Promoting selected core thinking skills using math stations rotation

References

• Açıkgül, K., & Şad, S. N. (2021). High school students’ acceptance and use of mobile technology in learning mathematics. Education and Information Technologies, 26, 4181–4201.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Akinoso, S. O., Agoro, A. A., & Alabi, O. M. (2020). Effects of station rotation model of instructional delivery for mathematics in the era of advanced technology. Education, 24(2), 60–72.
   Google Scholar
• Alhassora, N. S. A., Abu, M. S., & Abdullah, A. H. (2017). Newman error analysis on evaluating and creating thinking skills. Man In India, 19(97), 413–427.
   Google Scholar
• Alshahrani, A. (2021). Using community of inquiry to examine the effect of station rotation strategy in elementary mathematics [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Northern Illinois University.
   Google Scholar
• Ayalon, M., & Nama, S. (2023). Secondary school mathematics teacher-perceived factors involved in argumentation: An emerging framework. Research in Mathematics Education, 1–22. doi:10.1080/14794802.2022.2156585
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Banks, S. (2022). Math station rotations: 4 Reasons. Retrieved December 9, 2023, from https://www.therouttymathteacher.com/math-station-rotations/#:~:text=Math%20stations%20provide%20multiple%20learning,the%20skill%20and%20demonstrate%20mastery.
   Google Scholar
• Berlin, R., & Cohen, J. (2018). Understanding instructional quality through a relational lens. ZDM, 50(3), 367–379. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-018-0940-6
   Google Scholar
• Bray, A., & Tangney, B. (2016). Enhancing student engagement through the affordances of mobile technology: A 21st century learning perspective on Realistic Mathematics Education. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 28(1), 173–197. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13394-015-0158-7
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chavula, C., Choi, Y., & Rieh, S. Y. (2022). Understanding creative thinking processes in searching for new ideas. In Proceedings of the 2022 Conference on Human Information Interaction and Retrieval (pp. 321–326).
   Google Scholar
• Christina, S., Rusijono, R., & Bachtiar, B. (2019). The application of blended learning’s station rotation method in elementary school science education to improve higher-order thinking skills. Dinamika Jurnal Ilmiah Pendidikan Dasar, 11(2), 79–85. https://doi.org/10.30595/dinamika.v11i2.5048
   Google Scholar
• Clark, K., James, A., & Montelle, C. (2014). “We definitely wouldn't be able to solve it all by ourselves, but together … ”: group synergy in tertiary students’ problem-solving practices. Research in Mathematics Education, 16(3), 306–323. https://doi.org/10.1080/14794802.2014.950687
   Google Scholar
• Conner, A., Singletary, L. M., Smith, R. C., Wagner, P. A., & Francisco, R. T. (2014). Teacher support for collective argumentation: A framework for examining how teachers support students’ engagement in mathematical activities. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 86(3), 401–429. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-014-9532-8
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cutting, C., & Lowrie, T. (2022). Bounded learning progressions: A framework to capture young development of mathematical activity in play-based contexts. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 35(2), 317–337.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• da Ponte, J. P., & Quaresma, M. (2016). Teachers’ professional practice conducting mathematical discussions. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 93(1), 51–66. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-016-9681-z
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Desoete, A. (2008). Multi-method assessment of metacognitive skills in elementary school children: How you test is what you get. Metacognition and Learning, 3(3), 189–206. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-008-9026-0
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Downton, A., & Sullivan, P. (2017). Posing complex problems requiring multiplicative thinking prompts students to use sophisticated strategies and build mathematical connections. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 95(3), 303–328. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-017-9751-x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ellis, A., Özgür, Z., & Reiten, L. (2019). Teacher moves for supporting student reasoning. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 31(2), 107–132. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13394-018-0246-6
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ennouamani, S., Mahani, Z., & Akharraz, L. (2020). A context-aware mobile learning system for adapting learning content and format of presentation: Design, validation and evaluation. Education and Information Technologies, 25(5), 3919–3955. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-020-10149-9
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fabian, K., Topping, K. J., & Barron, I. G. (2018). Using mobile technologies for mathematics: Effects on student attitudes and achievement. Educational Technology Research and Development, 66(5), 1119–1139. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-018-9580-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Farhan, S. M., & Risen, H. (2020). Core thinking skills included in the mathematics textbook for the intermediate third grade. Cosmos, 9(2), 13–21.
   Google Scholar
• Freiman, V., Polotskaia, E., & Savard, A. (2017). Using a computer-based learning task to promote work on mathematical relationships in the context of word problems in early grades. ZDM, 49(6), 835–849. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-017-0883-3
   Google Scholar
• Fulbeck, E., Atchison, D., Giffin, J., Seidel, D., & Eccleston, M. (2020). Personalizing student learning with station rotation: A descriptive study. American Institutes for Research, 1–74.
