Professional Documents
Culture Documents
VOL 3, N1
December 2008
Readers are free to copy, display, and distribute this article, as long as the work is attributed to the author(s) and Mathematics Teaching-Re-
search Journal On-Line, it is distributed for non-commercial purposes only, and no alteration or transformation is made in the work. All oth-
er uses must be approved by the author(s) or MT-RJoL. MT-RJoL is published jointly by the Bronx Colleges of the City University of New York.
www.hostos.cuny.edu/departments/math/mtrj
Mathematics Teaching-Research Journal Online 20
VOL 3, N1
December 2008
ABSTRACT
The purpose of this study was to describe the usefulness of clinical interviews
when working with low-performing high school students in mathematics. The subjects of
the study were public high school students participating in the New York City
Mathematics and Science Partnership program during the summer of 2007. Our work
was aimed at improving the teaching of high school mathematics through an innovative
approach called mathematics interviews, popularly called clinical interviews. The
methodology was geared to a target population consisting of the lowest third performing
Math A students.
Through the clinical interviews conducted with the members of the lowest
performing students, we were able to identify and correct misconceptions, identify areas
of weaknesses and gain a better understanding of the students’ mathematical thinking.
We gained an insight on how a student’s mind functions vis a vis mathematical thinking.
Based on this qualitative research, we concluded that clinical interviews could be
a useful tool for helping teachers gain insight into the students’ thought processes,
pinpoint misconceptions, develop a dialogue in response to the students’ problems and
raise the students’ self-confidence. By helping teachers become more responsive to their
students’ needs, clinical interviews ultimately help students become better learners.
This research addresses the usefulness of clinical interviews in conjunction with
other pedagogical tools to improve the teaching and learning of mathematics in urban
high schools and middle schools. This work also paves the way for enhancing the
methodology used with remedial mathematics students in community colleges.
Readers are free to copy, display, and distribute this article, as long as the work is attributed to the author(s) and Mathematics Teaching-Re-
search Journal On-Line, it is distributed for non-commercial purposes only, and no alteration or transformation is made in the work. All oth-
er uses must be approved by the author(s) or MT-RJoL. MT-RJoL is published jointly by the Bronx Colleges of the City University of New York.
www.hostos.cuny.edu/departments/math/mtrj
Mathematics Teaching-Research Journal Online 21
VOL 3, N1
December 2008
INTRODUCTION
Many students start having mathematics difficulties in middle school, especially if the
schools they attend are urban schools in high poverty areas. According to Ball, these
students will probably have a teacher who is “entirely unprepared in mathematics and has
had no opportunity to study mathematics for teaching” (Hiebert and Ball, 2005). The
condition worsens in the high school years. When these students enter community
colleges without a mathematical base on which future knowledge can be scaffolded—and
when they also have to support a family or hold down a job—their mathematics
difficulties become an impediment to their going forward with their education.
During the several years we have been teaching mathematics in community
colleges in the Bronx, we have worked with students in the Associate Degree program
who struggle in arithmetic and algebra. Not entirely to our surprise, we found that the
same difficulties are prevalent among high school students in the Mathematics and
Science Partnership in New York City (MSPinNYC or simply MSP), a five-year project
funded by the National Science Foundation.
In MSP, college faculty, high school teachers and selected tutors provide a six-
week intensive summer training on a college campus to several hundred students from
Manhattan and the Bronx who failed the Regents exam in mathematics, chemistry or
living environment. The students’ day was divided equally among classroom instruction,
labs and tutoring sessions. They also participated in board of directors’ meetings where
they discussed educational or social issues. After class, the teachers and tutors met for
half an hour in an activity called “kid talk” discussing their observations about what
worked and what needed improvement. At the end of the summer, the students took the
Regents exam and most earned a passing grade.
The mathematics knowledge MSP students need to pass the Math A Regents
exam is similar to the knowledge students in community colleges need to pass remedial
mathematics classes. The topics with which students struggle—fractions, decimals and
proportions, signed numbers, distributivity, estimating, simple word problems—have
been taught in high school, middle school and even elementary school. Since the ethnic
and socioeconomic composition of our college students is similar to that of our MSP
students, our work with MSP students lays the groundwork for expanding the research to
the teaching of mathematics in community colleges.
