Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education

• Ahmad Fauzi Mohd Ayub, Tengku Mohd Tengku Sembok, & Wong Su Luan. (2009). The use of computer in teaching and learning calculus among Diploma students: An assessment on the TEMACCC package. In A. F. M. Ayub & A. S. Md. Yunus (Eds.), Mathematics and Applications Technology (274-300). Universiti Putra Malaysia.
• Antohe, V. (2009). Limits of Educational Soft “GeoGebra” in a Critical Constructive Review. Annals. Computer Science Series, 7(1), 47-54.
• Arbain, N., & Shukor, N. A. (2014). The Effects of GeoGebra on Students Achievement. Procedia -Social and Behavioral Sciences, 172, 208 – 214. doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.01.356
• Awang, Z. (2012). Structural Equation Modeling Using Amos Graphic. UiTM Press.
• Azizi Yahaya & Ellangovan A/L M Savarimuthu. (2008). The importance of conceptual understanding in mathematics. In Y. Boon & S. Sulaiman (Eds.), Problems in Science and Mathematics Education. www.penerbit.utm.my
• Baker, W. (2002). Written meta-cognition and procedural knowledge. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 32, 1-36.
• Bell, C. J. (2001). Conceptual understanding of function in a multi-representational learning environment (Doctor of Philosophy Dissertation Presented to the Faculty of the Graduate School of the University of Texas at Austin).
• Best, J. W., & Kahn, J. V. (2003). Research in education (9th ed.) Boston: Pearson Education.
• Bhasah Abu Bakar. (2007). Methods of Academic Research Data Analysis. Kuala Lumpur: Utusan Publications & Distributors.
• Botana, F., Hohenwarter, M., Janičić, P. et al. (2015). Automated Theorem Proving in GeoGebra: Current Achievements. J Autom Reasoning, 55, 39. doi:10.1007/s10817-015-9326-4
• Bu, L., Haciomeroglu, E. S., & Mumba, F. (2011). Mathematical Problem Solving in Dynamic Learning Environments: The Case of Geogebra. Proceedings of The Second North American Geogebra Conference: Where Mathematics, Education and Technology Meet. University of Toronto. June 17- 18. ISBN 978-0-920233-65-8 (CD)
• Bu, L., Mumba, F., & Alghazo, Y. (2011). GeoGebra as a Pedagogical Tool: A Preliminary Taxonomy. Proceedings of The Second North American Geogebra Conference: Where Mathematics, Education and Technology Meeting. University of Toronto. June 17-18. ISBN 978-0-920233-65-8 (CD)
• Byrne, B. M. (2010). Structural equation modelling with AMOS: Basic concepts, applications and programming, (2nd ed.) Multivariate Applications Series. New York: Routledge.
• Caglayan, G. (2014). Statics Versus Dynamic Disposition: The Role of GeoGebra in Representing Polynomial-Rational Inequalities and Exponential-Logarithmic Functions. Computers in The Schools, 31(4), 339-370. doi:10.1080/07380569.2014.967632
• Carpenter, T. P. (1986). Conceptual knowledge as a foundation for procedural knowledge. In J. Hibert (Ed.), Conceptual and procedural knowledge: The case of mathematics. (pp.113-131). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
• Castro, C. H. (2011). Assessing the Impact of Computer Programming in Understanding Limits and Derivatives in a Secondary Mathematics Classroom (Dissertation, Department of Middle Secondary Education and Instructional Technology Georgia State University).
• César Sáenz. (2009). The Role of Contextual, Conceptual and Procedural Knowledge in Activating Mathematical Competencies (PISA). Educational Studies in Mathematics, 71(2), 123-143. doi:10.1007/s 10649-008-9 167-8
• Chappell, K. K., & Killpatrick, K. (2003). Effect of concepts-based instructions on students’ conceptual understanding and procedural knowledge of calculus. Problem, Resource, and Issues in Mathematics Undergraduate studies, 13(1), 17-37.
• Cowan, H. (2011). Knowledge and Understanding of Function Held by Students with Visual Impairments (Dissertation, The Ohio State University).
• Creswell, J. W. (2005). Educational research. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Pearson.
• Dede Suratman. (2011). The Effect of Problem Solving Learning on Ability to Understand Mathematical Concepts Among Senior Highschool Science Students. Retrieved from http://jurnal.untan.ac.id/index.php/jckrw/article/download/145/145
• Deslauriers, D. (2007). Students’ Problem Solving and Understanding in Learning Mathematics through Conceptually and Procedurally Focused Instruction: A Situated Discourse Approach (Dissertation Doctor of Philoshopy, Department of Educational & Counselling Psycology McGill University Montreal).
