Which of the following examples best illustrates reflective practice

Try the new Google Books

Check out the new look and enjoy easier access to your favorite features

• Ames, C. (1992). Classrooms: goals, structures, and student motivation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84(3), 261–271.

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Atkinson, R., Derry, S., Renkl, A., & Wortham, D. (2000). Learning from examples: instructional principles from the worked examples research. Review of Educational Research, 70(2), 181–214.

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Bell, A., Greer, B., Grimision, L., & Mangan, C. (1989). Children’s performance in multiplicative word problems: elements of a descriptive theory. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 20(5), 434–449.

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Bills, L., & Rowland, T. (1999). Examples, generalisation and proof. In L. Brown (Ed.), Making meaning in mathematics, advances in mathematics education 1 (pp. 103–116). York: QED.

  Google Scholar 

• Bills, L., Dreyfus, T., Mason, J., Tsamir, P., Watson, A., & Zaslavsky, O. (2006). Exemplification in mathematics education. In J. Novotná, H. Moraová, M. Krátká, & N. Stehliková (Eds.), Proc. 30th Conf. of the Int. Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 1, pp. 126–154). Prague: PME.

  Google Scholar 

• Calderhead, J. (1989). Reflective teaching and teacher education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 5(1), 43–51.

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Cheong, Y. K. (2002). The model method in Singapore. The Mathematics Educator, 6(2), 47–64.

  Google Scholar 

• Christiansen, B., & Walther, G. (1986). Task and activity. In B. Christiansen, A. G. Howson, & M. Otte (Eds.), Perspectives on mathematics education (pp. 243–307). Holland: Reidel.

  Chapter  Google Scholar 

• Clarke, D., Keitel, C., & Shimizu, Y. (Eds.). (2006). Mathematics classrooms in 12 Countries: the insider’s perspective (LPS series volume 1). Rotterdam: SENSE Publishers.

  Google Scholar 

• Dewey, J. (1933). How we think: a restatement of the relation of reflective thinking to the educative process. Boston: Heath and Company.

  Google Scholar 

• Doyle, W. (1983). Academic work. Review of Educational Research, 53, 159–199.

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Doyle, W. (1988). Work in mathematics classes: the context of students’ thinking during instruction. Educational Psychologist, 23, 167–180.

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Ekiz, D. (2006). Self-observation and peer-observation: reflective diaries of primary student-teachers. Elementary Education Online, 5(1), 45–57.

  Google Scholar 

• Farrell, T. S. (2013). Reflecting on ESL teacher expertise: a case study. System, 41(4), 1070–1082.

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Ferraro, J. M. (2000). Reflective practice and professional development. ERIC Digest.

• Fischbein, E., Deri, M., Nello, M. S., & Marino, M. S. (1985). The role of implicit models in solving problems in multiplication and division. Journal of Research in Mathematics Education, 16(1), 3–17.

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Fong, H. K. (1999). Some generic principles for solving mathematical problems in the classroom. Teaching and Learning, 19(2), 80–83.

  Google Scholar 

• Grushka, K., Hinde-McLeod, J., & Reynolds, R. (2005). Reflecting upon reflection: theory and practice in one Australian university teacher education program. Reflective Practice, 6(1), 239–246.

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Gueudet, G., & Trouche, L. (2012). Communities, documents and professional geneses: interrelated stories. In G. Gueudet, B. Pepin, & L. Trouche (Eds.), From text to ‘lived’ resources: curriculum material and mathematics teacher development (pp. 23–41). Berlin: Springer.

  Chapter  Google Scholar 

• Hiebert, J., & Wearne, D. (1993). Instructional tasks, classroom discourse, and students’ learning in second-grade arithmetic. American Educational Research Journal, 30, 393–425.

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Jay, J. K., & Johnson, K. L. (2002). Capturing complexity: a typology of reflective practice for teacher education. Teacher and Teacher Education, 18, 73–85.

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Jones, K., & Pepin, B. (2016). Research on mathematics teachers as partners in task design. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 19(2), 105–121.

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Jung, H., & Brady, C. (2016). Roles of a teacher and researcher during in situ professional development around the implementation of mathematical modeling tasks. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 19(2), 277–295.

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Kamin, D. (2010). The use of tasks and examples in a high school mathematics classroom: variance of purpose and deployment. Canada: Simon Fraser university.

  Google Scholar 

• Keitel, C. (2006). ‘Setting a task’ in German schools: different frames for different ambitions. In D. J. Clarke, C. Keitel, & Y. Shimizu (Eds.), Mathematics classrooms in twelve countries: the insider’s perspective (pp. 37–57). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.

  Google Scholar 

• Kilpatrick, J., Swafford, J., & Findell, B. (Eds.). (2001). Adding it up: helping children learn mathematics. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

  Google Scholar 

• Kersting, N. B., Givvin, K. B., Sotelo, F. L., & Stigler, J. W. (2010). Teachers’ analyses of classroom video predict student learning of mathematics: further explorations of a novel measure of teacher knowledge. Journal of Teacher Education, 61, 172–181.

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Killion, J., & Todnem, G. (1991). A process of personal theory building. Educational Leadership, 48(6), 14–17.

  Google Scholar 

• Kho, T. H. (1982). The use of models in the teaching of mathematics to primary school children. In R. S. Bhathal, G. Kamaria, & H. C. Wong (Eds.), Teaching of mathematics. Singapore: Singapore Association for the Advancement of Science & Singapore Science Centre.

  Google Scholar 

• Kucan, L. (2007). Insights from teachers who analyzed transcripts of their own classroom discussions. The Reading Teacher, 61(3), 228–236.

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Leinhardt, G. (2001). Instructional explanations: a commonplace for teaching and location for contrast. In V. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (4th ed., pp. 333–357). Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.

  Google Scholar 

• Leinhardt, G., Zaslavsky, O., & Stein, M. K. (1990). Graphs and graphing: tasks, learning and teaching. American Educational Research Association, 60(1), 1–64.

  Google Scholar 

• Lo, M. L. (2012). Variation theory and improvement of teaching and learning. Göteborg: Göteborgs Universitet.

  Google Scholar 

• Martin, T. S. (2007). Mathematics teaching today: improving practice, improving student learning (2nd ed.). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.

  Google Scholar 

• Marton, F. (2015). Necessary conditions of learning. London: Routledge.

  Google Scholar 

• Marton, F., & Booth, S. (1997). Learning and awareness. Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.

• Marton, F., & Pang, M. F. (2008). The idea of phenomenography and the pedagogy of conceptual change. In S. Vosniadou (Ed.), International Handbook on Research of Conceptual Change (pp. 533–559). New York, London: Routledge.

  Google Scholar 

• Marton, F., & Tsui, A. B. M. (2004). Classroom discourse and the space of learning. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.

  Google Scholar 

• Mason, J., & Pimm, D. (1984). Generic examples: seeing the general in the particular. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 15(3), 277–290.

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Mok, I. A. C., & Kaur, B. (2006). ‘Learning task’ lesson events. In D. J. Clarke, J. Emanuelsson, E. Jablonka, & I. A. C. Mok (Eds.), Making connections: comparing mathematics classrooms around the world (pp. 147–163). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.

  Google Scholar 

• Olteanu, C. (2016). Reflection and the object of learning. International Journal for Lesson and Learning Studies, 5(1), 60–75.

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Olteanu, L. (2014). Effective communication, critical aspects and compositionality in algebra. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 45(7), 1021–1033.

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Olteanu, C., & Olteanu, L. (2012). Improvement of effective communication—the case of subtraction. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 10(4), 803–826.

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Pareja Roblin, N., & Margalef, L. (2013). Learning from dilemmas: teacher professional development through collaborative action and reflection. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 19(1), 18–32.