   Google Scholar
• Güler, M., Bütüner, S., Danişman, Ş, & Gürsoy, K. (2022). A meta-analysis of the impact of mobile learning on mathematics achievement. Education and Information Technologies, 27(2), 1725–1745. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10640-x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hähkiöniemi, M., Francisco, J., Lehtinen, A., Nieminen, P., & Pehkonen, S. (2023). The interplay between the guidance from the digital learning environment and the teacher in supporting folding back. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 112(3), 461–479. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-022-10193-x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hamida, N., Arianto, F., & Hartono, S. (2021). The effect of station rotation online model on problem-solving students’ ability: A case study at junior high school. Review of International Geographical Education Online, 11(10), 1500–1507.
   Google Scholar
• Hansen, E. K. S. (2022). Students’ agency, creative reasoning, and collaboration in mathematical problem-solving. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 34(4), 813–834. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13394-021-00365-y
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hung, C. M., Huang, I., & Hwang, G. J. (2014). Effects of digital game-based learning on students’ self-efficacy, motivation, anxiety, and achievements in learning mathematics. Journal of Computers in Education, 1(2-3), 151–166. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40692-014-0008-8
   Google Scholar
• Ingram, N., Williamson-Leadley, S., & Pratt, K. (2016). Showing and telling: Using tablet technology to engage students in mathematics. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 28(1), 123–147. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13394-015-0162-y
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jagušt, T., & Botički, I. (2019). Mobile learning system for enabling collaborative and adaptive pedagogies with modular digital learning contents. Journal of Computers in Education, 6(3), 335–362. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40692-019-00139-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jones, K. (2000). Providing a foundation for deductive reasoning: Students’ interpretation when using dynamic geometry software and their evolving mathematical explanations. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 44(1&2), 55–85. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1012789201736
   Google Scholar
• Kyriakides, A., Meletiou-Mavrotheris, M., & Prodromou, T. (2016). Mobile technologies in the service of students’ learning of mathematics: The example of game application ALEX in the context of a primary school in Cyprus. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 28(1), 53–78. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13394-015-0163-x
   Google Scholar
• Lehtinen, A., & Hähkiöniemi, M. (2016). Complementing the guidance provided by a simulation through teacher questioning. In H. Silfverberg, & P. Hästö (Eds.), Annual symposium of the Finnish mathematics and science education research association 2015 (pp. 80–89). Finnish Mathematics and Science Education Research Association. http://www.protsv.fi/mlseura/julkaisut/MALU2015_Final.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Leung, I. K. (2008). Teaching and learning of inclusive and transitive properties among quadrilaterals by deductive reasoning with the aid of Smart Board. ZDM, 40(6), 1007–1021. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-008-0159-z
   Google Scholar
• Lev-Zamir, H., & Leikin, R. (2011). Creative mathematics teaching in the eye of the beholder: Focusing on teachers’ conceptions. Research in Mathematics Education, 13(1), 17–32. https://doi.org/10.1080/14794802.2011.550715
   Google Scholar
• Lithner, J. (2017). Principles for designing mathematical tasks that enhance imitative and creative reasoning. ZDM, 49(6), 937–949. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-017-0867-3
   Google Scholar
• MacDonald, A. (2021). Nearpod. In OER Lab. Technology in the curriculum (pp. 54–59). Ontario Tech University.
   Google Scholar
• Marzano, R. J., Brandt, R. S., Hughes, C. S., Jones, B. F., Presseisen, B. Z., Rankin, S. C., & Suhor, C. (1988). Dimensions of thinking. Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
   Google Scholar
• Maxwell, C., & White, J. (2017). Blended (R)evolution: How 5 teachers are modifying the station rotation to fit students’ needs. Clayton Christensen Institute for Disruptive Innovation, 1–33.
   Google Scholar
• Měkota, T., & Marada, M. (2020). The influence of the Nearpod application on learning social geography in a grammar school in Czecha. Education and Information Technologies, 25(6), 5167–5184. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-020-10214-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Miller, H. B., & Cuevas, J. A. (2017). Mobile learning and its effects on academic achievement and student motivation in middle grades students. International Journal for the Scholarship of Technology Enhanced Learning, 1(2), 91–110.
   Google Scholar
• Miragliotta, E. (2022). Geometric prediction: A framework to gain insight into solvers’ geometrical reasoning. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 65, 100927. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmathb.2021.100927
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Miragliotta, E., & Baccaglini-Frank, A. E. (2021). Enhancing the skill of geometric prediction using dynamic geometry. Mathematics, 9(8), 821. https://doi.org/10.3390/math9080821
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Misrom, N. B., Muhammad, A., Abdullah, A., Osman, S., Hamzah, M., & Fauzan, A. (2020). Enhancing students’ higher-order thinking skills (HOTS) through an inductive reasoning strategy using GeoGebra. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning (iJET), 15(3), 156–179. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijet.v15i03.9839
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mondragon, M. C., Acelajado, M. J., & La, D. (2018). Blended learning station-rotation model: Effects on grade 10 students’ performance in and attitude toward mathematics. In Electronic Proceedings of the 23rd Asian Technology Conference in Mathematics.
