The earliest teaching and learning of probability in Singapore, the US, and Indonesia from the perspectives of textbooks analysis

References

• Afriki, A., A. S. Farani, D. R. Anggari, F. Wulan, H. Purnihastuti, N. Darwanti, S. Puspitawati, and Hendriyeti. 2015. Buku Tematik Terpadu Kurikulum 2013 Untuk Kelas 6 [Integrated Mathematics Textbooks 2013 Curriculum for 6th Grade]. Jakarta, Indonesia: Pusat Kurikulum dan Perbukuan, Balitbang, Kemdikbud.
   Google Scholar
• Ahuja, O. P. 2005. “World-Class High Quality Mathematics Education for All K-12 American Students.” The Montana Mathematics Enthusiast 3 (2): 223–248.
   Google Scholar
• Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority. 2010. The Australian Curriculum: Mathematics. Sydney, NSW: Author.
   Google Scholar
• Ball, D. L., and D. K. Cohen. 1996. “Reform by the Book: What is – or Might be – the Role of Curriculum Materials in Teacher Learning and Instructional Reform?” Educational Researcher 25 (9): 6–14. doi: 10.3102/0013189X025009006
   Google Scholar
• Batanero, C. 2013. “Teaching and Learning Probability.” In Encyclopedia of Mathematics Education, edited by S. Lerman, 491–496. Heidelberg: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Batanero, C., E. Chernoff, J. Engel, H. Lee, and E. Sánchez. 2016. “Research on Teaching and Learning Probability.” In Research on Teaching and Learning Probability. ICME-13 Topical Surveys, edited by C. Batanero, E. Chernoff, J. Engel, H. Lee, and E. Sánchez, 1–33. Cham: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Batanero, C., J. D. Godino, and R. Roa. 2004. “Training Teachers to Teach Probability.” Journal of Statistics Education 12 (1): 1–15.
   Google Scholar
• Batanero, C., M. Henry, and B. Parzysz. 2005. “The Nature of Chance and Probability.” In Exploring Probability in School, edited by G. A. Jones, 15–37. Boston: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Boonen, A. J. H., M. Van der Schoot, F. Van Wesel, M. H. De Vries, and J. Jolles. 2013. “What Underlies Successful Word Problem Solving? A Path Analysis in Sixth Grade Students.” Contemporary Educational Psychology 38 (3): 271–279. doi:10.1016/j.cedpsych.2013.05.001.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Borovcnik, M., and R. Kapadia. 2014. “A Historical and Philosophical Perspective on Probability.” In Probabilistic Thinking: Presenting Plural Perspectives, edited by E. J. Chernoff and B. Sriraman, 7–34. New York, NY: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Cai, J. 1995. A Cognitive Analysis of U.S and Chinese Students’ Mathematical Performance on Tasks Involving Computation, Simple Problem Solving, and Complex Problem Solving. Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
   Google Scholar
• Cai, J., and M. Cirillo. 2014. “What Do We Know About Reasoning and Proving? Opportunities and Missing Opportunities from Curriculum Analyses.” International Journal of Educational Research 64: 132–140. doi: 10.1016/j.ijer.2013.10.007
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Charalambous, C. Y., S. Delaney, H.-Y. Hsu, and V. Mesa. 2010. “A Comparative Analyses of the Addition and Subtraction of Fraction in Textbooks from Three Countries.” Mathematical Thinking and Learning 12 (2): 117–151. doi:10.1080/10986060903460070.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Choi, K.-M., and H.-J. Park. 2013. “A Comparative Analysis of Geometry Education on Curriculum Standards, Textbook Structure, and Textbook Items Between the U.S. and Korea.” Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education 9 (4): 379–391. doi:10.12973/eurasia.2013.947a.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Erbas, A. K., C. Alacaci, and M. Bulut. 2012. “A Comparison of Mathematics Textbooks from Turkey, Singapore, and the United States of America.” Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice 12 (3): 2324–2330.
