Go math hmh

Go math hmh DEFAULT

Achieve. (2010). Comparing the Common Core State Standards in Mathematics and NCTM’s Curriculum Focal Points. Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved May 8, 2015 from http://www.achieve.org/CCSSandFocalPoints.

Albert, L. R., & Antos, J. (2000). Daily journals connect mathematics to real life. Mathematics Teaching in the Middle School, 5(8), 526–531.

Arcavi, Abraham. (2003). The role of visual representations in the learning of mathematics. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 52(3). 215–241.

Aspinwall L. & Aspinwall J. (2003). Investigating mathematical thinking using open writing prompts. Mathematics Teaching in the Middle School, 8(7), 350–353.

Avalos, B. (2011). Professional development in teaching and teacher education over ten years. Teaching and Teacher Education, 27(1). 10–20.

Bahr, D. L., Shaha, S. H., Farnsworth, B. J., Lewis, V. K., & Benson, L. F. (2004). Preparing tomorrow’s teachers to use technology: Attitudinal impacts of technology-supported field experience on preservice teacher candidates. Journal of Instructional Psychology. 31(2), 88–97.

Baker, S., Gersten, R., & Lee, D. (2002). A synthesis of empirical research on teaching mathematics to low-achieving students. The Elementary School Journal, 103(1), 67.

Baker, A., Schirner, K., & Hoffman, J. (2006). Multiage mathematics: Scaffolding young children’s mathematical learning. Teaching Children Mathematics, 13(1), 19–21.

Baxter, J. A., Woodward, J., & Olson, D. (2005). Writing in mathematics: An alternative form of communication for academically low-achieving students. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 20(2), 119–135.

Bay-Williams, J. M., & Livers, S. (2009). Supporting math vocabulary acquisition. Teaching Children Mathematics, 16(4), 238–245.

Beane, J. A. (1997). Curriculum integration: Designing the core of democratic education. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Benson, L. F., Farnsworth, B. J., Bahr, D. L., Lewis, V. K., & Shaha, S. H. (2004). The impact of training in technology assisted instruction on skills and attitudes of pre-service teachers. Education. 124(4), 649–663.

Bessier, Sally. (2006). An examination of gender differences in elementary constructivist classrooms using lego/logo instruction. Computers in Schools. 22. 7–19.

Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998a). Inside the black box: Raising standards through classroom assessment. Phi Delta Kappan, 80(2), 139–148.

Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998b). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy, and Practice, 5(1), 7–73.

Boaler, J. (1998). Open and closed mathematics: Student experiences and understandings. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 29, 41–62.

Boddy, M., Watson, K., & Aubusson, P. A trial of the Five Es: A referent model for constructivist teaching and learning. Research in Science Education, 33(1). 27–42.

Bosse, M. J., & Faulconer, J. (2008). Learning and assessing mathematics through reading and writing. School Science & Mathematics, 108(1), 8–19.

Brandenburg, Sr. M. L. (2002). Advanced math? Write! Educational Leadership, 60(3), 67–68.

Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. R. (Eds.). (1999). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. National Research Council. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.

Bray, W. S., Dixon, J. K., & Martinez, M. (2006). Fostering communication about measuring area in a transitional language class. Teaching Children Mathematics, 13(3), 132–138.

Britt, M., & Aglinskas, C. (2002). Improving students’ ability to identify and use source information. Cognition and Instruction, 20(4), 485–522.

Brown, A. & Campione, J. (1994). Guided discovery in a community of learners. In K. McGilly (Ed.), Classroom lessons: Integrating cognitive theory and classroom practice (pp. 229–270). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Buczynski, S., & Hansen, C. B. (2010). Impact of professional development on teacher practice: Uncovering connections. Teaching and Teacher Education, 26(3), 599–607.

Burns, M. (2004). Writing in math. Educational Leadership, 62(2), 30–33.

Burns, M. K., Appleton, J. J., & Stehouwer, J. D. (2005). Metaanalytic review of responsiveness-to-intervention research: Examining field-based and research-implemented models. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 23, 381–394.

Bybee, R. J. et al. (2006). The BSCS 5E instructional model: Origins and effectiveness. Colorado Springs, CO: BSCS.

Caine, R. N., & Caine, G. (1994). Making connections: Teaching and the human brain. Alexandria, Virginia: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Carnegie Mellon. (2015). Formative versus summative assessment. (Online). Retrieved April 30, 2015 from www.cmu.edu/teaching/assessment/basics/formative-summative.html.

Carpenter, Thomas P., Franke, Megan Loef, & Levi, Linda. (2003). Thinking mathematically: Integrating arithmetic and algebra in elementary schools. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

CDW. (2011). 2011 CDW-G 21st-century classroom report. Retrieved April 15, 2015 from http://webobjects.cdw.com/webobjects/media/pdf/newsroom/CDWG-21st-Century-Classroom-Report-0611.pdf.

Chapin, S. H., O’Connor, C., & Canavan Anderson, N. (2003). Classroom discussions: Using Math Talk to help students learn, grades 1–6. Sausalito, CA: Math Solutions Publications.

Charles, Randall I. (2005). Big ideas and understandings as the foundation for elementary and middle school mathematics. Journal of Mathematics Education Leadership. 7(1). 9–24.

Christenson, S. L., Ysseldyke, J. E., & Thurlow, M. L. (1989). Critical instructional factors for students with mild handicaps: An integrative review. Remedial and Special Education, 10(5), 21–31.

Chetty, R., Friedman, J. N., & Rockoff, J. E. (2012) Great teaching: Measuring its effects on students’ future earnings. Education Next, 12(3), 58–64.

Cheung, A., & Slavin, R. E. (2011). The effectiveness of educational technology applications for enhancing mathematics achievement in K-12 classrooms: A meta-analysis. Center for Research and Reform in Education. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University. Retrieved April 17, 2015 from http://www.bestevidence.org/word/tech_math_Apr_11_2012.pdf.

Cho, M. & Rathbun, G. (2013). Implementing teacher-centered online teacher professional development (oTPD) programme in higher education: a case study. Innovations in Education and Teaching International. 50(2). 144–156.

Clarke, B., & Shinn, M. R. (2004). A preliminary investigation into the identification and development of early mathematics curriculum-based measurement. School Psychology Review, 33(2), 234–248.

Clarke, Shirley, Timperley, Helen, & Hattie, John. (2004). Unlocking formative assessment: practical strategies for enhancing students’ learning in the primary and intermediate classroom. Auckland, New Zealand: Hodder Moa Beckett.

Clement, L.L. (2004). A model for understanding, using, and connecting representations. Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.

Clements, Douglas H., & Sarama, Julie. (2004). Learning trajectories in mathematics education. Mathematical Thinking and Learning. 6(2). 81–89.

Cobb, P., & Jackson, K. (2011). Comments on Porter, McMaken, Hwang, and Yang: Assessing the quality of the Common Core State Standards for Mathematics. Educational Researcher, 40(4), 183–185.

Collins, J. C. (2001). Good to great: Why some companies make the leap-and others don’t. New York, NY: HarperBusiness.

Cotton, K. (1995). Effective schooling practices: A research synthesis 1995 update. Portland, OR: Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory. Retrieved May 10, 2015 from http://www.kean.edu/~lelovitz/docs/EDD6005/Effective%20School%20Prac.pdf.

Coulson, D. (2002). BSCS Science: An inquiry approach—2002 evaluation findings. Arnold, MC: PS International.

Czerniak, C. M., Weber, W. B., Jr., Sandmann, A., & Ahem, J. (1999). A literature review of science and mathematics integration. School Science & Mathematics, 99(8), 421–430.

Demirsky Allan, S., & Goddard, Y. L. (2010). Differentiated instruction and RtI: A natural fit. Interventions that Work, 68(2).

Desimone, Laura M., Porter, Andrew C., Garet, Michael S., Yoon, Kwang Suk, & Birman, Beatrice F. (2002). Effects of professional development on teachers’ instruction: Results from three-year longitudinal study. Education Evaluation and Policy Analysis. 24(2). 81–112.

Dillenbourg, P. (2002). Over-scripting CSCL: The risks of blending collaborative learning with instructional design. Three worlds of CSCL. Can we support CSCL. 61–91.