More than three years ago while working in the summer MSP program, two
faculty researchers, Czarnocha of Hostos and Prabhu of BCC, postulated that our students
did not think metacognitively in mathematics but simply performed operations
algorithmically and got an answer as a result. They relied on memorization to solve
certain types of problems instead of trying to understand the problem. With too many
facts to “remember,” the students got confused. Lacking an understanding of elementary
arithmetic, they could not make the transition to algebra and trigonometry. Czarnocha
and Prabhu theorized that clinical interviews might provide a better gauge of students’
knowledge than the results of weekly mock exams.
Readers are free to copy, display, and distribute this article, as long as the work is attributed to the author(s) and Mathematics Teaching-Re-
search Journal On-Line, it is distributed for non-commercial purposes only, and no alteration or transformation is made in the work. All oth-
er uses must be approved by the author(s) or MT-RJoL. MT-RJoL is published jointly by the Bronx Colleges of the City University of New York.
www.hostos.cuny.edu/departments/math/mtrj
Mathematics Teaching-Research Journal Online 22
VOL 3, N1
December 2008
The impetus for the research came from the low retention and graduation rates of
our students enrolled in Associate Degree programs at Bronx Community College (BCC)
and Hostos Community College of The City University of New York. Based on the data
of CUNY Office of Institutional Research and Assessment (OIRA), less than 22% of a
typical freshmen cohort was awarded the Associate Degree at the end of 6 years (OIRA,
RTGI_0001).
A primary goal of this research was to use clinical interviews to identify and possibly
correct misconceptions and areas of weaknesses in the mathematical thinking of the
bottom third of MSP Math A students. These students were our intervention group,
referred to in this paper as the target population (TP). A second goal was to determine if
clinical interviews and follow-up activities could help increase the percentage of students
from the target population who passed the Regents examination.
THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
Sockett criticizes Shulman’s theory on three accounts: (a) context as opposed to content,
(b) the description of the moral framework for teaching and (c) the relation between
reason and action in teaching (Socket, 1987). Sockett, who thinks teaching should be
viewed through the lenses of socio-cultural perspective and the sociology of emotions,
argues that the act of teaching cannot be separated from the knowledge of the student
population. The moral framework considers a teacher’s excellence, grace, style,
enthusiasm, commitment, integrity, care, passion and sense of fairness. Regarding reason
and action, since teaching is praxis, teaching should be evaluated based on teaching
outcomes, not on teacher’s ability to explain.
What makes a good teacher? What makes a poor teacher? All of us remember a good
teacher we once had: someone who made us want to go to school or influenced our career
choice.
Hargreaves, whose study is grounded in the sociology of emotions, points out that
(a) teaching is an emotional practice, (b) teaching and learning involve emotional
understanding, (c) teaching is a form of emotional labor and (d) teachers’ emotions are
inseparable from their moral purpose (Hargreaves, 1998).
Based on Collins’s sociology of emotions, Tobin explains that good teaching is
made out of successful interactions that are charged with positive emotions; bad teaching
is made out of unsuccessful interactions that are charged with negative emotions (Tobin,
2006). During successful interactions, there is synchrony between the teacher and the
students. A chain of synchronous practices is charged with positive emotional energy and
leads to entrainment—for example, instead of copying from the board the students
anticipate what the teacher will write next. In these moments there is solidarity in the
classroom among all participants. The teaching happens without conscious awareness and
through practices that are anticipatory, timely and appropriate, i.e. fluent (Tobin, 2006).
Hargreaves argues that the emotional dimension of teaching is largely ignored or
underplayed by the policy makers (Hargreaves, 1998). Like painters, good teachers are
born, not made!
Readers are free to copy, display, and distribute this article, as long as the work is attributed to the author(s) and Mathematics Teaching-Re-
search Journal On-Line, it is distributed for non-commercial purposes only, and no alteration or transformation is made in the work. All oth-
er uses must be approved by the author(s) or MT-RJoL. MT-RJoL is published jointly by the Bronx Colleges of the City University of New York.
www.hostos.cuny.edu/departments/math/mtrj
Mathematics Teaching-Research Journal Online 24
VOL 3, N1
December 2008
Given the diverse background of the students in CUNY community colleges, it is vitally
important for educators to be sensitive to the students’ culture. Research shows that
“teachers’ attitude and expectations, as well as their knowledge of how to incorporate the
cultures, experiences, and needs of their students into their teaching, significantly
influence what students learn and the quality of their learning opportunities (Banks,
Cochran-Smith, Moll, Richert, Zeichner, LePage, Darling-Hammond & Duffy with
McDonald, 2005).
