• Alajmi, A. H. (2012). How do elementary textbooks address fractions? A review of mathematics textbooks in the USA, Japan, and Kuwait. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 79(2), 239–261.
• Altman, D. G. (1991). Practical statistics for medical research. London: Chapman & Hall.
• American Association for the Advancement of Science. (2000). Middle grades mathematics textbooks: A benchmarks-based evaluation. Washington DC: AAAS.
• Beaton, A. E., Mullis, I. V. Martin, M. O., Gonzalez, E. J., Kelly, D. L., & Smith, T. A. (1996). Mathematics achievement in the middle school years: IEA’s third international mathematics and science study (TIMSS). Boston, MA: Center for the Study of Testing, Evaluation, and Educational Policy, Boston College.
• Brenner, M. E., Mayer, R. E., Moseley, B., Brar, T., Durán, R., Smith-Reed, B., & Webb, D. (1997). Learning by understanding: The role of multiple representations in learning algebra. American Educational Research Journal, 34(4), 663–689.
• Cai, J. (1995). A cognitive analysis of U.S. and Chinese students’ mathematical performance on tasks involving computation, simple problem solving, and complex problem solving. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education Monograph, 7, 1–160.
• Cai, J. (2000). Mathematical thinking involved in U.S. and Chinese students’ solving of process- constrained and process-open problems. Mathematical thinking and Learning, 2(4), 309–340.
• Cai, J., & Cirillo, M. (2014). What do we know about reasoning and proving? Opportunities and missing opportunities from curriculum analyses. International Journal of Educational Research, 64, 132-140.
• Cai, J., Wang, N., Moyer, J. C., & Nie, B. (2011). Longitudinal investigation of the curriculum effect: An analysis of student learning outcomes from the LieCal Project. International Journal of Educational Research, 50(2), 117–136.
• Charalambous, C. Y., Delaney, S., Hsu, H.-Y., & Mesa, V. (2010). A comparative analysis of the addition and subtraction of fractions in textbooks from three countries. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 12(2), 117–151.
• Choi, K. M., & Park, H. J. (2013). A comparative analysis of geometry education on curriculum standards, textbook structure, and textbook items between the U.S. and Korea. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 9(4), 379–391.
• Delil, H. (2006). An analysis of geometry problems in 6-8 grades Turkish mathematics textbooks (Unpublished master’s thesis). Middle East Technical University, Ankara.
• Ding, M., & Li, X. (2010). A comparative analysis of the distributive property in U.S. and Chinese elementary mathematics textbooks. Cognition and Instruction, 28(12), 146–180.
• Doyle, W. (1983). Academic work. Review of Educational Research, 53, 159–199.
• Doyle, W. (1988). Work in mathematics classes: The context of students’ thinking during instruction. Educational Psychologist, 23(2), 167–180.
• Dufour-Janvier, B., Berdnarz, N., & Belanger, M. (1987). Pedagogical considerations concerning the Problem of representation. In C. Janvier (Eds.), Problems of representations in the teaching and learning of Mathematics (pp.109–122). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
• Fan, L. (1999). Applications of arithmetic in US and Chinese textbooks: A comparative study, In G. Kaiser, E. Luna & I. Huntley (Eds.), Studies in mathematics education series: II. International comparisons in mathematics education (pp. 151–162). London: Falmer Press.
• Fan, L., & Zhu, Y. (2000). Problem solving in Singaporean secondary mathematics textbooks. The Mathematics Educator, 5(1/2), 117–141.
• Fan, L., Chen, J., Zhu, Y., Oiu, X., & Hu, Q. (2004). Textbook use within and beyond Chinese classrooms: A study of 12 secondary schools in Kunming and Fuzhou of China. In F. Fan, N. Y. Wong, J. Cai, & S. Li (Eds.), How Chinese learn mathematics (pp. 228–261). Singapore: World Scientific.
• Fan, L., Zhu, Y., & Miao, Z. (2013). Textbooks research in mathematics education: Development, status and direction. ZDM, 45, 633–646.
• Greeno, J. G. (1991). Number sense as situated knowing in a conceptual domain. Journal of Research in Mathematics Education, 22(3), 170–218.
• Grishchenko, S. (2009). A comparative analysis of word problems in selected United States and Russian first grade textbooks (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of California, Santa Barbara.
• Gu, L., Huang, R., & Marton, F. (2004). Teaching with Variation: An effective way of mathematics teaching in China. In L. Fan, N. Y. Wong, J. Cai, & S. Li (Eds.), How Chinese learn mathematics: Perspectives from insiders (pp. 309–345). Singapore: World Scientific.
• Hiebert, J., & Grouws, D. A. (2007). The effects of classroom mathematics teaching on students’ learning. In F. K. Lester, Jr. (Ed.), Second handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning: A project of the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (Vol. 1, pp. 371–404). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.
• Hong, D. S., & Choi, K. M. (2014). A comparison of Korean and American secondary school textbooks: The case of quadratic equations. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 85(2), 241–263.
• Husén, T. (Ed.). (1967). International study of achievement in mathematics: A comparison of twelve countries (Vol. 2). New York: John Wiley & Sons.
• Kang Hsuan Educational Publishing Group. (2010). Mathematics textbook 1A-6B. Taiwan: Kang Hsuan.
• Kolovou, A., van den Heuvel-Panhuizen, M., & Bakker, A. (2009). Non-routine problem solving tasks in primary school mathematics textbooks: A needle in a haystack. Mediterranean Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 8(2), 31–68.
• Kwon, O. N., Park, J. S., & Park, J. H. (2006). Cultivating divergent thinking in mathematics through an open-ended approach. Asia Pacific Education Review, 7(1) 51–61.