Dixon, J. K. (1997). Computer use and visualization in students’ construction of reflection and rotation concepts. School Science and Mathematics, 97(7), 352–358.

Donovan, M. Suzanne, & Bransford, eds. (2005). How students learn: History, mathematics, and science in the classroom. National Research Council, Committee on How People Learn: A Targeted Report for Teachers. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.

Earp, N. W. (1970). Observations on teaching reading in mathematics. Journal of Reading, 13, 529–33.

Fosnot, Catherine Twomey, & Jacob, William. (2010). Young Mathematicians at Work: Constructing Algebra. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Franke, M. L., Kazemi, E., & Battey, D. S. (2007). Mathematics teaching and classroom practices. In F. K. Lester Jr. (Ed.), The second handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 225–256). Charlotte, NC: Information Age.

Freeman, B., & Crawford, L. (2008). Creating a middle school mathematics curriculum for English learners. Remedial and Special Education, 29(1), 9–19.

Fuchs, L. S. (2004). The past, present, and future of curriculum-based measurement research. School Psychology Review, 33, 188–192.

Fuchs, D., & Fuchs, L. S. (2006). Introduction to Response to Intervention: What, why, and how valid is it? Reading Research Quarterly, 41(1), 93–99.

Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., & Hollenbeck, K. N. (2007). Extending responsiveness to intervention to mathematics at first and third grades. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 22(1), 13–24.

Furner, J. M., & Duffy, M. L. (2002). Equity for all students in the new millennium: Disabling math anxiety. Intervention in School and Clinic, 38(2), 67–74.

Garet, M. S., Porter, A. C., Desimone, L., Birman, B. F., & Yoon, K. S. (2001). What makes professional development effective? Results from a national sample of teachers. American Educational Research Journal. 38(4), 915.

Gersten, R., Beckmann, S., Clarke, B., Foegen, A., Marsh, L., Star, J.R., & Witzel, B. (2009). Assisting students struggling with mathematics: Response to Intervention (RtI) for elementary and middle schools. Institute of Education Sciences What Works Clearinghouse. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education. Retrieved May 9, 2015 from http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/pdf/practiceguides/rti_math_pg_042109.pdf.

Gersten, R., & Chard, D. (2001). Number sense: Rethinking arithmetic instruction for students with mathematical disabilities. LD Online. Retrieved May 3, 2015 from http://www.ldonline.org/article/5838/.

Gersten, R., & Clarke, B. S. (2007). Effective strategies for teaching students with difficulties in mathematics. Instruction Research Brief. Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.

Ginsburg, A., Cooke, G., Leinwand, S., Noell, J., & Pollock, E. (2005). Reassessing U.S. international mathematics performance: New findings from the 2003 TIMSS and PISA. Prepared for U.S. Department of Education Policy and Program Studies Service (PPSS). Washington, DC: American Institutes for Research (AIR). Retrieved May 8, 2015 from http://www.air.org/files/TIMSS_PISA_math_study1.pdf.

Goldhaber, D. (2002). The mystery of good teaching: Surveying the evidence on student achievement and teachers’ characteristics. Education Next, 2(1), 50–55.

Gonzales, P., Williams, T., Jocelyn, L., Roey, S., Katsberg, D., & Brenwald, S. (2008). Highlights from TIMSS 2007: Mathematics and science achievement of U.S. fourth- and eighth-grade students in an international context (NCES 2009-001 Revised). National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.

Good, J. M., & Whang, P. A. (1999). Making meaning in educational psychology with student response journals. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Montreal, Canada.

Griffiths, A., VanDerHeyden, A. M., Parson, L. B., & Burns, M. K. (2006). Practical applications of Response-to-Intervention research. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 32(1), 50–57.

Hall, T., Strangman, N., & Meyer, A. (2009). Differentiated instruction and implications for UDL implementation. Wakefield, MA: National Center on Accessing the General Curriculum. http://aem.cast.org/about/publications/2003/ncac-differentiated-instruction-udl.html

Harmon, J. M., Hedrick, W. B., & Wood, K. D. (2005). Research on vocabulary instruction in the content areas: Implications for struggling readers. Reading and Writing Quarterly, 21, 261–280.

