Methods of instructional improvement in algebra: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Review of Educational Research

Volumn 80, Issue 3, 2010, Pages 372-400

  Rakes, Christopher R ^a   Valentine, Jeffrey C ^a   McGatha, Maggie B ^a   Ronau, Robert N ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LOUISVILLE   (United States)

Author keywords

Achievement; Conceptual understanding; Hierarchical modeling; Instructional practice; Mathematics education; Meta analysis

Indexed keywords

EID: 79956080154     PISSN: 00346543     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3102/0034654310374880     Document Type: Review

References (160)

1. Abrams, B. J. (1989). A comparison study of the Saxon Algebra 1 text. Dissertation Abstracts International-A, 51(07), 2251.
2. Aburime, F. E. (2007). How manipulatives affect the mathematics achievement of students in Nigerian schools. Educational Research Quarterly, 31, 3-15.
3. Adams, J. L., & Stephens, L. J. (1991). A comparison of computer-assisted instructional methods. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 22, 889-893.
4. Akinsola, M. K., & Animasahun, I. A. (2007). The effect of simulation-games environment on students achievement in and attitudes to mathematics in secondary schools. Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 6, 1-7.
5. Berenson, S. B., Carter, G. S., & Norwood, K. S. (1992). The at-risk student in college developmental algebra. School Science and Mathematics, 92, 55-58.
6. Berg, K. F. (1993, April). Structured cooperative learning and achievement in a high school mathematics class. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Atlanta, GA.
7. Biesinger, K., & Crippen, K. (2008). The impact of a state-funded online remediation site on performance related to high school mathematics proficiency. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 27, 5-17.
8. Blanco, L., & Garrote, M. (2007). Difficulties in learning inequalities in students of the first year of pre-university education in Spain. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 3, 221-229.
9. Brenner, M. E., Mayer, R. E., Moseley, B., Brar, T., Duran, R., Reed, B. S., & Webb, D. (1997). Learning by understanding: The role of multiple representations in learning. American Educational Research Journal, 34, 663-689.
10. Briggs, J., Demana, F., & Osborne, A. (1986). Moving into algebra: Developing the concepts of variable and function. The Australian Mathematics Teacher, 42, 5-8.
11. Brownell, W. A. (1938). A critique of the Committee of Seven's investigations on the grade placement of arithmetic topics. Elementary School Journal, 38, 495-508.
12. Bunch, M. A. (1972). A study of the effects on retention and on the problem-solving ability of students when geometry is used as an aid in teaching factoring of seconddegree polynomials. Dissertation Abstracts International-A, 34(03), 1057.
13. Butler, D. L., & Winne, P. H. (1995). Feedback and self-regulated learning: A theoretical synthesis. Review of Educational Research, 65, 245-282.
14. Carraher, D. W., & Schliemann, A. D. (2007). Early algebra. In F. K. Lester (Ed.), Second handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 669-706). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
15. Carroll, W. M. (1992, April). The use of worked examples in teaching algebra. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, CA.
16. Carroll, W. M. (1994). Using worked examples as an instructional support in the algebra classroom. Journal of Educational Psychology, 86, 360-367.
17. Cavanaugh, C., Gillan, K. J., Bosnick, J., Hess, M., & Scott, H. (2008). Effectiveness of interactive online algebra learning tools. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 38, 67-95.
18. Chambers, D. L. (1994). The right algebra for all. Educational Leadership, 53, 85-86.
19. Chirwa, A. S. (1996). Computers stimulate the generation of questions among students. Dissertation Abstracts International-A, 57(08), 3464.
20. Chung, G. K. W. K., Delacruz, G. C., Dionne, G. B., Baker, E. L., Lee, J., & Osmundson, E. (2007, April). Towards individualized instruction with technologyenabled tools and methods. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, IL.
21. Clay, D. W. (1998). A study to determine the effects of a non-traditional approach to algebra instruction on student achievement. Dissertation Abstracts International-A, 31(06), 3478.
