1. Shaaron Ainsworth (1999). The functions of multiple representations. Computers & Education, 33(2-3), 131-152.
2. S Ainsworth (2006). DeFT: A conceptual framework for learning with multiple representations. Learning and Instruction, 16(3), 183-198.
3. F Almeqdadi (2000). The effect of using the geometer's sketchpad (GSP) on Jordanian students' understanding of geometrical concepts. The effect of using the geometer's sketchpad (GSP) on Jordanian students' understanding of geometrical concepts
4. Bartolini Bussi,M (1996). Mathematical Discussion and Perspective Drawing in Primary School. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 31, 11-41.
5. M Battista (2007). Second Handbook of Research on Mathematics Teaching and Learning. Second Handbook of Research on Mathematics Teaching and Learning, 843-908.
6. M Battista (2011). Conceptualizations and issues related to learning progressions, learning trajectories, and levels of sophistication. The Mathematics Enthusiast, 8, 507-570.
7. H Bauersfeld (1992). Integrating Theories for Mathematics Education. For the Learning of Mathematics, 12(2), 19-28.
8. J Bruner (1961). The act of discovery. Harvard Educational Review, 31, 21-32.
9. J Bruner (1966). Toward a theory of instruction. Toward a theory of instruction
10. J Bruner (1986). Actual Minds, Possible Worlds. Actual Minds, Possible Worlds
11. H Burkhardt (1981). The real world and mathematics. The real world and mathematics
12. Thomas Carpenter,Elizabeth Fennema,Penelope Peterson,Chi-Pang Chiang,Megan Loef (1989). Using Knowledge of Children’s Mathematics Thinking in Classroom Teaching: An Experimental Study. American Educational Research Journal, 26(4), 499-531.
13. T Carpenter,E Fennema,M Franke,L Levi,S Empson (1999). Children's mathematics: Cognitively Guided Instruction. Children's mathematics: Cognitively Guided Instruction
14. J Choppin (1994). Spiral through recursion. Mathematics Teacher, 87, 504-508.
15. D Clement,M Battista (1990). Research into practise: Constructivist learning and teaching. Arithmetic Teacher, 38(1), 34-35.
16. (1995). Mathematical Learning and Small-Group Interaction: Four Case Studies: Paul Cobb. The Emergence of Mathematical Meaning, 35-139.
17. P Cobb,E Yackel,T Wood (1992). A constructivist alternative to the representational view of mind in mathematics education. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 23(1), 2-33.
18. A Coxford,Z Usiskin (1975). Geometry: A Transformation Approach. Geometry: A Transformation Approach
19. E De Corte,L Verschaffel,B Greer (2000). Connecting mathematics problem solving to the real world. Proceedings of the International Conference on Mathematics Education into the 21st Century: Mathematics for living, 66-73.
20. Paul Drijvers,Juan Godino,Vicenç Font,Luc Trouche (2008). One episode, two lenses. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 82(1), 23-49.
21. F Docq,A Daele (2001). Uses of ICT tools for CSCL: how do students make as their's own the designed environment. Proceedings of the First European Conference on Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 197-204.
22. M Dougiamas An exploration of the use of an Open Source software called Moodle to support a social constructionist epistemology of teaching and learning within Internet-based communities of reflective inquiry. An exploration of the use of an Open Source software called Moodle to support a social constructionist epistemology of teaching and learning within Internet-based communities of reflective inquiry
23. R Duval (1995). Sémiosis et pensée humaine. Taking science to school: Learning and teaching science in grades K-8
24. F Ferrara,D Pratt,O Robutti (2006). The role and uses of technologies for the teaching of algebra and calculus: Ideas discussed at PME over the last 30 years.
25. H Freudenthal (1973). Mathematics as an Educational Task. Mathematics as an Educational Task
26. H Freudenthal (1983). Didactical phenomenology of mathematical structures. Didactical phenomenology of mathematical structures
27. Freudenthal (1991). Revisiting Mathematics Education: China Lectures. Revisiting Mathematics Education: China Lectures
28. Karen Fuson,William Caroll,Jane Drueck (2000). Achievement Results for Second and Third Graders Using the Standards-Based Curriculum Everyday Mathematics. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 31(3), 277-295.
29. Van Hiele (1984). English translation of selected writings of Dina van Hiele-Geldof and Pierre M. Brooklyn: Brooklyn College
30. D Fuys,D Geddes,R Tischler (1988). The Van Hiele model of thinking in geometry among adolescents. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education : Monograph Number, 3
31. V Giraldo,E Belfort,L Carvalho (2004). Descriptions and conflicts in dynamic geometry. Proceedings of the 28th PME International Conference, 2, 455-462.
32. E Glasersfeld (1995). Radical constructivism: A way of knowing and learning. Radical constructivism: A way of knowing and learning
33. Gloriana González,Patricio Herbst (2009). Students’ Conceptions of Congruency Through the Use of Dynamic Geometry Software. International Journal of Computers for Mathematical Learning, 14(2), 153-182.
34. P Goldenberg (1999). Principles, Art, and Craft in Curriculum Design: The Case of Connected Geometry. International Journal of Computers for Mathematical Learning, 4
35. G Goldin,J Kilpatrick,W Martin,D Schifter (2003). National collaborative zones of proximal development in small group problem solving.
36. Merrilyn Goos,Peter Galbraith,Peter Renshaw,Vince Geiger (2003). Perspectives on technology mediated learning in secondary school mathematics classrooms. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 22(1), 73-89.
37. Rajendran Govender,Michael De Villiers (2004). A dynamic approach to quadrilateral definitions. Pythagoras, 34-45.
38. R Govender,M De Villiers (2002). Constructive Evaluations of Definitions in a Sketchpad Context. Association for Mathematics Education of South Africa National conference
39. K Gravemeijer (2004). Creating Opportunities for Students to Reinvent Mathematics. ICME 10
40. Angel Gutiérrez,Adela Jaime,José Fortuny,Angel Gutierrez,Jose Fortuny (1998). An Alternative Paradigm to Evaluate the Acquisition of the van Hiele Levels. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 22(3), 237.
41. Nurit Hadas,Rina Hershkowitz,Baruch Schwarz (2000). The role of contradiction and uncertainty in promoting the need to prove in Dynamic Geometry environments. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 44(1-3), 127-150.
42. J Hayes,L Flower (1980). Identifying the organization of writing processes. Cognitive processes in writing
43. R Hershkovitz (1990). Psychological aspects of learning geometry.
44. A Hoffer (1981). Geometry is more than proof. Mathematics Teacher, 74, 11-18.
45. K Hollebrands (2007). The role of a dynamic software program for geometry in the strategies high school mathematics students employ. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 38(2), 164-192.
46. K Hollebrands,R Smith (2009). Using dynamic geometry software to teach secondary school geometry: Implications from research. Understanding Geometry for a Changing World: 2009 Yearbook of the NCTM
47. N Jackiw (1991). The Geometer's Sketchpad. The Geometer's Sketchpad
48. N Jackiw (2006). Mathematics and the Aesthetic: New Approaches to an Ancient Affinity. Mechanism and Magic in the Psychology of Dynamic Geometry. Mathematics and the Aesthetic: New Approaches to an Ancient Affinity. Mechanism and Magic in the Psychology of Dynamic Geometry
49. N Jackiw,N Sinclair (2004). Iteration and Dynamic Geometry: Beyond Common Fractals with The Geometer's Sketchpad NCTM Philadelphia Session. Iteration and Dynamic Geometry: Beyond Common Fractals with The Geometer's Sketchpad NCTM Philadelphia Session, 142
50. B Jaworski (2003). Inquiry as a pervasive pedagogic process in mathematics education development. Proceedings of the Third Conference of the European Society for Research in Mathematics Education
51. P Johnson-Laird (1983). Mental Models: Towards a Cognitive Science of Language, Inference, and Consciousness. Mental Models: Towards a Cognitive Science of Language, Inference, and Consciousness
52. G Kadunz,R Sträßer (2004). Image -metaphordiagram: visualisation in learning mathematics. Proceedings of the 28th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education, 4, 241-248.
53. I Kant (1929). Critique of Pure Reason. Critique of Pure Reason
54. J Kaput (1991). Notations and representations as mediators of constructive processes. Radical Constructivism in Mathematics Education, 53-74.
55. James Kaput (1999). Representations, inscriptions, descriptions and learning: A kaleidoscope of windows. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 17(2), 265-281.
56. J Kaput (1992). Technology and Mathematics Education. Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning, 515-556.
57. M Kline (1990). Mathematics in Western Culture. Mathematics in Western Culture
58. J Krajcik,N Shin,S Stevens,H Short (2009). Using Learning Progressions to Inform the Design of Coherent Science Curriculum Materials. Annual Meeting of the American Education Research Association
59. S Patsiomitou (2012). A Linking Visual Representation DHLP for student's cognitive development. Global Journal Of Computer Science and Technology, 12(6), 53-82.
60. Stavroula Patsiomitou (2013). STUDENTS LEARNING PATHS AS ˜'DYNAMIC ENCEPHALOGRAPHS' OF THEIR COGNITIVE DEVELOPMENT. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF COMPUTERS & TECHNOLOGY, 4(3), 802-806.
61. S Patsiomitou,E Koleza (2008). Developing students geometrical thinking through linking representations in a dynamic geometry environment. Proceedings of the Joint Meeting of the 32nd Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education, 89-96.
