Classroom connectivity in Algebra I classrooms: results of a randomized control trial

References

• Abrahamson, A.L., Sanalan, V., Owens, D.T., Pape, S.J., Boscardin, C., & Demana, F. (2006). Classroom connectivity in mathematics and science achievement: Algebra I posttest. Unpublished document. College of Education and Human Ecology, Ohio State University.
   Google Scholar
• Azevedo, R., & Bernard, R.M. (1995). A meta-analysis of the effects of feedback in computer based instruction. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 13, 109–125. doi: 10.2190/9LMD-3U28-3A0G-FTQT
   Google Scholar
• Bapst, J.J. (1971). The effect of systematic student response upon teaching behavior (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Washington, Seattle, WA.
   Google Scholar
• Bell, B., & Cowie, B. (2001). The characteristics of formative assessment in science education. Science Education, 85, 536–553.doi: 10.1002/sce.1022.abs
   Google Scholar
• Bell, C.V. (2009). Cultural diversity and white teacher scaffolding of student self-regulated learning in algebra classes (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from http://etd.ohiolink.edu/
   Google Scholar
• Bell, C.V., & Pape, S.J. (2012). Scaffolding students’ opportunities to learn mathematics through social interactions. Mathematics Education Research, 24(4), 423–445.
   Google Scholar
• Bessler, W.C. (1969). The effectiveness of an electronic response system in teaching biology to the non-major utilizing nine group-paced linear programs (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Ball State University, Muncie, IN.
   Google Scholar
• Bloom, H.S., Hill, C.J., Black, A.R., & Lipsey, M.W. (2008). Performance trajectories and performance gaps as achievement effect-size benchmarks for educational interventions. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, 1, 289–328.doi: 10.1080/19345740802400072
   Google Scholar
• Brown, J.D. (1972). An evaluation of the Spitz student response system in teaching a course in logical and mathematical concepts. Journal of Experimental Education, 40, 12–20.
   Google Scholar
• Bryk, A.S., & Raudenbush, S.W. (1992). Hierarchical linear modeling: Applications and data analysis methods, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Burnstein, R.A., & Lederman, L.M. (2001). Using wireless keypads in lecture classes. The Physics Teacher, 39, 8–11.doi: 10.1119/1.1343420
   Google Scholar
• Casanova, J. (1971). An instructional experiment in organic chemistry: The use of a student response system. Journal of Chemical Education, 48, 453–455.
   Google Scholar
• Cohen, J. (1992). A power primer. Psychological Bulletin, 112, 155–159.doi: 10.1037//0033-2909.112.1.155
   Google Scholar
• Davis, S. (2003). Observations in classrooms using a network of handheld devices. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 19, 298–307.doi: 10.1046/j.0266-4909.2003.00031.x
   Google Scholar
• Dufresne, R.J., Gerace, W.J., Leonard, W.J., Mestre, J.P., & Wenk, L. (1996). Using the classtalk classroom communication system for promoting active learning in large lectures. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 7, 3–47.
   Google Scholar
• 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.doi: 10.2307/30034795
   Google Scholar
• Gee, J.P. (2008). A sociocultural perspective on opportunity to learn. In P.A. Moss, D.C. Pullin, J.P. Gee, E.H. Haertel, & L.J. Young (Eds.), Assessment, equity, and opportunity to learn (pp. 76–108). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Greenwood, C.R., Delquardi, J., & Hall, R.V. (1984). Opportunity to respond and academic achievement. In W.L. Heward, T.E. Heron, D.S. Hill, & J. Trap-Porter (Eds.), Focus on behavioral analysis in education (pp. 58–88). Columbus, OH: Merrill.