22. Cooper, H. (1998). Synthesizing research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
23. Coppen, M. J. (1976). The development and evaluation of an individualized mastery programme in mathematics for low-ability secondary school students. New Zealand Journal of Educational Studies, 11, 132-142.
24. Denson, P. S. (1989). A comparison of the effectiveness of the Saxon and Dolciani texts and theories about the teaching of high school algebra. Dissertation Abstracts International-A, 50(10), 3173.
25. Durmus, S. (1999). The effects of the use of the technology on college algebra students' achievements and attitudes toward mathematics: A constructivist approach. Dissertation Abstracts International-A, 60(10), 3622.
26. Duval, S., & Tweedie, R. (2000a). A nonparametric "trim and fill" method of accounting for publication bias in meta-analysis. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 95, 89-98.
27. Duval, S., & Tweedie, R. (2000b). Trim and fill: A simple funnel-plot-based method of testing and adjusting for publication bias in meta-analysis. Biometrics, 56, 455-463.
28. Easton, J. Q. (2010, May). Out of the tower, into the schools: How new IES goals will reshape researcher roles. Presidential session presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Researcher Association, Denver, CO.
29. Edwards, T. G. (2000). Some 'big ideas' of algebra in the middle grades. Mathematics Teaching in the Middle School, 6, 26-31.
30. Ellington, A. J. (2003). A meta-analysis of the effects of calculators on students' achievement and attitude levels in precollege mathematics classes. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 34, 433-463.
31. Ellington, A. J. (2005). A modeling-based college algebra course and its effect on student achievement. Primus, 15, 193-214.
32. Ellington, A. J. (2006). The effects of non-CAS graphing calculators on student achievement and attitude levels in mathematics: A meta-analysis. International Journal of Instructional Media, 106, 16-26.
33. Elshafei, D. L. (1998). A comparison of problem-based and traditional learning in Algebra II. Dissertation Abstracts International-A, 60(01), 85.
34. Farrell, J. (1980). The effects of individualized instruction on the achievement of cognitive and affective objectives in selected first-year algebra students. Dissertation Abstracts International-A, 40(12), 6087.
35. Freeman, M. (1997). Math and science on a personal level. Lexington, KY: University of Kentucky, Appalachian Rural Systemic Initiative.
36. Freudenthal, H. (1983). Didactical phenomenology of mathematical structures. Boston, MA: Kluwer Academic.
37. Furr, R. M., & Bacharach, V. R. (2008). Psychometrics: An introduction. Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
38. Gates, J. (2008). MIND Research Institute launches national readiness intervention program. Retrieved from http://www.mindinstitute.net/pdf/08_0630_MI-ARShips%20Final.pdf.
39. Gesshel-Green, H. (1987). The effect of interactive microcomputer graphics on student achievement and retention in second year algebra in an academic high school. Dissertation Abstracts International-A, 48(02), 326.
40. Githua, B. N., & Mwangi, J. G. (2003). Students' mathematics self-concept and motivation to learn mathematics: Relationship and gender differences among Kenya's secondary-school students in Nairobi and Rift Valley provinces. International Journal of Educational Development, 23, 487-499.
41. Goins, K. B. (2001). Comparing the effects of visual and algebra tile manipulative methods on student skill and understanding of polynomial multiplication. Dissertation Abstracts International-A, 62(12), 4098.
42. Goldsby, D. S. (1994). The effect of algebra tile use on the polynomial factoring ability of Algebra I students. Dissertation Abstracts International-A, 57(08), 3434.
43. Graham, A. T., & Thomas, M. O. J. (2000). Building a versatile understanding of algebraic variables with a graphic calculator. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 41, 265-282.
44. Greenes, C. E., & Rubenstein, R. (Eds.). (2008). Algebra and algebraic thinking in school mathematics: Seventieth yearbook. Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
45. Haas, M. S. (2005). Teaching methods for secondary algebra: A meta-analysis of findings. National Association of Secondary School Principals Bulletin, 89, 24-46.
