Triadic interaction in clinical task-based interviews with mathematics teachers

Educational Studies in Mathematics

Volumn 65, Issue 3, 2007, Pages 349-365

  Koichu, Boris ^a   Harel, Guershon ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

Clinical task based interviews; Division of fractions; Experimental contract; Grounded theory; Interactions between interviewers and interviewees; Posing word problems; Procedural replicability; Protocol analysis; Thinking aloud

Indexed keywords

EID: 33947717645     PISSN: 00131954     EISSN: 15730816     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10649-006-9054-0     Document Type: Review

References (15)

1. Aronsson, K., & Hundeide, K. (2002). Relational rationality and children's interview responses. Human Development, 45, 174-186.
2. Boden, D., & Zimmerman, D. (1991). Talk and social structures. Cambridge: Polity.
3. Clement, J. (2000). Analysis of clinical interviews: Foundation and model viability. In A. E. Kelly & R. Lesh (Eds.), Handbook of research design in mathematics and science education (pp. 547-589). New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum.
4. Dey, I. (1999). Grounding grounded theory: Guidelines for qualitative inquiry, San Diego: Academic.
5. Ericsson, K., & Simon, H. (1993). Protocol analysis: Verbal reports as data (Revised version). Cambridge: MIT Press.
6. Goldin, G. (2000). A scientific perspective on structures, task-based interviews in mathematics education research. In A. E. Kelly & R. Lesh (Eds.), Handbook of research design in mathematics and science education (pp. 517-545). New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum.
7. Harel, G. (1993). On teacher education programs in mathematics. International Journal for Mathematics Education in Science and Technology, 25, 113-119.
8. Harel, G. (2001). The development of mathematical induction as a proof scheme: A model for DNR-based instruction. In S. Campbell & R. Zaskis (Eds.), Learning and teaching number theory (pp. 185-212). New Jersey: Ablex.
9. Harel, G. (in press a). What is mathematics? A pedagogical answer to a philosophical question. In R. B. Gold & R. Simons (Eds.), Current issues in the philosophy of mathematics from the perspective of mathematicians. Mathematical Association of America.
10. Harel, G. (in press b). The DNR system as a conceptual framework for curriculum development and instruction. In R. Lesh, J. Kaput, E. Hamilton, & J. Zawojewski (Eds.), Foundations for the future. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum.
11. Newell, A., & Simon, H. (1972). Human problem solving. New Jersey: Englewood Cliffs.
12. Schoenfeld, A. (1985) Mathematical problem solving. New York: Academic.
13. Schoenfeld, A. (2002). Research methods in (mathematics) education. In L. D. English (Ed.), Handbook of international research in mathematics education (pp. 435-487). New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum.
14. Schubauer-Leoni, M. L., & Grossen, M. (1993). Negotiating the meaning of questions in didactic and experimental contracts. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 8(4), 451-471.
15. Van Someren, M. Y., Barnard, Y. F., & Sandberg, J. A. C. (1994). The think aloud method: A practical guide to modeling cognitive processes. London: Academic.