• Duru, A. (2011). Pre-Service Teachers’ Perception about The Concept of Limit. Education Science: Theory & Practice.
• Effandi Zakaria, Norazah Mohd Nordin & Sabri Ahmad. (2007). The Trend of teaching and learning Mathematics. Kuala Lumpur: Utusan Publications & Distributors.
• Eisenhart, M., Borko, H., Underhill, R., Brown, C., Jones, D., & Agard, P. (1993). Conceptual knowledge falls through the cracks: Complexities of learning to teach mathematics for understanding. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 24(1), 8-40.
• Engelbrecht, J., Harding, A., & Potgieter, M. (2005). Undergraduate students’ performance and confidence in procedural and conceptual mathematics. http://ridcully.upac.za/multi/conceptualmath.pdf
• Erman Suherman & Yaya Sukjaya. (1990). Evaluation of Mathematic Education. Bandung: Wijayakusumah.
• Furner, J. M., & Marinas, C. A. (2007). Geometry Sketching Software for Elementary Children: Easy as 1, 2, 3. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 3(1), 83-91.
• Gall, M. D., Borg, W. R., & Gall, J. P. (2003). Education research: An introduction. (7th Edition). White plains, New York: Longman.
• Groth, R. E., & Bergner, J. A. (2006). Preservice elementary teachers’ conceptual and procedural knowledge of mean, median and mode. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 5(1), 37-63. doi:10.1207/s!5327833mtl08013
• Haciomeroglu, E. S., Bu, L., Schoen, R. C, & Hohenwarter, M. (2009). Learning to Develop Mathematics Lessons with GeoGebra. MSOR Connections, 9(2), 24-26.
• Harper, J. L. (2007). The use of computer algebra systems in a procedural Algebra course to facilitate a framework for Procedural understanding (Dissertation for Doctor of Philosophy, Montana State University).
• Harrington, D. (2009). Confirmatory Factor Analysis. New York: Oxford University Press.
• Hashim, R. A., & Sani, A. M. (2008). A Confirmatory Factor Analysis of Newly Integrated Multidimensional School Engagement Scale. MJLI, 5, 21-40.
• Hiebert, J. (1986). Conceptual and Procedural Knowledge: The case of mathematics. Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
• Hiebert, J., & Lefevre, P. (1986). Conceptual and procedural knowledge in mathematics: An introductory analysis. In J. Hiebert (Ed.), Conceptual and procedural knowledge: The case of mathematics (1-28). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
• Hohenwarter, M., Hohenwarter, J., Kreis, Y., & Lavicza, Z. (2008). Teaching and calculus with free dynamic mathematics software GeoGebra. ICME 11 Mexico 2008. 11th International Congress on Mathematical Education.
• Holgado, M. J. C., Vargas, A. I. C., Morales, N. M., Manzanares, M. T. L., López, F. J. B., & Cuesta, M. V. (2013). The association between academic engagement and achievement in health sciences students. BMC Medical Education, 13(33).
• Hutkemri & Effandi Zakaria. (2010). The GeoGebra software in mathematic teaching. Proceeding International Seminar Comparative Studies in Education System Between Indonesia and Malaysia. Bandung: Rizqi Press.
• Infante, N. M. E. (2007). Students’ understanding of related rates problems in calculus (Dissertation Doctor of Philosophy, Arizona State University).
• Jensen, T. A. (2009). A study of the relationship between introductory calculus students’ understanding of function and their understanding of limit (Dissertation for Doctor of philosophy, Montana State University).
• Karno To. (1996). Knowing text analysis (Introduction to ANATES computer program). Bandung: Department of Educational Psychology and Guidance FIP IKIP.
• Kiuru, N., Pakarinen, E., Vasalampi, K., Silinskas, G., Aunola, K., Poikkeus, A.-M., Metsäpelto, R.-M., Lerkkanen, M.-K., & Nurmi, J.-E. (2014). Task-focused behavior mediates the associations between supportive interpersonal environments and students’ academic performance. Psychological Science, 25, 1018-1024.
• Kline, R. B. (2005). Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling (2nd ed.). New York: The Guilford Press.
• Lim, C. H. (2007). Education research: Quantitative and qualitative approaches. Kuala Lumpur: McGraw Hilll Education.
• Maryunis, A. (1989). Information Mapping Method in The Secondary School (SMA) Learning and Teaching Process (an observation experiment conducted at district of Jakarta 1988) (Dissertation, Faculty of Mathematics Studies, Universitas Negeri Jakarta).
• Nezhnov, P., Kardanova, E., & Ryabinina (2013). Investigating the process of internalizing learned concepts. Educational Issues (Voprosy Obrazovaniya), 4, 162-181.
