Few South African students pass Grade 12 Physical Science with symbols required by university science, engineering and health science faculties. A large number of students who sit for Grade 12 Physical Science and Mathematics exams pass with symbols that are well below those required by the mainstream science courses at South African universities. Most South African universities have introduced Science Foundation Programmes with the aim of upgrading those students who failed to obtain university entrance symbols in the relevant subjects. Amongst the courses offered in Science Foundation Programmes is Foundation Physics. This study investigates the influence of Foundation Physics in order to find out if the programmes in different institutions are successful in empowering the students who failed to get the required entrance mark in Grade 12 Physical Science. Four South African Historically Black universities participated in this study. The Force and Motion Conceptual Evaluation test (FMCE) (Thornton & Sokoloff, 1998) and mechanics marks were used to assess students' understanding of Newtonian mechanics. Data was analyzed from socio-cultural perspective. A total of 194 students participated in the study. Two groups of students were compared, i.e. those who did Foundation Physics (Foundation group) and those who did not do Foundation Physics (non-Foundation group). The students were tested after they had completed a mechanics module, which forms a great foundation of Physics I (Introductory Physics). Two focus group interviews were held with selected Foundation and non-Foundation students per institution. Students voiced their experiences in Physics I and Foundation Physics. Students were chosen to represent focus groups according to their performance in the FMCE test. Mechanics class performances were also used to evaluate students' performance. In order to establish how Foundation Physics is taught, Foundation Physics Lecturer interviews were conducted at all four institutions. Analysis of data showed that both Foundation and non-Foundation students performed equally in Physics I mechanics module. Foundation group performed better than the non-Foundation group in the FMCE, which is a conceptual test. Foundation Physics lecturers indicated that there were some differences in the way mechanics was taught in Physics I and Foundation Physics. These differences affected students' performance. The lecturers also indicated that there was minimal interaction between Physics I lecturers and Foundation Physics lecturers pertaining to the teaching of the two courses. What influence does Foundation Physics have on the performance of students in Physics I? This study found that students who did Foundation Physics performed better than those who did not do Foundation Physics in conceptual questions and both the groups perform equally in questions that require memorizing and calculations. This implies that Foundation Physics courses are empowering the students to perform well in Physics I. However, as it is evidenced by this research, the differences in assessment in Physics I and Foundation Physics courses in some institutions hampers Foundation Physics students' learning, because the questions asked require them to memorize without understanding, something they are not used to. The researcher recommends that Foundation Physics staff and Physics I staff should start communicating, not only about how Foundation Physics should be run as was the case in the past, but also on how best Physics I should be run. This might help in making sure that the two courses are assessed similarly at one institution. / Mathematics, Science and Technology Education / D. Phil. (Mathematics, Science and Technology Education)

Few South African students pass Grade 12 Physical Science with symbols required by university science, engineering and health science faculties. A large number of students who sit for Grade 12 Physical Science and Mathematics exams pass with symbols that are well below those required by the mainstream science courses at South African universities. Most South African universities have introduced Science Foundation Programmes with the aim of upgrading those students who failed to obtain university entrance symbols in the relevant subjects. Amongst the courses offered in Science Foundation Programmes is Foundation Physics. This study investigates the influence of Foundation Physics in order to find out if the programmes in different institutions are successful in empowering the students who failed to get the required entrance mark in Grade 12 Physical Science. Four South African Historically Black universities participated in this study. The Force and Motion Conceptual Evaluation test (FMCE) (Thornton & Sokoloff, 1998) and mechanics marks were used to assess students' understanding of Newtonian mechanics. Data was analyzed from socio-cultural perspective. A total of 194 students participated in the study. Two groups of students were compared, i.e. those who did Foundation Physics (Foundation group) and those who did not do Foundation Physics (non-Foundation group). The students were tested after they had completed a mechanics module, which forms a great foundation of Physics I (Introductory Physics). Two focus group interviews were held with selected Foundation and non-Foundation students per institution. Students voiced their experiences in Physics I and Foundation Physics. Students were chosen to represent focus groups according to their performance in the FMCE test. Mechanics class performances were also used to evaluate students' performance. In order to establish how Foundation Physics is taught, Foundation Physics Lecturer interviews were conducted at all four institutions. Analysis of data showed that both Foundation and non-Foundation students performed equally in Physics I mechanics module. Foundation group performed better than the non-Foundation group in the FMCE, which is a conceptual test. Foundation Physics lecturers indicated that there were some differences in the way mechanics was taught in Physics I and Foundation Physics. These differences affected students' performance. The lecturers also indicated that there was minimal interaction between Physics I lecturers and Foundation Physics lecturers pertaining to the teaching of the two courses. What influence does Foundation Physics have on the performance of students in Physics I? This study found that students who did Foundation Physics performed better than those who did not do Foundation Physics in conceptual questions and both the groups perform equally in questions that require memorizing and calculations. This implies that Foundation Physics courses are empowering the students to perform well in Physics I. However, as it is evidenced by this research, the differences in assessment in Physics I and Foundation Physics courses in some institutions hampers Foundation Physics students' learning, because the questions asked require them to memorize without understanding, something they are not used to. The researcher recommends that Foundation Physics staff and Physics I staff should start communicating, not only about how Foundation Physics should be run as was the case in the past, but also on how best Physics I should be run. This might help in making sure that the two courses are assessed similarly at one institution. / Mathematics, Science and Technology Education / D. Phil. (Mathematics, Science and Technology Education)

Practical work is regarded as an essential part of learning; hence most tertiary institutions have included a practical component in their physics courses. There is a concern about the effectiveness of the practical work in most universities. The present study is a case study that assessed the contributions of simulations on Foundation Physics students’ practical work. In assessing the contribution of simulations, two tests, Determining and Interpreting Resistive Electric Circuits Concepts Test (DIRECT) and the Test of Integrated Science Process Skills (TISP) were used. A class test, observations and worksheets from students’ practical work were analyzed and interviews with a selected group were conducted. There were 20 Foundation Physics students participating from the University of Limpopo. Results indicated that the simulations contributed positively on students’ understanding of electric circuits. However the study revealed that the students who did simulations do not differ from those who did not do the simulations with regards to the development of process skills. / Institute of Science and Technology Education / M.Sc. (Physics Education)

Practical work is regarded as an essential part of learning; hence most tertiary institutions have included a practical component in their physics courses. There is a concern about the effectiveness of the practical work in most universities. The present study is a case study that assessed the contributions of simulations on Foundation Physics students’ practical work. In assessing the contribution of simulations, two tests, Determining and Interpreting Resistive Electric Circuits Concepts Test (DIRECT) and the Test of Integrated Science Process Skills (TISP) were used. A class test, observations and worksheets from students’ practical work were analyzed and interviews with a selected group were conducted. There were 20 Foundation Physics students participating from the University of Limpopo. Results indicated that the simulations contributed positively on students’ understanding of electric circuits. However the study revealed that the students who did simulations do not differ from those who did not do the simulations with regards to the development of process skills. / Institute of Science and Technology Education / M.Sc. (Physics Education)