Hatano, G., & Inagaki, K. (1991). Constrained person analogy in young children’s biological inference. Cognitive Development, 6(2), 219–231.

Hattie, J. (1992). Self-concept. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Hattie, John A. C. (2009). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. New York: Routledge.

Haystead, Mark W., & Marzano, Robert J. (2009). Meta-analytic synthesis of studies conducted at Marzano Research Laboratory on instructional strategies. Englewood, CO: Marzano Research Laboratory.

Heritage, M. (2007). Formative assessment: What do teachers need to know and do? Phi Delta Kappan, 89(2), 140–145.

Hiebert, J., Gallimore, R., Garnier, H., Givvin, K. B., Hollingsworth, H., Jacobs, J., et al. (2003). Teaching mathematics in seven countries: Results from the TIMSS 1999 video study (NCES 2003-2013). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics.

Hiebert, James & Wearne, Diana. (1993). Instructional tasks, classroom discourse, and students’ learning in second-grade arithmetic. American Educational Research Journal, 30(2). 393–425.

Hiebert, James, Morris, Anne K., Berk, Dawn, & Jansen, Amanda. (2007). Preparing teachers to learn from teaching. Journal of Teacher Education, 58(1), 47–61.

Hiebert, J., & Grouws, D.A. (2007). The effects of classroom mathematics teaching on students’ learning. Second handbook of research on the teaching and learning of mathematics. Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. 371–404.

Hitchcock, C., Meyer, A., Rose, D., & Jackson, R. (2002). Providing new access to the general curriculum: Universal Design for learning. Teaching Exceptional Children, 35(2), 8–17.

Huppert, J., Lomask, S. M., & Lazarowitz, R. (2002). Computer simulations in the high school: students’ cognitive stages, science process skills and academic achievement in microbiology. International Journal of Science Education, 24(8), 803–821.

Hyde, A. (2006). Comprehending math: Adapting reading strategies to teach mathematics k-6. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Hyun, Eunsook & Davis, Genevieve. (2005). Kindergarteners’ conversations in a computer-based technology classroom. Communication Education, 54, 118–135.

Jackson, M. B., & Phillips, E. R. (1983). Vocabulary instruction in ratio and proportion for seventh graders. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 14(5), 337–343.

Jacobs, Victoria R., Franke, Megan Loef, Carpenter, Thomas P., Levi, Linda, & Battey, Dan. (2007). Professional development based on children’s algebraic reasoning in elementary school. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 38(3), 258–288.

Jerald, C. D. (2001). Dispelling the myth revisited. Washington DC: Education Trust.

Johnson, C. I., & Mayer, R. E. (2009). A testing effect with multimedia learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 101(3), 621–629.

Kallison, J. M. (1986). Effects of lesson organization on achievement. American Educational Research Journal, 23(2), 337–347.

Kapur, Manu. (2010). Productive failure in mathematical problem solving. Instruction Science. 38(6). 523–550.

Kebritchi, M., Hirumi, A., & Bai, H. (2010). The effects of modern mathematics computer games on mathematics achievement and class motivation. Computers & Education, 55, 427–443.

Ketterlin-Geller, L. R., Chard, D. J., & Fien, H. (2008). Making connections in mathematics: Conceptual mathematics intervention for low-performing students. Remedial and Special Education, 29(1), 33–45.

Ketterlin-Geller, L. R., & Yovanoff, P. (2009). Diagnostic assessments in mathematics to support instructional decision making. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 14(16), 1–11.

Kilpatrick, J., Swafford, J., & Findell, B., Eds. (2001). Mathematics Learning Study Committee, National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.

Kouba, V. L. (1989). Common and uncommon ground in mathematics and science terminology. School Science and Mathematics, 89(7), 598.

Kovalik, S. (1994). Integrated thematic instruction: The model. Kent, WA: Susan Kovalik & Associates.

Krebs, A. (2005). Analyzing student work as a professional development activity. School Science and Mathematics, 105(8), 402–411.

Lappan, G., & Briars, D. (1995). How should mathematics be taught? In I. M. Carl (Ed.), Prospects for school mathematics. Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. 131–156.

