Ball, D., & Bass, H. (2000). Making believe: The collective construction of public mathematical knowledge in the elementary classroom. In D. Phillips (Ed.), *Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education, Constructivism in Education*. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Bartolini Bussi, M. G. (1996). Mathematical discussion and perspective drawing in primary school.

*Educational Studies in Mathematics, 31*, 11–41.

CrossRefBartolini Bussi, M. G., Boni, M., Ferri, F., & Garuti, R. (1999). Early approach to theoretical thinking: Gears in primary school.

*Educational Studies in Mathematics, 39*, 67–87.

CrossRefBezuk, N., & Bieck, M. (1993). Current research on rational numbers and common fractions: Summary and implications for teachers. In D. T. Owens (Ed.), *Research ideas for the classroom—middle grades mathematics* (pp. 118–136). New York: MacMillan.

Bingolbali, E., & Monaghan, J. (2008). Concept image revisited.

*Educational Studies in Mathematics, 68*, 19–35.

CrossRefBonotto, C. (2005). How informal out-of-school mathematics can help students make sense of formal in-school mathematics: The case of multiplying by decimal numbers.

*Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 7*(4), 313–344.

CrossRefBonotto, C. (2006). Extending students’ understanding of decimal numbers via realistic mathematical modeling and problem posing. In J. Novotna, H. Moraova, M. Kratka, & N. Stehlikova (Eds.), *Proceedings of the 30th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics* (vol. 2, pp. 193–200). Prague: Charles University Faculty of Education.

Bowers, J., & Doerr, H. (2001). An analysis of prospective teachers’ dual roles in understanding the mathematics of change: Eliciting growth with technology.

*Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 4*, 115–137.

CrossRefBruner, J. (1966). *Towards a theory of instruction*. New York: Norton.

Busse, A. (2005). Individual ways of dealing with the context of realistic tasks—first steps towards a typology.

*ZDM: The International Journal on Mathematics Education, 37*(5), 354–360.

CrossRefChapman, O. (2006). Classroom practices for context of mathematics word problems.

*Educational Studies in Mathematics, 62*, 211–230.

CrossRefCobb, P., McLain, K., & Gravemeijer, K. (2003). Learning about statistical covariation.

*Cognition and Instruction, 21*(1), 1–78.

CrossRefConnell, M., & Peck, D. (1993). Report of a conceptual intervention in elementary mathematics. *Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 12*, 329–350.

Cramer, K., & Henry, A. (2002). Using manipulative models to build number sense for addition and fractions. In B. Litwiller (Ed.), *Making sense of fractions, ratios, and proportions* (pp. 41–48). Reston: The National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.

Davydov, V., & Tsvetkovich, Z. (1991). On the objective origin of the concept of fractions. *Focus on Learning Problems in Mathematics, 13*(1), 13–64.

Dreyfus, T. (1999). Why Johnny can’t prove.

*Educational Studies in Mathematics, 38*, 85–109.

CrossRefFischbein, E. (1987). *Intuition in science and mathematics*. Dordrecht: Reidel.

Fischbein, E. (1993). The interaction between the formal, the algorithmic and the intuitive components in a mathematical activity. In R. Biehler, R. Scholz, R. Straber, B. Winkelmann (Eds.), *Didactics of Mathematics as a Scientific Discipline* (pp. 231–245). Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Kluwer.

Freudenthal, H. (1983). *Didactical phenomenology of mathematical structures*. Dordrecht: Reidel.

Fuchs, L., Fuchs, D., Hamlett, C., Phillips, N., Karns, K., & Dutka, S. (1997). Enhancing students’ helping behavior during peer-mediated instruction with conceptual mathematical explanations.

*The Elementary School Journal, 97*(3), 223–249.

CrossRefGinsburg, H., & Seo, K. (1999). Mathematics in children’s thinking.

*Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 1*(2), 113–129.

CrossRefHealey, L., & Hoyles, C. (2000). A study of proof conceptions in algebra.

*Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 31*, 396–428.

CrossRefHiebert, J., & Carpenter, T. (1992). Learning and teaching with understanding. In D. A. Grouws (Ed.), *Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning* (pp. 65–97). New York: Macmillan.

Hoyles, C., Noss, R., & Pozzi, S. (2001). Proportional reasoning in nursing practice.

*Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 32*(1), 4–28.

CrossRefIsrael national mathematics curriculum (2006). Retrieved December 10, 2008, from

http://cms.education.gov.il.

Koren, M. (2004). Acquiring the concept of signed numbers: Incorporating practically-based and mathematically-based explanations. *Aleh (in Hebrew), 32*, 18–24.

Lampert, M. (1990). When the problem is not the question and the solution is not the answer. *American Educational Research Journal, 27*(1), 29–63.