   Google Scholar
• Moua, S. (2021). Incorporating mathematics stations into the current curriculum [Unpublished master thesis]. Hamline University.
   Google Scholar
• Muhammad, F. (2021). The impact of the McCarthy model in teaching mathematics to develop conceptual understanding and analytical thinking skills among middle school students. Journal of Mathematics Education, 24(1), 122–184.
   Google Scholar
• Olsen, J. K., Rummel, N., & Aleven, V. (2019). It is not either or: An initial investigation into combining collaborative and individual learning using an ITS. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 14(3), 353–381. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-019-09307-0
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Özsoy, G. (2011). An investigation of the relationship between metacognition and mathematics achievement. Asia Pacific Education Review, 12(2), 227–235. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12564-010-9129-6
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Permatasari, S. D. A., Budiyono, B., & Pratiwi, H. (2020, February). Analysis of mathematical creativity in the field of geometry in junior high school students. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1469(1), 012157. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1469/1/012157
   Google Scholar
• Perry, R. (2019). Mathematics stations in the third-grade classroom: Are they worth it? Journal of Teacher Action Research, 5(3), 38–60.
   Google Scholar
• Pho, D. H., Nguyen, H. T., Nguyen, H. M., & Nguyen, T. T. N. (2021). The use of the learning station method according to competency development for elementary students in Vietnam. Cogent Education, 8(1), 1870799. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2020.1870799
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Puntambekar, S. (2022). Distributed scaffolding: Scaffolding students in classroom environments. Educational Psychology Review, 34(1), 451–472. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-021-09636-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Qarsham, A. (2022). The effectiveness of the project-based learning strategy in developing generative thinking skills in mathematics among middle school students. College of Education Journal, 10(32), 428–474.
   Google Scholar
• Riconscente, M. M. (2013). Results from a controlled study of the iPad fractions game motion math. Games and Culture, 8(4), 186–214. https://doi.org/10.1177/1555412013496894
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Saltzman, E. (2022). Collaborative learning with a geometry video game: The role of elaboration and game design in motivation and learning [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. City University of New York.
   Google Scholar
• Sanmugam, M., Selvarajoo, A., Ramayah, B., & Lee, K. W. (2019). Use of Nearpod as an interactive learning method. Inted2019 Proceedings, 1, 8908–8915. https://doi.org/10.21125/inted.2019.2219
   Google Scholar
• Santos-Trigo, M., Moreno-Armella, L., & Camacho-Machín, M. (2016). Problem-solving and the use of digital technologies within the mathematical working space framework. ZDM, 48(6), 827–842. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-016-0757-0
   Google Scholar
• Simon, M. (1995). Reconstructing mathematics pedagogy from a constructivist perspective. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 26(2), 114–145. https://doi.org/10.2307/749205
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Soselisa, C. M., & Bachri, B. S. (2019). Station rotation method based on differentiated instruction to improve higher-order thinking skills. 3rd International Conference on Education Innovation (pp. 176–179). Atlantis Press.
   Google Scholar
• Stein, M. K., Grover, B. W., & Henningsen, M. (1996). Building student capacity for mathematical thinking and reasoning. American Educational Research Journal, 33(2), 455–488. https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312033002455
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thanheiser, E., Melhuish, K., Sugimoto, A., Rosencrans, B., & Heaton, R. (2021). Networking frameworks: A method for analysing the complexities of classroom cultures focusing on. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 107(2), 285–314. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-021-10026-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thomas, M., & Lin, C. (2013). Designing tasks for use with digital technology. In C. Margolinas (Ed.), Task design in mathematics education—Proceedings of ICMI Study 22 (pp. 109–118). ICMI.
   Google Scholar
• Truitt, A. A., & Ku, H. Y. (2018). A case study of third-grade students’ perceptions of the station rotation blended learning model in the United States. Educational Media International, 55(2), 153–169. https://doi.org/10.1080/09523987.2018.1484042
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Wang, J., & Chia, I. (2022). Engaging students via Nearpod in synchronous online teaching. Management Teaching Review, 7(3), 245–253. https://doi.org/10.1177/2379298120974959
   Google Scholar
• Yerushalmy, M., & Olsher, S. (2020). Online assessment of students’ reasoning when solving example-eliciting tasks: Using conjunction and disjunction to increase the power of examples. ZDM, 52(5), 1033–1049. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-020-01134-0
   Google Scholar
• Yurt, E. (2022). Teachers’ views and experiences regarding acquiring analytical thinking skills in the middle school mathematics curriculum. International Journal on Social and Education Sciences (IJonSES), 4(4), 599–619.
   Google Scholar
• Zachariades, T., Christou, C., & Pitta-Pantazi, D. (2013). Reflective, systemic and analytic thinking in real numbers. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 82(1), 5–22. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-012-9413-y
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar