Ambrose, R., & Kenehan, G. (2009). Children’s Evolving Understanding of Polyhedra in the Classroom.

*Mathematical Thinking and Learning,*
*11*(3), 158–176.

CrossRefGoogle ScholarBartolini Bussi, M. G., & Mariotti, M. A. (2008). Semiotic mediation in the mathematics classroom: Artifacts and signs after a Vygotskian perspective. In L. English, M. Bartolini Bussi, G. Jones, R. Lesh, & D. Tirosh (Eds.), *Handbook of international research in mathematics education, second revised edition* (pp. 746–783). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Bartolini-Bussi, M. & Baccaglini-Frank, A. (2015). Geometry in early years: sowing seeds for a mathematical definition of squares and rectangles.

*ZDM Mathematics Education, 47*(3). doi:

10.1007/s11858-014-0636-5 (this issue).

Battista, M.T. (2008). Development of shapemakers geometry microworld. In Blume, G.W., Heid, M.K. (Eds.), *Research on Technology and the Teaching and Learning of Mathematics Vol. 2: Cases and Perspectives* (pp. 131-156). Information Age Publishing.

Battista, M. T. (2007). The development of geometric and spatial thinking. In F. Lester (Ed.),

*Second handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning* (pp. 843–908). Reston: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.

Google ScholarBrochard, R., Dufour, A., & Despres, O. (2004). Effect of musical expertise on visuospatial abilities: evidence from reaction times and mental imagery.

*Brain and Cognition,*
*54*(2), 103–109.

CrossRefGoogle ScholarBruce, C. & Hawes, Z. (2015). The role of 2D and 3D mental rotations in mathematics for young children: what is it? Why does it matter? And what can we do about it?

*ZDM Mathematics Education, 47*(3). doi:

10.1007/s11858-014-0637-4 (this issue).

Bruce, C., McPherson, R., Sabbati, M., & Flynn, T. (2011). Revealing significant learning moments with interactive whiteboards in mathematics.

*Journal of Educational Computing Research,*
*45*(4), 433–454.

CrossRefGoogle ScholarBruce, C. D., Moss, J., Sinclair, N., Whiteley, W., Okamoto, Y., McGarvey, L., & Davis, B. (2013). Early years spatial reasoning: learning, teaching, and research implications. In *Presented at the NCTM research presession: Linking research and practice.* Denver, CO.

Bruner, J. (1969).

*On knowing: essays for the left hand*. Athaneum: New York.

Google ScholarBryant, P., & Watson, A. (2009).

*Key understandings in mathematics learning: Understanding space and its representation in mathematics*. Nuffield Foundation.

http://foundation.bootle.biz/sites/default/files/P5.pdf. Accessed 34 April 2014.

Châtelet, G. (2000/1993). *Les enjeux du mobile*. Paris: Seuil. (Engl. transl., by R. Shore & M. Zagha: *Figuring space: Philosophy, Mathematics and Physics*). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academy Press.

Clements, D. H., & Battista, M. T. (1989). Learning of geometric concepts in a Logo environment.

*Journal of Research in Mathematics Education,*
*20*, 450–467.

CrossRefGoogle ScholarClements, D. H., & Battista, M. T. (1992). Geometry and spatial reasoning. In D. A. Grouws (Ed.),

*Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning* (pp. 420–464). New York: Macmillan.

Google ScholarClements, D., Battista, A., Sarama, J., & Swaminathan, S. (1996). Development of turn and turn measurement concepts in a computer-based instructional unit.

*Educational Studies in Mathematics,*
*30*, 313–337.

CrossRefGoogle ScholarClements, D. H., & Sarama, J. (2011). Early childhood teacher education: the case of geometry.

*Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education,*
*14*(2), 133–148.

CrossRefGoogle ScholarCraine, T. (2009).

*Understanding geometry for a changing world*. Reston: NCTM.

Google ScholarCupchik, G. C., Phillips, K., & Hill, D. S. (2001). Shared processes in spatial rotation and musical permutation.

*Brain and Cognition,*
*46*(3), 373–382.

CrossRefGoogle Scholarde Freitas, E., & Sinclair, N. (2012). Diagram, gesture, agency: theorizing embodiment in the mathematics classroom.

*Educational Studies in Mathematics,*
*80*(1–2), 133–152.

Google ScholarDelgado, A. R., & Prieto, G. (2004). Cognitive mediators and sex-related differences in mathematics.

*Intelligence,*
*32*(1), 25–32.

CrossRefGoogle ScholarDevichi, C., & Munier, V. (2013). About the concept of angle in elementary school: misconceptions and teaching sequences.

*Journal of Mathematical Behavior,*
*32*, 1–19.

CrossRefGoogle ScholarDieudonné, J. (1981). The universal domination of geometry.

*The Two-Year Cllege Mathematics Journal,*
*12*(4), 227–231.

CrossRefGoogle ScholarErez, M., & Yerushalmy, M. (2006). ‘‘If you can turn a rectangle into a square, you can turn a square into a rectangle…’’ young students experience the dragging tool.

*International Journal of Computers for Mathematical Learning,*
*11*, 271–299.

CrossRefGoogle ScholarFarmer, G., Verdine, B., Lucca, K., Davies, T., Dempsey, R., Newcombe, N., et al. (2013).

*Putting the pieces together: Spatial skills at age 3 predict to spatial and math performance at age 5*. Seattle: SRCD poster presentation.

Google ScholarFennema, E., & Tartre, L. A. (1985). The use of spatial visualisation in mathematics by girls and boys.

*Journal for Research in Mathematics Education,*
*16*, 184–206.

CrossRefGoogle ScholarForsythe, S. K. (2011). Developing perceptions of symmetry in a Dynamic Geometry environment.

*Research in Mathematics Education,*
*13*(2), 225–226.

CrossRefGoogle ScholarFreudenthal, H. (1971). Geometry between the devil and the deep sea.

*Educational Studies in Mathematics,*
*3*, 413–435.

CrossRefGoogle ScholarFuys, D., Geddes, D., Lovett, C. J., & Tischler, R. (1988). The van Hiele model of thinking in geometry among adolescents. *Journal for Research in Mathematics Education* [monograph number 3]. Reston: NCTM.

Gibson, D., Congdon, E. & Levine, S. (2012). The effects of word learning biases on children’s understanding of angle. Published by the Spatial Intelligence Learning Center.

http://bit.ly/1qOBlyu. Accessed December 2014.

Gonzales, G., & Herbst, P. (2006). Competing arguments for the geometry curse: why were American high school students supported to study geometry in the twentieth century?

*International Journal for the History of Mathematics Education,*
*1*(1), 7–33.

Google ScholarGoodwin, K., & Highfield, K. (2013). A framework for examining technologies and early mathematics learning. In L. D. English & J. T. Mulligan (Eds.),

*Reconceptualising early mathematics learning* (pp. 205–226). New York: Springer.

CrossRefGoogle ScholarGuay, R. B., & McDaniel, E. D. (1977). The relationship between mathematics achievement and spatial abilities among elementary school children.

*Journal for Research in Mathematics Education,*
*8*(3), 210–215.

CrossRefGoogle ScholarGutiérrez, A. (1992). Exploring the links between van Hiele levels and 3-dimensional geometry.

*Structural Topology,*
*18*, 31–48.

Google ScholarHallowell, D., Okamoto, Y, Romo, L. & LaJoy, J. (2015). First-grader’s spatial-mathematical reasoning about plane and solid shapes and their representations.

*ZDM Mathematics Education, 47*(3). doi:

10.1007/s11858-015-0664-9 (this issue).

Henderson, D. W., & Taimina, D. (2005).

*Experiencing geometry. Euclidean and non-Euclidean with history*. Ithaca: Cornell University.

Google ScholarHershkowitz, R. (1989). Visualization in geometry—two sides of the coin.

*Focus on Learning Problems in Mathematics,*
*11*(1), 61–76.

Google ScholarHighfield, K. (2009). Mapping, Measurement and Robotics.

*Reflections, Journal of the Mathematical Association of New South Wales,*
*34*(1), 52–55.

Google ScholarHighfield, K. (2010). Robotic toys as a catalyst for mathematical problem solving.

*Australian Primary Mathematics Classroom,*
*15*, 22–27.

Google ScholarHighfield, K., & Mulligan, J. (2007). The Role of Dynamic Interactive Technological Tools in Preschoolers’ Mathematical Patterning. In J. Watson & K. Beswick (Eds), *Proceedings of the 30th annual conference of the Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia* (pp. 372–381). MERGA.

Highfield, K., & Mulligan, J. T. (2008). Young children’s engagement with technological tools: The impact on mathematics education. Paper presented to the

*International Congress of Mathematical Education (ICME 11): Discussion Group 27: How is technology challenging us to re*-

*think the fundamentals of mathematics education?*
http://dg.icme11.org/tsg/show/28. Accessed 1 December 2008.

Highfield, K., & Mulligan, J. T. (2009). Young children’s embodied action in problem-solving tasks using robotic toys. In M. Tzekaki, M. Kaldrimidou, & H. Sakonidis (Eds.),

*Proceedings of the 33rd conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education* (Vol. 2, pp. 273–280). Thessaloniki: PME.

Google ScholarJaime, A., & Gutiérrez, A. (1995). Guidelines for teaching plane isometries in secondary school.

*Mathematics Teacher,*
*88*, 591–597.

Google ScholarJones, K. (2000). Providing a foundation for deductive reasoning: students’ interpretations when using dynamic geometry software and their evolving mathematical explanations.

*Educational Studies in Mathematics,*
*44*(1–3), 55–85.

CrossRefGoogle ScholarKaur, H. (2015). Two aspects of young children’s thinking about different types of dynamic triangles: prototypicality and inclusion.

*ZDM Mathematics Education, 47*(3). doi:

10.1007/s11858-014-0658-z (this issue).

Kell, H., Lubinski, D., Benbow, C., & Stieger, J. (2013). Who Rises to the Top? Early Indicators.

*Psychological Science,*
*24*, 648–659.

CrossRefGoogle ScholarKotsopoulos, D., Cordy, M. & Langemeyer, M. (2015). Children’s understanding of large-scale mapping tasks: an analysis of talk, drawings, and gesture.

*ZDM Mathematics Education, 47*(3). doi:

10.1007/s11858-014-0661-4 (this issue).

Lakoff, G., & Núñez, R. E. (2000).

*Where mathematics comes from: How the embodied mind brings mathematics into being* (1st ed.). New York: Basic Books.

Google ScholarLehrer, R., Jenkins, M., & Osana, H. (1998). Longitudinal study of children’s reasoning about space and geometry. In R. Lehrer & D. Chazan (Eds.),

*Designing learning environments for developing understanding of geometry and space* (pp. 137–167). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Google ScholarLovell, K. (1959). A follow-up study on some aspects of the work of Piaget and Inhelder on the child’s conception of space.

*British Journal of Educational Psychology,*
*29*, 104–117.

CrossRefGoogle ScholarMammana, C., & Villani, V. (Eds.) (1998). *Perspective on the teaching of geometry for the 21st century: an ICMI study.* Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers (New ICMI Studies Series; No. 5).

Mamolo, A., Ruttenberg-Rozen, R. & Whitelely, W. (2015). Developing a network of and for geometric reasoning.

*ZDM Mathematics Education, 47*(3). doi:

10.1007/s11858-014-0654-3 (this issue).

Martin, J. L. (1976). An analysis of some of Piaget’s topological tasks from a mathematical point of view.

*Journal for Research in Mathematics Education,*
*7*, 8–24.

CrossRefGoogle ScholarMitchelmore, M. C. (1998). Young Students’ Concepts of Turning and Angle.

*Cognition and Instruction,*
*16*(3), 265–284.

CrossRefGoogle ScholarMoss, J., Hawes, Z., Naqvi, S. & Caswell, B. (2015). Adapting Japanese Lesson Study to enhance the teaching and learning of geometry and spatial reasoning in early years classrooms: a case study.

*ZDM Mathematics Education, 15*(3). doi:

10.1007/s11858-015-0679-2 (this issue).

Moyer, P. S., Niezgoda, D., & Stanley, J. (2005). Young children’s use of virtual manipulatives and other forms of mathematical representations. In W. Masalski & P. C. Elliott (Eds.),

*Technology-supported mathematics learning environments: 67th yearbook* (pp. 17–34). Reston: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.

Google ScholarNg, O. & Sinclair, N. (2015). Young children reasoning about symmetry in a dynamic geometry environment.

*ZDM Mathematics Education, 47*(3). doi:

10.1007/s11858-014-0660-5 (this issue).

Page, E. I. (1959). Haptic perception: a consideration of one of the investigations of Piaget and Inhelder.

*Educational Review,*
*11*, 115–124.

CrossRefGoogle ScholarPittalis, M., & Christou, C. (2010). Types of reasoning in 3D geometry thinking and their relation with spatial ability.

*Educational Studies in Mathematics,*
*75*, 191–212.

CrossRefGoogle ScholarRivera, F. D., Steinbring, H., & Arcavi, A. (2014). Visualisation as an epistemological learning tool: an introduction.

*ZDM—The International Journal on Mathematics Education,*
*46*(1), 1–2.

CrossRefGoogle ScholarSarama, J., & Clements, D. (2002). Building blocks for young children’s mathematical development.

*Journal of Educational Computing Research,*
*27*(1&2), 93–110.

CrossRefGoogle ScholarSfard, A. (2008).

*Thinking as communicating: Human development, the growth of discourses, and mathematizing*. New York: Cambridge University Press.

CrossRefGoogle ScholarSinclair, N. (2008). *The history of the geometry curriculum in the United States*. IAP—Information Age Publishing Inc.

Sinclair, N., de Freitas, E., & Ferrara, F. (2013). Virtual encounters: the murky and furtive world of mathematical inventiveness.

*ZDM—The International Journal on Mathematics Education,*
*45*(2), 239–252.

CrossRefGoogle ScholarSinclair, N., & Moss, J. (2012). The more it changes, the more it becomes the same: the development of the routine of shape identification in dynamic geometry environments.

*International Journal of Education Research,*
*51&52*, 28–44.

CrossRefGoogle ScholarSinclair, N., Pimm, D., & Skelin, M. (2012). *Developing Essential Understanding of Geometry for Teaching Mathematics in Grades 5*–*8*. *Essential Understanding Series*. Reston: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.

Soury-Lavergne, S. & Maschietto, M. (2015). Intertwining of spatial and geometrical knowledge in problem solving with technology at primary school. *ZDM Mathematics Education, 47*(3) (this issue).

Spelke, E. S., Gilmore, C. K., & McCarthy, S. (2011). Kindergarten children’s sensitivity to geometry in maps.

*Developmental Science,*
*14*(4), 809–821.

CrossRefGoogle ScholarSpencer, H. (1876). *Inventional geometry*. American Book Company.

Stipek, D. (2013). Mathematics in early childhood education: revolution or evolution?

*Early Education and Development,*
*24*, 431–435. doi:

10.1080/10409289.2013.777285.

CrossRefGoogle ScholarTahta, D. (1980). About geometry.

*For the Learning of Mathematics,*
*1*(1), 2–9.

Google ScholarThom, J., & McGarvey, L. (2015). The act and artifact of drawing(s): observing geometric thinking with, in, and through children’s drawings. *ZDM Mathematics Education, 47*(3) (this issue).

Tsamir, P., Tirosh, D., & Levenson, E. (2008). Intuitive nonexamples: the case of triangles.

*Educational Studies in Mathematics,*
*69*, 81–95.

CrossRefGoogle ScholarTsamir, P., Tirosh, D., Levenson, E., Barkai, R. & Tabach, M. (2015). Early-years teachers’ concept images and concept definitions: triangles, circles, and cylinders.

*ZDM Mathematics Education, 47*(3). doi:

10.1007/s11858-014-0641-8 (this issue).

Usiskin, Z. (1987). Resolving the continuing dilemmas in school geometry. In M. M. Lindquist & A. P. Shulte (Eds.),

*Learning and Teaching Geometry, K-12: 1987 Yearbook* (pp. 17–31). Reston: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.

Google ScholarVan den Heuvel-Panhuizen, M., & Buys, K. (Eds.). (2008).

*Young children learn measurement and geometry. A learning-teaching trajectory with intermediate attainment targets for the lower grades in primary school*. Rotterdam/Tapei: Sense Publishers.

Google ScholarVan den Heuvel-Panhuizen, M., Iliade, E., & Robitzsch, A. (2015). Kindergartners’ performance in two types of imaginary perspective-taking.

*ZDM Mathematics Education, 47*(3). doi:

10.1007/s11858-015-0677-4 (this issue).

Van Hiele, P. M. (1985). The child’s thought and geometry. In D. Geddes & R. Tischler (Eds.), *English translation of selected writings of Dina van Hiele*-*Geldof and Pierre M. van Hiele* (pp. 243–252). Brooklyn: Brooklyn College, School of Education (Original work published 1959).

Wai, J., Lubinski, D., & Benbow, C. P. (2009). Spatial ability for STEM domains: aligning over 50 years of cumulative psychological knowledge solidifies its importance.

*Journal of Educational Psychology,*
*101*, 817–835.

CrossRefGoogle ScholarWalcott, C., Mohr, D., & Kastberg, S. E. (2009). Making sense of shape: an analysis of children’s written responses.

*Journal of Mathematical Behavior,*
*28*, 30–40.

CrossRefGoogle ScholarWhiteley, W. (1999). The decline and rise of geometry in 20th century North America. In J. G. McLoughlin (Ed.), *Canadian Mathematics Study Group Conference Proceedings*, (pp. 7–30). St John’s, NF: Memorial University of Newfoundland.