Teachers’ Discussions Of Students’ Thinking: Meeting The Challenge Of Attending To Students’ Thinking
By Michelle T. Chamberlin. 2005
97 citations recorded by the source corpus.
Subfields: Education, Statistics and Probability
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/6c958a1d9fd23ebde0da7fdcb118528b1247938b
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
In Education
- Elizabeth A. van Es
- Jennifer W. Sun
- Miriam Gamoran Sherin
- Rosemary S. Russ
- Frank K. Lester Jr.
- H. Diefes‐Dux
- Monica E. Cardella
- Bruce L. Sherin
In Statistics and Probability
- Frank K. Lester Jr.
- Elizabeth A. van Es
- H. Diefes‐Dux
- Jennifer W. Sun
- J. Zawojewski
- Richard A. Lesh
- Jeffrey Choppin
- Bharath Sriraman
Citations in the corpus
- Professional vision in action: An exploratory study (2008, background): “Berliner, 1994; Rodgers, 2002), and more specifically for the teaching of mathematics today (Ball, & Cohen, 1999; Chamberlin, 2005).”
- Participants' Roles in the Context of a Video Club (2009, background): “Chamberlin (2005) explained that students have difficulty expressing their thinking clearly,”
- A Framework for Analyzing Feedback in a Formative Assessment System for Mathematical Modeling Problems (2012, background): “Other studies have examined how teachers analyze and classify students’ work on MEAs (e.g., Chamberlin, 2005; Schorr & Koellner-Clark, 2003).”
- Model-Eliciting Activities (MEAs) as a Bridge Between Engineering Education Research and Mathematics Education Research (2008, background): “, [45, 46, 58]), and it has won a place at the table of engineering education reform discourse.”
- An Exploratory Study of the Influence That Analyzing Teaching Has on Preservice Teachers’ Classroom Practice (2015, background): “…mathematics and science education promote classroom environments focused on student thinking (CCSI, 2011; NCTM, 2000; NRC, 2001); yet, secondary mathematics teachers do not typically design instructional interactions focused on student ideas (see Chamberlin, 2005; Stockero, 2008; Van Zoest, 1995).”