Larkin, M. J. (2001). Providing support for student independence through scaffolded instruction. Teaching Exceptional Children, 34(1), 30–34.

Leinwand, S., & Fleischman, S. (2004). Teach mathematics right the first time. Educational Leadership, 62(1) 88–89.

Leiva, M. A. (2007). The problem with words in mathematics: A strategy for differentiated instruction. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin Company. Retrieved April 20, 2015 from http://www.beyond-the-book.com/strategies/strategies_092006.html.

Lembke, E. & Foegen, A. (2005). Identifying indicators of early mathematics proficiency in kindergarten and grade 1. (Technical Report No. 6). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota. College of Education and Human Development. Retrieved May 2, 2015 from www.progressmonitoring.org/pdf/TREarlymath6.pdf.

Lesh, Richard, Post Tom, & Behr, Merlyn. (1987). Representations and translations among representations in mathematics learning and problem solving. In Problems of Representation in the Teaching and Learning of Mathematics, edited by Claude Janvier, Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, 33–40.

Li, Q., & Ma, X. (2010). A meta-analysis of the effects of computer technology on school students’ mathematics learning. Educational Psychology Review, 22(3), 215–243.

López, O. S. (2010). The digital learning classroom: Improving English Learners’ academic success in mathematics and reading using interactive whiteboard technology. Computers & Education, 54(4), 901–915.

Ma, Liping. (2010). Knowing and teaching elementary mathematics: Teachers’ understanding of fundamental mathematics in China and the United States. 2nd ed. New York: Routledge.

Marzano, R. (2000). What works in classroom instruction. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.

Marzano, R. J., & Haystead, M. (2009). Final report on the evaluation of the Promethean technology. Englewood, CO: Marzano Research Laboratory.

Marzano, R. J., Pickering, D. J., & Pollock, J. E. (2001). Classroom instruction that works: Research-based strategies for increasing student achievement. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development (ASCD).

Matsumura, L. C., Slater, S. C., Junker, B., Peterson, M., Boston, M., Steele, M., et al. (2006). Measuring reading comprehension and mathematics instruction in urban middle schools: A pilot study of the instructional quality assessment. (CSE Technical Report 691). Los Angeles: University of California-Los Angeles. National Center for Research on Evaluation. Retrieved May 2, 2015 from https://www.cse.ucla.edu/products/reports/R691.pdf.

Mayer, R. E. (2001, 2009). Multimedia learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Mayer, R. E. (2005). Principles for managing essential processing in multimedia learning. In R. E. Mayer (Ed.), The Cambridge Handbook of Multimedia Learning (pp. 169–182). New York: Cambridge University Press.

Mayes, R., Chase, P. N., & Walker, V. L. (2008). Supplemental practice and diagnostic assessment in an Applied College Algebra Course. Journal of College Reading and Learning, 38(2), 7–31.

Means, B., Toyama, Y., Murphy, R., Bakia, M., & Jones, K. (2009). Evaluation of evidence-based practices in online learning: A meta-analysis and review of online learning studies. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Planning, Evaluation, and Policy Development, Policy and Program Studies Service. Retrieved April 28, 2015 from http://www2.ed.gov/rschstat/eval/tech/evidence-based-practices/finalreport.pdf.

Meiers, M., & Ingvarson, L. (2005). Investigating the links between teacher professional development and student learning outcomes. Retrieved May 3, 2015 from http://www.dest.gov.au/sectors/school_education/publications_resources/profiles/teacher_prof_development_student_learning_outcomes.htm.

Mellard, D. F., & Johnson, E. S. (2008). RTI: A practitioner’s guide to implementing response to intervention. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

Mid-Continent Research for Education and Learning (McREL). (2010). What we know about mathematics teaching and learning, third edition. Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree Press.

Miri, B., David, B. C., & Uri, Z. (2007). Purposely teaching for the promotion of higher-order thinking skills: A case of critical thinking. Research in Science Education, 37(4), 353–369.

Moskal, B. (2000). Understanding student responses to open-ended tasks. Mathematics Teaching in the Middle School, 5(8), 500–505.