46. Hannafin, R. D., & Foshay, W. R. (2008). Computer-based instruction's (CBI) rediscovered role in k-12: An evaluation case study of one high school's use of cbi to improve pass rates on high-stakes tests. Educational Technology Research and Development, 56, 147-160.
47. Hartley, S. S. (1977). Meta-analysis of the effects of individually paced instruction in mathematics. Dissertation Abstracts International, 38(07), 4003.
48. Haver, W. E. (1978). Developing skills in college algebra-A mastery approach. The Two-Year College Mathematics Journal, 9, 282-287.
49. Hawkins, V. J. (1982). A comparison of two methods of instruction, a saturated learning environment and traditional learning environment: Its effects on achievement and retention among female adolescents in first-year algebra. Dissertation Abstracts International-A, 43(02), 416.
50. Heath, R. D. (1987). The effect of calculators and computers on problem-solving ability and attitude toward mathematics. Dissertation Abstracts International-A, 48(05), 1102.
51. Hecht, J. B., Roberts, N. K., Schoon, P. L., & Fansler, G. (1995, October). Teacher teams and computer technology. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Midwestern Educational Research Association, Chicago, IL.
52. Hedges, L. V., & Hedberg, E. C. (2007). Intraclass correlation values for planning group-randomized trials in education. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 29, 60-87.
53. Henderson, R. W., & Landesman, E. M. (1995). Effects of thematically integrated mathematics instruction on students of mexican descent. Journal of Educational Research, 88, 290-300.
54. Hiebert, J. (2003). What research says about the NCTM standards. In J. Kilpatrick, W. G. Martin, & D. Schifter (Eds.), A research companion to "Principles and standards for school mathematics" (pp. 5-23). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
55. 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. 65-100). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
56. Hiebert, J., & Grouws, D. A. (2007). The effects of classroom mathematics teaching on students' learning. In F. K. Lester (Ed.), Second handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 371-404). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
57. Hiebert, J., Carpenter, T. P., Fennema, E., Fuson, K. C., Wearne, D., Murray, H., et al. (1997). Making sense: Teaching and learning mathematics with understanding. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
58. Hiebert, J., Morris, A. K., Berk, D., & Jansen, A. (2007). Preparing teachers to learn from teaching. Journal of Teacher Education, 58, 47-61.
59. Hiebert, J., Stigler, J. W., Jacobs, J. K., Givvin, K. B., Garnier, H., Smith, M., & Gallimore, R. (2005). Mathematics teaching in the United States today (and tomorrow): Results from the TIMSS 1999 video study. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 27, 111-132.
60. Hodo, L. B. (1989). The effects of study skills instruction on achievement and usage of selected study strategies in Algebra II classes. Dissertation Abstracts International-A, 50(04), 862.
61. Howe, R. (2005). Comments on NAEP algebra problems. Retrieved from http://www.brookings.edu/brown/~/media/Files/Centers/bcep/AlgebraicReasoningConferenceHowe.pdf.
62. Hutchinson, N., & Hemingway, P. (1987, April). Teaching representation and solution of algebraic word problems to learning disabled adolescents. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Washington, DC.
63. Ives, B. (2007). Graphic organizers applied to secondary algebra instruction for students with learning disorders. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 22, 110-118.
64. Johnson, D. M., & Smith, B. (1987). An evaluation of Saxon's algebra text. Journal of Educational Research, 81, 97-102.
65. Kalchman, M. S. (2001). Using a neo-Piagetian framework for learning and teaching mathematical functions. Dissertation Abstracts International-A, 62(11), 3719.
66. Kalchman, M., & Koedinger, K. (2005). Teaching and learning functions. In S. Donovan & J. D. Bransford (Eds.), How students learn: History, mathematics, and science in the classroom (pp. 351-393). Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.
67. Kalyuga, S., & Sweller, J. (2005). Rapid dynamic assessment of expertise to improve the efficiency of adaptive e-learning. Educational Technology Research and Development, 53, 83-93.