• Norazah, M. N. & Effandi, Z. (2007). Computer-assisted of Mathematic learning. In Effandi Zakaria, Norazah Mohd Nordin, & Sabri Ahmad (Eds.), The Trend of teaching and learning Mathematics, pp. 67-79. Kuala Lumpur: Utusan Publications & Distributors.
• Oldknow, A. & Taylor, R. (2000). Teaching Mathematics with ICT. London: Continuum.
• Pitsolantis, N. (2007). Linking procedural and conceptual understanding of fractions during learning and instruction with fifth-and sixth-grade students: An evaluation of Hiebert’s sites approach (Thesis Master, Concordia University Montreal, Quebec, Canada).
• Post, T. R. (1998). Knowledge representation and quantitative thinking. In M. Reynolds (Ed.), Knowledge Base for The Beginning Teacher-Special Publication of the AACTE (221-231). Oxford: Pergamon Press.
• Ratliff, B. K. (2009). Student Understanding of Function Composition and the Effect of Dynamic Visualization (Dissertation, Faculty of the Curry School of Education, University of Virginia).
• Rincon, L. F. (2009). Designing dynamic and interactive applications using Geogebra Software. Kean University. ERIC full text and thesis.
• Rittle-Johnson, B., & Star, J. R. (2007). Does comparing solution methods facilitate conceptual and procedural knowledge? An experimental study on learning to solve equations. Journal Educational Psychology, 99(3), 561-574.
• Robiah Sidin. (1994). Education in Malaysia: Challenges of the future. Kuala Lumpur: Fajar Bakti.
• Rohani Ahmad Tarmizi. (2009). The use of information and communication technology in teaching and learning Mathematics. In Ahmad Fauzi Mohd Ayub & Aida Suraya Md. Yunus (Eds.), Mathematics and applications technology. Publication of Universiti Putra Malaysia.
• Scheja, M. & Pettersson, K. (2010). Transformation and Contextualisation: Conceptualizing Students’ Conceptual Understandings of Threshold Concepts in Calculus. High Educ., 59, 221–241.
• Schumacker, R. E, Lomax, R. G. (2004). A beginner’s guide to structural equation modelling, Second edition. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc. pp. 328-329.
• Sekaran, U. (1992). Research Methods for Business: A Skill-Building Approach (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Wiley.
• Selden, A. & Selden, J. (1992). Research perspective on conceptions of functions: summary and overview. In G. Harel & E. Dubinsky (Eds.). The concept of function: Aspects of epistemology and pedagogy (pp. 1-16). Washington DC: Mathematical Association of America.
• Setu Budiardjo. (2011). Inculcation of Jigsaw cooperation learning method to improve the achievement of class XII students of light transport techniques 2 of SMK Negeri 5 Semarang in solving the functional sequences. Journal AKSIOMA, (2).
• Sivin-Kachala, J. & Bialo, E. R. (2000). Research Report on the Effectiveness of Technology in Schools (7th ed.). Washington, DC: software Information Industry Association.
• Sudjana. (2005). Statistic Method. Bandung: Tarsito.
• Supriadi, N., Kusumah, Y. S., Sabandar, J., & Afgani, J. D. (2014). Developing High-Order Mathematical Thinking Competency on High School Students’ Through GeoGebra-Assisted Blended Learning. Mathematical Theory and Modeling, 4(6), 57-66.
• Teachey, A. L. (2003). Investigation in conceptual understanding of polynomial function and the impact of mathematical beliefs systems on achievement in an accelerated summer program for gifted students (Dissertation for Ph.D., University of North Carolina).
• Vinner, S. (1992). The Function Concept as a Prototype for Problems in Mathematics Learning. In G. Harel, & E. Dubinsky, (Eds.) The concept of function: Aspects of epistemology and pedagogy, MAA, pp. 195-213.
• Wang, M. T., & Holcombe, R. (2010). Adolescents’ perceptions of classroom environment, school engagement, and academic achievement. American Educational Research Journal, 47, 633-662.
• Wiersma, W. (2000). Research methods in education: An introduction. Needham Heights: Allyn and Bacon.
• Williams, S. (1991). Predications of the limit concept: An Application of repertory grids. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 32(4), 343-367.
• Zengin, Y., Furkan, Z., & Kutluca, T. (2012). The effect of dynamic mathematics software geogebra on student achievement in teaching of trigonometry. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 31, 183-187. doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.12.038