National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2000, 2009). Principles and standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author. Retrieved May 8, 2015 from http://www.nctm.org/standards/content.aspx?id=16909.

National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (2014). Principles to actions: Ensuring mathematical success for all. Reston, VA: Author.

National Governors Association, Council of Chief State School Officers, Achieve, Council of the Great City Schools, & National Association of State Boards of Education. (2013). K-8 publishers’ criteria for the Common Core State Standards for Mathematics. (Spring 2013 Release; 4/9/13). Retrieved May 2, 2015 from http://www.corestandards.org/assets/Math_Publishers_Criteria_K-8_Spring%202013_FINAL.pdf.

National Governors Association Center for Best Practices & Council of Chief State School Officers. (2010a). Common Core State Standards for Mathematics. Washington, D.C.: Author. Retrieved May 8, 2015 from http://www.corestandards.org/the-standards.

National Governors Association Center for Best Practices & Council of Chief State School Officers. (2010b). Key points in mathematics. Retrieved May 7, 2015 from http://www.corestandards.org/other-resources/.

National Institute for Literacy. (2007). What content-area teachers should know about adolescent literacy. Washington, DC: NIL, NICHD.

National Mathematics Advisory Panel. (2008). Foundations for success: The final report of the National Mathematics Advisory Panel. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education. Retrieved May 2, 2015 from http://www2.ed.gov/about/bdscomm/list/mathpanel/index.html.

National Research Council. (1999). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

National Research Council. (2001). Adding it up: Helping children learn mathematics. J. Kilpatrick, J. Swafford, & B. Findell (Eds.). Mathematics Learning Study Committee, Center for Education, Division of Behavioral and Social Science and Education. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. Retrieved May 8, 2015 from http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=9822&page=1.

National Research Council. (2005). How students learn: History, mathematics, and science in the classroom. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.

National Research Council. (2012). Education for life and work: Developing transferable knowledge and skills for the 21st century. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.

North Central Regional Educational Laboratory. (2003). A meta-analysis of the effectiveness of teaching and learning with technology on student outcomes. Naperville, IL: North Central Regional Educational Laboratory.

O’Neil, H. F., & Brown, R. S. (1998). Differential effects of question formats in math assessment on metacognition and affect. Applied Measurement in Education, 11(4), 331–351.

Popham, W. J. (2006). All about accountability/phony formative assessments: Buyer beware. Educational Leadership, 64(3), 86–87.

Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants. On the Horizon, 9(5), 1–6.

Publishers’ Criteria. www.corestandards.org

Pugalee, D. K. (2004). A comparison of verbal and written descriptions of students’ problem-solving processes. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 55, 27–47.

Pugalee, D. K. (2005). Writing to develop mathematical understanding. Norwood, MA: Christopher-Gordon.

Putnam, R. (2003). Commentary on four elementary math curricula. In S. Senk & D. Thompson (Eds.), Standards-oriented school mathematics curricula: What does it say about student outcomes? Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. 161–180.

Reed, D. S. (2009). Is there an expectations gap? Educational federalism and the demographic distribution of proficiency cut scores. American Educational Research Journal, 46(3), 718–742.

Rideout, V. J., Foehr, U. G., & Roberts, D. F. (2010). Generation M2: Media in the lives of 8- to 18-year-olds: A Kaiser Family Foundation study. Menlo Park, CA: The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation. Retrieved May 1, 2015 from http://www.kff.org/entmedia/upload/8010.pdf.

Rienties, B., Brouwer, N., & Lygo-Baker, S. (2013). The effects of online professional development on teachers’ beliefs and intentions towards learning facilitation and technology. Teaching and Teacher Education. 29, 122–131.

Sours: https://www.hmhco.com/research/go-math-research-foundations

The “Introduction to Program” video helps you to the learning elements of your program with suggestions on how to best understand how to use California GO MATH!! in your classroom!

Learning Videos with author Dr. Ed Burger

 Make learning fun with our dynamic Math On the Spot videos, starring program authors.

How-To Videos: Get started with your online materials in my.hrw with these guided videos.


Smart Notebook Files


In order to access the audio feature of Concept readers, Adobe Reader is required to be installed. Audio should play without issue in Internet Explorer and Safari but user may be prompted to trust the content first.  Adobe Reader may also prompt user to trust the content.

