Students’ attitudes towards online pre-laboratory exercises for a physics extended curriculum programme

References

• Agustian, H. Y., and M. K. Seery. 2017. “Reasserting the Role of Pre-Laboratory Activities in Chemistry Education: A Proposed Framework for Their Design.” Chemistry Education Research and Practice 4: 518–532. doi:10.1039/c7rp00140a
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• American Association of Physics Teachers (AAPT). 1997. “Goals of the Introductory Physics Laboratory.” The Physics Teacher 35: 546–548. doi:10.1119/1.2344803
   Google Scholar
• Branch, R. M. 2009. Instructional Design: The ADDIE Approach. New York: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Chittleborough, G. D., M. Mocerino, and D. F. Treagust. 2007. “Achieving Greater Feedback and Flexibility Using Online Pre-Laboratory Exercises with Non-Major Chemistry Students.” Journal of Chemical Education 84: 884–888. doi:10.1021/ed084p884
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dillenbourg, P., D. Schneider, and P. Synteta. 2002. Virtual Learning Environments. Paper presented at the 3rd Hellenic Conference on Information & Communication Technologies in Education, Rhodes, Greece. https://telearn.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00190701/document doi:10.1044/1059-0889(2002/er01)
   Google Scholar
• Downes, S. 2010. “Learning Networks and Connective Knowledge.” In Collective Intelligence and E-Learning 2.0: Implications of Web-Based Communities and Networking, edited by H. H. Yang and S. C. Yuen, 1–26. Hershey, New York: Information Science Reference.
   Google Scholar
• Garraway, J. 2011. “Peer Marking as a Pedagogical Tool for Epistemological Access.” In Case Studies of Epistemological Access in Foundation/Extended Curriculum Programme Studies in South Africa, edited by V. Bozalek, J. Garraway, and S. McKenna, 133–142. Cape Town: University of the Western Cape. https://www.cput.ac.za/files/images_folder/units/fundani/Epistemological.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Garvey, A. M., J. A. Gonzalo-Angulo, and L. Parte. 2017. “Cognitive Load Theory: Limiting the Gap between Academics and Students in Accounting and Auditing.” Revista De Ciências Empresariais E Jurídicas/Review of Business and Legal Sciences 28: 5–28. doi:10.26537/rebules.v0i28.1024
   Google Scholar
• Goldie, J. G. S. 2016. “Connectivism: A Knowledge Learning Theory for the Digital Age?” Medical Teacher 38: 1–6. doi:10.3109/0142159X.2016.1173661
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gregory, S. J., and G. Di Trapani. 2012. “A Blended Learning Approach to Laboratory Preparation.” International Journal of Innovation in Science and Mathematics Education 20: 56–70.
   Google Scholar
• Habibi, Z., and A. Habibi. 2014. The Effect of Information Technology in Teaching Physics Courses. Paper presented at the International Conference on Education in Mathematics, Science & Technology (ICEMST 2014), Konya, Turkey, May. http://2014.icemst.com/ICEMST_Proceeding.pdf?rnd=1022212669
   Google Scholar
• Hake, R. 1998. “Interactive-Engagement versus Traditional Methods: A Six-Thousand-Student Survey of Mechanics Test Data for Introductory Physics Courses.” American Journal of Physics 66: 64–74. doi:10.1119/1.18809
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heick, T. 2017. “What Is the Cognitive Load Theory? A Definition for Teachers.” TeachThought. https://www.teachthought.com/learning/cognitive-load-theory-definition-teachers/
   Google Scholar
• Holtman, L., and D. Marshall. 2008. “Foundational Provisions in the UWC Science Faculty: Widening Access and Promoting Success.” In Some Developments in Research in Science and Mathematics in Sub-Saharan Africa: Access,Relevance, Learning, Curriculum Research, edited by L. Holtman, C. Julie, Ø. Mikalsen, D. Mtetwa, and M. Ogunniyi, 73–105. Somerset West: African Minds.
