@inbook{35704,
  author       = {{Winsløw, Carl and Biehler, Rolf and Jaworski, Barbara and Rønning, Frode and Wawro, Megan}},
  booktitle    = {{Research and Development in University Mathematics Education}},
  editor       = {{Durand-Guerrier, V. and Hochmuth, R. and Nardi, E. and Winsløw, C.}},
  isbn         = {{9780429346859}},
  pages        = {{59--79}},
  publisher    = {{Routledge}},
  title        = {{{Education and professional development of university mathematics teachers}}},
  doi          = {{10.4324/9780429346859-6}},
  year         = {{2021}},
}

@article{35761,
  author       = {{Höper, Lukas and Malin, Leah and Biehler, Rolf}},
  journal      = {{mathematik lehren}},
  number       = {{228}},
  pages        = {{19–22}},
  publisher    = {{Friedrich Verlag}},
  title        = {{{Schatten von 3D-Objekten: Modellierung mit GeoGebra 3D und Anwendungen in der Computergrafik}}},
  volume       = {{2021}},
  year         = {{2021}},
}

@article{35763,
  author       = {{Hüsing, Sven and Weiser, Niklas and Biehler, Rolf}},
  journal      = {{mathematik lehren}},
  number       = {{228}},
  pages        = {{23–27}},
  publisher    = {{Friedrich Verlag}},
  title        = {{{Faszination 3D-Film: Entwicklung einer 3D-Konstruktion}}},
  volume       = {{2021}},
  year         = {{2021}},
}

@article{35702,
  abstract     = {{<jats:title>Abstract</jats:title><jats:p>Mathematics Learning Support Centres are becoming more and more common in higher education both internationally and in Germany. Whereas it is clear that their quality largely depends on a functioning interaction in consultations, little is known about how such consultations proceed in detail. On the basis of models from the literature and recorded support sessions (N = 36), we constructed a process model that divides consultations into four ideal–typical phases. In the individual consultations, forward or backward leaps occur, but overall the model seems to describe the data well. A high intercoder reliability shows that it can be applied consistently on real data by different researchers. An analysis of the consultations between students and tutors shows that both mainly work on past attempts or thoughts of the students to solve the exercise or problems and on concrete strategies to solve a problem within the session. In contrast, very little time is dedicated to summarizing and reflecting the solution. The data allows for a more in-depth discussion of what constitutes quality in advising processes and how it might be further explored. Practically, the model may structure support sessions and help in focussing on different goals in different phases.</jats:p>}},
  author       = {{Schürmann, Mirko and Panse, Anja and Shaikh, Zain and Biehler, Rolf and Schaper, Niclas and Liebendörfer, Michael and Hilgert, Joachim}},
  issn         = {{2198-9745}},
  journal      = {{International Journal of Research in Undergraduate Mathematics Education}},
  keywords     = {{Education, Mathematics (miscellaneous)}},
  number       = {{1}},
  pages        = {{94--120}},
  publisher    = {{Springer Science and Business Media LLC}},
  title        = {{{Consultation Phases in Mathematics Learning and Support Centres}}},
  doi          = {{10.1007/s40753-021-00154-9}},
  volume       = {{8}},
  year         = {{2021}},
}

@article{35781,
  author       = {{Podworny, Susanne and Biehler, Rolf}},
  issn         = {{1098-6065}},
  journal      = {{Mathematical Thinking and Learning}},
  keywords     = {{Developmental and Educational Psychology, Education, General Mathematics}},
  number       = {{4}},
  pages        = {{291--311}},
  publisher    = {{Informa UK Limited}},
  title        = {{{The process of actively building a model for a randomization test – insights into learners’ modeling activities based on a case study}}},
  doi          = {{10.1080/10986065.2021.1922837}},
  volume       = {{24}},
  year         = {{2021}},
}

@article{35751,
  author       = {{Frischemeier, Daniel and Biehler, Rolf and Podworny, Susanne and Budde, Lea}},
  issn         = {{0141-982X}},
  journal      = {{Teaching Statistics}},
  keywords     = {{Education, Statistics and Probability}},
  number       = {{S1}},
  pages        = {{S182--S189}},
  publisher    = {{Wiley}},
  title        = {{{A first introduction to data science education in secondary schools: Teaching and learning about data exploration with<scp>CODAP</scp>using survey data}}},
  doi          = {{10.1111/test.12283}},
  volume       = {{43}},
  year         = {{2021}},
}

@article{24786,
  author       = {{Schürmann, Mirko and Liebendörfer, Michael and Gildehaus, Lara and Schaper, Niclas and Hochmuth, Reinhard and Biehler, Rolf and Lankeit, Elisa and Kuklinski, Christiane and Ruge, Johanna}},
  journal      = {{Sigma newsletter}},
  pages        = {{5--6}},
  title        = {{{Opportunities and Possibilities of a Network of Mathematical Learning and Support Centres in Germany}}},
  volume       = {{22}},
  year         = {{2021}},
}