62. S Patsiomitou,A Emvalotis (2009). Developing geometric thinking skills through dynamic diagram transformations. Proceedings of MEDCONF 2009, The Sixth Mediterranean Conference on Mathematics Education, 249-258.
63. S Patsiomitou,A Emvalotis (2009). Does the Building and transforming on LVAR modes impact students way of thinking?. Proceedings of the 33rd Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education, 4, 337-344.
64. S Patsiomitou,A Emvalotis (2009). Economy' and 'Catachrèse' in the use of custom tools in a Dynamic geometry problem-solving process. Electronic Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Technology in Mathematics Teaching (ICTMT9), 100.
65. S Patsiomitou,A Emvalotis (2009). Composing and testing a DG research-based curriculum designed to develop students' geometrical thinking. the annual European Conference on Educational Research (ECER)
66. S Patsiomitou,E Koleza (2009). The development of students' geometrical thinking through Linking Visual Active Representations. Proceedings of the 34th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education, II, 103.
67. S Patsiomitou,A Emvalotis (2010). Students' movement through van Hiele levels in a dynamic geometry guided reinvention process. Journal of Mathematics and Technology (JMT), 104.
68. S Patsiomitou,A Barkatsas,A Emvalotis (2010). Secondary students' "dynamic reinvention of geometric proof" through the utilization of linking visual active representations. Journal of Mathematics and Technology, 5, 105.
69. M Patton (1990). Qualitative evaluation methods. Qualitative evaluation methods, 106.
70. (1937). Knowing What Students Know. Knowing What Students Know, 108.
71. C Peirce (1903). The Essential Peirce, Volume 1. The Essential Peirce: Selected philosophical writings, 2, 109.
72. R Pierce,K Stacey (2009). Using Dynamic Geometry to Bring the Real World into the Classroom. Using Dynamic Geometry to Bring the Real World into the Classroom
73. H Schumann (2004). Reconstructive Modelling with Dynamic Geometry Systems. EduMath, 19(12), 111.
74. H Schumann,D Green (1994). A review of “Discovering Geometry with a Computer—Using Cabri-Géomètre” Heinz Schumann & David Green, 1994 Lund (Sweden), Chartwell-Bratt, Student Literature ISBN 0 86238 373 0. European Journal of Engineering Education, 21(1), 99-100.
75. K Sedig,M Sumner (2006). Characterizing interaction with visual mathematical representations. International Journal of Computers for Mathematical Learning, 11, 113.
76. Anna Sfard (2001). Participationist Discourse on Mathematics Learning. New Mathematics Education Research and Practice, 153-170.
77. M Simon (1995). Reconstructing mathematics pedagogy from a constructivist perspective. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 26(2), 114-145.
78. Martin Simon,Deborah Schifter (1991). Towards a constructivist perspective: An intervention study of mathematics teacher development. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 22(4), 309-331.
79. Nathalie Sinclair,Nicholas Jackiw (2007). Modeling Practices with The Geometer’s Sketchpad. International Perspectives on the Teaching and Learning of Mathematical Modelling, 541-554.
80. M Sinclair (2001). Supporting and Understanding the Disruptive Student in the Classroom. Supporting Special Educational Needs in Secondary School Classrooms, 85-101.
81. R Skemp (1986). The psychology of learning mathematics. The psychology of learning mathematics, 119.
82. Carol Smith,Marianne Wiser,Charles Anderson,Joseph Krajcik (2006). FOCUS ARTICLE: Implications of Research on Children's Learning for Standards and Assessment: A Proposed Learning Progression for Matter and the Atomic-Molecular Theory. Measurement: Interdisciplinary Research & Perspective, 4(1-2), 1-98.
83. P Smith,J Wedman (1988). Read-thinkaloud protocols: A new data-source for formative evaluation. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 1(2), 121.
84. Kaye Stacey (2012). The International Assessment of Mathematical Literacy: PISA 2012 Framework and Items. Selected Regular Lectures from the 12th International Congress on Mathematical Education, 771-790.
85. L Steffe,J Gale (1995). Constructivism in education. Iteration through the math curriculum :Sketchpad 4 does it again and again NCTM Annual Meeting Session 491 124, 123
86. S Stevens,N Shin,J Krajcik (2009). Towards a model for the development of an empirically tested learning progression. Paper presented at the Learning Progressions in Science (LeaPS) Conference
87. P Thompson (1987). Mathematical microworlds and intelligent computer-assisted instruction. Artificial intelligence and instruction: Applications and methods, 126.
88. S Toulmin (1958). The uses of argument. The uses of argument, 127.
89. Luc Trouche (2004). Managing the Complexity of Human/Machine Interactions in Computerized Learning Environments: Guiding Students’ Command Process through Instrumental Orchestrations. International Journal of Computers for Mathematical Learning, 9(3), 281-307.