APA

Zulnaidi, H., & Syed Zamri, S. N. A. (2017). The Effectiveness of the GeoGebra Software: The Intermediary Role of Procedural Knowledge On Students’ Conceptual Knowledge and Their Achievement in Mathematics. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 13(6), 2155-2180. https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2017.01219a

Vancouver

Zulnaidi H, Syed Zamri SNA. The Effectiveness of the GeoGebra Software: The Intermediary Role of Procedural Knowledge On Students’ Conceptual Knowledge and Their Achievement in Mathematics. EURASIA J Math Sci Tech Ed. 2017;13(6):2155-80. https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2017.01219a

AMA

Zulnaidi H, Syed Zamri SNA. The Effectiveness of the GeoGebra Software: The Intermediary Role of Procedural Knowledge On Students’ Conceptual Knowledge and Their Achievement in Mathematics. EURASIA J Math Sci Tech Ed. 2017;13(6), 2155-2180. https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2017.01219a

Chicago

Zulnaidi, Hutkemri, and Sharifah Norul Akmar Syed Zamri. "The Effectiveness of the GeoGebra Software: The Intermediary Role of Procedural Knowledge On Students’ Conceptual Knowledge and Their Achievement in Mathematics". Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education 2017 13 no. 6 (2017): 2155-2180. https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2017.01219a

Harvard

Zulnaidi, H., and Syed Zamri, S. N. A. (2017). The Effectiveness of the GeoGebra Software: The Intermediary Role of Procedural Knowledge On Students’ Conceptual Knowledge and Their Achievement in Mathematics. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 13(6), pp. 2155-2180. https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2017.01219a

MLA

Zulnaidi, Hutkemri et al. "The Effectiveness of the GeoGebra Software: The Intermediary Role of Procedural Knowledge On Students’ Conceptual Knowledge and Their Achievement in Mathematics". Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, vol. 13, no. 6, 2017, pp. 2155-2180. https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2017.01219a