What is to be Learned? Teachers’ Collective Inquiry into the Object of Learning

References

• Ball, D. L., & Bass, H. (2000). Interweaving content and pedagogy in teaching and learning to teach: Knowing and using mathematics. In J. Boaler (Ed.), Multiple perspectives on the teaching and learning of mathematics (pp. 83–104). Westport, CT: Ablex.
   Google Scholar
• Ball, D. L., Thames, M. H., & Phelbs, G. (2008). Content knowledge for teaching: What makes it special? Journal of Teacher Education, 59(5), 389–407. doi: 10.1177/0022487108324554
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bell, A., Greer, B., Grimison, L., & Mangan, C. (1989). Children's performance on multiplicative word problems: Elements of a descriptive theory. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 20(5), 434–449. doi: 10.2307/749419
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Björklund, C. (2012). One step back, two steps forward: An educator's experiences from a learning study of basic mathematics in preschool special education. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 56(5), 497–517. doi: 10.1080/00313831.2011.599425
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Booth, S., & Hultén, M. (2003). Opening dimensions of variation: An empirical study of learning in a web-based discussion. Instructional Science, 31(1–2), 65–86. doi: 10.1023/A:1022552301050
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bowden, J., & Marton, F. (1998). University of learning. London: Cogan.
   Google Scholar
• Carlgren, I., Ahlstrand, P., Bjorkholm, E., & Nyberg, G. (2015). The meaning of knowing what is to be known. Éducation & Didactique, 8(2), 143–159. doi: 10.4000/educationdidactique.2204
   Google Scholar
• Cheng, E. C., & Lo, M. L. (2013). “Learning study”: Its origins, operationalisation, and implications. OECD Education Working Papers. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/5k3wjp0s959p-en
   Google Scholar
• Davies, B., & Renert, M. (2013). Profound understanding of emergent mathematics: Broadening the construct of teachers’ disciplinary knowledge. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 82(2), 245–265. doi:10.1007/s10649-012-9424-8
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Davies, B., & Renert, M. (2014). The math teachers know: Profound understanding of emergent mathematics. New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Dillay, C. A., & Rucker, W. E. (1970). Division with common and decimal fractional numbers. The Arithmetic Teacher, 17(5), 438–441.
   Google Scholar
• Greer, B. (1992). Multiplication and division as models of situations. In D. A. Grouws (Ed.), Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 276–295). New York, NY: Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Harris, L. R. (2011). Phenomenograhic perspectives on the structure of conceptions: The origins, purposes, strengths, and limitations of the what/how and referential/structural framework. Educational Research Review, 6, 109–124. doi: 10.1016/j.edurev.2011.01.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ingerman, A., Berge, M., & Booth, S. (2009). Physics group work in a phenomenographic perspective: Learning dynamics as the experience of variation and relevance. European Journal of Engineering Education, 34(4), 349–358. doi: 10.1080/03043790902989382
   Google Scholar
• Kullberg, A. (2010). What is taught and what is learned. Professional insights gained and shared by teachers of mathematics. Göteborg, Sweden: Acta Universitatis Gothoburgensis.
   Google Scholar
• Lewis, C., Perry, R., & Murata, A. (2006). How should research contribute to instructional improvement? The case of lesson study. Educational Researcher, 35(3), 3–14. doi: 10.3102/0013189X035003003
   Google Scholar
• Lo, M. L. (2012). Variation theory and the improvement of teaching. Gothenburg, Sweden: Acta Universitatis Gothoburgensis.
   Google Scholar
• Lo, M. L., Chik, P. P. M., & Pang, M. F. (2006). Patterns of variation in teaching the colour of light to primary 3 students. Instructional Science, 34(1), 1–19. doi: 10.1007/s11251-005-3348-y
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lo, M. L., & Pong, W. Y. (2005). Catering for individual differences: Building on variation. In M. L. Lo, W. Y. Pong, & P. P. M. Chik (Eds.), For each and everyone: Catering for individual differences through learning studies (pp. 11–26). Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ma, L. (1999). Knowing and teaching elementary mathematics. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Mårtensson, P. (2015). Att få syn på avgörande skillnader: Lärares kunskap om lärandeobjektet [Learning to see distinctions: Teachers’ gaining knowledge of the object of learning]. Jonkoping, Sweden: School of Education and Communication, Jonkoping University.
