Variation in approaches to lab practical classes among computing academics

Informatics in Education

Volumn 6, Issue 1, 2007, Pages 215-230

  Simon, ^a   de Raadt, Michael ^b   Venables, Anne ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NEWCASTLE   (Australia)

^b UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN QUEENSLAND   (Australia)

^c VICTORIA UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

Author keywords

Computing education; Lab practical class; Phenomenography

Indexed keywords

EID: 34249081410     PISSN: 16485831     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Åkerlind, G.S. (2004). A new dimension to understanding university teaching. Teaching in Higher Education, 9(3), 363-375.
2. Åkerlind, G.S. (2005). Phenomenographic methods: a case illustration. In J. Bowden and P. Green (Eds.), Doing Ddevelopmental Phenomonography. Melbourne, Victoria, Australia, RMIT University Press. pp. 103-127.
3. Azemi, A. (1995). Teaching Computer Programming Courses in a Computer Laboratory Environment. http://fie.engrng.pitt.edu/fie95/2a5/2a55/ 2a55.htm (retrieved 3 March 2006).
4. Ballantyne, R., J.D. Bain and J. Packer (1999). Researching university teaching in Australia: themes and issues in academics' reflections. Studies of Higher Education, 24(2), 237-257.
5. Berglund, A. (2005). Learning Computer Systems in a Distributed Project Course: the what, why, how and where. Uppsala, Sweden, Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis.
6. Bligh, D.A. (1971). What's the Use of Lectures? Penguin, Harmondsworth.
7. Carbone, A., and J.J. Kaasbøll (1998). A survey of methods used to evaluate computer science teaching. In Proceedings of the 3rd Annual Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education (ITiCSE '98). Dublin, Ireland.
8. Carter, J., and R. Boyle (2002). Teaching delivery issues - lessons from computer science. Journal of Information Technology Education, 1(2), 77-89.
9. Cope, C. (2000). Educationally critical aspects of a deep understanding of the concept of an information system. In Proceedings of The Fourth Australasian Computing Education Conference (ACE2000), Melbourne, Australia.
10. Davy, J., and T. Jenkins (1999). Research-led innovation in teaching and learning. In Proceedings of the 4th Annual Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education (ITiCSE '99). Krakow, Poland.
11. Fox, D. (1983). Personal theories of teaching. Studies in Higher Education, 8(2), 151-163.
12. Hagan, D., and J. Sheard (1998). The value of discussion classes for teaching introductory programming. In Proceedings of the 3rd Annual Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education (ITiCSE '98). Dublin, Ireland.
13. Hughes, I.E. (2000). Alternatives to laboratory practicals - do they meet the needs? Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 38(1), 3-7.
14. Jenkins, T. (2002). On the difficulty of learning to program. In Proceedings of 3rd LTSN-ICS Conference. Loughborough, USA.
15. Kember, D. (1997). A reconceptualisation of the research into university academics' conceptions of teaching. Learning and Instruction, 7(3), 255-275.
16. Kutay, C., and R. Lister (2006). Up close and pedagogical: computing academics talk about teaching. Australian Computer Science Communications, 28(5), 125-134.
17. Lister, R., A. Berglund, I. Box, C. Cope, A. Pears, C. Avram, M. Bower, A. Carbone, B. Davey, M. d. Raadt, B. Doyle, S. Fitzgerald, L. Mannila, C. Kutay, M. Peltomäki, J. Sheard, Simon, K. Sutton, D. Traynor, J. Tutty and A. Venables (2007). Differing ways that computing academics understand teaching. Australian Computer Science Communications, 29(5), 97-106.
18. Lister, R., and J. Leaney (2003). First year programming: let all the flowers Bloom. Australian Computer Science Communications, 25(5), 221-230.
19. Marton, F. (1986). Phenomenography - a research approach to investigating different understandings of reality. Journal of Thought, 21, 28-49.
20. McInnis, C. (1999). Lecturing. Centre for the Study of Higher Education Booklet Series, University of Melbourne.
21. McKenzie, J. (2002). Variation and relevance structures for university teachers' learning: bringing about change in ways of experiencing teaching. Research and Development in Higher Education, 25, 434-441.
22. Prosser, M., K. Trigwell and P. Taylor (1994). A phenomenographic study of academics' conceptions of science learning and teaching. Learning and Instruction, 4, 217-231.
23. Reif, F., and L. A. Scott (1999). Teaching scientific thinking skills: students and computers coaching each other. American Journal of Physics, 67(9), 819-831.
24. Ruthven, K., and S. Hennessy (2002). A practitioner model of the use of computer-based tools and resources to support mathematics teaching and learning. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 49, 47-88.
25. Sewell, R.D.E., R.G. Stevens and D.J.A. Lewis (1996). Pharmacology experimental benefits from the use of computer-assisted learning. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 60, 303-307.
26. Simon (2003). An IT degree combining the strengths of university and TAFE. Australian Computer Science Communications, 25(5), 35-40.
27. Venables, A., G. Tan, S. Devi Nagappan and A. Ghous (2006). Everything we wanted to know about our course, but were afraid to ask? Views from a students' perspective. In Proceedings of 2006 Information Resources Management Association International Conference. Washington. D.C. USA.
28. Ward, J.P.T., J. Gordon, M.J. Field and H.P. Lehmann (2001). Communication and information technology in medical education. Medical Education Quartet: The Lancet, 357, 792-796.