Alligood, K. T., Sauer, T. D., & Yorke, J. A. (2000). Chaos: An introduction to dynamical systems. New York: Springer.
Ares, N., Stroup, W. M., & Schademan, A. R. (2009). The power of mediating artifacts in group-level development of mathematical discourses. Cognition and Instruction,
Bailey, D. H., & Borwein, J. M. (2011). Exploratory experimentation and computation. Notices of the AMS,
Baish, J. W., & Jain, R. K. (2000). Fractals and cancer. Cancer Research,
Barr, D., Harrison, J., & Conery, L. (2011). Computational thinking: A digital age skill for everyone. Learning & Leading with Technology,
Bers, M. U. (2010). The TangibleK robotics program: Applied computational thinking for young children. Early Childhood Research & Practice
Blikstein, P., & Wilensky, U. (2009). An atom is known by the company it keeps: A constructionist learning environment for materials science using agent-based modeling. International Journal of Computers for Mathematical Learning,
Brady, C., White, T., Davis, S., & Hegedus, S. (2013). SimCalc and the networked classroom. In S. J. Hegedus & J. Roschelle (Eds.), The SimCalc vision and contributions: Democratizing access to important mathematics
(pp. 99–121). Dordrecht: Springer.CrossRef
Brown, A. L. (1992). Design experiments: Theoretical and methodological challenges in creating complex interventions in classroom settings. Journal of the Learning Sciences,
Chandrasekharan, S. (2009). Building to discover: A common coding model. Cognitive Science,
Chi, M. T., Feltovich, P. J., & Glaser, R. (1981). Categorization and representation of physics problems by experts and novices. Cognitive Science,
Clark, A. C., & Ernst, J. V. (2008). STEM-based computational modeling for technology education. The Journal of Technology Studies,
Cobb, P., Confrey, J., diSessa, A., Lehrer, R., & Schauble, L. (2003). Design experiments in educational research. Educational Researcher,
Collins, A. (1992). Toward a design science of education. In E. Scanlon & T. O’Shea (Eds.), New directions in educational technology. Berlin: Springer.
Common Core State Standards Initiative. (2010). Common core state standards for mathematics.
Retrieved December 15, 2012, from http://www.corestandards.org/Math
de Jong, T., Weinberger, A., Girault, I., Kluge, A., Lazonder, A. W., Pedaste, M., et al. (2012). Using scenarios to design complex technology-enhanced learning environments. Educational Technology Research and Development,
Demko, S., Hodges, L., & Naylor, B. (1985). Construction of fractal objects with iterated function systems. AC SIGGRAPH Computer Graphics,
Dierbach, C., Hochheiser, H., Collins, S., Jerome, G., Ariza, C., Kelleher, T., & Kaza, S. (2011). A model for piloting pathways for computational thinking in a general education curriculum. In Proceedings of the 42nd ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education (pp. 257–262). ACM.
diSessa, A. (2000). Changing minds: Computers, learning, and literacy. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
diSessa, A. A., & Abelson, H. (1986). Boxer: A reconstructible computational medium. Communications of the ACM,
Edelson, D. C., Pea, R. D., & Gomez, L. M. (1996). The collaboratory notebook. Communications of the ACM,
Forte, A., & Bruckman, A. (2007). Constructing text: Wiki as a toolkit for (collaborative?) learning. In International Symposium on Wikis: Proceedings of the 2007 International Symposium on Wikis (Vol. 21, No. 25, pp. 31–42).
Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). Discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Mill Valley, CA: Sociology Press.
Goldstone, R. L., & Wilensky, U. (2008). Promoting transfer by grounding complex systems principles. The Journal of the Learning Sciences,
Grover, S., & Pea, R. (2013). Computational thinking in K-12: A review of the state of the field. Educational Researcher,
Hambrusch, S., Hoffmann, C., Korb, J. T., Haugan, M., & Hosking, A. L. (2009). A multidisciplinary approach towards computational thinking for science majors. In ACM SIGCSE Bulletin (Vol. 41, No. 1, pp. 183–187). New York: ACM.
Harel, I., & Papert, S. (1991). Constructionism. New York: Ablex Publishing.
Hegedus, S. J., & Moreno-Armella, L. (2009). Intersecting representation and communication infrastructures. ZDM,
Hmelo-Silver, C. E., Jordan, R., Liu, L., & Chernobilsky, E. (2011). Representational tools for understanding complex computer-supported collaborative learning environments. Analyzing Interactions in CSCL,
Jackson, S., Krajcik, J., & Soloway, E. (2000). Model-It: A design retrospective. In M. J. Jacobson & R. B. Kozma (Eds.), Advanced designs for the technologies of learning: Innovations in science and mathematics education (pp. 77–116). New York: Wiley.
