Revised Bloom's taxonomy and integral calculus: unpacking the knowledge dimension

References

• Green KH. Matching functions and graphs at multiple levels of Bloom's revised taxonomy. PRIMUS: Problems Res Issues Math Undergraduate Stud. (2010);20(3):204–216.
   Google Scholar
• Anderson LW, Krathwohl DR, Airasian PW, et al. A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: a revision of Bloom's Taxonomy of educational objectives (complete edition). New York (NY): Longman; 2001.
   Google Scholar
• Hanna W. The new Bloom's Taxonomy: Implications for music education. Arts Edu Policy Review. 2007;108(4):7–16.
   Google Scholar
• Thompson E, Luxton-Reilly A, Whalley JL, et al. Bloom's taxonomy for CS assessment. In: S Hamilton M. Proceedings of the tenth conference on Australasian computing education – Volume 78. Paper presented at Research in Practice in Information Technology, Wollongong: Australian Computer Society, Inc.; 2008. p. 155–161.
   Google Scholar
• Pickard MJ. The new Bloom's taxonomy: An overview for family and consumer sciences. J Family Consumer Sci Edu. 2007;25(1):45–55.
   Google Scholar
• Gurlitt J, Renkl A. Prior knowledge activation: how different concept mapping tasks lead to substantial differences in cognitive processes, learning outcomes, and perceived self-efficacy. Instr Sci. 2010;38(4):417–433.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weinert FE, Helmke A. The neglected role of individual differences in theoretical models of cognitive development. Learn Instr. 1998;8(4):309–323.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bloom BS, Engelhart MD, Furst EJ, et al. Taxonomy of educational objectives: handbook I: cognitive domain. New York (NY): David McKay; 1956.
   Google Scholar
• Piaget J, Elkind D, Tenzer A. Six psychological studies. New York (NY): Vintage Books; 1967.
   Google Scholar
• Flavell JH. Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new area of cognitive–developmental inquiry. Am Psychol. 1979;34(10):906–911.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Näsström G. Interpretation of standards with Bloom's revised taxonomy: a comparison of teachers and assessment experts. Int J Res Method Edu. 2009;32(1):39–51.
   Google Scholar
• Anderson LW. Objectives, evaluation, and the improvement of education. Studies Edu Eval. 2005;31(2):102–113.
   Google Scholar
• Krathwohl DR. A revision of Bloom's taxonomy: An overview. Theory Pract. 2002;41(4):212–218.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jones SR. Understanding the integral: Students’ symbolic forms. J Math Behavior. 2013;32(2):122–141.
   Google Scholar
• Thompson PW, Silverman J. The concept of accumulation in calculus. In: MP Carlson, C Rasmussen, Editors. Making the connection: research and teaching in undergraduate mathematics. Washington (DC): Mathematical Association of America; 2008. p. 43–52.
   Google Scholar
• Ministry of Education. The New Zealand curriculum. Wellington: Learning Media; 2007.
   Google Scholar
• Victorian Curriculum and Assessment Authority. Victorian certificate of education study design. Melbourne (Australia): State Government of Victoria; 2013.
   Google Scholar
• Sofronas KS, DeFranco TC, Vinsonhaler C, et al. What does it mean for a student to understand the first-year calculus? Perspectives of 24 experts. J Math Behavior. 2011;30(2):131–148.
   Google Scholar
• Kiat SE. Analysis of students’ difficulties in solving integration problems. Math Educ. 2005;9(1):39–59.
   Google Scholar
• Thomas MOJ, Hong YY. The Riemann integral in calculus: students' processes and concepts. In: Clarkson PC, editor. Proceedings of the 19th Annual Conference of the Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia (MERGA); 1996. p. 572–579.
   Google Scholar
• Mahir N. Conceptual and procedural performance of undergraduate students in integration. I J Math Edu Sci Technol. 2009;40(2):201–211.
   Google Scholar
• Orton A. Students' understanding of integration. Educ Stud Math. 1983;14(1):1–18.
   Google Scholar
• Bowen GA. Document analysis as a qualitative research method. Qual Res J. 2009;9(2):27–40.
   Google Scholar
• Su WM, Osisek PJ. The Revised Bloom's Taxonomy: implications for educating nurses. J Cont Educ Nursing. 2011;42(7):321.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Anton H, Bivens I, Davis S. Calculus: early transcendentals. Jefferson City (MO): Wiley Global Education; 2012.
   Google Scholar
• Thomas GB, Weir MD, Hass J, et al. Thomas' calculus early transcendentals. 12th ed. Boston (MA): Pearson; 2010.
   Google Scholar
• Stewart J. Calculus: early transendentals. 6th ed. Belmont (CA): Thompson; 2008.
   Google Scholar
• Clark KM, Thoo JB. Introduction to the special issue on the use of history of mathematics to enhance undergraduate mathematics instruction. PRIMUS: Problems Res Issues Math Undergraduate. 2014;24(8):663–668.
   Google Scholar
• Huntley MA, Flores A. A history of mathematics course to develop prospective secondary mathematics teachers' knowledge for teaching. PRIMUS: Problems Res Issues Math Undergraduate. 2010;20(7):603–616.
   Google Scholar
• Mayfield B. Weaving history through the major. PRIMUS: Problems Res Issues Math Undergraduate. 2014;24(8):669–683.
   Google Scholar
• Harvey R, Averill R. A lesson based on the use of contexts: An example of effective practice in secondary school mathematics. Math Teacher Educ Develop. 2012;14(1):41–59.
   Google Scholar
• Van Den Heuvel-Panhuizen M. The role of contexts in assessment problems in mathematics. Learn Math. 2005;25(2):2–23.
   Google Scholar
• Barnes M. Investigating change: an introduction to calculus for Australian schools. unit 9: total change. Carlton: Curriculum Press; 1993.
   Google Scholar
• Weinstein CE, Mayer RE. The teaching of learning strategies. In: M Wittrock, Editor. Handbook of research on teaching. 3rd ed. New York (NY): Macmillan; 1986. p. 315–327.
   Google Scholar
• Schoenfeld AH. What's all the fuss about metacognitlon? In: AH Schoenfeld, editor. Cognitive science and mathematics education. Hillsdale (NJ): Lawrence Erlbaum; 1987. p. 189–215.
   Google Scholar
• Chazan D. High school geometry students' justification for their views of empirical evidence and mathematical proof. Educ Stud Math. 1993;24(4):359–387.
   Google Scholar
• Keys TD, Conley AM, Duncan GJ, et al. The role of goal orientations for adolescent mathematics achievement. Contemp Educ Psychol. 2012;37(1):47–54.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McNamara DS. Measuring deep, reflective comprehension and learning strategies: challenges and successes. Metacog Learn. 2011;6(2):195–203.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar