Erratum to Advancing the math skills of middle school students in technology education classrooms (NASSP Bulletin, (2010), 94, 2, (81-106), 10.1177/0192636510379902);Advancing the math skills of middle school students in technology education classrooms

NASSP Bulletin

Volumn 94, Issue 2, 2010, Pages 81-106

  Bottge, Brian A ^a   Grant, Timothy S ^b   Stephens, Ana C ^c   Rueda, Enrique ^d  

^a UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY COLLEGE DUBLIN   (Ireland)

^c UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN MADISON   (United States)

^d NONE

Author keywords

anchored instruction; math; middle school; technology education

Indexed keywords

EID: 77958536394     PISSN: 01926365     EISSN: 19301405     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0192636510393485     Document Type: Erratum

References (63)

1. Baroody, A.J., & Coslick, R.T. (1998). Fostering children's mathematical power. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
2. Barrows, H.L. (1996, Winter). Problem-based learning in medicine and beyond: A brief overview. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 68, 3-12.
3. Behr, M., Harel, G., Post, T., & Lesh, R. (1992). Rational number, ratio, and proportion. In D. A. Grouws (Ed.), Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 296-333). New York, NY: Macmillan.
4. Bottge, B.A. (1999). Effects of contextualized math instruction on problem solving of average and below-average achieving students. Journal of Special Education, 33, 81-92.
5. Bottge, B.A., Heinrichs, M., Chan, S., & Serlin, R. (2001). Anchoring adolescents' understanding of math concepts in rich problem-solving environments. Remedial and Special Education, 22, 299-314.
6. Bottge, B.A., Rueda, E., Grant, T.S., Stephens, A.C., & LaRoque, P.T. (in press). Anchoring problem-solving and computation instruction in context-rich learning environments. Exceptional Children.
7. Bottge, B.A., Rueda, E., Kwon, J.M., Grant, T., & LaRoque, P. (2009). Assessing and tracking students' problem solving performances in anchored learning environments. Education Technology Research and Development, 57, 529-552.
8. Bottge, B.A., Rueda, E., LaRoque, P.T., Serlin, R.C., & Kwon, J. (2007). Integrating reform-oriented math instruction in special education settings. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 22, 96-108.
9. Bottge, B.A., Rueda, E., Serlin, R.C., Hung, Y., & Kwon, J. (2007). Shrinking achievement differences with anchored math problems: Challenges and possibilities. Journal of Special Education, 41, 31-49.
10. Bottge, B., Rueda, E., & Skivington, M. (2006). Situating math instruction in rich problem-solving contexts: Effects on adolescents with challenging behaviors. Behavioral Disorders, 31, 394-407.
11. Bransford, J., Derry, S., Berliner, D., Hammerness, K., & Beckett, K. l. (2005). Theories of learning and their roles in teaching. In L. Darling-Hammond & J. Bransford (Eds.), Preparing teachers for a changing world: What teachers should learn and be able to do (pp. 40-87). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
12. Brown, J.S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 17, 32-41.
13. Bruner, J.S. (1960). The process of education. New York, NY: Random House.
14. Center for Applied Special Technology. (2009). Universal design for learning. Retrieved from http://www.cast.org/research/udl/index.html.
15. Charalambous, C.Y., & Pitta-Pantazi, D. (2007). Drawing on a theoretical model to study students' understandings of fractions. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 64, 293-316.
16. Cho, S.-J., Bottge, B.A., Cohen, A.S., & Kim, S.-H. (in press). Detecting cognitive change in the math skills of low-achieving adolescents. Journal of Special Education.
17. Calhoon, M.B., Emerson, R.W., Flores, M., & Houchins, D.E. (2007). Computational fluency performance profile of high school students with mathematics disabilities. Remedial and Special Education, 28, 292-303.
18. Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt University. (1990). Anchored instruction and its relationship to situated cognition. Educational Researcher, 19, 2-10.
19. Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt. (1997). The Jasper project: Lessons in curriculum, instruction, assessment, and professional development. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
20. Cohen, J. (1977). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. New York, NY: Academic Press.
21. Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and education. New York, NY: Macmillan.
22. Educational Testing Service. (2007). America's perfect storm: Three forces changing our nation's future. Princeton, NJ: Author.
23. Frank, M., & Barzilai, A. (2006). Project-based technology: Instructional strategy for developing technological literacy. Journal of Technology Education, 18, 39-53.
24. Fuchs, L.S., & Fuchs, D. (2002). Mathematical problem-solving profiles of students with mathematics disabilities with and without comorbid reading difficulties. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 35, 563-573.
25. Gijbels, D., Dochy, F., Van den Bossche, P., & Segers, M. (2005). Effects of problem-based learning: A meta-analysis from the angle of assessment. Review of Educational Research, 75, 27-61.
26. Greeno, J.G., & the Middle School Mathematics Through Applications Project Group. (1998). The situativity of knowing, learning, and research. American Psychologist, 53, 5-26.
27. Greeno, J.G., & Collins, A. (2008). Commentary on the final report of the national mathematics advisory panel. Educational Researcher, 37, 618-623.
28. Hand, V.M. (2010). The co-construction of opposition in a low-track mathematics classroom. American Educational Research Journal, 47, 97-132.