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Peled, I., & Zaslavsky, O. (1997). Counter-examples that (only) prove and counter-examples that (also) explain. Focus on Learning Problems in Mathematics, 19(3), 49–61.

  Google Scholar 

• Pepin, B., Gueudet, G., & Trouche, L. (2013). Re-sourcing teacher work and interaction: new perspectives on resource design, use and teacher collaboration. ZDM: The International Journal of Mathematics Education, 45(7), 929–943.

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Plomp, T. (2013). Educational design research: an introduction. In T. Plomp & N. Nieveen (Eds.), Educational design research— – part a: an introduction (pp. 10–51). Enschede: SLO.

  Google Scholar 

• Remillard, J. T. (2005). Examining key concepts in research on teachers’ use of mathematics curricula. Review of Educational Research, 75(2), 211–246.

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Reeves, T. C. (2011). Can educational research be both rigorous and relevant? Educational Designer: Journal of the International Society for Design and Development in Education, 1(4), 1–24.

  Google Scholar 

• Runesson, U. (2006). What is it possible to learn? On variation as a necessary condition for learning. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 50(4), 397–410.

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Ruys, I., Van Keer, H., & Aelterman, A. (2012). Examining pre-service teacher competence in lesson planning pertaining to collaborative learning. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 44(3), 349–379.

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Santagata, R., & Angelici, G. (2010). Studying the impact of the lesson analysis framework on preservice teachers’ abilities to reflect on videos of classroom teaching. Journal of Teacher Education, 61(4), 339–349.

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Schön, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner: how professionals think in action. New York: Basic Books, Inc..

  Google Scholar 

• Shimizu, Y., Kaur, B., Huang, R., & Clarke, D. (Eds.). (2010). Mathematical tasks in classrooms around the world. Rotterdam: Sense.

  Google Scholar 

• Stein, M. K., & Lane, S. (1996). Instructional tasks and the development of student capacity to think and reason: an analysis of the relationship between teaching and learning in a reform mathematics project. Educational Research and Evaluation, 2, 50–80.

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Stein, M. K., Grover, B. W., & Henningsen, M. A. (1996). Building student capacity for mathematical thinking and reasoning: an analysis of mathematical tasks used in reform classrooms. American Educational Research Journal, 33(2), 455–488.

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Swedish National Agency for Education. (2016). Läroplan för grundskolan, förskoleklassen och fritidshemmet 2011 (Reviderad 2016). Elanders Sverige AB.

• Sullivan, P. (2011). Teaching mathematics: using research-informed strategies (Australian Education Review, 59). Camberwell: Australian Council for Educational Research.

  Google Scholar 

• Swan, M. (2005). Improving learning in mathematics: challenges and strategies. London: DfES.

  Google Scholar 

• Swan, M. (2011). Designing tasks that challenge values, beliefs and practices: a model for the professional development of practicing teachers. In O. Zaslavski & P. Sullivan (Eds.), Constructing knowledge for teaching secondary mathematics: tasks to enhance prospective and practicing teacher learning (pp. 57–71). Berlin: Springer.

  Chapter  Google Scholar 

• Vanhulle, S. (2005). How future teachers develop professional knowledge through reflective writing in a dialogical frame. L1-Educational Studies in Language and Literature., 5(3), 287–314.

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Zaslavsky, O. (2010). The explanatory power of examples in mathematics: challenges for teaching. In M. K. Stein & L. Kucan (Eds.), Instructional explanations in the disciplines (pp. 107–128). New York: Springer.

  Chapter  Google Scholar 

• Wake, G., Swan, M., & Foster, C. (2016). Professional learning through the collaborative design of problem-solving lessons. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 19(2), 243–260.

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Watson, A., & Mason, J. (2002). Student-generated examples in the learning of mathematics. Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, 2(2), 237–249.

  Article  Google Scholar 

Page 2

From: Reflection-for-action and the choice or design of examples in the teaching of mathematics