@article{45335,
  author       = {{Schönherr, Johanna and Schukajlow, S. and Blomberg, J.}},
  journal      = {{mathematik lehren}},
  pages        = {{22–27}},
  title        = {{{Was ist eine gute Skizze? Strategiewissen beim mathematischen Modellieren im Bereich der Geometrie fördern}}},
  volume       = {{224}},
  year         = {{2021}},
}

@article{45333,
  author       = {{Schönherr, Johanna and Schukajlow, S. and Blomberg, J. and Leopold, C.}},
  journal      = {{Mathematical Thinking and Learning}},
  title        = {{{Does strategic knowledge matter? Effects of strategic knowledge about drawing on students’ modeling competencies in the domain of geometry}}},
  doi          = {{10.1080/10986065.2021.2012741}},
  year         = {{2021}},
}

@article{45342,
  author       = {{Schönherr, Johanna and Blomberg, J. and Schukajlow, S. and Leopold, C.}},
  journal      = {{Contemporary Educational Psychology}},
  title        = {{{Do emotions and prior performance facilitate the use of the learner-generated drawing strategy? Effects of enjoyment, anxiety, and intramathematical performance on the use of the drawing strategy and modelling performance}}},
  doi          = {{10.1016/j.cedpsych.2021.101967}},
  volume       = {{65}},
  year         = {{2021}},
}

@article{35737,
  author       = {{Biehler, Rolf and Fleischer, Franz Yannik}},
  issn         = {{0141-982X}},
  journal      = {{Teaching Statistics}},
  keywords     = {{Education, Statistics and Probability}},
  pages        = {{S133--S142}},
  publisher    = {{Wiley}},
  title        = {{{Introducing students to machine learning with decision trees using CODAP and Jupyter Notebooks}}},
  doi          = {{10.1111/test.12279}},
  volume       = {{43}},
  year         = {{2021}},
}

@article{34822,
  abstract     = {{The role of domain-specific content knowledge is discussed controversially for the early childhood context. Therefore, this review aims at untangling the research on domain-specific content knowledge for early childhood educators by systematically reviewing the conceptual and operational definition of and results on early childhood educators' content knowledge in different domains. Using the scientific databases ERIC, PsycInfo and Web of Sciences, we identified 36 studies on early childhood educators' domain-specific content knowledge. By comparing these studies, we found that conceptualizations of early childhood educators' content knowledge move on a continuum between a scientific related perspective and a practice related perspective. The scientific related perspective defines content knowledge as the knowledge of key concepts, facts and rules of the domain integrating knowledge taught in primary, secondary or upper secondary school. The practice related perspective includes knowledge of key concepts, facts and rules of the domain limited to the knowledge explicitly relevant for teaching in early childhood education as well as selected domain-specific knowledge of children and teaching. Our review shows that the results and implications drawn by the study authors depend on how these authors conceptualize early childhood educators' content knowledge on this continuum. Further research, therefore, needs to consider carefully how early childhood educators' content knowledge is conceptualized. The paper further discusses gaps in this research field, such as validating methods for measuring early childhood educators' content knowledge or implementing more rigorous experimental designs to examine effects of early childhood educators' content knowledge.}},
  author       = {{Bruns, Julia and Gasteiger, Hedwig and Strahl, Carolin}},
  issn         = {{2049-6613}},
  journal      = {{Review of Education}},
  keywords     = {{content knowledge, domain-specific learning, early childhood education, teacher knowledge}},
  number       = {{2}},
  pages        = {{500--538}},
  publisher    = {{Wiley}},
  title        = {{{Conceptualising and measuring domain-specific content knowledge of early childhood educators: A systematic review}}},
  doi          = {{10.1002/rev3.3255}},
  volume       = {{9}},
  year         = {{2021}},
}

@article{45687,
  author       = {{Bruns, Julia and Schopferer, T.}},
  journal      = {{. TPS – Theorie und Praxis der Sozialpädagogik}},
  pages        = {{28--32}},
  title        = {{{Eine mustergültige Wissenschaft}}},
  volume       = {{11}},
  year         = {{2021}},
}

@inproceedings{36527,
  author       = {{Jensen, Solveig and Gasteiger, Hedwig and Bruns, Julia}},
  booktitle    = {{Proceedings of the 44th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education}},
  editor       = {{Inprasitha, Maitree and Changsri, Narumon and Boonsena, Nisakorn}},
  location     = {{Khon Kaen, Thailand}},
  pages        = {{101--109}},
  title        = {{{Place value and regrouping as seperate constructs of place value understanding}}},
  volume       = {{3}},
  year         = {{2021}},
}