68. Keif, M. G. (1995). Performance of students completing courses using the CORD Applied Mathematics curriculum in four Missouri school districts. Dissertation Abstracts International-A, 57(09), 3863.
69. Kieran, C. (1989). The early learning of algebra: A structural perspective. In S. Wagner & C. Kieran (Eds.), Research issues in the learning and teaching of algebra (pp. 33-56). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
70. Kieran, C. (1992). The learning and teaching of school algebra. In D. A. Grouws (Ed.), Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 390-419). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
71. Kieran, C. (2007). Learning and teaching of algebra at the middle school through college levels: Building meaning for symbols and their manipulation. In F. K. Lester (Ed.), Second handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 707-762). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
72. Kieran, C. (2008). What do students struggle with when first introduced to algebra symbols? Retrieved from http://www.nctm.org/uploadedFiles/Research_News_and_Advocacy/Research/Clips_and_Briefs/Brief%20-%20What%20Can%20We%20Learn.pdf.
73. Kieren, T. E. (1968). The computer as a teaching aid for eleventh grade mathematics: A comparison study. Dissertation Abstracts International-A, 29(10), 3526.
74. Kilpatrick, J., Swafford, J., & Findell, B. (Eds.). (2001). Adding it up: Helping children learn mathematics. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
75. Kim, T. (2006). Impact of inquiry-based teaching on student mathematics achievement and attitude. Dissertation Abstracts International-A, 67(04).
76. Kish, L. (1965). Survey sampling. New York, NY: John Wiley.
77. Klauer, K. J., & Phye, G. D. (2008). Inductive reasoning: A training approach. Review of Educational Research, 78, 85-123.
78. Koedinger, K. R., Anderson, J. R., Hadley, W. H., & Mark, M. A. (1997). Intelligent tutoring goes to school in the big city. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 8, 30-43.
79. Konold, K. B. (2004). Using the concrete-representational-abstract teaching sequence to increase algebra problem-solving skills. Dissertation Abstracts International-A, 65(08), 2949.
80. Küchemann, D. (1978). Children's understanding of numerical variables. Mathematics in School, 9, 23-26.
81. Lawrence, L. K. (1992). The long-term effects of an incremental development model of instruction upon student achievement and student attitude toward mathematics. Dissertation Abstracts International-A, 53(03), 747.
82. Lee, J., Grigg, W., & Dion, G. (2007). The nation's report card: Mathematics 2007-National Assessment of Educational Progress at grades 4 and 8 [NCES 2007- 494]. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics.
83. Leinhardt, G., Zaslavsky, O., & Stein, M. K. (1990). Functions, graphs, and graphing: Tasks, learning, and teaching. Review of Educational Research, 60, 1-64.
84. Leitzel, J. R. (1989). Critical considerations for the future of algebra instruction or a reaction to: "Algebra: What should we teach and how should we teach it?" In S. Wagner, & C. Kieran (Eds.), Research issues in the learning and teaching of algebra (pp. 25-27). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
85. Lipsey, M. W., & Wilson, D. B. (2001). Practical meta-analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
86. Lou, Y., Abrami, P. C., & d'Apollonia, S. (2001). Small group and individual learning with technology: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 71, 449-521.
87. Lou, Y., Abrami, P. C., Spence, J. C., & Poulsen, C. (1996). Within-class grouping: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 66, 423-458.
88. Lwo, L. S. (1992). Effects of individualized examples and personalized contexts in computer-based adaptive teaching of algebra word problems. Dissertation Abstracts International-A, 53(06), 1832.
89. Makanong, A. (2000). The effects of constructivist approaches on ninth grade algebra achievement in Thailand secondary school students. Dissertation Abstracts International-A, 61(03), 923.
90. Malloy, C. E., & Malloy, W. W. (1998). Resiliency and Algebra 1: A promising nontraditional approach to teaching low-achieving students. Clearing House, 71, 314-317.
91. Mathews, S. M. (1997). The effect of using two variables when there are two unknowns in solving algebraic word problems. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 9, 122-135.