   Google Scholar
• Guzzo, R.A., Jette, R.D., & Katzell, R.A. (1985). The effects of psychologically based intervention programs on worker productivity: A meta-analysis. Personnel Psychology, 38, 275–291.doi: 10.1111/j.1744-6570.1985.tb00547.x
   Google Scholar
• Hake, R. (1998). Interactive engagement versus traditional methods: A six-thousand student survey of mechanics test data for introductory physics courses. American Journal of Physics, 66, 64–74.doi: 10.1119/1.18809
   Google Scholar
• Hegedus, S.J., Kaput, J., Dalton, S., Moniz, R., & Roschelle, J. (2007). SimCalc classroom connectivity project 2: Understanding classroom interactions among diverse, connected classrooms technology – Overview of the present finding of a 4-year study (2004–2008). Technical Report. Dartmouth, MA: University of Massachusetts Dartmouth, James J. Kaput Center for Research and Innovation in Mathematics Education.
   Google Scholar
• Hegedus, S.J., & Kaput, J.J. (2004). An introduction to the profound potential of connected algebra activities: Issues of representation, engagement and pedagogy. In M.J. Høines & A.B. Fuglestad (Eds.), Proceedings of the 28th international conference of the international group for the psychology of mathematics education (pp. 129–136). Bergen: Bergen University College.3
   Google Scholar
• Hegedus, S.J., & Moreno-Armella, L. (2009). Intersecting representation and communication infrastructures. ZDM Mathematics Education, 41, 399–412.doi: 10.1007/s11858-009-0191-7
   Google Scholar
• Hegedus, S.J., & Penuel, W.R. (2008). Studying new forms of participation and identity in mathematics classrooms with integrated communication and representational infrastructures. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 68, 171–183.doi: 10.1007/s10649=008-9120-x
   Google Scholar
• Hu, L., & Bentler, P.M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6, 1–55.
   Google Scholar
• Irving, K.E., Pape, S.J., Owens, D.T., Abraham, A.L., Silver, D., & Sanalan, V.A. (2010, May). Longitudinal study of classroom connectivity in promoting mathematics and science achievement: Years 1–3. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Denver, CO.
   Google Scholar
• Judson, E., & Sawada, D. (2002). Learning from past and present: Electronic response systems in college lecture halls. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 21, 167–181.
   Google Scholar
• Kluger, A.N., & DeNisi, A. (1996). The effects of feedback interventions on performance: A historical review, a meta-analysis, and a preliminary feedback intervention theory. Psychological Bulletin, 119, 254–284.doi: 10.1037//0033-2909.119.2.254
   Google Scholar
• Knight, J.K., & Wood, W.B. (2005). Teaching more by lecturing less. Cell Biology Education, 4, 298–310.doi: 10.1187/05-06-0082
   Google Scholar
• Lundeberg, M.A., Kang, H., Wolter, B., DelMas, R., Armstrong, N., Borsari, B., … Herried, C.F. (2011). Context matters: Increasing understanding with interactive Clicker Case studies. Educational Technology Research and Design, 59, 645–671. doi:10.1007/s11423-010-9182-1
   Google Scholar
• Mazur, E. (1997). Peer instruction: A user’s manual, Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
   Google Scholar
• National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing (2004). CRESST Algebra I test, Los Angeles, CA: Author.
   Google Scholar
• National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics, Reston, VA: Author.
   Google Scholar
• National Mathematics Advisory Panel (2008). Foundations for success: The final report of the National Mathematics Advisory Panel, Washington, DC: US Department of Education.
   Google Scholar
• Owens, D.T., Demana, F., Abrahamson, A.L., Meagher, M., & Herman, M. (2004). Developing pedagogy for wireless calculator networks and researching teacher professional development, Columbus, OH: The Ohio State University, (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED479499).
   Google Scholar
• Pape, S.J., Bell, C.V., Owens, S.K., Bostic, J.D., Irving, K.E., Owens, D.T., … Silver, S. (2010, May). Examining verbal interactions within connected mathematics classrooms. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Denver, CO.