@article{34823,
  author       = {{Bruns, Julia and Gasteiger, Hedwig and Strahl, Carolin}},
  issn         = {{2049-6613}},
  journal      = {{Review of Education}},
  number       = {{2}},
  pages        = {{539--540}},
  publisher    = {{Wiley}},
  title        = {{{Context and Implications Document for: Conceptualising and measuring domain-specific content knowledge of early childhood educators: A systematic review}}},
  doi          = {{10.1002/rev3.3256}},
  volume       = {{9}},
  year         = {{2021}},
}

@inproceedings{36536,
  author       = {{Jensen, Solveig and Gasteiger, Hedwig and Bruns, Julia}},
  booktitle    = {{Beiträge zum Mathematikunterricht 2021}},
  location     = {{Lüneburg}},
  publisher    = {{WTM-Verlag}},
  title        = {{{Stellenwertverständnis: Verständnis von Stellenwertprinzip und Bündelungsprinzip als separate Konstrukte}}},
  doi          = {{http://dx.doi.org/10.17877/DE290R-22292}},
  year         = {{2021}},
}

@inbook{56204,
  author       = {{Frischemeier, Daniel and Podworny, Susanne and Biehler, Rolf}},
  booktitle    = {{Konzepte und Studien zur Hochschuldidaktik und Lehrerbildung Mathematik}},
  isbn         = {{9783662628539}},
  issn         = {{2197-8751}},
  publisher    = {{Springer Berlin Heidelberg}},
  title        = {{{Integration fachwissenschaftlicher und fachdidaktischer Komponenten in der Lehramtsausbildung Mathematik Grundschule am Beispiel einer Veranstaltung zur Leitidee „Daten, Häufigkeit und Wahrscheinlichkeit“}}},
  doi          = {{10.1007/978-3-662-62854-6_11}},
  year         = {{2021}},
}

@inbook{13108,
  abstract     = {{Diagrammatisches Schlie{\ss}en wird im Zusammenhang mit dem Lernen von Mathmematik und ihrer Symbolsprache als wesentliche Theorie der Wissenskonstruktion diskutiert. Dabei wird h{\"{a}}ufig davon ausgegangen, dass die Wissenskonstruktion im Sinne diagrammatischen Schlie{\ss}ens erfolgt. Deskriptive Rekonstruktionen diagrammatischen Schlie{\ss}ens bei Lernenden stellen jedoch ein Desiderat der mathematikdidaktischen Forschung dar. Der vorliegende Beitrag befasst sich mit der Fragestellung, wie sich diagrammatisches Schlie{\ss}en bei Lernenden rekonstruieren l{\"{a}}sst. Als m{\"{o}}gliche Werkzeuge f{\"{u}}r eine solche Rekonstruktion werden Toulmins Argumentationsschema und Vergnauds Schema-Begriff exemplarisch angewandt, um das diagrammatische Schlie{\ss}en eines Sch{\"{u}}lerpaars beim Einstieg in die Subtraktion negativer Zahlen zu rekonstruieren. Abschlie{\ss}end wird die tats{\"{a}}chliche Eignung der beiden Ans{\"{a}}tze zur Rekonstruktion diagrammatischen Schlie{\ss}ens diskutiert.}},
  author       = {{Schumacher, Jan and Rezat, Sebastian}},
  booktitle    = {{Zeichen und Sprache im Mathematikunterricht}},
  editor       = {{Kadunz, Gert}},
  publisher    = {{Springer}},
  title        = {{{Rekonstruktion diagrammatischen Schließens beim Erlernen der Subtraktion negativer Zahlen. Vergleich zweier methodischer Zugänge}}},
  doi          = {{10.1007/978-3-662-61194-4_5}},
  year         = {{2020}},
}

@inproceedings{31873,
  author       = {{Schumacher, Jan}},
  publisher    = {{LibreCat University}},
  title        = {{{Deduktion und Abduktion beim diagrammatischen Schließen – das didaktische Potential der Peirceschen Semiotik}}},
  doi          = {{10.17877/DE290R-21555}},
  year         = {{2020}},
}

@inbook{31551,
  author       = {{Häsel-Weide, Uta and Nührenbörger, Marcus}},
  booktitle    = {{Kinder lernen Zukunft – Anforderungen und tragfähige Grundlagen}},
  editor       = {{Hecker, Ulrich and Lassek, Maresi and Ramseger, Jörg}},
  pages        = {{108--118}},
  publisher    = {{Grundschulverband}},
  title        = {{{Tragfähige Grundlagen}}},
  volume       = {{Band 150}},
  year         = {{2020}},
}