References
- Anderson, J. R. (2010). Cognitive psychology and its implications (7th ed.). Worth Publishing.
- Anderson, J. R., Reder, L. M., & Simon, H. A. (2000, Summer). Applications and misapplications of cognitive psychology to mathematics education. Texas Educational Review, 29–49. http://act-r.psy.cmu.edu/papers/misapplied-abs-ja.html
- Baroody, A. J. (1999). Children’s relational knowledge of addition and subtraction. Cognition and Instruction, 17(2), 137–175. https://doi.org/10.1207/S1532690XCI170201
- Baroody, A. J., Torbeyns, J., & Verschaffel, L. (2009). Young children’s understanding and application of subtraction related principles: Introduction. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 11(1–2), 2–9. https://doi.org/10.1080/10986060802583873
- Berwick, D. M. (2008). The science of improvement. Journal of American Medical Association, 299(10), 1182–1184. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.299.10.1182
- Bruner, J. (1966). Toward a theory of instruction. Belknap.
- Bryk, A. (2009). Support a science of performance improvement. Phi Delta Kappan, 90(8), 597–600. https://doi.org/10.1177/003172170909000815
- Cai, J., Morris, A., Hohensee, C., Hwang, S., Robison, V., & Hiebert, J. (2019). Research pathways that connect research and practice. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 50(1), 2–10. https://doi.org/10.5951/jresematheduc.50.1.0002
- Cai, J., & Moyer, J. C. (2008). Developing algebraic thinking in earlier grades: Some insights from international comparative studies. In C. E. Greene & R. Rubenstein (Eds.), Algebra and algebraic thinking in school mathematics (pp. 169–182). NCTM.
- Carpenter, T. P., Fennema, E., Franke, M. L., Levi, L., & Empson, S. B. (1999). Children’s mathematics: Cognitively guided instruction. Heinemann.
- Carpenter, T. P., Franke, L. P., & Levi, L. (2003). Thinking mathematically: Integrating arithmetic & algebra in elementary school. Heinemann.
- Carraher, D. W., & Schliemann, A. D. (2007). Early algebra and algebraic reasoning. In F. K. Lester Jr. (Ed.), Second handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 669–705). Information Age.
- Catrambone, R., & Yuasa, M. (2006). Acquisition of procedures: The effects of example elaborations and active learning exercises. Learning and Instruction, 16(2), 139–153. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2006.02.002
- Chi, M. T. H. (2000). Self-explaining: The dual processes of generating and repairing mental models. In R. Glaser (Ed.), Advances in instructional psychology (pp. 161–238). Erlbaum.
- Chi, M. T. H., Adams, J., Bogusch, E. B., Bruchok, C., Kang, S., Lancaster, M., Levy, R., Li, N., McEldoon, K. L., Stump, G. S., Wylie, R., Xu, D., & Yaghmourian, D. L. (2018). Translating the ICAP theory of cognitive engagement into practice. Cognitive Science, 42(6), 1777–1832. https://doi.org/10.1111/cogs.12626
- Chi, M. T. H., Bassok, M., Lewis, M. W., Reimann, P., & Glaser, R. (1989). Self-explanations: How students study and use examples in learning to solve problems. Cognitive Science, 13(2), 145–182. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog1302_1
- Chi, M. T. H., Feltovich, P. J., & Glaser, R. (1981). Categorization and representation of physics problems by experts and novices. Cognitive Science, 5(2), 121–152. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog0502_2
- Chi, M. T. H., & VanLehn, K. (2012). Seeing deep structure from the interactions of surface features. Educational Psychologist, 47(3), 177–188. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2012.695709
- Chi, M. T. H., & Wylie, R. (2014). The ICAP framework: Linking cognitive engagement to active learning outcomes. Educational Psychologist, 49(4), 219–243. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2014.965823
- Common Core State Standards Initiative. (2010). Common core state standards for mathematics. http://www.corestandards.org/the-standards
- Craig, S. D., Sullins, J., Witherspoon, A., & Gholson, B. (2006). The deep-level-reasoning-question effect: The role of dialogue and deep-level-reasoning questions during vicarious learning. Cognition and Instruction, 24(4), 565–591. https://doi.org/10.1207/s1532690xci2404_4
- Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. (2018). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (4th ed.). Sage.