   Google Scholar
• Jones, S. M., and A. Edwards. 2010. “Online Pre-Laboratory Exercises Enhance Student Preparedness for First Year Biology Practical Classes.” International Journal of Innovation in Science and Mathematics Education 18: 1–9.
   Google Scholar
• Keim, J., J. C. McDermott, and M. R. Gerard. 2010. “A Community College Bridge Program: Utilizing A Group Format to Promote Transitions for Hispanic Students.” Community College Journal of Research and Practice 34: 769–783. doi:10.1080/10668920802319104
   Google Scholar
• Leonard, L., T. Mokwele, A. Siebrits, and J. Stoltenkamp. 2016. ‘Digital Natives’ Require Basic Digital Literacy Skills. Paper presented at the International Academic Forum IICTCHawaii2016 Conference, Hawaii, USA, January 8–11. https://papers.iafor.org/submission19537/
   Google Scholar
• Marshall, D., and J. M. Case. 2010. “Discourse in the Learning of Physics: The Design of an Introductory Physics Curriculum.” African Journal of Research in Mathematics, Science and Technology Education 14(2): 15–27. DOI: 10.1080/10288457.2010.10740679
   Google Scholar
• Merkoffer, P., and A. Murphy. 2009. “The E-Skills Landscape in South Africa: The Issues of Demand and Supply and the Use of International Benchmarks to Inform the South African E-Skills Development Context.” Zeitschrift Für Politikberatung 2: 685–695. doi.:10.1007/s12392-010-0219-y
   Google Scholar
• Myers, C., and S. Drevlow 1982. Summer Bridge Program: A Dropout Prevention Program for Minority and Low-Income Students at the University of California. San Diego. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New York, March 21. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED216630
   Google Scholar
• National Planning Commission. 2012. National Development Plan 2030: Our Future – Make It Work. Pretoria: Department of the Presidency.
   Google Scholar
• Neuman, W. L. 2003. Social Research Methods: Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches. Fifth edition. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
   Google Scholar
• Paetkau, M., D. Bissonnette, and C. Taylor. 2013. “Measuring the Effectiveness of Simulations in Preparing Students for the Laboratory.” The Physics Teacher 51: 113–115. doi:10.1119/1.4775536
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reagan, A. M. 2012. “Online Introductory Physics Labs: Status and Methods.” Washington Academy of Sciences 98: 31–46.
   Google Scholar
• Salmon, G. N. D. “The five stage model.” http://www.gillysalmon.com/five-stage-model.html [15 October 2017].
   Google Scholar
• Siemens, G. 2005. “Connectivism: A Learning Theory for the Digital Age.” International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning 1(2).
   Google Scholar
• Strayhorn, T. L. 2011. “Bridging the Pipeline: Increasing Underrepresented Students’ Preparation for College through a Summer Bridge Program.” American Behavioral Scientist 55(2) 142–159. doi:10.1177/0002764210381871
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Timpany, G. 2016. “Structured Vs. Unstructured Questions.” Cvent. https://blog.cvent.com/events/feedback-surveys/structured-vs-unstructured-questions/
   Google Scholar
• Trumper, R. 2003. “The Physics Laboratory – A Historical Overview and Future Perspectives.” Science and Education 12: 645–670. doi:10.1023/A:1025692409001
   Google Scholar
• University of the Western Cape. 2016. “Institutional Operating Plan 2016–2020 White Paper.” https://ikamva.uwc.ac.za/content/whitepaper.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Van De Heyde, V., J. Stoltenkamp, and A. Siebrits 2017. “Designing a Social Work Online Self-Coaching Program: Integrated Support and Joint Ownership.” Cogent Education 4: 1–18. doi: 10.1080/2331186X.2017.1346547
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• World Economic Forum. 2016. “The Global Information Technology Report 2016: Innovating in the digital economy.” http://www3.weforum.org/docs/GITR2016/WEF_GITR_Full_Report.pdf
   Google Scholar