Levenson, E., Tirosh, D., & Tsamir, P. (2004). Elementary school students’ use of mathematically-based and practically-based explanations: The case of multiplication. In M. Hoines, & A. Fuglestad (Eds.) *Proceedings of the 28th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education, vol. 3* (pp. 241–248). Bergen, Norway.

Levenson, E., Tirosh, D., & Tsamir, P. (2006). Mathematically and practically-based explanations: Individual preferences and sociomathematical norms.

*International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 4*, 319–344.

CrossRefLevenson, E., Tsamir, P., & Tirosh, D. (2007a). First and second graders’ use of mathematically-based and practically-based explanations for multiplication with zero. *Focus on Learning Problems in Mathematics, 29*(2), 21–40.

Levenson, E., Tsamir, P., & Tirosh, D. (2007b). Elementary school teachers’ preferences for mathematically-based and practically-based explanations. In J. Novotna & H. Morava (Eds.), *Approaches to teaching mathematics at the elementary level* (pp. 166–173). Prague: SEMT 07.

Levenson, E., Tsamir, P., & Tirosh, D. (2007c). Neither even nor odd: Sixth grade students’ dilemmas regarding the parity of zero.

*Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 26*, 83–95.

CrossRefLinchevsky, L., & Williams, J. (1999). Using intuition from everyday life in ‘filling’ the gap in children’s extension of their number concept to include the negative numbers.

*Educational Studies in Mathematics, 39*, 131–147.

CrossRefMack, N. (1990). Learning fractions with understanding: Building on informal knowledge.

*Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 21*(1), 16–32.

CrossRefMack, N. (1995). Confounding whole-number and fraction concepts when building on informal knowledge.

*Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 26*(5), 422–441.

CrossRefNational Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (1989). *Curriculum and evaluation standards for school mathematics*. Reston: NCTM.

National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2000). *Principles and standards for school mathematics*. Reston: NCTM.

Nunes, T., Schliemann, A., & Carraher, W. (1993). *Street mathematics and school mathematics*. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Nyabanyaba, T. (1999). Whither relevance? Mathematics teachers’ discussion of the use of ‘real-life’ contexts in school mathematics. *For the Learning of Mathematics, 19*(3), 10–14.

Parameswaran, R. (2007). On understanding the notion of limits and infinitesimal quantities.

*International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 5*(2), 193–216.

CrossRefPerry, M. (2000). Explanations of mathematical concepts in Japanese, Chinese, and U.S. first- and fifth-grade classrooms.

*Cognition and Instruction, 18*(2), 181–207.

CrossRefPiaget, J. (1952). *The child’s conception of number*. New York: Humanities.

Raman, M. (2002). Coordinating informal and formal aspects of mathematics: Student behavior and textbook messages.

*Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 21*, 135–150.

CrossRefRied, D. (2002). Elements in accepting an explanation.

*Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 20*, 527–547.

CrossRefStreefland, L. (1987). Free production of fraction monographs. In J. C. Bergeron, N. Herscovics, & C. Kieran (Eds.), *Proceedings of the eleventh international conference Psychology of Mathematics Education (PME-XI) vol I* (pp. 405–410). Montreal.

Streefland, L. (1991). *Fractions in realistic mathematics education: A paradigm of developmental research*. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic.

Thompson, A., Philipp, R., Thompson, P., & Boyd, B. (1994). Calculational and conceptual orientation in teaching mathematics. In A. Coxford (Ed.), *1994 Yearbook of the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics* (pp. 79–92). Reston: The National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.

Tsamir, P., & Sheffer, R. (2000). Concrete and formal arguments: The case of division by zero. *Mathematics Education Research Journal, 12*(2), 92–106.

Van den Heuvel-Panhuizen, M. (2003). The didactical use of models in realistic mathematics education: An example from a longitudinal trajectory on percentage.

*Educational Studies in Mathematics, 54*, 9–35.

CrossRefVerschaffel, L., De corte, E., & Lasure, S. (1994). Realistic considerations in mathematical modeling of school arithmetic word problems.

*Learning and Instruction, 4*(4), 273–294.

CrossRefWu, H. (1999). Basic skills versus conceptual understanding: A bogus dichotomy. *American Educator, 23*(3), 14–19. 50-52.

Yackel, E., & Cobb, P. (1996). Sociomathematical norms, argumentation, and autonomy in mathematics.

*Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 22*, 390–408.

CrossRefYackel, E., Rasmussen, C., & King, K. (2000). Social and sociomathematical norms in an advanced undergraduate mathematics course.

*Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 19*, 275–287.

CrossRefYoshida, H., Verschaffel, L., & De Corte, E. (1997). Realistic considerations in solving problematic word problems: Do Japanese and Belgian children have the same difficulties.

*Learning and Instruction, 7*(4), 329–338.

CrossRef