   Google Scholar
• Pape, S.J., Irving, K.E., Bell, C.V., Shirley, M.L., Owens, D.T., Owens, S., Bostic, J.D., & Lee, S.C. (2012). Principles of effective pedagogy within the context of connected classroom technology: Implications for teacher knowledge. In R.N. Ronau, C.R. Rakes, & M.L. Niess (Eds.), Educational technology, teacher knowledge, and classroom impact: A research handbook on frameworks and approaches (pp. 176–199). Hershey, PA: IGI Global.doi: 10.4018/978-1-60960-750-0
   Google Scholar
• Paschal, C.B. (2002). Formative assessment in physiology teaching using a wireless classroom communication system. Advances in Physiology Education, 26, 299–308.
   Google Scholar
• Penuel, W.R., Abrahamson, L., & Roschelle, J. (2006). Theorizing the transformed classroom: Sociocultural interpretation of the effects of audience response systems in higher education. In D.A. Banks (Ed.), Audience response systems in higher education: Applications and cases (pp. 187–208). Hershey, PA: Information Science Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Preszler, R.W., Dawe, A., Shuster, C.B., & Shuster, M. (2007). Assessment of the effects of student response systems on student learning and attitudes over a broad range of biology courses. CBE-Life Sciences Education, 6, 29–41.doi: 10.1187/cbe.06-09-0190
   Google Scholar
• RAND Mathematics Study Panel, & Ball, D.L. (2003). Mathematical proficiency for all students: Toward a strategic research and development program in mathematics education, Santa Monica, CA: RAND.
   Google Scholar
• Raudenbush, S.W., Martinez, A., & Spybrook, J. (2007). Strategies for improving precision in group-randomized experiments. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 29, 5–29.doi: 10.3102/0162373707299460
   Google Scholar
• Roschelle, J., Penuel, W.R., & Abrahamson, L. (2004a). The networked classroom. Educational Leadership, 61, 50–54.
   Google Scholar
• Roschelle, J., Penuel, W.R., & Abrahamson, L. (2004b). Classroom response and communication systems: Research review and theory. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Diego, CA.
   Google Scholar
• Roschelle, J., Vahey, P., Tatar, D., & Kaput, J., Hegedus, S.J. (2003). Five key considerations for networking in a handheld-based mathematics classroom. In N.A. Pateman, B.J. Dougherty, & J.T. Zilliox (Eds.), Proceedings of the 2003 joint meeting of PME and PMENA (pp. 71–78). Honolulu, HI: University of Hawaii.4
   Google Scholar
• Ruiz-Primo, M.A., & Furtak, E.M. (2007). Exploring teachers’ informal formative assessment practices and students’ understanding in the context of scientific inquiry. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44, 57–84.doi: 10.1002/tea.20163
   Google Scholar
• Slain, D., Abate, M., Hodges, B.M., Stamatakis, M.K., & Wolak, S. (2004). An interactive response system to promote active learning in the doctor of pharmacy curriculum. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 68, 1–9.doi: 10.5688/aj6805117
   Google Scholar
• Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Stroup, W.M., Ares, N.M., & Hurford, A.C. (2005). A dialectic analysis of generativity: Issues of network-supported design in mathematics and science. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 7, 181–206.doi: 10.1207/s15327833mtl0703_1
   Google Scholar
• White, T. (2006). Code talk: Student discourse and participation with networked handhelds. Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 1, 359–382.doi: 10.1007/s11412-006-9658-5
   Google Scholar
• White, T. (2008). Debugging an artifact, instrumenting a bug: Dialectics of instrumentation and design in technology-rich learning environments. International Journal of Computers for Mathematical Learning, 13, 1–26. doi:10.1007/s10758-007-9119-x
   Google Scholar
• Wiliam, D., & Thompson, M. (2008). Integrating assessment with learning: What will it take to make it work? In C.A. Dwyer (Ed.), The future of assessment: Shaping teaching and learning (pp. 53–82). New York, NY: Lawrence Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar