References
- Advisory Committee to the NSF Directorate for Education and Human Resources. Shaping the future: New expectations for undergraduate education in science, mathematics, engineering, and technology. http://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=nsf96139. Accessed 28 April 2016.
- Bransford, J., A. Brown, and R. Cocking (Eds). 2000. How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience, and School. Washington DC: National Academy Press.
- Carlson, M. and C. Rasmussen (Eds). 2008. Making the Connection: Research and Teaching in Undergraduate Mathematics Education. Washington, DC: The Mathematical Association of America.
- Committee on Development of an Addendum to the National Science Education Standards on Scientific Inquiry. 2000. Inquiry and the National Science Education Standards: A Guide for Teaching and Learning. Washington DC: National Academy Press.
- Davis, B. 1997. Listening for differences: An evolving conception of mathematics teaching. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education. 28(3): 355–376. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/749785.
- Eberlein, T., J. Kampmeier, V. Minderhout, R. S. Moog, T. Platt, P. Varma-Nelson, and H. B. White. 2008. Pedagogies of engagement in science: A comparison of PBL, POGIL, and PLTL. Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education. 36: 262–273. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/bmb.20204
- Freeman, S., S. L. Eddy, M. McDonough, M. K. Smith, N. Okoroafor, H. Jordt, and M. P. Wenderoth. 2014. Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 111(23): 8410–8415. http://dx.doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1319030111
- Kilpatrick, J. 1987. What constructivism might be in mathematics education. Proceedings of Psychology of Mathematics Education. 11(1): 3–27.
- Kowalski, R. T. 2011. Functional DNA: Teaching infinite series through genetic analogy. PRIMUS: Problems, Resources, and Issues in Mathematics Undergraduate Studies. 21(5): 456–472. DOI: 10.1080/10511970903261910
- Mello, R. R. 2012. From constructivism to dialogism in the classroom. Theory and learning environments. International Journal of Educational Psychology. 1(2): 127–152. DOI: 10.4471/ijep.2012.08.
- Michaels, M., C. O’Conner, and L. Resnick. 2007. Deliberative discourse idealized and realized: Accountable talk in the classroom and in civic life. Studies in Philosophy and Education. 7: 283–297. DOI: 10.1007/s11217-007-9071-1
- National Council for Mathematics Teachers. 2014. Principles to Actions. Reston, VA: National Council for Mathematics Teachers.
- National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. Principles and standards for school mathematics. http://www.nctm.org/Standards-and-Positions/Principles-and-Standards. Accessed 28 April 2016.
- POGIL Project. https://pogil.org. Accessed 28 April 2016.
- Rasmussen, C. N. and O. Kwon. 2007. An inquiry oriented approach to undergraduate mathematics. Journal of Mathematical Behavior. 26: 189–194. DOI: 10.1016/j.jmathb.2007.10.001
- Rasmussen, C., O. N. Kwon, and K. Marrongelle. 2008. A framework for interpreting inquiry-oriented teaching. In Electronic Proceedings of the 11th Special Interest Group of the Mathematical Association of America on Research in Undergraduate Education. sigmaa.maa.org/rume/crume2008/Proceedings/IODM_paper.pdf. Accessed 16 September 2016.
- Richards, J. 1991. Mathematical discussions. In E. von Glaserfeld (Ed.), Radical Constructivism in Mathematics Education, pp. 13–51. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.
- Thompson, P. W. 2014. Constructivism in mathematics education. In S. Lerman (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Mathematics Education, pp. 96–102. Berlin, Germany: Springer Verlag. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-4978-8_31
- Wertsch, J. V. 1991. Voices of the Mind: A Sociocultural Approach to Mediated Action. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.