Handbook of psychology volume 7 educational psychology
Download 9.82 Mb. Pdf ko'rish
|
- Bu sahifa navigatsiya:
- References 389
References 387 Giere, R. N. (1992). Cognitive models of science. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. Goldenberg, E. P., Cuoco, A. A., & Mark, J. (1998). A role for geom- etry in general education. In R. Lehrer & D. Chazan (Eds.),
Goodman, N. (1976). Languages of art. Indianapolis, IN: Hackett. Goodnow, J. (1977). Children’s drawings. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Goodwin, C. (1994). Professional vision. American Anthropologist,
Goodwin, C. (2000). Practices of color classification. Mind, culture, and activity, 7(1 & 2), 19–36. Greeno, J. G. (1998). The situativity of knowing, learning, and research. American Psychologist, 53, 5–26. Hall, R. (1990). Making mathematics on paper: Constructing repre- sentations of stories about related linear functions. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of California at Irvine. Hall, R. (1996). Representation as shared activity: Situated cogni- tion and Dewey’s cartography of experience. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 5(3), 209–238. Hall, R. (1999). The organization and development of discursive practices for “having a theory.” Discourse Processes, 27, 187– 218.
Hall, R., Stevens, R., & Torralba, T. (in press). Disrupting represen- tational infrastructure in conversations across disciplines. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 9(3). Halliday, M. A. K. (1978). Sociolinguistics aspects of mathematical education. In M. Halliday (Ed.), Language as social semiotic: The
London: University Park Press. Hanna, G. (1991). Mathematical proof. In D. Tall (Ed.), Advanced
Kluwer Academic Publishers. Hanna, G. (1995). Challenges to the importance of proof. For the
Harel, G. (1998). Greek versus modern mathematical thought and the role of Aristotelian causality in the mathematics of the Renaissance: Sources for understanding epistemological obsta- cles in college students’ conceptions of proof. Plenary talk given at the International Linear Algebra Society Conference, Madison, WI. Harel, G., & Sowder, L. (1998). Students’ proof schemes. In E. Dubinsky, A. Schoenfeld, & J. Kaput (Eds.), Research on colle- giate mathematics education (Vol. 3, pp. 234–283). American Mathematical Society. Harel, I., & Papert, S. (1991). Constructionism. Norwood, NJ: Ablex. Harris, P. J., & Leevers, H. J. (2001). Reasoning from false premises. In P. Mitchell & K. J. Riggs (Eds.), Children’s reason-
Francis.
Hartmann, C., & Lehrer, R. (2000). Quilt design as incubator for geometric ideas and mathematical habits of mind. Proceedings of the 22nd annual meeting of the North American Chapter of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Educa- tion, Tucson, AZ. Hatano, G., & Ito, Y. (1965). Development of length measuring behavior. Japanese Journal of Psychology, 36, 184 –196. Haverty, L. A., Koedinger, K. R., Klahr, D., & Alibali, M. W. (2000). Solving inductive reasoning problems in mathematics: Not-so-trivial pursuit. Cognitive Science, 24, 249 –298. Hawkins, J., Pea, R. D., Glick, J., & Scribner, S. (1984). “Merds that laugh don’t like mushrooms.” Developmental Psychology, 20, 584 –594. Healy, L., & Hoyles, C. (2000). A study of proof conceptions in algebra. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 31, 396 – 428. Henningsen, M., & Stein, M. K. (1997). Mathematical tasks and stu- dent cognition: Classroom-based factors that support and inhibit high-level mathematical thinking and reasoning. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 28(5), 524 –549. Herbst, P. (2002). Understanding the work of the teacher getting stu- dents to prove. Journal of Research in Mathematics Education,
Hersh, R. (1993). Proving is convincing and explaining. Educa- tional Studies in Mathematics, 24(4), 389–399. Hershkowitz, R., & Schwarz, B. B. (1999). Reflective processes in a mathematics classroom with a rich learning environment.
Hesse, M. B. (1965). Forces and fields. Totowa, NJ: Littlefield, Adams. Hestenes, D. (1992). Modeling games in the Newtonian world. American Journal of Physics, 60, 440 – 454. Hiebert, J. (1981a). Cognitive development and learning linear measurement. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education,
Hiebert, J. (1981b). Units of measure: Results and implications from national assessment. Arithmetic Teacher, 28, 38– 43. Hiebert, J. (1984). Why do some children have trouble learning measurement concepts? Arithmetic Teacher, 31, 19–24. Hildreth, D. J. (1983). The use of strategies in estimating measure- ments. Arithmetic Teacher, 30, 50 –54. Hodgson, T., & Riley, K. J. (2001). Real-world problems as contexts for proof. Mathematics Teacher, 94(9), 724–728. Hoyles, C. (1997). The curricular shaping of students’ approaches to proof. For the Learning of Mathematics, 17, 7–16. Izsak, A. (2000). Inscribing the winch: Mechanisms by which students develop knowledge structures for representing the physical world with algebra. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 9(1), 31–74. Jackiw, N. (1995). The geometer’s sketchpad. Berkeley, CA: Key Curriculum Press.
388 Mathematical Learning Jacobson, C., & Lehrer, R. (2000). Teacher appropriation and student learning of geometry through design. Journal for
Joram, E., Subrahmanyam, K., & Gelman, R. (1998). Measurement estimation: Learning to map the route from number to quantity and back. Review of Educational Research, 68, 413– 449. Jorgensen, J. C., & Falmagne, R. J. (1992). Aspects of the meaning of if . . . then for older preschoolers: Hypotheticality, entailment, and suppositional processes. Cognitive Development, 7, 189 –212. Kaiser, D. (2000). Stick-figure realism: Conventions, reification, and the persistence of Feynman diagrams, 1948–1964. Repre-
Kaput, J. (1992). Technology and mathematics education. In D. A. Grouws (Ed.), Research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 515–556). New York: Macmillan. Kaput, J. (1999). Teaching and learning a new algebra. In E. Fennema & T. A. Romberg (Eds.), Mathematics classrooms that promote understanding (pp. 133–155). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Kaput, J., & Shaffer, D. (in press). On the development of human representational competence from an evolutionary point of view. In K. Gravemeijer, R. Lehrer, B. Van Oers, & L. Verschaffel (Eds.), Symbolizing, modeling, and tool use in mathematics edu-
demic.
Karmiloff-Smith, A. (1992). Beyond modularity. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Kelly, A. E., & Lesh, R. A. (Eds.). (2000). Handbook of research
Erlbaum.
Kemeny, V. (2001). Discursive construction of mathematical mean- ing: A study of teaching mathematics through conversation in the primary grades. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Wisconsin, Madison. Kerr, D. R., & Lester, S. K. (1976). An error analysis model for mea- surement. In D. Nelson & R. E. Reys (Eds.), Measurement in school mathematics (pp. 105–122). Reston, VA: National Coun- cil of Teachers of Mathematics. Kline, M. (1980). Mathematics: The loss of certainty. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. Koedinger, K. R. (1998). Conjecturing and argumentation in high- school geometry students. In R. Lehrer & D. Chazan (Eds.), Designing learning environments for developing understanding of geometry and space (pp. 319 –347). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Koedinger, K. R., & Anderson, J. R. (1990). Abstract planning and perceptual chunks: Elements of expertise in geometry. Cognitive
Konold, C., & Pollatsek, A. (in press). Data analysis as the search for signals in noisy processes. Journal for Research in Mathe-
Kotovsky, L., & Gentner, D. (1996). Comparison and categorization in the development of relational similarity. Child Development,
Krummerheuer, G. (1995). The ethnography of argumentation. In P. Cobb & H. Bauersfeld (Eds.), The emergence of mathematical
Krummerheuer, G. (1998). Formats of argumentation in the mathe- matics classroom. In H. Steinbring, M. G. Bartolini Bussi, & A. Sierpinska (Eds.), Language and communication in the mathe- matics classroom (pp. 223–234). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. Kuhn, D. (1977). Conditional reasoning in children. Developmental
Kuhn, D. (1989). Children and adults as intuitive scientists. Psycho- logical Review, 96, 674–689. Kuhn, D. (1991). The skills of argument. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Kuhn, D. (1992). Thinking as argument. Harvard Educational Review, 62, 155–178. Kuhn, D. (2001). How do people know? Psychological Science, 12(1), 1–8. Kuhn, D., Amsel, E., & O’Loughlin, M. (1988). The development of scientific thinking skills. New York: Academic Press. Kuhn, D., Shaw, V., & Felton, M. (1997). Effects of dyadic instruc- tion on argumentative reasoning. Cognition and Instruction, 15, 287–315.
Lakatos, I. (1976). Proofs and refutations. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Lakoff, G., & Nunez, R. E. (1997). The metaphorical structure of mathematics: Sketching out cognitive foundations for a mind- based mathematics. In L. D. English (Ed.), Mathematical reason-
Erlbaum.
Lakoff, G., & Nunez, R. E. (2000). Where mathematics comes from. New York: Basic Books. Lampert, M. (2001). Teaching problems and the problems of teach-
Lampert, M., Rittenhouse, P., & Crumbaugh, C. (1996). Agreeing to disagree: Developing sociable mathematical discourse. In D. Olson & N. Torrance (Eds.), The handbook of education and human development (pp. 731–764). Cambridge, MA: Blackwell. Latour, B. (1986). Visualization and cognition: Thinking with eyes and hands. Knowledge and Society: Studies in the Sociology of
Latour, B. (1987). Science in action: How to follow scientists and engineers through society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Lee, K., Karmiloff-Smith, A., Cameron, C. A., & Dodsworth, P. (1998). Notational adaptation in children. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science, 30, 159–171. Lehrer, R. (2002). Developing understanding of measurement. In J. Kilpatrick, G. Martin, & D. Schifter (Eds.), A research com-
Council of Teachers of Mathematics. References 389 Lehrer, R., Guckenberg, T., & Lee, O. (1988a). Comparative study of the cognitive consequences of inquiry-based Logo instruction.
Lehrer, R., Jacobson, C., Kemeny, V., & Strom, D. (1999). Building on children’s intuitions to develop mathematical understanding of space. In E. Fennema & T. A. Romberg (Eds.), Classrooms that promote mathematical understanding (pp. 63–87). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Lehrer, R., Jacobson, C., Thoyre, G., Kemeny, V., Strom, D., Horvath, J., Gance, S., & Koehler, M. (1998). Developing understanding of geometry and space in the primary grades. In R. Lehrer & D. Chazan (Eds.), Designing learning environment for develop- ing understanding of geometry and space (pp. 169–200). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Lehrer, R., Jenkins, M., & Osana, H. (1998). Longitudinal study of children’s reasoning about space and geometry. In R. Lehrer & D. Chazan (Eds.), Designing learning environment for developing
NJ: Erlbaum. Lehrer, R., & Pritchard, C. (in press). Symbolizing space into being. In K. Gravemeijer, R. Lehrer, B. Van Oers, & L. Verschaffel (Eds.), Symbolizing, modeling, and tool use in mathematics edu-
Lehrer, R., Randle, L., & Sancilio, L. (1989). Learning pre-proof geometry with LOGO. Cognition and Instruction, 6, 159–184. Lehrer, R., & Schauble, L. (2000). Modeling in mathematics and science. In R. Glaser (Ed.), Advances in Instructional Psychol-
Lehrer, R., & Schauble, L. (2002). Symbolic communication in mathematics and science: Co-constituting inscription and thought. In E. Amsel & J. Byrnes (Eds.), The development of symbolic communication (pp. 167–192). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Lehrer, R., Schauble, L., Carpenter, S., & Penner, D. E. (2000). The inter-related development of inscriptions and conceptual understanding. In P. Cobb, E. Yackel, & K. McClain (Eds.), Symbolizing and communicating in mathematics classrooms: Perspectives on discourse, tools, and instructional design (pp. 325–360). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Lehrer, R., Strom, D., & Confrey, J. (in press). Grounding metaphors and inscriptional resonance: Children’s emerging understanding of mathematical similarity. Cognition and Instruction. Leinhardt, G., & Schwarz, B. B. (1997). Seeing the problem: An explanation from Polya. Cognition and Instruction, 15, 395– 434. Lesh, R. (2002). Research design in mathematics education: Focus- ing on design experiments. In L. English (Ed.), The international
287). Hillsdale, N.J.: Erlbaum. Lesh, R., & Doerr, H. (1998). Symbolizing, communicating, and mathematizing: Key components of models and modeling. In P. Cobb & E. Yackel (Eds.), Symbolizing and communicating
Erlbaum.
