Advertisement

Research and Curricula

  • Julie Sarama
  • Douglas H. ClementsEmail author
Chapter
Part of the Research in Mathematics Education book series (RME)

Abstract

Connecting curriculum development and research benefits both. Those designing curricula should ensure that their work is scientifically based and evaluated. Those studying existing curricula should understand the ways in which they were developed and validated (or not) and that a comprehensive evaluation program involves more than final outcomes. We use a curriculum research framework to draw implications for research in both development and evaluation projects. For each phase of the framework, we discuss how publishable research and curriculum development (R&D) might occur, as well as what opportunities there may be for evaluation research alone. In all cases, we briefly suggest methods.

Keywords

Cognition Curriculum Design science Evaluation Learning trajectories Mathematics Professional development Research Scale-up 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This research was supported by the Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education, through grants R305K05157 and R305A110188, and also by the National Science Foundation, through grants ESI-9730804 and REC-0228440. The opinions expressed are those of the authors and do not represent views of the IES or NSF. Although the research is concerned with the scale-up model, not particular curricula, a minor component of the intervention used in this research has been published by the authors, who thus could have a vested interest in the results. An external auditor oversaw the research design, data collection, and analysis, and other researchers independently confirmed findings and procedures. The authors wish to express appreciation to the school districts, teachers, and children who participated in this research.

References

  1. Aguirre, J., Herbel-Eisenmann, B. A., Celedón-Pattichis, S., Civil, M., Wilkerson, T., Stephan, M., … Clements, D. H. (2017). Equity within mathematics education research as a political act: Moving from choice to intentional collective professional responsibility. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 48(2), 124–147.  https://doi.org/10.5951/jresematheduc.48.2.0124CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bailey, D. H., Duncan, G. J., Watts, T. W., Clements, D. H., & Sarama, J. (2018). Risky business: Correlation and causation in longitudinal studies of skill development. American Psychologist, 73(1), 81–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Balfanz, R. (1999). Why do we teach young children so little mathematics? Some historical considerations. In J. V. Copley (Ed.), Mathematics in the early years (pp. 3–10). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.Google Scholar
  4. Baroody, A. J. (1987). Children’s mathematical thinking: A developmental framework for preschool, primary, and special education teachers. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
  5. Baroody, A. J. (2016). Curricular approaches to introducing subtraction and fostering fluency with basic differences in grade 1. In R. Bracho (Ed.), The development of number sense: From theory to practice. Monograph of the Journal of Pensamiento Numérico y Algebraico (Numerical and Algebraic Thought) (Vol. 10, pp. 161–191). University of Granada.  https://doi.org/10.1080/17405629.2016.1147345CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Baroody, A. J., Cibulskis, M., Lai, M.-l., & Li, X. (2004). Comments on the use of learning trajectories in curriculum development and research. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 6, 227–260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Baroody, A. J., & Coslick, R. T. (1998). Fostering children's mathematical power: An investigative approach to K-8 mathematics instruction. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Baroody, A. J., & Purpura, D. J. (2017). Number and operations. In J. Cai (Ed.), Handbook for research in mathematics education (pp. 308–354). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM).Google Scholar
  9. Barrett, J. E., Cullen, C. J., Sarama, J., Clements, D. H., Klanderman, D., Miller, A. L., & Rumsey, C. (2011). Children’s unit concepts in measurement: A teaching experiment spanning grades 2 through 5. ZDM-The International Journal on Mathematics Education, 43, 637.  https://doi.org/10.1080/10986065.2012.625075CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Battista, M. T., & Clements, D. H. (2000). Mathematics curriculum development as a scientific endeavor. In A. E. Kelly & R. A. Lesh (Eds.), Handbook of research design in mathematics and science education (pp. 737–760). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  11. Blanton, M., Brizuela, B. M., Gardiner, A. M., Sawrey, K., & Newman-Owens, A. (2015). A learning trajectory in 6-year-olds’ thinking about generalizing functional relationships. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 46(5), 511–558.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Brade, G. (2003). The effect of a computer activity on young children’s development of numerosity estimation skills. Buffalo, NY: University at Buffalo, State University of New York.Google Scholar
  13. Brown, A. L., & Campione, J. C. (1996). Psychological theory and the design of innovative learning environments: On procedures, principles, and systems. In R. Glaser (Ed.), Innovations in learning: New environments for education (pp. 289–325). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  14. Bruner, J. (1986). Actual minds, possible worlds. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  15. Burkhardt, H. (2006). From design research to large-scale impact: Engineering research in education. In J. V. d. Akker, K. P. E. Gravemeijer, S. McKenney, & N. Nieveen (Eds.), Educational design research. London: Routledge (pp. 133–162). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  16. Cai, J. (Ed.). (2017). Compendium for research in mathematics education. Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.Google Scholar
  17. Cai, J., Morris, A., Hohensee, C., Hwang, S., Robison, V., & Hiebert, J. (2017). Clarifying the impact of educational research on learning opportunities. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 48(3), 230–236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Casey, B. M., Dearing, E., Vasilyeva, M., Ganley, C. M., & Tine, M. (2011). Spatial and numerical predictors of measurement performance: The moderating effects of community income and gender. Journal of Educational Psychology, 103(2), 296–311.  https://doi.org/10.1037/a0022516CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Celedòn-Pattichis, S., Peters, S. A., Borden, L. L., Males, J. R., Pape, S. J., Chapman, O., … Leonard, J. (2018). Asset-based approaches to equitable mathematics education research and practice. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 49(4), 373–389.  https://doi.org/10.5951/jresematheduc.49.4.037CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Cheng, Y.-L., & Mix, K. S. (2012). Spatial training improves children’s mathematics ability. Journal of Cognition and Development, 15(1), 2–11.  https://doi.org/10.1080/15248372.2012.725186CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Choppin, J., Roth McDuffie, A., Drake, C., & Davis, J. (2018). Curriculum ergonomics: Conceptualizing the interactions between curriculum design and use. International Journal of Educational Research, 92, 75–85.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2018.09.015CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Civil, M. (2002). Everyday mathematics, mathematicians’ mathematics, and school mathematics: Can we bring them together? In Everyday and academic mathematics in the classroom: Journal for Research in Mathematics Education Monograph Number 11 (pp. 40–62). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.Google Scholar
  23. Civil, M. (2016). STEM learning research through a funds of knowledge lens. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 11(1), 41–59.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-014-9648-2CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Clarke, D. M., Cheeseman, J., Gervasoni, A., Gronn, D., Horne, M., McDonough, A., … Rowley, G. (2002). Early Numeracy Research Project final report. Department of Education, Employment and Training, the Catholic Education Office (Melbourne), and the Association of Independent Schools Victoria.Google Scholar
  25. Clements, D. H. (2002). Linking research and curriculum development. In L. D. English (Ed.), Handbook of international research in mathematics education (pp. 599–636). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  26. Clements, D. H. (2007). Curriculum research: Toward a framework for ‘research-based curricula. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 38(1), 35–70.  https://doi.org/10.2307/30034927CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Clements, D. H. (2008). Design experiments and curriculum research. In A. E. Kelly, R. A. Lesh, & J. Y. Baek (Eds.), Handbook of innovative design research in Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) Education (pp. 761–776). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  28. Clements, D. H., & Battista, M. T. (2000). Designing effective software. In A. E. Kelly & R. A. Lesh (Eds.), Handbook of research design in mathematics and science education (pp. 761–776). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  29. Clements, D. H., & Sarama, J. (2000/2018). Building Blocks fidelity of implementation. Buffalo, NY/Denver, CO: University of Buffalo, State University of New York/University of Denver.Google Scholar
  30. Clements, D. H., & Sarama, J. (2004). Learning trajectories in mathematics education. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 6, 81–89.  https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327833mtl0602_1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Clements, D. H., & Sarama, J. (2007a). Effects of a preschool mathematics curriculum: Summative research on the Building Blocks project. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 38(2), 136–163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Clements, D. H., & Sarama, J. (2007b/2013). Building blocks (Vols. 1 and 2). Columbus, OH: McGraw-Hill Education.Google Scholar
  33. Clements, D. H., & Sarama, J. (2013). Rethinking early mathematics: What is research-based curriculum for young children? In L. D. English & J. T. Mulligan (Eds.), Reconceptuallizing early mathematics learning (pp. 121–147). Dordrecht, Germany: Springer.  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-6440-8_7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Clements, D. H., & Sarama, J. (2014a). Learning and teaching early math: The learning trajectories approach (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Clements, D. H., & Sarama, J. (2014b). Learning trajectories: Foundations for effective, research-based education. In A. P. Maloney, J. Confrey, & K. H. Nguyen (Eds.), Learning over time: Learning trajectories in mathematics education (pp. 1–30). New York, NY: Information Age Publishing.Google Scholar
  36. Clements, D. H., & Sarama, J. (2016). Math, science, and technology in the early grades. The Future of Children, 26(2), 75–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Clements, D. H., Sarama, J., & DiBiase, A.-M. (2004). Engaging young children in mathematics: Standards for early childhood mathematics education. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  38. Clements, D. H., Sarama, J., Spitler, M. E., Lange, A. A., & Wolfe, C. B. (2011). Mathematics learned by young children in an intervention based on learning trajectories: A large-scale cluster randomized trial. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 42(2), 127–166.  https://doi.org/10.5951/jresematheduc.42.2.0127CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Clements, D. H., Sarama, J., Wolfe, C. B., & Spitler, M. E. (2015). Sustainability of a scale-up intervention in early mathematics: Longitudinal evaluation of implementation fidelity. Early Education and Development, 26(3), 427–449.  https://doi.org/10.1080/10409289.2015.968242CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Clements, D. H., Wilson, D. C., & Sarama, J. (2004). Young children’s composition of geometric figures: A learning trajectory. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 6, 163–184.  https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327833mtl0602_1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Cobb, P. (2001). Supporting the improvement of learning and teaching in social and institutional context. In S. Carver & D. Klahr (Eds.), Cognition and instruction: Twenty-five years of progress (pp. 455–478). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  42. Cobb, P. (2007). Putting philosophy to work: Coping with multiple theoretical perspectives. In F. K. Lester Jr. (Ed.), Second handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (Vol. 1, pp. 3–38). New York, NY: Information Age Publishing.Google Scholar
  43. Cobb, P., Confrey, J., diSessa, A., Lehrer, R., & Schauble, L. (2003). Design experiments in educational research. Educational Researcher, 32(1), 9–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Cobb, P., & McClain, K. (2002). Supporting students’ learning of significant mathematical ideas. In G. Wells & G. Claxton (Eds.), Learning for life in the 21st century: Sociocultural perspectives on the future of education (pp. 154–166). Oxford, UK: Blackwell.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Confrey, J., & Lachance, A. (2000). Transformative teaching experiments through conjecture-driven research design. In A. E. Kelly & R. A. Lesh (Eds.), Handbook of research design in mathematics and science education (pp. 231–265). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  46. Confrey, J., Maloney, A. P., Nguyen, K. H., & Rupp, A. A. (2014). Equipartitioning: A foundation for rational number reasoning. Elucidation of a learning trajectory. In A. P. Maloney, J. Confrey, & K. H. Nguyen (Eds.), Learning over time: Learning trajectories in mathematics education (pp. 61–96). New York, NY: Information Age Publishing.Google Scholar
  47. Confrey, J., Rupp, A. A., Maloney, A. P., & Nguyen, K. H. (2012). Toward developing and representing a novel learning trajectory for equipartitioning: Literature review, diagnostic assessment design, and explanatory item response modeling.Google Scholar
  48. Danesi, M. (2009, April 24). Puzzles and the brain. Retrieved October 11, 2018, from https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/brain-workout/200904/puzzles-and-the-brain
  49. Doabler, C. T., Clarke, B., Fien, H., Baker, S. K., Kosty, D. B., & Cary, M. S. (2014). The science behind curriculum development and evaluation: Taking a design science approach in the production of a tier 2 mathematics curriculum. Learning Disability Quarterly, 38(2), 97–111.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0731948713520555CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Donegan-Ritter, M. M., & Zan, B. (2017). Designing and implementing inclusive STEM activities for early childhood. In C. Curran & A. J. Peterson (Eds.), Handbook of research on classroom diversity and inclusive education practice (pp. 222–249). IGI Global.  https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-5225-2520-2.ch010
  51. Drake, C., Land, T. J., & Tyminski, A. M. (2014). Using educative curriculum materials to support the development of prospective teachers’ knowledge. Educational Researcher, 43(3), 154–162.  https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X14528039CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Eisner, E. W. (1998). The primacy of experience and the politics of method. Educational Researcher, 17(5), 15–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Ernest, P. (1995). The one and the many. In L. P. Steffe & J. Gale (Eds.), Constructivism in education (pp. 459–486). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  54. Foster, M. E., Anthony, J. L., Clements, D. H., Sarama, J., & Williams, J. J. (2018). Hispanic dual language learning kindergarten students’ response to a numeracy intervention: A randomized control trial. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 43, 83–95.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecresq.2018.01.009CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Franke, M. L., Kazemi, E., & Battey, D. (2007). Mathematics teaching and classroom practice. In F. K. Lester Jr. (Ed.), Second handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (Vol. 1, pp. 225–256). New York, NY: Information Age Publishing.Google Scholar
  56. Frye, D., Baroody, A. J., Burchinal, M. R., Carver, S., Jordan, N. C., & McDowell, J. (2013). Teaching math to young children: A practice guide. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance (NCEE), Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education.Google Scholar
  57. Fuson, K. C. (1992). Research on learning and teaching addition and subtraction of whole numbers. In G. Leinhardt, R. Putman, & R. A. Hattrup (Eds.), Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 53–187). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  58. Gravemeijer, K. P. E. (1994). Educational development and developmental research in mathematics education. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 25, 443–471.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Greenwald, A. G., Pratkanis, A. R., Leippe, M. R., & Baumgardner, M. H. (1986). Under what conditions does theory obstruct research progress? Psychological Review, 93, 216–229.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Heck, D. J., Chval, K. B., Weiss, I. R., & Ziebarth, S. W. (Eds.). (2012). Approaches to studying the enacted mathematics curriculum. Charlotte, NC: Information Age.Google Scholar
  61. Hiebert, J. C. (1999). Relationships between research and the NCTM standards. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 30, 3–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Kilpatrick, J. (1992). A history of research in mathematics education. In D. A. Grouws (Ed.), Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 3–38). New York, NY: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  63. Kulik, J. A., & Fletcher, J. D. (2016). Effectiveness of intelligent tutoring systems: A meta-analytic review. Review of Educational Research, 86(1), 42–78.  https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654315581420CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Lagemann, E. C. (1997). Contested terrain: A history of education research in the United States, 1890–1990. Educational Researcher, 26(9), 5–17.Google Scholar
  65. Lamberg, T. D., & Middleton, J. A. (2009). Design research perspectives on transitioning from individual microgenetic interviews to a whole-class teaching experiment. Educational Researcher, 38, 233–245.  https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X09334206CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Langhorst, P., Ehlert, A., & Fritz, A. (2012). Non-numerical and numerical understanding of the part-whole concept of children aged 4 to 8 in word problems. Journal für Mathematik-Didaktik, 33(2), 233–262.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s13138-012-0039-5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Larson, R. S., Dearing, J. W., & Backer, T. E. (2017). Strategies to scale up social programs: Pathways, partnerships and fidelity. Retrieved from The Wallace Foundation website: wallacefoundation.org.
  68. Lesh, R. A., & Kelly, A. E. (2000). Multitiered teaching experiments. In A. E. Kelly & R. A. Lesh (Eds.), Handbook of research design in mathematics and science education (pp. 197–230). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  69. Lester, F. K., Jr., & Wiliam, D. (2002). On the purpose of mathematics education research: Making productive contributions to policy and practice. In L. D. English (Ed.), Handbook of international research in mathematics education (pp. 489–506). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  70. Lewis, C. C., & Tsuchida, I. (1998). A lesson is like a swiftly flowing river: How research lessons improve Japanese education. American Educator, 12, 14–17; 50–52.Google Scholar
  71. Lloyd, G. M., Cai, J., & Tarr, J. E. (2017). Issues in curriculum studies: Evidence-based insights and future directions. In J. Cai (Ed.), Compendium for research in mathematics education (pp. 824–852). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.Google Scholar
  72. MacDonald, B. L. (2015). Ben’s perception of space and subitizing activity: A constructivist teaching experiment. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 27(4), 563–584.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s13394-015-0152-0CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Maloney, A. P., Confrey, J., & Nguyen, K. H. (Eds.). (2014). Learning over time: Learning trajectories in mathematics education. New York, NY: Information Age Publishing.Google Scholar
  74. May, H., Gray, A., Sirinides, P., Goldsworthy, H., Armijo, M., Sam, C., … Tognatta, N. (2015). Year one results from the multisite randomized evaluation of the i3 scale-up of reading recovery. American Educational Research Journal, 52(3), 547–581.  https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831214565788CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. McClain, K., Cobb, P., Gravemeijer, K. P. E., & Estes, B. (1999). Developing mathematical reasoning within the context of measurement. 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.Google Scholar
  76. Moll, L. C., Amanti, C., Neff, D., & Gonzalez, N. (1992). Funds of knowledge for teaching: Using a qualitative approach to connect homes and classrooms. Theory Into Practice, 31, 132–141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Moyer-Packenham, P. S., Shumway, J. F., Bullock, E., Tucker, S. I., Anderson-Pence, K. L., Westenskow, A., … Jordan, K. (2015). Young children’s learning performance and efficiency when using virtual manipulative mathematics iPad apps. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 34(1), 41–69.Google Scholar
  78. Murata, A. (2004). Paths to learning ten-structured understanding of teen sums: Addition solution methods of Japanese Grade 1 students. Cognition and Instruction, 22, 185–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. National Research Council. (2004). On evaluating curricular effectiveness: Judging the quality of K-12 mathematics evaluations. Washington, DC: Mathematical Sciences Education Board, Center for Education, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education, The National Academies Press.Google Scholar
  80. National Research Council. (2009). Mathematics learning in early childhood: Paths toward excellence and equity. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.  https://doi.org/10.17226/12519CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. NGA/CCSSO. (2010). Common core state standards. Washington, DC: National Governors Association Center for Best Practices, Council of Chief State School Officers.Google Scholar
  82. Nguyen, T., Watts, T. W., Duncan, G. J., Clements, D. H., Sarama, J., Wolfe, C. B., & Spitler, M. E. (2016). Which preschool mathematics competencies are most predictive of fifth grade achievement? Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 36, 550–560.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecresq.2016.02.003CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Penuel, W. R., Confrey, J., Maloney, A. P., & Rupp, A. A. (2014). Design decisions in developing assessments of learning trajectories: A case study. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 23(1), 47–95.  https://doi.org/10.1080/10508406.2013.866118CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Penuel, W. R., & Shepard, L. A. (2016). Assessment and teaching. In D. H. Gitomer & C. A. Bell (Eds.), Handbook of research on teaching (5th ed., pp. 787–850). Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.  https://doi.org/10.3102/978-0-935302-48-6_12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Presmeg, N. C. (2007). The role of culture in teaching and learning mathematics. In F. K. Lester Jr. (Ed.), Second handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (Vol. 1, pp. 435–458). New York, NY: Information Age Publishing.Google Scholar
  86. Presmeg, N. C., & Barrett, J. E. (2003). Lesson study characterized as a multi-tiered teaching experiment. Paper presented at the Twenty-Fifth Annual Meeting of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education, Hawai’i.Google Scholar
  87. Remillard, J. T. (2005). Examining key concepts in research on teachers’ use of mathematics curricula. Review of Educational Research, 75(2), 211–246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. Rittle-Johnson, B., Fyfe, E. R., & Zippert, E. (2018). The roles of patterning and spatial skills in early mathematics development. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 46, 166–178.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecresq.2018.03.006CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. Russek, B. E., & Weinberg, S. L. (1993). Mixed methods in a study of implementation of technology-based materials in the elementary classroom. Evaluation and Program Planning, 16, 131–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. Sakakibara, T. (2014). Mathematics learning and teaching in Japanese preschool: Providing appropriate foundations for an elementary schooler’s mathematics learning. International Journal of Educational Studies in Mathematics, 1(1), 16–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. Sarama, J., & Clements, D. H. (2008). Linking research and software development. In G. W. Blume & M. K. Heid (Eds.), Research on technology and the teaching and learning of mathematics: Volume 2, cases and perspectives (Vol. 2, pp. 113–130). New York, NY: Information Age Publishing.Google Scholar
  92. Sarama, J., & Clements, D. H. (2009). Early childhood mathematics education research: Learning trajectories for young children. New York, NY: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. Sarama, J., Clements, D. H., & Henry, J. J. (1998). Network of influences in an implementation of a mathematics curriculum innovation. International Journal of Computers for Mathematical Learning, 3, 113–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. Sarama, J., Clements, D. H., Starkey, P., Klein, A., & Wakeley, A. (2008). Scaling up the implementation of a pre-kindergarten mathematics curriculum: Teaching for understanding with trajectories and technologies. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, 1(1), 89–119.  https://doi.org/10.1080/19345740801941332CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. Sarama, J., Clements, D. H., & Vukelic, E. B. (1996). The role of a computer manipulative in fostering specific psychological/mathematical processes. In E. Jakubowski, D. Watkins, & H. Biske (Eds.), Proceedings of the 18th annual meeting of the North America Chapter of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 2, pp. 567–572). Columbus, OH: ERIC Clearinghouse for Science, Mathematics, and Environmental Education.Google Scholar
  96. Sarama, J., Clements, D. H., Wolfe, C. B., & Spitler, M. E. (2012). Longitudinal evaluation of a scale-up model for teaching mathematics with trajectories and technologies. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, 5(2), 105–135. doi:10.1080119345747.2011.627980.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  97. Schmidt, W. H., & Houang, R. (2012). Curricular coherence and the common core state standards for mathematics. Educational Researcher, 41(8), 294–308.  https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X12464517CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  98. Schoenfeld, A. H. (2002). Research methods in (mathematics) education. In L. D. English (Ed.), Handbook of international research in mathematics education (pp. 435–487). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  99. Schoenfeld, A. H. (2016). 100 years of curriculum history, theory, and research. Educational Researcher, 45(2), 105–111.  https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X16639025CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  100. Siegler, R. S. (2006). Microgenetic analyses of learning. In W. Damon, R. M. S. E. Lerner, D. Kuhn, & R. S. V. E. Siegler (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology: Volume 2: Cognition, perception, and language (6th ed., pp. 464–510). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.Google Scholar
  101. Silver, E. A., & Herbst, P. G. (2007). Theory in mathematics education scholarship. In F. K. Lester Jr. (Ed.), Second handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (Vol. 1, pp. 39–67). New York, NY: Information Age Publishing.Google Scholar
  102. Simon, M. A. (1995). Reconstructing mathematics pedagogy from a constructivist perspective. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 26(2), 114–145.  https://doi.org/10.2307/749205CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  103. Simon, M. A., Placa, N., & Avitzur, A. (2016). Participatory and anticipatory stages of mathematical concept learning: Further empirical and theoretical development. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 47(1), 63–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  104. Simon, M. A., Saldanha, L., McClintock, E., Akar, G. K., Watanabe, T., & Zembat, I. O. (2010). A developing approach to studying students’ learning through their mathematical activity. Cognition and Instruction, 28(1), 70–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  105. Spradley, J. P. (1980). Participant observation. New York, NY: Holt, Rhinehart & Winston.Google Scholar
  106. Steffe, L. P., Thompson, P. W., & Glasersfeld, E. v. (2000). Teaching experiment methodology: Underlying principles and essential elements. In A. E. Kelly & R. A. Lesh (Eds.), Handbook of research design in mathematics and science education (pp. 267–306). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  107. Stein, M. K., & Kaufman, J. H. (2010). Selecting and supporting the use of mathematics curricula at scale. American Educational Research Journal, 47(3), 663–693.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  108. Stein, M. K., Remillard, J. T., & Smith, M. S. (2007). How curriculum influences student learning. In F. K. Lester Jr. (Ed.), Second handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (Vol. 1, pp. 319–369). New York, NY: Information Age Publishing.Google Scholar
  109. Stephan, M., Cobb, P., Gravemeijer, K. P. E., & Estes, B. (2001). The role of tools in supporting students’ development of measuring conceptions. In A. Cuoco (Ed.), The roles of representation in school mathematics (pp. 63–76). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.Google Scholar
  110. Streefland, L. (Ed.). (1991). Realistic mathematics education in primary school. Utrecht, The Netherlands: Freudenthal Institute, Utrecht University.Google Scholar
  111. Szilagyi, J., Sarama, J., & Clements, D. H. (2013). Young children’s understandings of length measurement: Evaluating a learning trajectory. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 44, 581–620.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  112. Sztajn, P., Confrey, J., Wilson, P. H., & Edgington, C. (2012). Learning trajectory based instruction: Toward a theory of teaching. Educational Researcher, 41, 147–156.  https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X12442801CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  113. Van den Brink, F. J. (1991). Realistic arithmetic education for young children. In L. Streefland (Ed.), Realistic mathematics education in primary school (pp. 77–92). Utrecht, The Netherlands: Freudenthal Institute, Utrecht University.Google Scholar
  114. Van Dooren, W., De Bock, D., Hessels, A., Janssens, D., & Verschaffel, L. (2004). Remedying secondary school students’ illusion of linearity: A teaching experiment aiming at conceptual change. Learning and Instruction, 14(5), 485–501.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  115. Verdine, B. N., Golinkoff, R. M., Hirsh-Pasek, K., & Newcombe, N. S. (2017). Links between spatial and mathematical skills across the preschool years. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 82(1, Serial No. 324). Retrieved from http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/mono.v82.1/issuetoc.  https://doi.org/10.1111/mono.12280CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  116. Whitehurst, G. J. (2009). Don’t forget curriculum. Retrieved from Brown Center on Education Policy, The Brookings Institution website http://www.brookings.edu/papers/2009/1014_curriculum_whitehurst.aspx
  117. Wilson, M. (2012). Responding to a challenge that learning progressions pose to measurement practice: Hypothesized links between dimensions of the outcome progression. In A. C. Alonzo & A. W. Gotwals (Eds.), Learning progressions in science (pp. 317–344). Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense Publishers.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of DenverDenverUSA

Personalised recommendations