Undergraduate students’ initial conceptions of factorials

References

• Brualdi RA. Introductory combinatorics. 4th ed.. Upper Saddle River (NJ): Pearson Prentice Hall; 2004.
   Google Scholar
• Lockwood E. A set-oriented perspective on solving counting problems. For the Learning of Mathematics. 2014;34(2):31–37.
   Google Scholar
• Halani A. Students’ ways of thinking about enumerative combinatorics solution sets: the odometer category. In: Brown S, Larsen S, Marrongelle K, Oehrtman M, editors. Proceedings for the fifteenth Special Interest Group of the MAA on research on undergraduate mathematics education. Portland (OR): Portland State University; 2012. p. 59–68.
   Google Scholar
• Lockwood E, Gibson B. Combinatorial tasks and outcome listing: Examining productive listing among undergraduate students. Educ Stud Math. 2016;91(2):247–270.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eizenberg MM, Zaslavsky O. Students’ verification strategies for combinatorial problems. Math Think Learn. 2004;6(1):15–36.
   Google Scholar
• Batanero C, Navarro-Pelayo V, Godino J. Effect of the implicit combinatorial model on combinatorial reasoning in secondary school pupils. Educ Stud Math. 1997;32:181–199.
   Google Scholar
• Hadar N, Hadass R. The road to solve combinatorial problems is strewn with pitfalls. Educ Stud Math. 1981;12:435–443.
   Google Scholar
• Martin GE. The art of enumerative combinatorics. New York (NY): Springer; 2001.
   Google Scholar
• English LD. Young children's combinatorics strategies. Educ Stud Math. 1991;22:451–474.
   Google Scholar
• Maher CA, Powell AB, Uptegrove EB, editors. Combinatorics and reasoning: representing, justifying, and building isomorphisms. New York (NY): Springer; 2011.
   Google Scholar
• Lockwood E, Swinyard CA, Caughman JS. Patterns, sets of outcomes, and combinatorial justification: Two students’ reinvention of counting formulas. International Journal of Research in Undergraduate Mathematics Education. 2016;1(1):27–62.
   Google Scholar
• Lockwood E, Caughman, JS. Set partitions and the multiplication principle. Problems, Resources, and Issues in Mathematics Undergraduate Studies. 2016;26(2):143–157.
   Google Scholar
• Cadwallader Olsker T. The labeling strategy: moving beyond order in counting problems. Problems Resour Issues Math Undergrad Stud. 2013;23(10):921–934.
   Google Scholar
• Mamona-Downs J, Downs M. Realization of techniques in problem solving: the construction of bijections for enumeration tasks. Educ Stud Math. 2004;56:235–253.
   Google Scholar
• Lockwood E. A model of students’ combinatorial thinking. Journal of Mathematical Behavior. 2013;32:251–265.
   Google Scholar
• Tillema ES. A power meaning of multiplication: three eighth graders’ solutions of Cartesian product problems. J Math Behav. 2013;32:331–352.
   Google Scholar
• Piaget J, Inhelder B. The origin of the idea of chance in children. New York (NY): W.W. Norton & Company; 1975.
   Google Scholar
• Dubois JG. Une systematique des configurations combinatoires simples. Educ Stud Math. 1984;15(1):37–57.
   Google Scholar
• Fischbein E, Gazit A. The combinatorial solving capacity in children and adolescents. ZDM. 1988;5:193–198.
   Google Scholar
• Thompson PW. Conceptual analysis of mathematical ideas: some spadework at the foundation of mathematics education. Plenary paper delivered at the 32nd annual meeting of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education. In: Figueras O, Cortina JL, Alatorre S, Rojano T, SÈpulveda A, editors. Proceedings of the annual meeting of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education. Vol 1. Morèlia: PME; 2008. p. 45–64.
   Google Scholar
• von Glasersfeld E. Radical constructivism: A way of knowing and learning. London: Falmer Press; 1995.
   Google Scholar
• Steffe LP. Radical constructivism: A way of knowing and learning. International Reviews on Mathematics Education. Karlsruhe: ZDM; 1996.
   Google Scholar
• Epp S. Discrete mathematics with applications. 4th ed. Boston (MA): Brooks/Cole; 2010.
   Google Scholar
• Clement J. Analysis of clinical interviews: foundations and model viability. In: Lesh R, Kelly A, editors. Handbook of research methodologies for science and mathematics education. Hillsdale (NJ): Lawrence Erlbaum; 2000. p. 547–589.
   Google Scholar
• Goldin GA. Observing mathematical problem solving through task-based interviews. J Res Math Educ Monograph. 1997;9:40–177.
   Google Scholar
• Strauss A, Corbin J. Basics of qualitative research: techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks (CA): Sage Publications; 1998.
   Google Scholar
• Kavousian S. Enquiries into undergraduate students’ understanding of combinatorial structures [unpublished doctoral dissertation], Vancouver: Simon Fraser University; 2008.
   Google Scholar
• Lockwood E, Reed Z, Caughman J.S. An analysis of statements of the multiplication principle in combinatorics, discrete, and finite mathematics textbooks. To appear in International Journal of Research in Undergraduate Mathematics Education. In press.
   Google Scholar
• Tucker A. Applied combinatorics. 4th ed. New York: John Wiley & Sons; 2002.
   Google Scholar