Villegas and Lucas state that because of the diversity of the student population, a
good teacher cannot have one script for all. In a multicultural society, responsible
educators continuously tailor instruction to individual children in specific cultural
contexts. Doing so demands that teachers know their students well and have the skills to
transform this knowledge into appropriate classroom practice (Villegas and Lucas, 2002).
The need for culturally responsive teaching is acute in community colleges like
BCC and Hostos Community College, which are characterized by significant ethnic
diversity and a large community of Black and Hispanic students. Villegas and Lucas,
who espouse a constructivist approach in learning of science, point to research proving
the effectiveness of working collaboratively in small groups of mixed ability.
Mathematics Difficulties
At the Bronx and Hostos community colleges, our students’ mathematics difficulties
emanate from many years of inadequate mathematics education. Even those students who
attend classes regularly and work hard on their homework make basic errors when
working with fractions, percentages, decimals, proportions, distributivity, basic equations
or order of operations. In this paper we refer to these errors as misconceptions (or
conceptual errors).
In a typical urban classroom, an overworked classroom teacher has neither the
time nor the patience to try to understand WHY their students make conceptual errors.
Diagnosing these errors is time consuming and requires skills that many teachers do not
possess. Consequently, for most teachers an error is an error. This is even truer in
community colleges where the instructors are more detached from their students, where a
“lesson” is called a “lecture”, and where homework is recommended but not mandatory
and in most cases goes unchecked and uncorrected.
In mathematics education we see no difference between our community college
remedial mathematics students and the MSP students. They not only have the same
attitudes toward learning mathematics but are held back by low literacy skills, their
inability to do mental mathematics or work with fractions, difficulties with word
problems or problems requiring mathematical logic, the desire to be shown the
algorithmic way of “how to” solve a problem rather than bothering to understand “why”
and a lack of a “feel” for numbers.
Readers are free to copy, display, and distribute this article, as long as the work is attributed to the author(s) and Mathematics Teaching-Re-
search Journal On-Line, it is distributed for non-commercial purposes only, and no alteration or transformation is made in the work. All oth-
er uses must be approved by the author(s) or MT-RJoL. MT-RJoL is published jointly by the Bronx Colleges of the City University of New York.
www.hostos.cuny.edu/departments/math/mtrj
Mathematics Teaching-Research Journal Online 25
VOL 3, N1
December 2008
For simplicity’s sake, we distinguish among three types of errors: careless errors,
calculation errors and conceptual errors.
Careless Errors
Careless errors result when students rush. An example would be writing the
number 8 instead of 6, reading the wrong number, or reversing digits. These errors are
made randomly. Students can avoid them by “slowing down” and checking their work. A
consistent pattern in these errors, such as a student consistently reversing digits, may
indicate the presence of dyslexia or other learning disability.
Calculation Errors
These errors result when students have a good grasp of concepts but are tired or
are working under pressure. When adding numbers, students frequently make calculation
errors by omitting the carry in one column while correctly adding the rest of the columns.
Like careless errors, calculation errors can be minimized by having students concentrate
on the calculation. Students can detect these errors by rechecking their work. Systematic,
neatly organized work helps in reducing calculation errors.
Conceptual Errors
In mathematics, conceptual errors (misconceptions) result from a fundamental
misunderstanding of a concept. A student makes a conceptual error in geometry when
confusing perimeter with area or not understanding that the opposite sides of a rectangle
are equal.
In algebra, students make conceptual errors when distributing only to the first
term in the parentheses. Example for many students 2(3x – 4) is equal to 6x – 4.
Students usually confuse between
– 4 – 2, an addition of two negative numbers resulting in – 6 and
(– 4)(–2), a multiplication of two negative numbers resulting in +8
Conceptual errors in mathematics are insidious. Students acquire them along the way and
keep reinforcing them so that they become “fossilized”. Even when resorting to a
calculator, the students fail to compare the calculator’s answer to the answer they would
have obtained erroneously had they done the calculation by hand. An undetected or
uncorrected conceptual error becomes part of the student’s mathematical construction.
Without outside intervention, most students cannot correct their mathematical
conceptual errors. In his Winning at Math guide, Nolting states “...it is not the fault of the
Readers are free to copy, display, and distribute this article, as long as the work is attributed to the author(s) and Mathematics Teaching-Re-
search Journal On-Line, it is distributed for non-commercial purposes only, and no alteration or transformation is made in the work. All oth-
er uses must be approved by the author(s) or MT-RJoL. MT-RJoL is published jointly by the Bronx Colleges of the City University of New York.
www.hostos.cuny.edu/departments/math/mtrj
Mathematics Teaching-Research Journal Online 26
VOL 3, N1
December 2008
students if they have not been taught how to study math. Even students taking general
study skills courses are often not taught how to study and learn it.” (Nolting, 2002).