   Google Scholar
• Fan, L. 2013. “Textbook Research as Scientific Research: Towards a Common Ground on Issues and Methods of Research on Mathematics Textbooks.” ZDM Mathematics Education 45 (5): 765–777. doi:10.1007/s11858-013-0530-6.
   Google Scholar
• Fan, L., and G. S. Kaeley. 2000. “The Influence of Textbooks on Teaching Strategies: An Empirical Study.” Mid-Western Educational Researcher 13 (4): 2–9.
   Google Scholar
• Fan, L. H., and Y. Zhu. 2000. “Problem Solving in Singaporean Secondary Mathematics Textbooks.” The Mathematics Educator 5: 117–141.
   Google Scholar
• Fowler, L. D. 2015. “Comparison of Linear Functions in Middle Grades Textbooks from Singapore and the United States.” PhD diss., Florida International University.
   Google Scholar
• Frejd, P. 2012. “Teachers’ Conceptions of Mathematical Modelling at Swedish Upper Secondary School.” Journal of Mathematical Modelling and Application 1 (5): 17–40.
   Google Scholar
• Gainsburg, J. 2008. “Real-World Connections in Secondary Mathematics Teaching.” Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education 11 (3): 199–219.
   Google Scholar
• Gal, I. 2005. “Towards “Probability Literacy” for All Citizens: Building Blocks and Instructional Dilemmas.” In Exploring Probability in Schools: Challenges for Teaching and Learning, edited by G. Jones, 39–63. New York, NY: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Goertz, M. E. 2000. “Implementing Standards-Based Reform: Challenges for State Policy.” In Closing the gap: A Report on the Wingspread Conference: Beyond the Standards Horse Race, edited by T. Duggan and M. Holmes, 65–83. Washington, DC: Council for Basic Education.
   Google Scholar
• Gu, L., R. Huang, and F. Marton. 2004. “Teaching With Variation: A Chinese Way of Promoting Effective Mathematics Learning.” In How Chinese Learn Mathematics: Perspectives From Insiders, edited by L. Fan, J. Wong, J. Cai, and S. Li, 309–347. River Edge, NJ: World Scientific Publishing Co.
   Google Scholar
• Hadi, S. 2002. “Effective Teacher Professional Development for the Implementation of Realistic Mathematics Education in Indonesia.” PhD diss., University of Twente.
   Google Scholar
• Haggarty, L., and B. Pepin. 2002. “An Investigation of Mathematics Textbooks and Their Use in English, French, and German Classrooms: Who Get an Opportunity to Learn What?” British Educational Research Journal 28 (4): 567–590. doi:10.1080/0141192022000005832.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hewitt, P. G. 1983. “Millikan Lecture 1982: The Missing Essential – a Conceptual Understanding of Physics.” American Journal of Physics 51: 305–311.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hong, D. S., and K. M. Choi. 2014. “A Comparison of Korean and American Secondary School Textbooks: The Case of Quadratic Equations.” Educational Studies in Mathematics 85 (2): 241–263. doi: 10.1007/s10649-013-9512-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hoven, J., and B. Garelick. 2007. “Singapore Math: Simple or Complex?” Educational Leadership 65 (3): 28–31.
   Google Scholar
• Jones, G. 2005. “Introduction.” In Exploring Probability in School: Challenges for Teaching and Learning, edited by G. Jones, 1–12. New York, NY: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Jones, G. A., C. W. Langrall, and E. S. Mooney. 2007. “Research in Probability: Responding to Classroom Realities.” In The Second Handbook of Research on Mathematics Teaching and Learning: A Project of the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, edited by F. K. Lester Jr, 909–955. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Jones, D. L., and J. E. Tarr. 2007. “An Examination of the Levels of Cognitive Demand Required by Probability Tasks in Middle Grades Mathematics Textbooks.” Statistics Education Research Journal 6 (2): 4–27.