Kafai, Y., & Resnick, M. (1996). Constructionism in practice: Designing, thinking, and learning in a digital world. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Kahn, K. (1996). ToonTalk™: An animated programming environment for children. Journal of Visual Languages & Computing,
Khan, S. (2008). The case in case-based design of educational software: A methodological interrogation. Educational Technology Research and Development,
Konold, C., & Miller, C. D. (2005). TinkerPlots: Dynamic data exploration [Computer software]. Emeryville, CA: Key Curriculum Press.
Kress, G., & Van Leeuwen, T. V. (2001). Multimodal discourse: The modes and media of contemporary communication. London: Hodder Arnold.
Kurland, D. M., Pea, R. D., Clement, C., & Mawby, R. (1986). A study of the development of programming ability and thinking skills in high school students. Journal of Educational Computing Research,
Leinhardt, G., Zaslavsky, O., & Stein, M. K. (1990). Functions, graphs, and graphing: Tasks, learning, and teaching. Review of Educational Research,
Linn, M. C., Clark, D., & Slotta, J. D. (2003). WISE design for knowledge integration. Science Education,
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: NCTM.
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (2003). Fractal tool [computer software]. NCTM Illuminations Resource Website, Retrieved August 17, 2013, from http://illuminations.nctm.org/ActivityDetail.aspx?ID=17
National Research Council. (2012). A framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
National Research Council Committee for the Workshops on Computational Thinking. (2010). Report of a workshop on the scope and nature of computational thinking. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
National Research Council Committee on Science Learning, & Kindergarten Through Eighth Grade. (2007). In R. A. Duschl, H. A. Schweingruber, & A. W. Shouse (Eds.), Taking science to school: Learning and teaching science in grades K-8. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
Noss, R., & Hoyles, C. (2006). Exploring mathematics through construction and collaboration. In: R. K Sawyer (Ed.), Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 389–405). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Papert, S. (1980). Mindstorms: Children, computers, and powerful ideas. New York: Basic Books Inc.
Papert, S. (1996). An exploration in the space of mathematics educations. International Journal of Computers for Mathematical Learning,
Renninger, K. A., & Shumar, W. (2002). Community building with and for teachers at the Math Forum. In K. A. Renninger & W. Shumar (Eds.), Building virtual communities: Learning and change in cyberspace
(pp. 60–95). New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRef
Repenning, A., Ioannidou, A., & Zola, J. (2000). AgentSheets: End-user programmable simulations. Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation,
Repenning, A., Webb, D., & Ioannidou, A. (2010, March). Scalable game design and the development of a checklist for getting computational thinking into public schools. In Proceedings of the 41st ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education (pp. 265–269). New York: ACM.
Resnick, M., Maloney, J., Monroy-Hernández, A., Rusk, N., Eastmond, E., Brennan, K., et al. (2009). Scratch: Programming for all. Communications of the ACM,
Romberg, T. A., & Kaput, J. J. (1999). Mathematics worth teaching, mathematics worth understanding. In E. Fennema & T. A. Romberg (Eds.) Mathematics classrooms that promote understanding (pp. 3–17). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Sabelli, N. H. (2006). Complexity, technology, science, and education. Journal of the Learning Sciences,
Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (1994). Computer support for knowledge-building communities. The Journal of the Learning Sciences,
Sherin, B. L. (2001). A comparison of programming languages and algebraic notation as expressive languages for physics. International Journal of Computers for Mathematical Learning,
Slotta, J. D., & Aleahmad, T. (2009). WISE technology lessons: Moving from a local proprietary system to a global open source framework. Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning,
Techsmith Corporation (2004). Camtasia [Computer software].
Tissenbaum, M., Lui, M., & Slotta, J. D. (2012). Co-designing collaborative smart classroom curriculum for secondary school science. Journal of Universal Computer Science,
Wang, F., & Hannafin, M. J. (2005). Design-based research and technology-enhanced learning environments. Educational Technology Research and Development,
White, T. (2009). Encrypted objects and decryption processes: Problem-solving with functions in a learning environment based on cryptography. Educational Studies in Mathematics,
Wilensky, U. (1999). NetLogo [Computer Software]. Evanston, IL: Center for Connected Learning, Northwestern University.
Wilensky, U., & Reisman, K. (2006). Thinking like a wolf, a sheep, or a firefly: Learning biology through constructing and testing computational theories—an embodied modeling approach. Cognition and Instruction,
Wilensky, U., & Resnick, M. (1999). Thinking in levels: A dynamic systems approach to making sense of the world. Journal of Science Education and Technology,
Wing, J. M. (2006). Computational thinking. Communications of the ACM,
Yin, R. K. (2008). Case study research: Design and methods. Thousand Oaks, CS: AGE Publications.