In our mathematics college teaching, we tell our students that “mistakes are their
friend.” Students who understand and analyze their errors can capitalize on that
knowledge and thus achieve a better understanding of the subject. (Borasi, 1994).
Clinical interviews are becoming an important tool in numeracy projects because of their
value in helping teachers understand children’s thinking while they are working on a
problem Heirdsfeld (2002). Rather than waiting for mistakes to become fossilized,
teachers in lower grades can use clinical interviews to help them detect children’s
misconceptions. Heidsfield corroborates Hunting’s statement that clinical interviews
“ allow students to teach teachers ” (Heirdsfield, 2002).
A teacher can learn a lot about a student’s thinking, even if the student is an A
student. The 8th grade student interviewed by Wheatley was presented with seven
different problems involving arithmetic computations and applications with proportions,
fractions, and geometry (Walbert, 2001). Using videotaping and interview transcripts,
Wheatley found that while the student learned common procedures and how to apply
them, she failed to make connections between concepts and unknown situations
Hunting (1997) contrasts the similarities and differences of clinical interviews
used as part of mathematics research vs. interviews used in mathematics classroom for
assessment purposes. The interviewers should possess interviewing skills, sound
pedagogical content knowledge of mathematics, know what types of questions to ask and
how to answer student’s questions and be capable of interpreting and making connections
of students’ answers (Hunting, 2002).
METHODOLOGY
Because no data on the students’ prior performance was available to us at the beginning
of the research, we identified the target population based on the average of the first two
mock Regents tests given on July 12 and July 19, 2007. Of the 51 Math A students at
Lehman College, the 16 lowest scoring students (bottom third) became candidates for the
target population. Their average score was 44.0, compared to 54.5 of the rest of the
students. We then assigned the codes TP1 through TP16 to the 16 students. Our selection
was corroborated by the classroom teachers.
Clinical Interviews
The target population of 16 students was codified as TP1 through TP16 in a data
collection book. We then interviewed each student and did so several times during the
entire summer program.
In the first interview we built a rapport with the students by introducing ourselves
and explaining the purpose of the research and its methodology. The students described
their career aspirations, college plans and attitude toward math. Some students told us
Readers are free to copy, display, and distribute this article, as long as the work is attributed to the author(s) and Mathematics Teaching-Re-
search Journal On-Line, it is distributed for non-commercial purposes only, and no alteration or transformation is made in the work. All oth-
er uses must be approved by the author(s) or MT-RJoL. MT-RJoL is published jointly by the Bronx Colleges of the City University of New York.
www.hostos.cuny.edu/departments/math/mtrj
Mathematics Teaching-Research Journal Online 27
VOL 3, N1
December 2008
how much they hated mathematics while others said, “I don’t hate or dislike math, I just
don’t understand it.” We were surprised to learn that several students were contemplating
a career in engineering, technology or computer science. After the first interview, the
students expressed their eagerness to meet with us again. They grasped that the goal was
to improve their mathematical ability which in turn would increase their chance of
passing the Regents exam.
During the clinical interviews, we asked the students to explain why and how they
solved different multiple-choice questions in the mock Regents exam that they had taken.
We did not assume that a correct answer in a multiple-choice question equated to correct
mathematical thinking or knowledge in solving the question. We asked for evidence, such
as an explanation of the way they solved the problem; sometimes we asked them to solve
a similar problem. We also studied the students’ work and notes in their exam books.
After identifying students’ misconceptions, we revisited the concept or the
procedure. We probed for understanding by asking the students to find mistakes in a
wrong solution.
After the clinical interviews, we alerted the teachers and tutors to the misconceptions we
detected and to weaknesses characteristic of the target population. We conducted
professional development sessions with the tutors during which we discussed our
findings and suggested ways of addressing the misconceptions.
Detected Misconceptions
Below are some common student misconceptions we identified though the clinical
interviews. The item analysis helped us identify problems students struggled with.
Order of Operations
Although the students had spent the first two or three days of class on order of operations,
many were still confused especially when it was time for them to work independently. It
was hard to wean them from certain mnemonics, mainly PEMDAS (Please Excuse My
Dear Aunt Sally), when deciding what operations to do first. Many erroneously believed
they should always do addition before subtraction, since the letter A comes before the
letter S in that mnemonic.