92. McBee, M. (1984). Dolciani vs. Saxon: A comparison of two Algebra I textbooks with high school students. Oklahoma City, OK: Oklahoma City Public Schools, Oklahoma Department of Planning, Research, and Evaluation. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED241348)
93. McCaffrey, D. F., Hamilton, L. S., & Stecher, B. M. (2001). Interactions among instructional practices, curriculum, and student achievement: The case of standardsbased high school mathematics. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 32, 483-517.
94. McClung, L. W. (1998). A study on the use of manipulatives and their effect on student achievement in a high school Algebra I class. Unpublished master's thesis, Salem- Teiko University, Salem, WV. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED425077)
95. McDermott, L. C., Rosenquist, M. L., & Van Zee, E. H. (1987). Student difficulties in connecting graphs and physics: Examples from kinematics. American Journal of Physics, 55, 503-513.
96. McKenzie, S. Y. (1999). Achievement and affective domains of Algebra I students in traditional or self-paced computer programs. Dissertation Abstracts International-A, 60(09), 3297.
97. Morgan, P., & Ritter, S. (2002). An experimental study of the effects of Cognitive Tutor Algebra I on student knowledge and attitude. Retrieved from http://www.carnegielearning.com/web_docs/morgan_ritter_2002.pdf.
98. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (1989). Curriculum and evaluation standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.
99. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.
100. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2008). Algebra: What, when, and for whom. Retrieved from http://www.nctm.org/uploadedFiles/About_NCTM/Position_Statements/Algebra%20final%2092908.pdf.
101. National Mathematics Advisory Panel. (2008). Foundations for success: The final report of the National Mathematics Advisory Panel. Retrieved from http://www2.ed.gov/about/bdscomm/list/mathpanel/report/final-report.pdf.
102. Nichols, J. D., & Miller, R. B. (1994). Cooperative learning and student motivation. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 19, 167-178.
103. No Child Left Behind Act of 2002, 20 U.S.C. § 6301 et seq. (West, 2002).
104. O'Dwyer, L. M., Carey, R., & Kleiman, G. (2007). A study of the effectiveness of the Louisiana Algebra I Online Course. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 39, 289-306.
105. Pajares, F. (1996). Self-efficacy beliefs in academic settings. Review of Educational Research, 66, 543-578.
106. Parham, J. W. (1993). An analysis of the effects of tutoring on seventh-grade students engaged in the mastery of pre-algebra concepts. Dissertation Abstracts International-A, 54(11), 4021.
107. Peters, K. G. (1992). Skill performance comparability of two algebra programs on an eighth-grade population. Dissertation Abstracts International-A, 54(01), 1993.
108. Pierce, R. (1984). A quasi-experimental study of Saxon's incremental development model and its effects on student achievement in first-year algebra. Dissertation Abstracts International-A, 45(02), 443.
109. Raudenbush, S. W., & Bryk, A. S. (2002). Hierarchical linear models: Applications and data analysis methods (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
110. Raudenbush, S. W., Bryk, A. S., Cheong, Y. F., Congdon, R., & du Toit, M. (2004). HLM 6: SSI Scientific Software International: Hierarchical linear & non-linear modeling. Lincolnwood, IL: Scientific Software International, Inc.
111. Rech, J. F., Juhler, S. M., & Johnson, H. L. (1995). The effectiveness of videotapes in the individualized instruction of intermediate algebra and college algebra. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 26, 463-472.
112. Reys, R. E., Reys, B., & Lapan, R. (2003). Assessing the impact of standards-based middle grades mathematics curriculum materials on student achievement. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 34, 74-95.
113. Rittle-Johnson, B., & Alibali, M. W. (1999). Conceptual and procedural knowledge of mathematics: Does one lead to the other? Journal of Educational Psychology, 91, 175-189.
114. Rodgers, C. E. (1995). An investigation of two instructional methods for teaching selected pre-algebra concepts to minority at-risk seventh-grade mathematics students. Dissertation Abstracts International-A, 56(08), 3042.