Lesh, R., & Harel, G. (in press). Problem solving, modeling and local conceptual development. Models and modeling in mathe- matics education [Monograph for International Journal for
Lesh, R., Hoover, M., Hole, B., Kelly, A., & Post, T. (2000). Princi- ples for developing thought revealing activities for students and teachers. In A. Kelly & R. Lesh (Eds.), The handbook of research design in mathematics and science education (pp. 591–646). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Leslie, A. M. (1987). Pretense and representation: The origins of “theory of mind.” Psychological Review, 94, 412–426. Levi, I. (1996). For the sake of the argument. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press. Lindquist, M. (1989). The measurement standards. Arithmetic
Lynch, M. (1990). The externalized retina: Selection and mathemati- zation in the visual documentation of objects in the life sciences. In M. Lynch & S. Woolgar (Eds.), Representation in scientific practice (pp. 153–186). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Martin, W. G., & Harel, G. (1989). Proof frames of preservice elementary teachers. Journal for Research in Mathematics
McClain, K., & Cobb, P. (2001). An analysis of development of sociomathematical norms in one first-grade classroom. Journal
McClain, K., Cobb, P., Gravemeijer, K., & Estes, B. (1999). Developing mathematical reasoning within the context of mea- surement. In L. V. Stiff & F. R. Curcio (Eds.), Developing mathematical reasoning in grades K-12 (pp. 93–106). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. Meira, L. (1995). The microevolution of mathematical representa- tions in children’s activity. Cognition and Instruction, 13, 269– 313. Meira, L. (in press). Mathematical representations as systems of notations-in-use. In K. Gravemeijer, R. Lehrer, B. Van Oers, & L. Verschaffel (Eds.), Symbolizing, modeling, and tool use in mathe- matics education (pp. 89–106). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.
Miller, C. S., Lehman, J. F., & Koedinger, K. R. (1999). Goals and learning in microworlds. Cognitive Science, 23, 305–336. Miller, K. F. (1984). Child as the measurer of all things: Measure- ment procedures and the development of quantitative concepts. In C. Sophian (Ed.), Origins of cognitive skills (pp. 193–228). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Miller, K. F., & Baillargeon, R. (1990). Length and distance: Do preschoolers think that occlusion bring things together? Devel- opmental Psychology, 26, 103–114. Moschkovich, J. N. (1996). Moving up and getting steeper: Negoti- ating shared descriptions of linear graphs. The Journal of the
Moss, J., & Case, R. (1999). Developing children’s understanding of the rational numbers: A new model and an experimental
390 Mathematical Learning curriculum. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 30, 122–147. Munn, P. (1998). Symbolic function in pre-schoolers. In C. Donlan (Ed.), The development of mathematical skills (pp. 47–71). Hove, UK: Psychology Press, Taylor & Francis. Nemirovsky, R., & Monk, S. (2000). “If you look at it the other way . . .”: An exploration into the nature of symbolizing. In P. Cobb, E. Yackel, & K. McClain (Eds.), Symbolizing and
Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Nemirovsky, R., Tierney, C., & Wright, T. (1998). Body motion and graphing. Cognition and Instruction, 16, 119–172. Newcombe, N. S., & Huttenlocher, J. (2000). Making space. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Noss, R., & Hoyles, C. (1996). Windows on mathematical meaning. Amsterdam: Kluwer Academic. Nunes, T. (1999). Mathematics learning as the socialization of the mind. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 6, 33–52. Nunes, T., Light, P., & Mason, J. (1993). Tools for thought: The measurement of length and area. Learning and Instruction, 3, 39–54. O’Brien, D., Dias, M., Roazzi, A., & Braine, M. (1998). Conditional reasoning: The logic of supposition and children’s understanding of pretense. In M. D. S. Braine & D. P. O’Brien (Eds.), Mental logic (pp. 245–272). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Ochs, E., Jacoby, S., & Gonzales, P. (1994). Interpretive journeys: How physicists talk and travel through graphic space. Configu-
