Early Algebra Is Not the Same as Algebra Early

Algebra in the Early Grades

Volumn , Issue , 2017, Pages 235-272

  Carraher, David W ^a   Schliemann, Analúcia D ^b   Schwartz, Judah L ^b  

^a TERC   (United States)

^b TUFTS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 85144460398     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.4324/9781315097435-12     Document Type: Chapter

References (40)

1. Bodanskii, F. (1991). The formation of an algebra method of problem solving in primary school. In V. V. Davydov (Ed.), Psychological abilities of primary school children in learning mathematics (Vol. 6, pp. 275-338). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
2. Brizuela, B. M., and Schliemann, A. D. (2004). Ten-year-old students solving equations. For the Learning of Mathematics, 24(2), 33-40.
3. Carraher, D. W., Brizuela, B., and Earnest, D. (2001). The reification of additive differences in early algebra: Viva La Différence! In H. Chick, K. Stacey, J. Vincent, and J. Vincent (Eds.), The future of the teaching and learning of algebra (Proceedings of the 12th ICMI study conference, pp. 163-170). Melbourne, Australia: University of Melbourne.
4. Carraher, D. W., and Earnest, D. (2003). Guess my rule revisited. In M. Pateman, B. Dougherty, and J. Zilliox (Eds.), Proceedings of the 27th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 2, pp. 173-180). Honolulu: University of Hawaii.
5. Carraher, D. W., and Schliemann, A. D. (2002a). Is everyday mathematics truly relevant to mathematics education? In J. Moshkovich and M. Brenner (Eds.), Monographs of the Journal for Research in Mathematics Education (Vol. 11, pp. 131-153). Washington, DC: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
6. Carraher, D. W., and Schliemann, A. D. (2002b). Modeling reasoning. In K. Gravemeijer, R. Lehrer, B. van Oers, and L. Verschaffel (Eds.), Symbolizing, modeling and tool use in mathematics education (pp. 295-304). Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Kluwer Academic.
7. Carraher, D. W., Schliemann, A. D., and Brizuela, B. (2000). Children’s early algebraic concepts. Plenary address presented at the 22nd annual meeting of the North American Chapter of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education, Tucson, AZ.
8. Carraher, D. W., Schliemann, A. D., and Brizuela, B. M. (2001). Can young students operate on unknowns? In M. van der H.-P. (Ed.), Proceedings of the 25th conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 1, pp. 130-140). Utrecht, the Netherlands: Freudenthal Institute.
9. Collis, K. F. (1975). The development of formal reasoning. Newcastle, Australia:University of Newcastle.
10. Dubinsky, E., and Harel, G. (1992). The concept of function: Aspects of epistemology and pedagogy. Washington, DC: Mathematical Association of America.
11. Duckworth, E. R. (1979). Either we’re too early and they can’t learn it or we’re too late and they know it already: The dilemma of “applying Piaget.” Harvard Educational Review, 49(3), 297-312.
12. Filloy, E., and Rojano, T. (1989). Solving equations: The transition from arithmetic to algebra. For the Learning of Mathematics, 9(2), 19-25.
13. Herscovics, N., and Linchevski, L. (1994). A cognitive gap between arithmetic and algebra. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 27, 59-78.
14. Inhelder, B., and Piaget, J. (1958). The growth of logical thinking from childhood to adolescence:An essay on the construction of formal operational structures. New York: Basic Books.
15. Mason, J. (1996). Expressing generality and roots of algebra. In N. Bednarz, C. Kieran, and L. Lee (Eds.), Approaches to algebra: Perspectives for research and teaching (pp. 65-86). Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Kluwer Academic.
16. Meira, L. (1998). Making sense of instructional devices: The emergence of transparency in mathematical activity. Journal of Research in Mathematics Education, 29(2), 121-142.
17. National Council for Teachers of Mathematics. (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.
18. Piaget, J. (1964). Development and learning. In R. E. Ripple and V. N. Rockcastle (Eds.), Piaget rediscovered: A report on the conference on Cognitive Studies and Curriculum Development (pp. 7-20). Ithaca, NY: Cornell University.
19. Piaget, J. (1968). Épisémologie et psychologie de la fonction [Epistemology and psychology of function];. Paris: Presses Unversitaires de France.
20. Poincaré, H. (1968). Sur la nature du raisonnement mathématique. La science et l’hypothese [On the nature of mathematical reasoning: Science and hypothesis] (pp. 31-45). Paris: Flammarion. (Original work published 1916)
21. Rasmussen, C. (2004). Students’ evolving understanding of differential equations. Report presented at the Workshop on Design Research in Mathematics Education. Fairfax, VA: George Mason University.
22. Resnick, L. B. (1982). Syntax and semantics in learning to subtract. In T. P. Carpenter, J. M. Moser, and T. A. Romberg (Eds.), Addition and subtraction: A cognitive perspective (pp. 136-155). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
23. Resnick, L. B. (1986). The development of mathematical intuition. In M. Perlmutter (Ed.), Perspectives on intellectual development: The Minnesota symposium on child psychology (Vol. 19, pp. 159-194). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
24. Russell, B. (1967). The autobiography of Bertrand Russell. (Vol. 1, pp. 1872-1914). London: Allen and Unwin.
25. Schliemann, A. D., and Carraher, D. W. (1992). Proportional reasoning in and out of school. In P. Light and G. Butterworth (Eds.), Context and cognition (pp. 47-73). Hemel-Hempstead, England: Harverster-Wheatsheaf.
26. Schliemann, A. D., and Carraher, D. W. (2002). The evolution of mathematical reasoning:Everyday versus idealized reasoning. Developmental Review, 22(2), 242-266.
27. Schliemann, A. D., Carraher, D. W., and Brizuela, B. M. (2001). When tables become function tables. In Proceedings of the 25th conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 4, pp. 145-152). Utrecht, the Netherlands: University of Utrecht.
28. Schliemann, A. D., Carraher, D. W., and Brizuela, B. (2007). Bringing out the algebraic character of arithmetic; From children’s ideas to classroom practice. Mahwah, NJ:Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
29. Schliemann, A. D., Carraher, D. W., Brizuela, B. M., Earnest, D., Goodrow, A., Lara-Roth, S., and Peled, I. (2003). Algebra in elementary school. In N. A. Pateman, B. J. Dougherty, and J. Zilliox (Eds.), Proceedings of the 27th conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education held jointly with the 25th conference of PME-NA (Vol. 4, pp. 127-134). Honolulu, HI: CRDG, College of Education, University of Hawaii.
30. Schoenfeld, A. (1995). Report of Working Group 1. In C. B. Lacampagne, W. Blair, and J. Kaput (Eds.), The algebra initiative colloquium (Vol. 2, pp. 11-18). Washington, DC:U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Research and Improvement.
31. Schwartz, J. L. (1996). Semantic aspects of quantity. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
32. Schwartz, J. L., and Yerushalmy, M. (1992). Getting students to function in and with algebra. In G. Harel and E. Dubinsky (Eds.), The concept of function: Aspects of epistemology and pedagogy (Vol. 25, pp. 261-289). Washington, DC: Mathematical Association of America.
33. Schwartz, J. L., and Yerushalmy, M. (1995). On the need for a bridging language for mathematical modeling. For the Learning of Mathematics, 15(2), 29-35.
34. Seldon, A., and Seldon, J. (1992). Research perspectives on conceptions of function:Summary and overview. In E. Dubinsky and G. Harel (Eds.), Concept of function:Aspects of epistemology and pedagogy (pp. 1-21). Washington, DC: Mathematical Association of America.
35. Stern, E., and Mevarech, Z. (1996). Children’s understanding of successive divisions in different contexts. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 1, 153-172.
36. Vergnaud, G. (1982). A classification of cognitive tasks and operations of thought involved in addition and subtraction problems. In T. P. Carpenter, J. M. Moser, and T. A. Romberg (Eds.), Addition and subtraction: A cognitive view (pp. 39-59). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
37. Vergnaud, G. (1994). Multiplicative conceptual field: What and why. In G. Harel and J. Confrey (Eds.), Multiplicative reasoning in the learning of mathematics (pp. 41-59). New York: SUNY Press.
38. Vergnaud, G. (1996). The theory of conceptual fields. In L. P. Steffe, P. Nesher, P. Cobb, G. Goldin, and B. Greer (Eds.), Theories of mathematical learning (pp. 219-239). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
39. Verschaffel, L. G., Greer, B., and De Corte, E. (2002). Everyday knowledge and mathematical modeling of school word problems. In K. Gravemeijer, R. Lehrer, B. van Oers, and L. Verschaffel (Eds.), Symbolizing, modeling, and tool use in mathematics education (pp. 249-268). Utrecht, the Netherlands: Kluwer Academic.
40. Wells, S., and Read, M. (2002). The journey of man: A genetic odyssey. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.