115. Roscoe, R. D., & Chi, M. T. H. (2007). Understanding tutor learning: Knowledgebuilding and knowledge-telling in peer tutors' explanations and questions. Review of Educational Research, 77, 534-574.
116. Rosenshine, B., Meister, C., & Chapman, S. (1996). Teaching students to generate questions: A review of the intervention studies. Review of Educational Research, 66, 181-221.
117. Schumacker, R. E., Young, J. I., & Bembry, K. L. (1995). Math attitudes and achievement of Algebra I students: A comparative study of computer-assisted and traditional lecture methods of instruction. Computers in the Schools, 11, 27-33.
118. Seals, G. J. (2001). The effects of portfolio use as a learning tool on Algebra II students' achievement and their attitudes toward mathematics. Dissertation Abstracts International-A, 63(01), 72.
119. Seidel, T., & Shavelson, R. J. (2007). Teaching effectiveness research in the past decade: The role of theory and research design in disentangling meta-analysis results. Review of Educational Research, 77, 454-499.
120. Sfard, A. (1991). On the dual nature of mathematical conceptions: Reflections on processes and objects as different sides of the same coin. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 22, 1-36.
121. Shadish, W. R., Cook, T. D., & Campbell, D. T. (2001). Experimental and quasiexperimental design. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.
122. Shneyderman, A. (2001). Evaluation of the cognitive tutor algebra 1 program. Retrieved from http://oer.dadeschools.net/algebra.pdf.
123. Shoecraft, P. J. (1971). The effects of provisions for imagery through materials and drawings on translating algebra word problems, grades seven and nine. Dissertation Abstracts International-A, 32(07), 3874.
124. Silvis, K. T. (2007). A comparison of hands-on and traditional approaches for teaching eighth grade pre-algebra. Dissertation Abstracts International-A, 68(03), 921.
125. Siskind, T. G. (1994). The effect of calculator use on mathematics achievement for rural high school students. The Rural Educator, 16, 1-4.
126. Skemp, R. R. (2006). Relational understanding and instrumental understanding. Mathematics Teaching in the Middle School, 12, 88-95. (Reprinted from Mathematics Teaching, 77, 20-26, 1976)
127. Slavin, R. E., & Karweit, N. L. (1982). Student teams and mastery learning: A factorial experiment in urban math nine classes. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University, Center for Social Organization of Schools. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED215904)
128. Slavin, R. E., & Lake, C. (2008). Effective programs in elementary mathematics: A best-evidence synthesis. Review of Educational Research, 78, 427-515.
129. Smith, K. B. (1994). Studying different methods of technology integration for teaching problem solving with systems of equations and inequalities and linear programming. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 13, 465-479.
130. Smith, K. B., & Shotsberger, P. G. (1997). Assessing the use of graphing calculators in college algebra: Reflecting on dimensions of teaching and learning. International Journal of Instructional Media, 97, 368-376.
131. Smith, L. R. (1985). Presentational behaviors and student achievement in mathematics. Journal of Educational Research, 78, 292-298.
132. Socas Robayna, M. M. (1997). Dificultades, obstáculos y errores en el aprendizaje de las matemáticas en la educación secundaria. [Difficulties, obstacles, and errors in learning mathematics in secondary education]. In L. R. Romero (Ed.), La educación matemática en la enseñanza secundaria (pp. 125-154). Barcelona: Horsori y Instituto de Ciencias de la Educación.
133. St. John, D. J. (1992). A comparison of two methods of teaching eighth-grade pre-algebra students how to construct tables for use in solving selected mathematical problems. Dissertation Abstracts International-A, 54(02), 453.
134. Stephens, L. J., & Konvalina, J. (1999). The use of computer algebra software in teaching intermediate and college algebra. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 30, 483-488.
135. Stigler, J. W., & Hiebert, J. (1997). Understanding and improving classroom mathematics instructions: An overview of the TIMSS video study. Phi Delta Kappan, 79, 14-21.
