Spontaneous focusing on what and why? What children’s imprecise responses reveal about their mathematical thinking and relational reasoning

References

• Alexander, P. A., & The Disciplined Reading and Learning Research Laboratory. (2012). Reading into the future: Competence for the 21st century. Educational Psychologist, 47(4), 259–280. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2012.722511
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Alexander, P. A., & Baggetta, P. (2014). Percept-concept coupling and human error. In D. N. Rapp & J. L. G. Baasch (Eds.), Processing inaccurate information: Theoretical and applied perspectives from cognitive science and the educational sciences (pp. 297–327). MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Alexander, P. A., The Disciplined Reading and Learning Research Laboratory. (2018). Test of Relational Reasoning-Junior (copyright pending). University of Maryland.
   Google Scholar
• Alexander, P. A., Dumas, D., Grossnickle, E. M., List, A., & Firetto, C. M. (2016). Measuring relational reasoning. Journal of Experimental Education, 84(1), 119–151. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220973.2014.963216
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Alexander, P. A., Murphy, P. K., & Kulikowich, J. M. (1998). What responses to domain-specific analogy problems reveal about emerging competence: A new perspective on an old acquaintance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 90(3), 397–406. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.90.3.397
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baggetta, P. (2019). The contributions of crystallized cross-domain knowledge and fluid relational reasoning ability to ninth- and twelfth-grade students’ performance on scholastic aptitude and content-specific achievement measures [Unpublished doctor dissertation]. University of Maryland, College of Education.
   Google Scholar
• Bernardo, A. B. (1999). Overcoming obstacles to understanding and solving word problems in mathematics. Educational Psychology, 19(2), 149–163. https://doi.org/10.1080/0144341990190203
   Google Scholar
• Brown., J. S., & Burton, R. R. (1978). Diagnostic models for procedural bugs in basic mathematical skills. Cognitive Science, 2(2), 155–192. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog0202_4
   Google Scholar
• Chae, S.-E., & Alexander, P. A. (2019). The development of relational reasoning in South Korean elementary and middle-school students: A cross-sectional investigation [Manuscript submitted for publication]. Department of Human Development and Quantitative Methodology, University of Maryland.
   Google Scholar
• Dewey, J. (1933). How we think. A restatement of the relation of reflective thinking to the educative process. DC Heath and Company.
   Google Scholar
• Diamond, A. (2013). Executive functions. Annual Review of Psychology, 64(1), 135–168. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych–113011–143750
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Downing, S. M. (2006). Selected-response item formats in test development. In S. M. Downing & T. M. Haladyna (Eds.), Handbook of test development (pp. 287–301). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
   Google Scholar
• Dumas, D., Alexander, P. A., Baker, L. M., Jablansky, S., & Dunbar, K. M. (2014). Relational reasoning in medical education: Patterns in discourse and diagnosis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 106(4), 1021–1035. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0036777
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dumas, D., Alexander, P. A., & Grossnickle, E. M. (2013). Relational reasoning and its manifestations in the educational context: A systematic review of the literature. Educational Psychology Review, 25(4), 391–427. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-013-9224-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dumas, D., Schmidt, L. C., & Alexander, P. A. (2016). Predicting creative problem solving in engineering design. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 21, 50–66. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2016.05.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fountain., L. (2016). Relations among topic knowledge, individual interest, relational reasoning, and critical thinking in maternity nursing [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. University of Maryland, College of Education.
   Google Scholar
• Hannula, M. M., & Lehtinen, E. (2005). Spontaneous focusing on numerosity and mathematical skills of young children. Learning and Instruction, 15(3), 237–256. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2005.04.005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hannula, M. M., Lepola, J., & Lehtinen, E. (2010). Spontaneous focusing on numerosity as a domain-specific predictor of arithmetical skills. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 107(4), 394–406. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2010.06.004
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hattan, C. (2018). Prompting rural students’ use of prior knowledge and experience to support comprehension of unfamiliar content [Doctoral dissertation]. Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and Thesis database. (Order No. 10786674).
   Google Scholar
• Jablansky, S., Alexander, P. A., & Singer, L. M. (2016, April). Examining the relational reasoning capabilities of elementary and middle school students with learning needs [Paper presentation]. Annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Washington DC.