• Lappan, S., Fey, J. T., Fitzgerald, W., Friel, S., & Phillips, E. D. (1996). A guild to the connected mathematics curriculum: Getting to know connected mathematics. Palo Alto, CA: Dale Seymour.
• Laurinoli, T., Lindroos-Heinänen, R., Luoma-aho, E., Sankilampi, T., Selenius, R., Talvitie, K. & Vähä-Vahe, O. (2008). Laskutaito 7–9. Helsinki, Finland: WOSY.
• Leung, K. S. F. (2001). In search of an East Asian identity in mathematics education. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 47(1), 35–51.
• Li, Y. (2000). A comparison of problems that follow selected content presentations in American and Chinese mathematics textbooks. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 31(2), 234–241.
• Mayer, R. E., Sims, V., & Tajika, H. (1995). A comparison of how textbooks teach mathematical problem solving in Japan and the United States. American Educational Research Journal, 32(2), 443–460.
• Ministry of Education in Singapore. (2001). Mathematics syllabus lower secondary, Singapore: Curriculum Planning and Development Division, Ministry of Education.
• Mullis, I., Martin, M.O., Foy, P. & Arora, A. (2012). TIMSS 2011 International results in mathematics. Chestnut Hill, MA, USA: TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center, Lynch School of Education, Boston College.
• National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (1991). Professional standards for teaching mathematics. Reston, VA: NCTM.
• National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: NCTM.
• National Research Council. (2001). Helping children learn mathematics. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
• Organization for Economic Co-operation & Development (OECD). (2013). PISA 2012 results: What students know and can do: Student performance in mathematics, reading and science (Vol. I). Paris: OECD.
• Özer, E., & Sezer, R. (2014). A comparative analysis of questions in American, Singaporean, and Turkish mathematics textbooks based on the topics covered in 8th grade in Turkey. Educational Sciences: Theory and Practice, 14 (1), 411–421.
• Reys, B. J., Reys, R. E., & Chavez, O. (2004). Why Mathematics Textbooks Matter. Educational Leadership, 61(5), 61–66.
• Riley, M. S., Greeno, J. G., & Heller, J. I. (1983). Development of children’s problem–solving ability in arithmetic. In H. P. Ginsburg (Ed.), The development of mathematical thinking (pp. 153–196). New York: Academic Press.
• Rivette, K., Grant, Y., Ludema, H., & Rickard, A. (2003). Connected mathematics project: Research and evaluation summary. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
• Stanic, G., & Kilpatrick, J. (1988). Historical perspective on problem solving in the mathematics curriculum. In R. Charles & E. Silver (Eds.), The teaching and assessing of mathematical problem solving (pp. 1–22). Reston: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
• Stein, M. K., & Smith, M. S. (2010). The influence of curriculum on students’ learning. In B. J. Reys, R. E., Reys, & R. Rubenstein (Eds.), Mathematics curriculum: Issues, trends, and future directions (pp. 351–362). Reston: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
• Stein, M. K., & Smith, M. S. (1998). Mathematical tasks as a framework for reflection: From research to practice. Mathematics Teaching in the Middle School, 3(4), 268–275.
• Stigler, J. W., Fuson, K. C., Ham, M., & Kim, M. S. (1986). An analysis of addition and subtraction word problems in American and Soviet elementary mathematics textbooks. Cognition and Instruction, 3(3), 153–171.
• Sun, Y., Kulm, G., & Capraro, M. M. (2009). Middle grade teachers’ use of textbooks and their classroom instruction. Journal of Mathematics Education, 2(2), 20–37.
• Sweller, J., Chandler, P., Tierney, P., & Cooper, M. (1990). Cognitive load as a factor in the structuring of technical material. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 119, 176–192.
• Tarr, J., Reys, R., Reys, B., Chavez, O., Shih, J., & Osterlind, S. (2008). The impact of middle grades mathematics curricula and the classroom learning environment on student achievement. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 39, 247–280.
• Teh, K. S., & Loh, C. Y. (2007). New syllabus Mathematics 1 (6th ed.). Singapore: Shinglee.
• Törnrros, J. (2005). Mathematics textbooks, opportunity to learn and student achievement. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 31(4), 315–327.
• van Zanten, M., & van den Heuvel-Panhuizen, M. (2014). Freedom of design: The multiple faces of subtraction in Dutch primary school textbooks. In Y. Li & G. Lappan (Eds.), Mathematics curriculum in school education (pp. 231–259). Heidelberg: Springer.
• Wijaya, A., van den Heuvel-Panhuizen, M., & Doorman, M. (2015). Opportunity-to-learn context-based tasks provided by mathematics textbooks.  Educational Studies in Mathematics 89(1), 41–65.
• Xin, Y. P. (2007). Word problem solving tasks in textbooks and their relation to student performance. Journal of Educational Research, 100(6), 347–359.
• Yang, D. C., & Lin, Y. C. (2016). Examining the differences of linear systems between Finnish and Taiwanese textbooks. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 11(6), 1265–1281.
• Yang, D. C., Reys, R. E., & Wu, L. L. (2010). Comparing how fractions were developed in textbooks used by the 5th- and 6th-graders in Singapore, Taiwan, and the U.S.A. School Science and Mathematics, 110(3), 118–127.
• Zhu, Y. & Fan, L. (2006). Focus on the representation of problem types in intended curriculum: A comparison of selected mathematics textbooks from Mainland China and the United States. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 4(4), 609–626.
• Zhu, Y., & Fan, L. (2004). An analysis of the representation of problem types in Chinese and US mathematics textbooks. Paper accepted for ICME-10 Discussion Group 14, 4-11 July: Copenhagen, Denmark.