As a case in point, many students answered that 4 – 2 + 1 = 1
Some students’ thinking was so ingrained with PEMDAS that they failed to relate the
expression 4 – 2 + 1 to a practical problem like, “You have $4, spent $2 and then found
$1; how much money did you end up with?” They failed to see the connection between
mathematics exercises and mathematics as a representation of real life.
Likewise, because the letter M comes before the letter D in the mnemonic
PEMDAS, some students answered 8 ÷ 2 ! 4 = 1. Since the letter R (for root) is not part
of the mnemonic PEMDAS, students had difficulty calculating 25 ! 4. They
multiplied 25 by 4, took the square root and got100 = 10. Some students followed the
same procedure for 4 25 and obtained 10 as a result.
Readers are free to copy, display, and distribute this article, as long as the work is attributed to the author(s) and Mathematics Teaching-Re-
search Journal On-Line, it is distributed for non-commercial purposes only, and no alteration or transformation is made in the work. All oth-
er uses must be approved by the author(s) or MT-RJoL. MT-RJoL is published jointly by the Bronx Colleges of the City University of New York.
www.hostos.cuny.edu/departments/math/mtrj
Mathematics Teaching-Research Journal Online 28
VOL 3, N1
December 2008
Division by 0
Many students in the target population correctly answered 0 to the operation 0 ÷ 6;
however they provided the same answer for the divisions 6 ÷ 0, or 0 ÷ 0.
One student explained, “When I divide six apples to two people, each one will get
three apples; but, if there are zero takers, I can keep the six apples.” Obviously, the
student confused the quotient with the remainder.
Readers are free to copy, display, and distribute this article, as long as the work is attributed to the author(s) and Mathematics Teaching-Re-
search Journal On-Line, it is distributed for non-commercial purposes only, and no alteration or transformation is made in the work. All oth-
er uses must be approved by the author(s) or MT-RJoL. MT-RJoL is published jointly by the Bronx Colleges of the City University of New York.
www.hostos.cuny.edu/departments/math/mtrj
Mathematics Teaching-Research Journal Online 29
VOL 3, N1
December 2008
We identified several difficulties students had when trying to solve a word problem
requiring the use of proportion:
• They lacked a sense of magnitude when working with fractions and fraction
equivalents.
• They struggled translating the words of a problem into a simple proportion.
For example, “If 5 workers assembled 9 computers a day, how many workers will
be required to assemble 18 computes in a day?”
• They lacked a sense of proportionality.
For example, “Suppose you want to enlarge a picture measuring 3” by 5”. The
enlarged picture is 9” wide; how long is it?”
Distributivity property
Some students we interviewed equated 3(2x + 3) with 6x + 3. Since they did not
understand that 3(2x + 3) is equivalent to (2x + 3) + (2x +3) + (2x +3), these students
remembered to multiply but distributed the 3 only to the first term in the parenthesis.
Units of measurement
None of the students interviewed knew how many square inches are in a square foot.
Readers are free to copy, display, and distribute this article, as long as the work is attributed to the author(s) and Mathematics Teaching-Re-
search Journal On-Line, it is distributed for non-commercial purposes only, and no alteration or transformation is made in the work. All oth-
er uses must be approved by the author(s) or MT-RJoL. MT-RJoL is published jointly by the Bronx Colleges of the City University of New York.
www.hostos.cuny.edu/departments/math/mtrj
Mathematics Teaching-Research Journal Online 30
VOL 3, N1
December 2008
Logic problems
The logic problems on the Regents exam are hard for all students. The concepts of
inverse, converse and contrapositive were confusing not only to the target population
students but also to the other students. Some students relied on a mnemonic
memorization of how to find the inverse, converse or contrapositive (logical equivalent)
of the statement, “If I have money, I go to the movies.” They remembered that to find the
inverse you convert the positive to a negative and vice versa.
When answering this kind of question on the Regents exam, some students chose
the equivalent of “I go to the movies if I have money” as being the converse of “If I have
money, I go to the movies.” They apparently thought the converse of “If p then q” is
“then q if p.” The “if” and “then” conjunction was carried with the subordinate statement
it preceded.
Over reliance on mnemonics may trap students who have not mastered a
mathematical concept.