   Google Scholar
• Ketterlin-Geller, L. R., & Yovanoff, P. (2009). Diagnostic assessments in mathematics to support instructional decision making. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 14(16), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.7275/vxrk–3190
   Google Scholar
• Krawczyk, D. C. (2012). The cognition and neuroscience of relational reasoning. Brain Research, 1428, 13–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brainres.2010.11.080
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kulikowich, J. M., & Alexander, P. A. (1994). Error patterns on cognitive tasks: Applications of polytomous item response theory and log-linear modeling. In C. Reynolds (Ed.), Cognitive assessment: An interdisciplinary dialogue (pp. 137–154). Plenum.
   Google Scholar
• Mamede, S., Schmidt, H. G., & Rikers, R. (2006). Diagnostic errors and reflective practice in medicine. Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice, 13(1), 138–145. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2753.2006.00638.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McMullen, J., Hannula-Sormunen, M. M., Laakkonen, E., & Lehtinen, E. (2016). Spontaneous focusing on quantitative relations as a predictor of the development of rational number conceptual knowledge. Journal of Educational Psychology, 108(6), 857–868. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000094
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McMullen, J., Hannula-Sormunen, M. M., & Lehtinen, E. (2014). Spontaneous focusing on quantitative relations in the development of children’s fraction knowledge. Cognition and Instruction, 32(2), 198–218. https://doi.org/10.1080/07370008.2014.887085
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McMullen, J., Hannula-Sormunen, M. M., & Lehtinen, E. (2015). Preschool spontaneous focusing on numerosity predicts rational number conceptual knowledge 6 years later. ZDM, 47(5), 813–824. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-015-0669-4
   Google Scholar
• McMullen, J., Hannula-Sormunen, M. M., & Lehtinen, E. (2017). Spontaneous focusing on quantitative relations as a predictor of rational number and algebra knowledge. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 51, 356–365. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2017.09.007
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nanu, C. E., McMullen, J., Munck, P., & Hannula-Sormunen, M. M.,, . (2018). Spontaneous focusing on numerosity in preschool as a predictor of mathematical skills and knowledge in the fifth grade. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 169, 42–58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2017.12.011
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Novick, M. R. (1966). The axioms and principal results of classical test theory. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 3(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-2496(66)90002-2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pellegrino, J. W., & Goldman, S. R. (1987). Information processing and elementary mathematics. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 20(1), 23–32. https://doi.org/10.1177/002221948702000105
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Raven, J. C. (1941). Standardisation of progressive matrices, 1938. British Journal of Medical Psychology, 19(1), 137–150. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8341.1941.tb00316.x
   Google Scholar
• Rodriguez, M. C. (2016). Selected-response item development. In S. Lane, M. R. Raymond, & T. M. Haladyna (Eds.), Handbook of test development (2nd ed., pp. 259–273). Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Russell, B., & Lackey, D. (1973). Essays in analysis. Allen & Unwin.
   Google Scholar
• Sella, F., Berteletti, I., Lucangeli, D., & Zorzi, M. (2016). Spontaneous non‐verbal counting in toddlers. Developmental Science, 19(2), 329–337. https://doi.org/10.1111/desc.12299
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Siegler, R. S. (2003). Implications of cognitive science research for mathematics education. In J. Kilpatrick, W. B. Martin, & D. E. Schifter (Eds.), A research companion to principles and standards for school mathematics (pp. 219–233). National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
   Google Scholar
• Spearman, C. (1927). The abilities of man: Their nature and measurement. Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Sternberg, R. J. (1977). Intelligence, information processing, and analogical reasoning: The componential analysis of human abilities. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
   Google Scholar
• VanLehn, K. (1983). On the representation of procedures in repair theory. In H. P. Ginsberg (Ed.), The development of mathematical thinking (pp. 201–253). Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• White, C. S., & Alexander, P. A. (1986). Effects of training on four-year-olds’ ability to solve geometric analogy problems. Cognition and Instruction, 3(3), 261–268. https://doi.org/10.1207/s1532690xci0303_6
   Google Scholar
• Young, R. M., & O’Shea, T. (1981). Errors in children’s subtraction. Cognitive Science, 5(2), 153–177. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog0502_3
   Google Scholar
• Zhao, H., Alexander, P. A., & Sun, Y. (2020). Relational reasoning’s contributions to mathematical thinking and performance in Chinese elementary and middle-school students [Manuscript submitted for publication]. Department of Human Development and Quantitative Methodology, University of Maryland.
   Google Scholar