APA

Yang, D.-C., Tseng, Y.-K., & Wang, T.-L. (2017). A Comparison of Geometry Problems in Middle-Grade Mathematics Textbooks from Taiwan, Singapore, Finland, and the United States. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 13(7), 2841-2857. https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2017.00721a

Vancouver

Yang DC, Tseng YK, Wang TL. A Comparison of Geometry Problems in Middle-Grade Mathematics Textbooks from Taiwan, Singapore, Finland, and the United States. EURASIA J Math Sci Tech Ed. 2017;13(7):2841-57. https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2017.00721a

AMA

Yang DC, Tseng YK, Wang TL. A Comparison of Geometry Problems in Middle-Grade Mathematics Textbooks from Taiwan, Singapore, Finland, and the United States. EURASIA J Math Sci Tech Ed. 2017;13(7), 2841-2857. https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2017.00721a

Chicago

Yang, Der-Ching, Yi-Kuan Tseng, and Tzu-Ling Wang. "A Comparison of Geometry Problems in Middle-Grade Mathematics Textbooks from Taiwan, Singapore, Finland, and the United States". Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education 2017 13 no. 7 (2017): 2841-2857. https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2017.00721a

Harvard

Yang, D.-C., Tseng, Y.-K., and Wang, T.-L. (2017). A Comparison of Geometry Problems in Middle-Grade Mathematics Textbooks from Taiwan, Singapore, Finland, and the United States. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 13(7), pp. 2841-2857. https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2017.00721a

MLA

Yang, Der-Ching et al. "A Comparison of Geometry Problems in Middle-Grade Mathematics Textbooks from Taiwan, Singapore, Finland, and the United States". Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, vol. 13, no. 7, 2017, pp. 2841-2857. https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2017.00721a