29. Hiebert, J., & Carpenter, T.P. (1992). Learning and teaching with understanding. In D. A. Grouws (Ed.), Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 65-97). New York, NY: Macmillan.
30. International Society for Technology in Education. (2007). National Educational Technology Standards and performance indicators for students. Eugene, OR; Author.
31. Kloosterman, P. (2010). Mathematics skills of 17-year-olds in the United States: 1978 to 2004. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 41, 20-51.
32. Lee, J., Grigg, W., & Dion, G. (2007). The nation's report care: Mathematics 2007 (NCES 2007-494). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
33. Leithwood, K., & Jantzi, D. (2008). Linking leadership to student learning: The contributions of leader efficacy. Educational Administration Quarterly, 44, 496-528.
34. Lesh, R., & Kelly, A. (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.
35. Lesh, R., Yoon, C., & Zawojewski, J. (2007). John Dewey revisited-Making mathematics practical versus making practice mathematical. In R. A. Lesh, E. Hamilton, & J. Kaput (Eds.), Foundations for the future in mathematics education (pp. 315-348). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
36. Maccini, P., & Gagon, J.C. (2006). Mathematics instructional practices and assessment accommodations by secondary special and general educators. Exceptional Children, 72, 217-234.
37. Maccini, P., Mulcahy, C.A., & Wilson, M.G. (2007). A follow-up of mathematics interventions for secondary students with learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 22, 58-74.
38. McEwan, E.K. (2000). The principal's guide to raising math achievement. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
39. National Center on Education and the Economy. (2007). Tough choices or tough times: The report of the new commission on the skills of the American workforce. Washington, DC: Author.
40. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.
41. National Mathematics Advisory Panel. (2008). Foundations for success: The final report of the National Mathematics Advisory Panel. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
42. National Research Council. (2001). Adding it up: Helping children learn mathematics. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
43. Pashler, H., Bain, P., Bottge, B., Graesser, A., Koedinger, K., McDaniel, M., & Metcalfe, J. (2007). Organizing instruction and study to improve student learning (NCER 2007-2004). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Research, Institute of Education Sciences, & U.S. Department of Education. Retrieved from http://ncer.ed.gov.
44. Pelfrey, R. (2006). The mathematics program improvement plan: A comprehensive evaluation process for K-12 schools. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
45. Post, T.R., Wachsmuth, I., Lesh, R., & Behr, M.J. (1985). Order and equivalence of rational number concepts. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 16, 18-36.
46. Raudenbush, S.W., & Bryk, A.S. (2002). Hierarchical linear models: Applications and data analysis methods (2nd ed.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
47. Raudenbush, S.W., Bryk, A.S., Cheong, Y.F., & Congdon, R.T. (2000). Hierarchical linear and nonlinear modeling. Lincolnwood, IL: Scientific Software International.
48. Rittle-Johnson, B., Siegler, R.S., & Alibali, M.W. (2001). Developing conceptual understanding and procedural skill in mathematics: An iterative process. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93, 346-363.
49. Roschelle, J., Singleton, C., Sabelli, N., Pea, R., & Bransford, J.D. (2008). Mathematics worth knowing, resources worth growing, research worth noting: A response to the National Mathematics Advisory Panel Report. Educational Researcher, 37, 610-617.
50. Sanders, M. (2001). New paradigm or old wine? The status of technology education practice in the United States. Journal of Technology Education, 12, 35-55.
51. Schoenfeld, A.H. (2004). The math wars. Educational Policy, 18, 253-286.
52. Shelly, R. (2002). Designing math labs to accommodate advanced standards and technology. NASSP Bulletin, 86, 45-61.
53. Smith, J.P. (2002). The development of students' knowledge of fractions and ratios. In B. Litwiller & G. Bright (Eds.), Making sense of fractions, ratios, and proportions (pp. 3-17). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
54. Smith, D., Wilson, B., & Corbett, D. (2009). Moving beyond talk. Educational Leadership, 66, 20-25.
55. Star, J.R. (2005). Reconceptualizing procedural knowledge. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 36, 404-411.
56. Stephens, A.C., Bottge, B.A., & Rueda, E. (2009). Ramping up on fractions. Mathematics Teaching in the Middle School, 14, 520-526.
57. Stodden, R.A., Galloway, L.M., & Stodden, N.J. (2003). Secondary school curricula issues: Impact on postsecondary students with disabilities. Exceptional Children, 70, 9-25.
58. Stone, J.R., III, Alfeld, C., & Pearson, D. (2008). Rigor and relevance: Enhancing high school students' math skills through career and technical education. American Educational Research Journal, 45, 767-795.
59. Stone, J.R., Alfeld, C., Pearson, D., Lewis, M.V., & Jensen, S. (2006). Building academic skills in context: Testing the value of enhanced math learning in CTE. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota.
60. Sulzer-Azaroff, B., & Mayer, G.R. (1977). Applying behavior analysis procedures with children and youth. New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
61. University of Iowa. (2001). The Iowa Tests of Basic Skills (ITBS, Form A). Itasca, IL. Riverside.
62. Wertheimer, M. (1959). Productive thinking. New York, NY: Harper & Brothers.
63. Woodward, J. (2004). Mathematics education in the United States: Past to present. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 37, 16-31.