• Anderson, J. R., Reder, L. M., & Simon, H. A. (1996). Situated learning and education. Educational Researcher, 25(4), 5-11.
• Brenner, M. E., Mayer, R. E., Moseley, B., Brar, T., Duran, R., Reed, B. S., & Webb, D. (1997). Learning by understanding: The role of multiple representations in learning algebra. American Educational Research Journal, 34(4), 663-689.
• Brown, M., & Edelson, D. (2003). Teaching as design: Can we better understand the ways in which teachers use materials so we can better design materials to support their changes in practice? . Evanston, IL: Center for Learning Technologies in Urban Schools.
• Cai, J. (2000). Mathematical thinking involved in US and Chinese students' solving of processconstrained and process-open problems. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 2(4), 309-340.
• Cai, J. (2008). Some highlights of the similarities and differences in intended, planned/implemented, and achieved curricula. Paper presented at the Mathematics Curriculum in Pacific Rim Countries--China, Japan, Korea, and Singapore.
• Cai, J., Nie, B., & Moyer, J. C. (2010). The teaching of equation solving: approaches in Standards-based and traditional curricula in the United States. Pedagogies: An International Journal, 5(3), 170-186. doi: 10.1080/1554480x.2010.485724
• 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. doi: 10.1080/10986060903460070
• Chesler, J. D. (2009). Interacting with Algebra: Mathematicians, Mathematics Educators, and Teachers Making Sense of Algebra Content (unpublised doctoral dissertation): The University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ.
• Cooney, T. J., Beckmann, S., Lloyd, G. M., Wilson, P. S., & Zbiek, R. M. (2010). Developing essential understanding of functions for teaching mathematics in grades 9-12. Reston, VA: NCTM.
• Cooper, B., & Harries, T. (2002). Children's responses to contrastingrealistic'mathematics problems: Just how realistic are children ready to be? Educational Studies in Mathematics, 49(1), 1-23.
• Drijvers, P. (2003). Algebra on screen, on paper, and in the mind. In J. T. Fey (Ed.), Computer algebra systems in secondary school mathematics education (pp. 241-267). Reston, VA: NCTM.
• Drijvers, P., & van Herwaarden, O. (2000). Instrumentation of ICT tools: the case of algebra in a computer algebra environment. International Journal of Computer Algebra in Mathematics Education, 7(4), 255-276.
• Fan, L. (1999). Applications of arithmetic in US and Chinese textbooks: A comparativestudy. 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., & Miao, Z. (2013). Textbook research in mathematics education: development status and directions. ZDM, 45(5), 633-646.
• Filloy, E., Rojano, T., & Solares, A. (2004). Arithmetic/algebraic problemsolving and the representation of two unknown quantities. Paper presented at the the 28th conference of the international group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education, Bergen University College.
• Floden, R. E. (2002). The Measurement of Opportunity to Learn1. Methodological advances in cross-national surveys of educational achievement, 231.
• Greeno, J. G. (1991). Number sense as situated knowing in a conceptual domain. Journal of Research in Mathematics Education,22(3), 170-218.
• Gu, L., Huang, R., & Marton, F. (2004). Teaching with variation: A Chinese way of promoting effective mathematics learning. In L. Fan, J. Wong, J. Cai & S. Li (Eds.), How Chinese learn mathematics: Perspectives from insiders. River Edge, NJ: World Scientific Publishing Co.
• Haggarty, L., & Pepin, B. (2002). An investigation of mathematics textbooks and their use in English, French and German classrooms: Who gets an opportunity to learn what? British Educational Research Journal, 28(4), 567-590.
• Häggström, J. (2008). Teaching systems of linear equations in Sweden and China: What is made possible to learn? : Department of Education Inst. för pedagogik och didaktik.
• Hollar, J. C., & Norwood, K. (1999). The effects of a graphing-approach intermediate algebra curriculum on students' understanding of function. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 30, 220-226.
• 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.
• Hough, S., & Gough, S. (2007). Realistic mathematics education. Mathematics Teaching, 203, 34-38.
• Hudson, R. A., Lahann, P. E., & Lee, J. S. (2010). Technology and the mathematics curriculum. . In B. Reys, R. E. Reys, R. N. Rubenstein & National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (Eds.), Mathematics curriculum: Issues, trends, and future directions. Reston, VA: NCTM.
• Inoue, N. (2005). The realistic reasons behind unrealistic solutions: The role of interpretive activity in word problem solving. Learning and Instruction, 15(1), 69-83.
• Kang Hsuan Educational Publishing Group. (2012). Mathematics textbook 7. Taiwan: Kang Hsuan.
• Kieran, C. (2007). Learning and teaching algebra at the middle school through college levels. In F. K. Lester (Ed.), Second handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 707–762). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Pub.
• Knuth, E. J. (2000). Student Understanding of the Cartesian Connection: An Exploratory Study. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 31(4), 500-508.
• Leung, K. S. F. (2001). In search of an East Asian identity in mathematics education. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 47(1), 35-51.
• Leung, K. S. F. (2006). Mathematics education in East Asia and the West: Does culture matter? Mathematics education in different cultural traditions-a comparative study of east asia and the west (pp. 21-46): Springer.
• 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, 234-241.
• Lombardi, M. M. (2007). Authentic learning for the 21st century: An overview. Educause learning initiative, 1(2007), 1-12.
• MacGregor, M., & Stacey, K. (1993). Cognitive models underlying students' formulation of simple linear equations. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 24(3), 217-232.
• Martin, M. O., Mullis, I. V., Gonzales, E. J., & Chrostowski, S. J. (2004). TIMSS 2003 international science report: Findings from IEA's trends in international mathematics and science study at the fourth and eighth grades. Boston: TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center, Lynch School of Education, Boston College.