   Google Scholar
• Marton, F. (1981). Phenomenography Describing conceptions of the world around us. Instructional Science, 10(2), 177–200. doi: 10.1007/BF00132516
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marton, F. (2015). Necessary conditions of learning. New York, NY: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Marton, F., & Booth, S. (1997). Learning and awareness. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Marton, F., Runesson, U., & Tsui, A. B. (2004). The space of learning. In F. Marton & A. B. Tsui (Eds.), Classroom discourse and the space of learning (pp. 3–40). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Marton, F., & Tsui, A. B. (2004). Classroom discourse and the space of learning. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• McKernan, J. (2010). A critique of instructional objectives. Education inquiry, 1(1), 57–67. doi: 10.3402/edui.v1i1.21929
   Google Scholar
• National Commission on Teaching and America's Future. (2010). STEM teachers in professional learning communities: A knowledge synthesis. Retrieved from http://www.wested.org/online_pubs/resource1097.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Nilsson, P. (2014). When teaching makes a difference: Developing science teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge through learning study. International Journal of Science Education, 36(11), 1794–1814. doi: 10.1080/09500693.2013.879621
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pang, M. F. (2003). Two faces of variation: On continuity in the phenomenografic movement. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 47(2), 145–156. doi: 10.1080/00313830308612
   Google Scholar
• Pang, M. F., & Lo, M. L. (2012). Learning study: Helping teachers to use theory, develop professionally, and produce new knowledge to be shared. Instructional Science, 40(3), 589–606. doi: 10.1007/s11251-011-9191-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pong, W. Y. (2000). Widening the space of variation-inter-contextual and intra-contextual shifts in pupils’ understanding of two economic concepts (Unpublished doctoral thesis). University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China.
   Google Scholar
• Rovio-Johansson, A., & Lumsden, M. (2012). Collaborative production of pedagogical knowledge: Enhancing students’ learning. Journal of Applied Research in Higher Education, 4(1), 72–83. doi: 10.1108/17581181211230694
   Google Scholar
• Runesson, U., Kullberg, A., & Maunula, T. (2011). Sensitivity to student learning: A possible way to enhance teachers’ and students’ learning? In O. Zaslawski & P. Sullivan (Eds.), Constructing knowledge for teaching secondary mathematics (pp. 263–278). London: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Säljö, R. (1982). Learning and understanding: A study of differences in constructing meaning in a text. Göteborg, Sweden: Acta Universitatis Gothoburgensis.
   Google Scholar
• Schön, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. New York, NY: Basic Books.
   Google Scholar
• Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4–14. doi: 10.3102/0013189X015002004
   Google Scholar
• Skolverket. (2011). Läroplan för grundskolan, förskoleklassen och fritidshemmet 2011 [Curriculum for compulsory school, pre-school class and leisure time centers]. Stockholm: Skolverket.
   Google Scholar
• Steffe, L. P. (2004). On construction of learning trajectories of children: The case of commensurate fractions. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 6(2), 129–162. doi: 10.1207/s15327833mtl0602_4
   Google Scholar
• Vergnaud, G. (1980). Didactics and acquisition of “multiplicative structures” in secondary schools. In W. F. Archenhold, R. H. Driver, A. Orton, & C. Wood-Robinson (Eds.), Cognitive development research in science and mathematics (pp. 190–201). Leeds, UK: University of Leeds Press.
   Google Scholar
• Verschaffel, L., Greer, B., & De Corte, E. (2007). Whole number concepts and operations. In F. K. J. Lester (Ed.), Second handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (Vol 1, pp. 557–628). Charlotte, NC: Information Age.
   Google Scholar
• Vikstrom, A. (2014). What makes the difference? Teachers explore what must be taught and what must be learned in order to understand the particular character of matter. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 25(6), 709–727. doi: 10.1007/s10972-014-9397-9
   Google Scholar
• Vosniadou, S., Vamvakoussi, X., & Skopeliti, I. (2008). The framework theory approach to the problem of conceptual change. In S. Vosniadou (Ed.), International handbook of research on conceptual change (pp. 3–34). New York, NY: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Yoshida, M. (1999). Lesson study: A case study of a Japanese approach to improving instruction through school-based teacher development. Champaign, IL: University of Illinois.
   Google Scholar