   Google Scholar
• Karp, A., V. N. Dubrovsky, V. A. Bulychev, S. Garfunkel, I. Ovsyannikova, S. A. Polikarpov, A. L. Semenov, et al. 2016. Current Issues in Mathematics Education. Bedford, MA: COMAP.
   Google Scholar
• Kissane, B., and M. Kemp. 2010. “Teaching and Learning Probability in an Age of Technology.” In Linking Applications with Mathematics and Technology; Proceedings of the 15th Annual Conference of the Asian Technology Conference on Mathematics, edited by M. Majewski, W.-C. Yang, T. de Alwis, and W. P. Hew, 401–410. Kuala Lumpur: ATCM Inc.
   Google Scholar
• Larina, G. 2016. “Analysis of Real-World Math Problems: Theoretical Model and Classroom Applications.” Educational Studies Moscow 3: 151–168. Accessed January 8 2019. https://vo.hse.ru/en/2016–3/191153172.html
   Google Scholar
• Leung, F. K. S. 2005. “Some Characteristics of East Asian Mathematics Classrooms Based on Data from the TIMSS 1999 Video Study.” Educational Studies in Mathematics 60: 199–215.
   Google Scholar
• Li, Y. 2000. “A Comparison of Questions That Follow Selected Content Presentations in American and Chinese Mathematics Textbooks.” Journal for Research in Mathematics Education 31 (2): 234–241. doi:10.1007/s10649-013-9512-4.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Max, B., B. Jean, J. Bretzlauf, A. Dillard, R. Hartfield, A. Issacs, D. A. Leslie, et al. 2004. Everyday Mathematics [The University of Chicago School Mathematics Project] for 6th Grade. Chicago, IL: SRA/McGraw-Hill.
   Google Scholar
• MECI (Ministry of Education and Culture of Indonesia). 2013. “Perkembangan Kurikulum di Indonesia, kelemahan dan kelebihannya” [Curriculum development in Indonesia, the weaknesses and strengths]. Accessed April 1 2018. http://www.kemdikbud.go.id/.
   Google Scholar
• Ministerio de Educación y Ciencia. 2006. Real Decreto 1513/2006, de 7 de Diciembre, por el que se Establecen las Enseñanzas Mínimas de la Educación Primaria [Royal decree establishing the minimum content for primary education]. Madrid: Author.
   Google Scholar
• Ministry of Education. 2007. The New Zealand Curriculum. Wellington: Learning Media.
   Google Scholar
• MOE (Ministry of Education of Singapore). 2006. Secondary Mathematics Syllabuses. Singapore: Ministry of Education, Curriculum Planning and Development Division. Accessed August 20 2018. http://www.moe.gov.sg/education/syllabuses.
   Google Scholar
• MOE (Ministry of Education of Singapore). 2012. Secondary Mathematics Syllabuses. Singapore: Ministry of education, curriculum planning and development division. Accessed August 20 2018. http://www.moe.gov.sg/education/syllabuses.
   Google Scholar
• Mullis, I. V. S., M. O. Martin, P. Foy, and M. Hooper. 2016a. “TIMSS 2015 international results in mathematics.” Accessed November 20 2018. http://timssandpirls.bc.edu/timss2015/international-results/.
   Google Scholar
• Mullis, I. V. S., M. O. Martin, S. Goh, and K. Cotter. 2016b. “TIMSS 2015 encyclopedia: Education policy and curriculum in mathematics and science.” Accessed November 20 2018. http://timssandpirls.bc.edu/timss2015/encyclopedia /.
   Google Scholar
• National Research Council. 2001. Helping Children Learn Mathematics. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
   Google Scholar
• NCTM (National Council of Teachers of Mathematics). 2000. Principle and Standards for School Mathematics. Reston, VA: NCTM.