- Ding, M. (2016). Opportunities to learn: Inverse operations in U.S. and Chinese elementary mathematics textbooks. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 18(1), 45–68. https://doi.org/10.1080/10986065.2016.1107819
- Ding, M., & Auxter, A. (2017). Children’s strategies to solving additive inverse problems: A preliminary analysis. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 29(1), 73–92. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13394-017-0188-4
- Ding, M., & Carlson, M. A. (2013). Elementary teachers’ learning to construct high quality mathematics lesson plans: A use of IES recommendations. The Elementary School Journal, 113(3), 359–385. https://doi.org/10.1086/668505
- Ding, M., Chen, W., & Hassler, R. (2019). Linear quantity models in the US and Chinese elementary mathematics classrooms. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 21, 105–130. https://doi.org/10.1080/10986065.2019.1570834
- Ding, M., & Li, X. (2014). Transition from concrete to abstract representations: The distributive property in a Chinese textbook series. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 87, 103–121. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-014-9558-y
- Ding, M., Li, X., Piccolo, D., & Kulm, G. (2007). Teacher interventions in cooperative-learning mathematics classes. Journal of Educational Research, 100(3), 162–175. https://doi.org/10.3200/JOER.100.3.162-175
- Duval, R. (2006). A cognitive analysis of problems of comprehension in a learning of mathematics. Education Studies in Mathematics, 61(1–2), 103–131. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-006-0400-z
- Franke, M. L., Webb, N. M., Chan, A. G., Ing, M., Freund, D., & Battey, D. (2009). Teacher questioning to elicit students’ mathematical thinking in elementary school classrooms. Journal of Teacher Education, 60(4), 380–392. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487109339906
- Fyfe, E. R., McNeil, N. M., & Borias, S. (2015). Benefits of “concreteness fading” for children’s mathematics understanding. Learning and Instruction, 35, 104–120. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2014.10.004
- Fyfe, E. R., & Nathan, M. J. (2019). Making “concreteness fading” more concrete as a theory of instruction for promoting transfer. Educational Review, 71(4), 403–422. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131911.2018.1424116
- Gall, M. D. (1970). The use of questions in teaching. Review of Educational Research, 40(5), 707–721. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543040005707
- Gerofsky, S. (2009). Genre, simulacra, impossible exchange, and the real: How postmodern theory problematises word problems. In L. Verschaffel, B. Greer, & W. V. Dooren (Eds.), Words and worlds: Modeling verbal descriptions of situations (pp. 21–38). Sense Publishing.
- Goldstone, R. L., & Son, J. Y. (2005). The transfer of scientific principles using concrete and idealized simulations. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 14(1), 69–110. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327809jls1401_4
- Hassler, R. (2016). Mathematical comprehension facilitated by situation models: Learning opportunities for inverse relations in elementary school [PhD dissertation]. Temple University, Philadelphia, PA.
- Hiebert, J., Carpenter, T. P., Fennema, E., Fuson, K. C., Wearne, D., Murray, H., Olivier, A., & Human, P. (1997). Making sense: Teaching and learning mathematics with understanding. Heinemann.
- Hiebert, J., & Morris, A. K. (2012). Teaching, rather than teachers, as a path toward improving classroom instruction. Journal of Teacher Education, 63(2), 92–102. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487111428328
- Hiebert, J., & Stigler, J. W. (2017). Teaching versus teachers as a lever for change: Comparing a Japanese and a U.S. Perspective on improving instruction. Educational Researcher, 46(4), 169–176. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X17711899
- Kaminski, J. A., Sloutsky, V. M., & Heckler, A. F. (2008). LEARNING THEORY: The Advantage of abstract examples in learning Math. Science, 320(5875), 454–455. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1154659
- Kaput, J. J. (2008). What is algebra? What is algebraic reasoning? In J. J. Kaput, D. W. Carraher, & M. L. Blanton (Eds.), Algebra in the early grades (pp. 5–17). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
- Kazemi, E., & Stipek, D. (2001). Promoting conceptual thinking in four upper-elementary mathematics classrooms. The Elementary School Journal, 102(1), 59–80. https://doi.org/10.1086/499693
- Kieran, C. (2018). Seeking, using, and expressing structure in numbers and numerical operations: A fundamental path to developing early algebraic thinking. In C. Kieran (Ed.), Teaching and learning algebraic thinking with 5- to 12-year-olds: The global evolution of an emerging field of research and practice (pp. 79–105). Springer International Publishing AG.
- Kirschner, P. A., Sweller, J., & Clark, R. E. (2006). Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work: An analysis of the failure of constructivist, discovery, problem-based, experiential, and inquiry-based teaching. Educational Psychologists, 41(2), 75–86. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep4102_1
- Kotovsky, L., & Gentner, D. (1996). Comparison and categorization in the development of relational similarity. Child Development, 67(6), 2797–2822. https://doi.org/10.2307/1131753
- Lewis, C. (2015). What is improvement science? Do we need it in education? Educational Researcher, 44(1), 54–61. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X15570388
- Martino, A. M., & Maher, C. (1999). Teacher questioning to promote justification and generalization in mathematics: What research practice has taught us? Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 18(1), 53–78. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0732-3123(99)00017-6
- Mason, J. (2018). How early is too early for thinking algebraically? In C. Kieran (Ed.), Teaching and learning algebraic thinking with 5- to 12-year-olds: The global evolution of an emerging field of research and practice (pp. 51–78). Springer International Publishing AG.
