville (TN): Vanderbilt University Press; 2000. p. 257–274.
   Google Scholar
• Sedlacek WE. The case for noncognitive measures. In: Camara WJ, Kimmel EW, editors. Choosing students: higher education admissions tools for the 21st Century. Mahwah (NJ): Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers; 2005. p. 177–193.
   Google Scholar
• Braxton JM, Hirschy AS, McClendon SA. Understanding and reducing college student departure. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2003.
   Google Scholar
• James R, McInnis C, Devlin M. Assessing learning in Australian universities. Melbourne: Centre for the Study of Higher Education; 2002. [cited 2015 May 20]. Available from: http://www.cshe.unimelb.edu.au/assessinglearning/.
   Google Scholar
• Gill O, Mac An Bhaird C, Ni Fhloinn E. The origins, development & evaluation of mathematics support services. Irish Math Soc Bull. 2010;66:51–63.
   Google Scholar
• Maynooth University. Mathematics support centre. [cited 2015 May 20]. Available from: http://supportcentre.maths.nuim.ie/testimonials.
   Google Scholar
• Grehan M, Macan Bhaird C, O'Shea A. Why do students not avail themselves of mathematics support? Res Math Educ. 2011;13(1):79–80.
   Google Scholar
• Oakley B. How I rewired my brain to become fluent in math. Nautilus Quarterly Newsletter. 2014 October [cited 2015 May 19]. Available from: http://nautil.us/issue/17/big-bangs/how-i-rewired-my-brain-to-become-fluent-in-math-rd
   Google Scholar
• Leung FKS. In search of an East Asian identity in mathematics education. Educ Stud Math. 2001;47(1):35–51.
   Google Scholar
• Engelbrecht J. Adding structure to the transition process to advanced mathematical activity. Int J Math Educ Sci Technol. 2010;41(2):143–154.
   Google Scholar
• Fhloinn EN, Perkin G. Novel approaches to refresher courses in basic mathematics. MSOR Connect. 2010;9(4):3–6.
   Google Scholar
• Burn HE, Baer EMD, Wenner JM. Embedded mathematics remediation using the math you need, when you need it: a 21st-century solution to an age-old problem. About Campus. 2013;18(5):22–25.
   Google Scholar
• Yeld N. The interface between schools and universities: findings from the National Benchmark Test project. Paper presented at: The CHEC/PGWC Joint Regional Workshop on Student Performance; October 2009; School of Public Health, University of the Western Cape. [cited 2013 October 15]. Available from: http://www.chec.ac.za/reports/Reports%20PDFs/ 10%20Report%20on%20Student%20Perfomance%20seminar%202009.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Swaner L, Brownell J. Outcomes of high impact practices for undeserved students. A review of the literature. Prepared for the Association of American Colleges and Universities; 2009. [cited 2013 June 8]. Available from: http://www.aacu.org/inclusive_excellence/documents/ ProjectUSALitReviewrevisedMar10.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Kaufmann J. Enhanced webassign. Andover: Cengage Learning; 2010.
   Google Scholar
• Harding A, Engelbrecht JC, Verwey A. Implementing Supplemental Instruction (SI) for a large group in mathematics. Int J Math Educ Sci Technol. 2011;42(7):847–856.
   Google Scholar
• Means B. Technology and education change: focus on student learning. J Res Technol Educ. 2010;42(3):285–307.
   Google Scholar
• Anastasi JS. Full-semester and abbreviated summer courses: an evaluation of student performance. Teach Psychol. 2010;1:19–22.
   Google Scholar
• Kucsera JV, Zimmaro DM. Comparing the effectiveness of intensive and traditional courses. Coll Teach. 2010;58(2):62–68.
   Google Scholar