136. Stodolsky, S. S. (1988). The subject matters: Classroom activity in math and social studies. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
137. Suh, J., & Moyer, P. S. (2007). Developing students' representational fluency using virtual and physical algebra balances. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 26, 155-173.
138. Tenenbaum, G. (1986). The effect of quality of instruction on higher and lower mental processes and on the prediction of summative achievement. Journal of Educational Research, 80, 105-114.
139. Thompson, D. R., & Senk, S. L. (2001). The effects of curriculum on achievement in second-year algebra: The example of the University of Chicago School Mathematics Project. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 32, 58-84.
140. Thorndike, E. L. (1913). Educational psychology (Vols. 1-2). New York, NY: Columbia University Press.
141. Thorpe, J. A. (1989). Algebra: What should we teach and how should we teach it? In S. Wagner & C. Kieran (Eds.), Research issues in the learning and teaching of algebra (pp. 11-24). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
142. Thornton, A., & Lee, P. (2000). Publication bias in meta-analysis: Its causes and consequences. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 53, 207-216.
143. Torigoe, E., & Gladding, G. (2006). Same to us, different to them: Numeric computation versus symbolic representation. AIP Conference Proceedings, 883, 153-156.
144. Urbina, S. (2004). Essentials of psychological testing. New York, NY: John Wiley.
145. Usiskin, Z. (1980). What should not be in the algebra and geometry curricula of average college-bound students? Mathematics Teacher, 73, 413-424.
146. Uy, C. (2005). Critical trial use of TIMSS as an alternative instructional delivery tool. Asia Pacific Education Review, 6, 28-40.
147. Van De Walle, J. A. (2007). Elementary and middle school mathematics (6th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson.
148. Vogel, C. (2008). Algebra: Changing the equation. District Administration, 44, 34-40.
149. Walker, S., & Senger, E. (2007). Using technology to teach developmental African- American algebra students. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 26, 217-231.
150. Weems, G. H. (2002). Comparison of beginning algebra taught onsite versus online. Journal of Developmental Education, 26, 10-18.
151. Welch, W. (1978). Science education in Urbanville. In R. Stake & J. Easley (Eds.), Case studies in science education (pp. 5-1-5-33). Urbana, IL: University of Illinois.
152. Wenglinsky, H. (2000). How teaching matters: Bringing the classroom back into discussions of teacher quality. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service, Policy Information Center. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED447128)
153. Whicker, K. M., Bol, L., & Nunnery, J. A. (1997). Cooperative learning in the secondary mathematics classroom. Journal of Educational Research, 91, 42-48.
154. Whitehurst, G. J. (2002, October). Evidence-based education. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the School Accountability Conference, Orlando, FL. Retrieved from http://www.ed.gov/offices/OERI/presentations/evidencebase.html.
155. Wiesner, M. B. W. (1989). Concept learning and the learning of strategies for teaching graphing, probability, and statistics among inservice elementary and secondary mathematics teachers. Dissertation Abstracts International-A, 50(06), 1588.
156. Wilkins, C. W. (1993). Effects of using a problem solving approach to Algebra I instruction. Mississippi State, MS: Mississippi State University. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED372934)
157. Wineland, J. N., & Stephens, L. (1995). Effects of spiral testing and review on retention and mathematical achievement for below-average eighth- and ninth-grade students. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 26, 227-232.
158. Witzel, B. S., Mercer, C. D., & Miller, M. D. (2003). Teaching algebra to students with learning difficulties: An investigation of an explicit instruction model. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 18, 121-131.
159. Wood, J. B. (1992, October). The application of computer technology and cooperative learning in developmental algebra at the community college. Paper presented at the ninth annual computer conference of the League for Innovation in the Community College, Orlando, FL. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED352099)
160. Woolner, P. (2004). A comparison of a visual-spatial approach and a verbal approach to teaching mathematics. In M. J. Hoines & A. B. Fuglestad (Eds.), Proceedings of the 28th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education, 2004 (pp. 449-456). Bergen, Norway: International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education.