• Nathan, M., Stephens, A., Masarik, D., Alibali, M., & Koedinger, K. (2002). Representational fluency in middle school: A classroom based study. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the twenty-fourth annual meeting of the North American chapter of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education. Columbus, OH: ERIC Clearinghouse for Science, Mathematics, and Environmental Education.
• National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: NCTM.
• Ni, Y., & Cai, J. (2011). Searching for evidence of curricular effect on the teaching and learning of mathematics: Lessons learned from the two projects. International Journal of Educational Research, 50(2), 137-143.
• Panasuk, R. M. (2010). Three phase ranking framework for assessing conceptual understanding in algebra using multiple representations. Education, 131(2), 235-257.
• Panasuk, R. M., & Beyranevand, M. L. (2010). Algebra students’ ability to recognize multiple representations and achievement. International Journal for Mathematics Teaching and Learning, 22, 1-22.
• Pape, S. J., & Tchoshanov, M. A. (2001). The role of representation (s) in developing mathematical understanding. Theory into Practice, 40(2), 118-127.
• Park, A. M. (2011). Comparing the cognitive demand of traditional and reform algebra 1 textbooks. Harvery Mudd college.
• Pehkonen, E. (2009). How Finns learn mathematics: What is the influence of 25 years of research in mathematics education? In M. Lepik (Ed.), Teaching mathematics: Retrospective and perspectives: Proceedings of the 10th International Conference (pp. 71- 101). Estonia: Tallinn University
• Pehkonen, L. (2004). The magic circle of the textbook–an option or an obstacle for teacher change. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 28th Conference of the International Mathematics Education.
• Reys, B. J., & Reys, R. E. (2006). The development and publication of elementary mathematics textbooks: let the buyer beware! Phi Delta Kappan, 87(5), 377-383.
• Reys, B. J., Reys, R. E., & Chavez, O. (2004). Why mathematics textbooks matter. Educational Leadership, 61(5), 61-66.
• Reys, R. E., & Yang, D.-C. (1998). Relationship between computational performance and number-sense among sixth-and eighth-grade students in Taiwan. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 29(2), 225-237.
• Rittle-Johnson, B., & Koedinger, K. R. (2005). Designing knowledge scaffolds to support mathematical problem solving. Cognition and Instruction, 23(3), 313-349.
• Schmidt, W., McKnight, C., Houang, R., Wang, H., Wiley, D., Cogan, L., & Wolfe, R. (2001). Why schools matter: Using TIMSS to investigate curriculum and learning. NY, NY: Jossey-Bass.
• Seeley, C., & Schielack, J. F. (2007). A look at the development of algebraic thinking in curriculum focal points. Mathematics Teaching in the Middle School, 13, 266–269.
• Senk, S., Thompson, D., & Wernet, J. W. (2014). Curriculum and achievement in algebra 2: influences of textbooks and teachers on students’ learning about functions. In Y. Li & G. Lappan (Eds.), Mathematics Curriculum in School Education (pp. 515-540). Netherlands: Springer
• Sfard, A. (1991). On the dual nature of mathematical conceptions: Reflections on processes and objects as different sides of the same coin. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 22, 1-36.
• Silver, E. A., & Stein., M. K. (1996). The QUASAR project: The "revolution of the possible" in mathematics instructional reform in urban mddle schools. Urban Education, 30(4), 476- 521.
• Sood, S., & Jitendra, A. K. (2007). A comparative analysis of number sense instruction in reform- based and traditional mathematics textbooks. The Journal of Special Education, 41(3), 145-157.
• Stein, M. K., Grover, B. W., & Henningsen, M. (1996). Building student capacity for mathematical thinking and reasoning: An analysis of mathematical tasks used in standards classrooms. American Educational Research Journal, 33, 455–488.
• Stein, M. K., Remillard, J., & Smith, M. (2007). How curriculum influences students' learning. In F. Lester (Ed.), Second handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 557-628): Charlotte: Information Age.
• Stein, M. K., Smith, M. S., Henningsen, M., & Silver, E. A. (2000). Implementing standards-based mathematics instruction. New York: Teachers College Press.
• Stigler, J. W., Lee, S.-y., Lucker, G. W., & Stevenson, H. W. (1982). Curriculum and achievement in mathematics: A study of elementary school children in Japan, Taiwan, and the United States. Journal of Educational Psychology, 74(3), 315.
• Tarr, J. E., Reys, R. E., Reys, B. J., Chavez, O., Shih, J., & Osterlind, S. (2008). The impact of middles grades mathematics curricula and the classroom learning environment on student achievement. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 39, 247-280.
• Toernroos, J. (2001). Mathematics textbooks and students’ achievement in the 7th grade: What is the effect of using different textbooks. In J. Novotna (Ed.). Proceedings of European Research in Mathematics Education II (pp. 518–527), Prague, Czech Republic: Charles University, Faculty of Education
• Törnroos, J. (2005). Mathematics textbooks, opportunity to learn and student achievement. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 31(4), 315-327.
• Wang, J., & Lin, E. (2005). Comparative studies on US and Chinese mathematics learning and the implications for standards-based mathematics teaching reform. Educational Researcher, 34(5), 3-13.
• WSOY. (2009). Laskutaito 9. Finland: WSOY.
• Yang, D. C. & Huang, F. Y. (2004). Relationships among computational performance, pictorial representation, symbolic representation, and number sense of sixth grade students in Taiwan, Educational Studies, 30(4), 373-389.
• 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.
• Yerushalmy, M. (2000). Problem solving strategies and mathematical resources: A longitudinal view on problem solving in a function based approach to algebra. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 43(2), 125-147.
• 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.