Readers are free to copy, display, and distribute this article, as long as the work is attributed to the author(s) and Mathematics Teaching-Re-
search Journal On-Line, it is distributed for non-commercial purposes only, and no alteration or transformation is made in the work. All oth-
er uses must be approved by the author(s) or MT-RJoL. MT-RJoL is published jointly by the Bronx Colleges of the City University of New York.
www.hostos.cuny.edu/departments/math/mtrj
Mathematics Teaching-Research Journal Online 31
VOL 3, N1
December 2008
Based on this research we concluded that clinical interviews could be a useful tool
for helping teachers gain insight into the students’ thought processes, pinpoint
misconceptions, develop a dialogue in response to the students’ problems and raise the
students’ self-confidence. By helping teachers become more responsive to their students’
needs, clinical interviews ultimately help students become better learners. An important
contribution of this research was showing how clinical interviews helped bolster the
weakest students’ performance in mathematics in the statewide August 2007 Regents
exams. In fact a total of 25% of the target population passed the Regents exam with a
score of 65 or higher. At the same time, 56% of the target population obtained a score of
55 or higher, which is sufficient for high school graduation.
.
RESEARCH CONCLUSIONS
Readers are free to copy, display, and distribute this article, as long as the work is attributed to the author(s) and Mathematics Teaching-Re-
search Journal On-Line, it is distributed for non-commercial purposes only, and no alteration or transformation is made in the work. All oth-
er uses must be approved by the author(s) or MT-RJoL. MT-RJoL is published jointly by the Bronx Colleges of the City University of New York.
www.hostos.cuny.edu/departments/math/mtrj
Mathematics Teaching-Research Journal Online 32
VOL 3, N1
December 2008
FUTURE RESEARCH
Readers are free to copy, display, and distribute this article, as long as the work is attributed to the author(s) and Mathematics Teaching-Re-
search Journal On-Line, it is distributed for non-commercial purposes only, and no alteration or transformation is made in the work. All oth-
er uses must be approved by the author(s) or MT-RJoL. MT-RJoL is published jointly by the Bronx Colleges of the City University of New York.
www.hostos.cuny.edu/departments/math/mtrj
Mathematics Teaching-Research Journal Online 33
VOL 3, N1
December 2008
REFERENCES
Ambrose, R., Nicol, C., Crespo, S., Jacobs, V., Moyer, P., Haydar, H. (2003). Exploring
the use of clinical interviews in teacher development. Journal of Mathematics
Teacher Education, 5, 293–315.
Chick, H.L et. al., (2005) Investigating Teachers’ Responses to Student Misconceptions,
Proceedings of the 29th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology
of Mathematics Education, Vol.2, 249-256. Melbourne: PME
Durante A. & Fuchs, E. (2007). What the college teachers learned from high school
teachers in MSP. MSPnet Library. http://mspnyc.mspnet.org/index.cfm/13967
Grossman, P., A. Schoenfeld with C. Lee. (2005). Teaching Subject Matter. In Preparing
Teachers for a Changing World. ed. L. Darling-Hammond and J. Bransford, 201-
231. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Readers are free to copy, display, and distribute this article, as long as the work is attributed to the author(s) and Mathematics Teaching-Re-
search Journal On-Line, it is distributed for non-commercial purposes only, and no alteration or transformation is made in the work. All oth-
er uses must be approved by the author(s) or MT-RJoL. MT-RJoL is published jointly by the Bronx Colleges of the City University of New York.
www.hostos.cuny.edu/departments/math/mtrj
Mathematics Teaching-Research Journal Online 34
VOL 3, N1
December 2008
Hiebert J., and Ball, D. L. (2005). From best research to what works: Improving the teaching
and learning of mathematics. The Albert Shanker Institute, National Press Club 2005:
1-33.
Hunting, R., P. (1997). Clinical interview methods in mathematics education research and
practice.
The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, Vol 16, issue 2, 145-165.
Pinchback, C., L. (1991). Types of Errors Exhibited in a Remedial Mathematics Course. Focus
on Learning Problems in Mathematics, v13 n2, 53-62.
Walbert, D. (2001). The clinical interview: LearnNC. University of North Carolina at Chapel
Hill School of Education. http://www.learnnc.org/lp/editions/pcmath/3
Readers are free to copy, display, and distribute this article, as long as the work is attributed to the author(s) and Mathematics Teaching-Re-
search Journal On-Line, it is distributed for non-commercial purposes only, and no alteration or transformation is made in the work. All oth-
er uses must be approved by the author(s) or MT-RJoL. MT-RJoL is published jointly by the Bronx Colleges of the City University of New York.
www.hostos.cuny.edu/departments/math/mtrj