   Google Scholar
• Nugroho, B. P. 2016. “2016, Kemendikbud Akan Menambah Sekolah Yang Terapkan Kurikulum 2013” [2016, ministry of education and culture (Indonesia) will increase the number of schools that implement 2103 Curriculum]. Detik News, January 2. Accessed July 15 2016. https://news.detik.com/berita/d-3109182/2016-kemendikbud-akan-menambah-sekolah-yang-terapkan-kurikulum-2013.
   Google Scholar
• OECD. 2007. PISA 2006: Science Competencies for Tomorrow’s World. Paris: OECD.
   Google Scholar
• OECD. 2010. PISA 2009 Results: What Students Know and Can Do. Student Performance in Reading, Mathematics, and Science (Vol. 1). Paris: OECD.
   Google Scholar
• OECD. 2016. “PISA 2015 Results in Focus.” Accessed January 7 2018. https://www.oecd.org/pisa/pisa-2015-results-in-focus.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development). 2004. Learning for Tomorrow’s World. First Results From PISA 2003. Paris: OECD.
   Google Scholar
• Ortiz, J. J., M. J. Cañizares, C. Batanero, and L. Serrano. 2002. "An Experimental Study of Probabilistic Language in Secondary School Textbooks.” Paper presented at the International Conference on Teaching Statistics 6 (ICOTS 6), Cape Town, South Africa, July 7–12.
   Google Scholar
• Ottevanger, W. 2001. “Materials development as a catalyst for science curriculum implementation in Namibia” PhD diss., University of Twente.
   Google Scholar
• Panasuk, R. M. 2010. “Three Phase Ranking Framework for Assessing Conceptual Understanding in Algebra Using Multiple Representations.” Education 131 (2): 235–257.
   Google Scholar
• Park, A. M. 2011. Comparing the Cognitive Demand of Traditional and Reform Algebra 1 Textbooks. Claremont, CA: Harvery Mudd College.
   Google Scholar
• Reys, B. J., and R. E. Reys. 2006. “The Development and Publication of Elementary Mathematics Textbooks: Let the Buyer Beware!.” Phi Delta Kappan 87: 377–384.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reys, B. J., R. E. Reys, and O. Chavez. 2004. “Why Mathematics Textbooks Matter.” Educational Leadership 61 (5): 61–66.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Secretaría de Educación Pública. 2011. Plan de Estudios, Educación Básica [Curriculum, basic education]. México: Secretaría de Educación Pública.
   Google Scholar
• Seng, T. K., L. C. Yee, J. Yeo, and I. Chow. 2007. New Syllabus Mathematics 6th Edition (3^rd Series) for 8^th Grade. Singapore: Shing Lee Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• SGBox.com. 2014. “Which Singapore Math Textbooks Are Singapore Schools Using?” Accessed April 18 2016. http://www.sgbox.com/singaporetextbooks.html.
   Google Scholar
• Siregar, E. R. M. S. 2015. . “A Comparative Study of International Mathematics Curriculum Materials and Standards: Indonesia, Singapore, and the US Common Core State Standards.” Poster presented at research and creative activities poster day at Western Michigan University, MI, April 24.
   Google Scholar
• Soedjadi. 2000. Teaching Mathematics has to Focus on Thinking Process. Indonesia: Kompas.
   Google Scholar
• Son, J., and S. Senk. 2010. “How Standards Curricula in the USA and Korea Present Multiplication and Division of Fractions.” Educational Studies in Mathematics 74: 117–142.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stein, M. K., M. S. Smith, M. Henningsen, and E. A. Silver. 2000. Implementing Standards-Based Mathematics Instruction. Williston, NY: Teachers College Press.
   Google Scholar
• Sweller, J., P. Chandler, P. Tierney, and M. Cooper. 1990. “Cognitive Load as A Factor in the Structuring of Technical Material.” Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 119: 176–192.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tarr, J. E., R. E. Reys, B. J. Reys, O. Chavez, J. Shih, and S. Osterlind. 2008. “The Impact of Middles Grades Mathematics Curricula and the Classroom Learning Environment on Student Achievement.” Journal for Research in Mathematics Education 39 (3): 247–280.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thevenot, C. 2010. “Arithmetic Word Problem Solving: Evidence for the Construction of a Mental Model.” Acta Psychol. 133: 90–95. doi: 10.1016/j.actpsy.2009.10.004
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thomson, S., and N. Fleming. 2004. Examining the Evidence: Science Achievement in Australian Schools in TIMSS 2002 (TIMSS Australia Monograph No. 7). Melbourne: Australian Council for Educational Research.
   Google Scholar
• Törnrros, J. 2005. “Mathematics Textbooks, Opportunity to Learn and Student Achievement.” Studies in Educational Evaluation 31 (4): 315–327.
   Google Scholar
• Tsakiridou, H., and E. Vavyla. 2015. “Probability Concepts in Primary School.” American Journal of Educational Research 3 (4): 535–540.
   Google Scholar
• U.S. Department of Education, Mathematics and Science Education Expert Panel. 1999. Exemplary and Promising Mathematics Programs. Washington, DC: Department of Education.
   Google Scholar
• Valverde, G., L. Bianchi, R. Wolfe, W. Schmidt, and R. Houang. 2002. According to the Book: Using TIMSS to Investigate the Translation of Policy Into Practice Through the World of Textbooks. London: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• Van De Walle, J. A., K. S. Karp, and J. M. Bay-Williams. 2013. Elementary and Middle School Mathematics: Teaching Developmentally. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.
   Google Scholar
• Weinberg, A., and E. Weisner. 2010. “Understanding Mathematics Textbooks Through Reader-Oriented Theory.” Educational Study in Mathematics 76 (1): 49–63. doi:10.1007/s10649-010-9264-3.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Westbury, I. 1992. “Comparing American and Japanese Achievement: Is the United States Really a Low Achiever?.” Educational Researcher 21 (5): 21–36.
   Google Scholar
• Wijaya, A., M. Van den Heuvel-Panhuizen, and M. Doorman. 2015. “Opportunity-to-learn Context-Based Tasks Provided by Mathematics Textbooks.” Educational Studies in Mathematics 89: 41–65. doi:10.1007/s10649-015-9595-1.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Xin, Y. P. 2007. “Word Problem Solving Tasks in Textbooks and Their Relation to Student Performance.” Journal of Educational Research 100 (6): 347–359.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yang, D. C. 2017. “Study of Fractions in Elementary Mathematics Textbooks from Finland and Taiwan.” Educational Studies 44 (2): 190–211. doi:10.1080/03055698.2017.1347493.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yang, D. C., R. E. Reys, and L. L. Wu. 2010. “Comparing the Development of Fractions in the Fifth- and Sixth-Graders’ Textbooks of Singapore, Taiwan, and the USA.” School Science and Mathematics 110 (3): 118–127. doi:10.1111/j.1949-8594.2010.00015.x.
   Google Scholar
• Yang, D. C., and I. A. Sianturi. 2017. “An Analysis of Singaporean Versus Indonesian Textbooks Based on Trigonometry Content.” Eurasia Journal of Mathematics Science and Technology Education 13 (7): 3829–3848.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yang, D. C., Y. K. Tseng, and T. L. Wang. 2017. “A Comparison of Geometry Problems in Middle-Grade Mathematics Textbooks From Taiwan, Singapore, Finland, and the United States.” Eurasia Journal of Mathematics Science and Technology Education 13 (7): 2841–2857.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhu, Y., and L. Fan. 2006. “Focus on the Representation of Problem Types in Intended Curriculum: A Comparison of Selected Mathematics Textbooks From Mainland China and the United States.” International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education 4 (4): 609–626. doi:10.1007/s10763-006-9036-9.
   Google Scholar