- Mayer, R. E. (2010). Applying the science of learning. Pearson.
- McNeil, N. M., & Fyfe, E. R. (2012). “Concreteness fading” promotes transfer of mathematical knowledge. Learning and Instruction, 22(6), 440–448. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2012.05.001
- Murata, A. (2008). Mathematics teaching and learning as a mediating process: The case of tape diagrams. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 10(4), 374–406. https://doi.org/10.1080/10986060802291642
- National Mathematics Advisory Panel. (2008). Foundations for success: The final report of the National mathematics Advisory Panel. U.S. Department of Education.
- Nesher, P., & Teubal, E. (1975). Verbal cues on an interfering factor in verbal problem solving. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 6(1), 41–51. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00590023
- Ng, S. F., & Lee, K. (2009). The model method: Singapore children’s tool for representing and solving algebraic word problems. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 40, 282–313. https://www.jstor.org/stable/40539338
- Nicol, C., & Crespo, S. (2006). Learning to teach with mathematics textbooks: How preservice teachers interpret and use curriculum materials. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 62(3), 331–355. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-006-5423-y
- Nunes, T., Bryant, P., & Watson, A. (2009). Key understandings in mathematics learning: A report to the Nuffield Foundation. Nuffield Foundation.
- Pashler, H., Bain, P. M., Bottge, B. A., Graesser, A., Koedinger, K., McGaniel, M., & Metcalfe, J. (2007). Organizing instruction and study to improve student learning (NCER 2007–2004). National Center for Education Research.
- Pomerance, L., Greenberg, J., & Walsh, K. (2016). Learning about learning: What every new teacher needs to know. National Council on Teacher Quality.
- Radford, L., & Roth, W. M. (2011). Intercorporeality and ethical commitment: An activity perspective on classroom interaction. Education Studies in Mathematics, 77(2–3), 227–245. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-010-9282-1
- Renkl, A., Atkinson, R. K., & Grobe, C. S. (2004). How fading worked solution steps works – A cognitive load perspective. Instructional Science, 32(1/2), 59–82. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:TRUC.0000021815.74806.f6
- Resnick, L. B., Cauzinille-Marmeche, E., & Mathieu, J. (1987). Understanding algebra. In J. Sloboda & D. Rogers (Eds.), Cognitive processes in mathematics (pp. 169–203). Clarendon.
- Richland, L. E., Zur, O., & Holyoak, K. J. (2007). MATHEMATICS: Cognitive supports for Analogies in the mathematics classroom. Science, 316(5828), 1128–1129. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1142103
- Russell, S., Schifter, D., & Bastable, V. (2011). Connecting arithmetic to algebra: Strategies for building algebraic thinking in the elementary grades. Heinemann.
- Schliemann, A. D., Carraher, D. W., & Brizuela, B. M. (2007). Bringing out the algebraic character of arithmetic: From children’s ideas to classroom practice. Lawrence Erlbaum.
- Star, J. R., & Rittle-Johnson, B. (2009). It pays to compare: An experimental study on computational estimation. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 102(4), 408–426. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2008.11.004
- Stein, M. K., Remillard, J., & Smith, M. S. (2007). How curriculum influence student learning. In F. K. Lester (Ed.), Second handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (Vol. 1, pp. 319–369). Information Age.
- Stevens, R. (1912). The question as a measure of efficiency in instruction: A critical study of classroom practice (Contributions to Education No. 48). Teachers College, Columbia University.
- Stigler, J. W., & Hiebert, J. (1999). The teaching gap: Best ideas from the world’s teachers for improving education in the classroom. The Free Press.
- Sweller, J. (1988). Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning. Cognitive Science, 12(2), 257–285. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog1202_4
- Sweller, J., & Cooper, G. A. (1985). The use of worked examples as a substitute for problem solving in learning algebra. Cognition and Instruction, 2(1), 59–89. https://doi.org/10.1207/s1532690xci0201_3
- Torbeyns, J., De Smedt, B., Ghesquière, P., & Verschaffel, L. (2009). Solving subtractions adaptively by means of indirect addition: Influence of task, subject, and instructional factors. Mediterrannean Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 8(2), 1–30. http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10
- van Gog, T., Kester, L., & Paas, F. (2011). Effects of worked examples, example-problem, and problem-example pairs on novices’ learning. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 36(3), 212–218. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2010.10.004
- Vergnaud, G. (1988). Multiplicative structures. In J. Hiebert & M. Behr (Eds.), Number concepts and operations in the middle grades (pp. 141–161). National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
- Wittwer, J., & Renkl, A. (2008). Why instructional explanations often do not work: A framework for understanding the effectiveness of instructional explanations. Educational Psychologist, 43(1), 49–64. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520701756420
- Zhu, X., & Simon, H. A. (1987). Learning mathematics from examples and by doing. Cognition and Instruction, 4(3), 137–166. https://doi.org/10.1207/s1532690xci0403_1