Ochs, E., Taylor, C., Rudolph, D., & Smith, R. (1992). Storytelling as a theory-building activity. Discourse Processes, 15, 37–72. O’Connor, M. C., & Michaels, S. (1993). Aligning academic task and participation status through revoicing: Analysis of a classroom discourse. Anthropology and Education Quarterly, 24, 318–335. O’Connor, M. C., & Michaels, S. (1996). Shifting participant frame- works: Orchestrating thinking practices in group discussion. In D. Hicks (Ed.), Discourse, learning, and schooling (pp. 63–103). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Olson, D. R. (1994). The world on paper. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Papert, S. (1980). Mindstorms: Children, computers, and powerful
Papert, S., Watt, D., diSessa, A., & Weir, S. (1979). Final report of the Brookline Logo Project: Pt. II. Project summary and data analysis (Logo Memo No. 53). Cambridge, MA: MIT, Artificial Intelligence Laboratory. Penner, E., & Lehrer, R. (2000). The shape of fairness. Teaching
Petrosino, A., Lehrer, R., & Schauble, L. (in press). Structuring error and experimental variation as distribution in the fourth grade.
Piaget, J., Inhelder, B., & Szeminska, A. (1960). The child’s concep- tion of geometry. New York: Harper and Row. Pimm, D. (1987). Speaking mathematically: Communication in mathematics classrooms. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul. Polya, G. (1945). How to solve it. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Porter, T. M. (1986). The rise of statistical thinking 1820–1900. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Pozzi, S., Noss, R., & Hoyles, C. (1998). Tools in practice, mathe- matics in use. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 36, 105–122. Resnick, M. (1994). Turtles, termites, and traffic jams. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Rips, L. J. (1998). Reasoning and conversation. Psychological Review, 105, 411–441. Rips, L. J., Brem, S. K., & Bailenson, J. N. (1999). Reasoning dialogues. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 8, 172– 177.
Roese, N. (1997). Counterfactual thinking. Psychological Bulletin, 121, 133–148. Roth, W. M., & McGinn, M. K. (1998). Inscriptions: Toward a the- ory of representing as social practice. Review of Educational
Rotman, B. (1988). Toward a theory of semiotics of mathematics. Semiotica, 72, 1–35. Rotman, B. (1993). Ad Infinitum. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. Schauble, L. (1996). The development of scientific reasoning in knowledge-rich contexts. Developmental Psychology, 32, 102–119. Schoenfeld, A. H. (1988). When good teaching leads to bad results: The disasters of “well taught” mathematics courses. Educational
Schoenfeld, A. H. (1992). Learning to think mathematically: Problem solving, metacognition, and sense making in mathe- matics. In D. A. Grouws (Ed.), Handbook of research on math- ematics teaching and learning (pp. 334–370). New York: Macmillan. Schoenfeld, A. H. (1994). What do we know about mathematics cur- ricula? Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 13, 55–80. Schoenfeld, A. H., Smith, J. P., III, & Arcavi, A. (1993). Learning: The microgenetic analysis of one student’s evolving understand- ing of a complex subject matter domain. In R. Glaser (Ed.),
NJ: Erlbaum. Schorr, R., & Clark, K. (in press). Using a modeling approach to analyze the ways in which teachers consider new ways to teach mathematics: Models and modeling in mathematics education [Monograph for International Journal for Mathematical Think- ing and Learning]. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Schunn, C. D., & Anderson, J. R. (1999). The generality/specificity of expertise in scientific reasoning. Cognitive Science, 23, 337–370.
|
ma'muriyatiga murojaat qiling