APA

Yang, D.-C., & Lin, Y.-C. (2015). Examining the Differences of Linear Systems between Finnish and Taiwanese Textbooks. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 11(6), 1265-1281. https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2015.1483a

Vancouver

Yang DC, Lin YC. Examining the Differences of Linear Systems between Finnish and Taiwanese Textbooks. EURASIA J Math Sci Tech Ed. 2015;11(6):1265-81. https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2015.1483a

AMA

Yang DC, Lin YC. Examining the Differences of Linear Systems between Finnish and Taiwanese Textbooks. EURASIA J Math Sci Tech Ed. 2015;11(6), 1265-1281. https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2015.1483a

Chicago

Yang, Der-Ching, and Yung-Chi Lin. "Examining the Differences of Linear Systems between Finnish and Taiwanese Textbooks". Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education 2015 11 no. 6 (2015): 1265-1281. https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2015.1483a

Harvard

Yang, D.-C., and Lin, Y.-C. (2015). Examining the Differences of Linear Systems between Finnish and Taiwanese Textbooks. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 11(6), pp. 1265-1281. https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2015.1483a

MLA

Yang, Der-Ching et al. "Examining the Differences of Linear Systems between Finnish and Taiwanese Textbooks". Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, vol. 11, no. 6, 2015, pp. 1265-1281. https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2015.1483a