However, in Google Chrome and Mozilla Firefox, the built-in PDF plug-in has to be disabled to access the audio feature of Concept readers. Please follow the step by step instructions

To disable the in-built PDF plugin on Firefox:

Step 1: Open Firefox and go to Tools -> Options -> Applications.

Step 2: Scroll down to Content Type = PDF.

Step 3: Change ‘Preview in Firefox’ to ‘Use Adobe Reader (default)’.

To disable the in-built PDF plugin on Chrome:

Step 1: Open Chrome and type “about:plugins” into the omnibox at the top.

Step 2: Scroll down and find Chrome PDF Viewer.

Step 3: Click the “Disable” link to prevent PDFs from loading within Chrome.


If audio still does not play in Adobe Reader, do the following:


Step 1: Log out and close the website.

Step 2: Open Adobe Reader on your computer.

Step 3: In the toolbar, go to Edit and then select Preferences.

Step 4: Click the Security (Enhanced) category on the left.

Step 5: In the section Sandbox Protections, on the upper left, clear the check box for Enable Protected Mode at Startup.

Step 6: In the section Enhanced Security, just under Sandbox Protections, clear the check box for Enable Enhanced Security.

Step 7: Click OK.

Step 8: Exit Adobe Reader.

Step 9: Try to access the media again.

Dr. Juli Dixon and her daughter, Alex, are working to change the world for students with special needs so that they actually like math and work with it well.  Join them as they tell of their very personal journey and share some deep insight into the world of students with special needs:



Professional Development Brochure


Program Enhancements

Sours: https://us.hmhco.com/cateach/math/
  1. Fire emblem stone
  2. Privacy plastic lattice
  3. Chevy drop kit

GO Math! offers an engaging and interactive approach to covering the Common Core State Standards. Our GO Math! Student Edition is write-in with embedded practice pages so students record their strategies, explanations, solutions, practice and test prep right in their books—all for one very affordable price. Includes two volumes.

  • Grade: Kindergarten
  • Material Type: Teacher Materials
  • Format: Kit
  • ISBN-13/EAN: 9780544433342
  • ISBN-10: 0544433343
  • Product Code: 1596240
  • National/State: National
  • Copyright Year: 2015
  • Program Name:GO Math!®

Please note that all discounts and final pricing will be displayed on the Review Order page before you submit your order.

Learn more about GO Math!®

Sours: https://www.hmhco.com/shop/k12/Go-Math/9780544433342
HMH Go Math! How to access workbook pages through my.hrw.com

GO Math! offers an engaging and interactive approach to covering the Common Core State Standards. Our GO Math! Student Edition is write-in, and at every grade level, so students record their strategies, explanations, solutions, practice and test prep right in their books.

  • Grade: Kindergarten
  • Material Type: Student Materials
  • Format: Softcover, 552 Pages
  • ISBN-13/EAN: 9780547587806
  • ISBN-10: 0547587805
  • Product Code: 1461131
  • National/State: National
  • Copyright Year: 2012
  • Program Name:GO Math!®

Please note that all discounts and final pricing will be displayed on the Review Order page before you submit your order.

Learn more about GO Math!®

Sours: https://www.hmhco.com/shop/k12/Go-Math/9780547587806

Hmh go math

Be inside, as if you had smeared everything in grease. The penis began to decrease, Marina got up, licked my fallen penis and carefully went into the bathroom, do a light rinsing of the ass, and put the condom with the. Condom in a small container. I also did such actions, but at that time the body was a little under drugs.

I lifted my shirt a little, put the excess into a knot, placing it at the level of the navel.

HMH 6th Grade Go Math Creating Assignments

I think I have to take care of your upbringing. she added instructively. Aunt Ir, we have the whole summer ahead. Hey.

Similar news:

He asked furiously. -And now I'll show you what I want. Or rather, WHOM. Mufasa looked at Scar in bewilderment as he approached him with a soft gait and shuddered when his brothers rough tongue licked his neck. Mufasa looked at his brother's antics in bewilderment and finally realized what he wanted.

15304 15305 15306 15307 15308