9ÿœˆmwÐmwØ @@@ @@@@ÿÿÿÿ<¨t‚͈Çmxüi EN DB      & ./ ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ1þÐwind£àwind1þPwind£Pwind£Ewindÿ¡[°windþ¡°windý¢swindü¡í€windû¢°windù£yàwindø£yÀwind÷£Ì°windõ¡Ùpwindô£0windó£windò¡[pwindñ£0windð£windï£Pwindî¡[windí£ windì¢ðwindë¡Ù0windê¡ÙPwindé£`windè£@windË£°€windÊ¢-pwindÉ1å0windÈ¢-Pwind–£zwind\¢W€wind[¢-0windZ sàwindT1ÿÀwindS1ÿàwindR sÀwindQ s windP:w0windM£ windK1ÿ`windJ£%`windI¡Ž@windH£€windG s`windF¢2PwindE s@windD¤™€windC¢20windB¤™`wind*£%wind)¡ÿàwind&¢-°wind%¢-wind$£$Ðwind#£$ðwind"¡ÿÀwind!£$°wind ¢-Ðwind£E wind1ÿ€wind¢d wind1ÿ  ² Bates2004 Breed2004 Clarke2004V Clarke2004 Fraser2004V Julie2004 Rueda2004 Sokolowski2004ÿ Wiest2004ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓ¡±ÁÓÿûûûÿúúúÿùùùÿøøøÿôôôÿðððÿÓÓÓÿøøø ÿíííÿçççÿÞÞÞÿÒÒÒÿ¼¼¼ÿ±±±ÿâââÿþþþÿþþþÿþþþÿýýýÿþþþÿýýýÿþþþÿýýýÿþþþÿþþþÿþþþÿþþþÿþþþÿþþþÿþþþÿþþþÿþþþÿþþþÿþþþÿþþþÿþþþÿþþþÿýýýÿþþþÿýýýÿüüüÿúúúÿ÷÷÷ÿóóóÿÖÖÖÿóóóÿóóóÿðððÿîîîÿèèèÿâââÿØØØÿÃÃÃÿÄÄÄÿäääÿúúúÿúúúÿúúúÿúúúÿúúúÿúúúÿùùùÿúúúÿúúúÿúúúÿúúúÿúúúÿúúúÿúúúÿúúúÿúúúÿúúúÿÛÛÛÿúúúÿúúúÿúúúÿúúúÿúúúÿúúúÿúúúÿúúúÿúúúÿúúúÿùùùÿøøøÿöööÿôôôÿðððÿÓÓÓÿíííÿìììÿêêêÿèèèÿãããÿÝÝÝÿØØØ ÿíííÿïïïÿïïïÿïïïÿïïïÿïïïÿïïïÿïïïÿïïïÿïïïÿïïïÿïïïÿïïïÿïïïÿïïïÿïïïÿïïïÿïïïÿïïïÿÛÛÛÿïïïÿïïïÿïïïÿïïïÿïïïÿïïïÿïïïÿïïïÿïïïÿïïïÿïïïÿíííÿëëëÿèèèÿåååÿÊÊÊ  5{5{ÿsªäÿйéÿŽ»ëÿŽ»ëÿŽ»ëÿŽ»ëÿŽ»ëÿŽ»ëÿŽ»ëÿŽ»ëÿŽ»ëÿŽ»ëÿŽ»ëÿŽ»ëÿŽ»ëÿ[˜Üÿ[˜ÜÿŽ»ëÿŽ»ëÿŽ»ëÿŽ»ëÿŽ»ëÿŽ»ëÿŽ»ëÿŽ»ëÿŽ»ëÿŽ»ëÿŽ»ëÿŽ»ëÿŽ»ëÿйéÿsªäÿ xÚÿ?±((ÿ?±ÿ xÚÿsªäÿйéÿŽ»ëÿŽ»ëÿŽ»ëÿŽ»ëÿŽ»ëÿŽ»ëÿŽ»ëÿŽ»ëÿŽ»ëÿŽ»ëÿŽ»ëÿŽ»ëÿŽ»ëÿ[˜Üÿ[˜ÜÿŽ»ëÿŽ»ëÿŽ»ëÿŽ»ëÿŽ»ëÿŽ»ëÿŽ»ëÿŽ»ëÿŽ»ëÿŽ»ëÿŽ»ëÿŽ»ëÿŽ»ëÿйéÿsªäÿ xÚÿ?±((ÿ?±ÿ xÚÿsªäÿйéÿŽ»ëÿŽ»ëÿŽ»ëÿŽ»ëÿŽ»ëÿŽ»ëÿŽ»ëÿŽ»ëÿŽ»ëÿŽ»ëÿŽ»ëÿŽ»ëÿŽ»ëÿ[˜Üÿ[˜ÜÿŽ»ëÿŽ»ëÿŽ»ëÿŽ»ëÿŽ»ëÿŽ»ëÿŽ»ëÿŽ»ëÿŽ»ëÿŽ»ëÿŽ»ëÿŽ»ëÿŽ»ëÿйéÿsªäÿ xÚÿ?±((ÿ?±ÿ xÚÿsªäÿйéÿŽ»ëÿŽ»ëÿŽ»ëÿŽ»ëÿŽ»ëÿŽ»ëÿŽ»ëÿŽ»ëÿŽ»ëÿŽ»ëÿŽ»ëÿŽ»ëÿŽ»ëÿ[˜Üÿ[˜ÜÿŽ»ëÿŽ»ëÿŽ»ëÿŽ»ëÿŽ»ëÿŽ»ëÿŽ»ëÿŽ»ëÿŽ»ëÿŽ»ëÿŽ»ëÿŽ»ëÿŽ»ëÿйéÿsªäÿ xÚÿ?±((ÿ?±ÿ xÚÿsªäÿйéÿŽ»ëÿŽ»ëÿŽ»ëÿŽ»ëÿŽ»ëÿŽ»ëÿŽ»ëÿŽ»ëÿŽ»ëÿŽ»ëÿŽ»ëÿŽ»ëÿŽ»ëÿ[˜Üÿ[˜ÜÿŽ»ëÿŽ»ëÿŽ»ëÿŽ»ëÿŽ»ëÿŽ»ëÿŽ»ëÿŽ»ëÿŽ»ëÿŽ»ëÿŽ»ëÿŽ»ëÿŽ»ëÿйéÿsªäÿ xÚÿ?±( ŽêMUTX¡`p2$€‘¸°Ø¢Ðpêë4 Authors Journals Keywords                               ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ ¬ Bates, Eric T.ÿçBreed, Margarita Clark, Davidœ Clarke, DavidFraser, Sherryÿç Julie, CyrilœRueda, Norma G.çSokolowski, Carole àWiest, Lynda R.ç  The Mathematics Educator ~¾º^"Eric T. Bates Lynda R. Wiest 2004TNImpact of Personalization of Mathematical Word Problems on Student PerformanceThe Mathematics Educator142¨ 17-26  December 2004އThis research investigated the impact of personalizing mathematical word problems using individual student interests on student problem-solving performance. Ten word problems were selected randomly from amathematics textbook to create a series of two assessments. Both assessments contained problems exactly as they appeared in the textbook and problems that were personalized using student interests based on student-completed interest inventories. Fourth-grade studentsÕ scores on the non-personalized and personalized problems were compared to investigate potential achievement differences. The scores were then disaggregated to examine the impact of reading ability and problem type on the treatment outcomes. The results showed no significant increase in student achievement when the personalization treatment was used regardless of student reading ability or word problem type (t = Ð.10, p = .46).”0*David Clarke Margarita Breed Sherry Fraser 2004@:The Consequences of a Problem-Based Mathematics CurriculumThe Mathematics Educator142 7-16December, 2004òìImplementation of a problem-based mathematics curriculum, the Interactive Mathematics Program (IMP), atthree high schools in California has been associated with more than just differences in student achievement. The outcomes that distinguished students who participated in the IMP program from students who followed a conventional algebra/geometry syllabus were the studentsÕ perceptions of the discipline of mathematics, of mathematical activity and the origins of mathematical ideas, of the mathematical nature of everyday activities, and of school mathematics and themselves as mathematicians. A coherent and consistent picture has emerged of the set of beliefs, perceptions and performances arising from such a program. Students who have participated inthe IMP program appear to be more confident than their peers in conventional classes; to subscribe to a view of mathematics as having arisen to meet the needs of society, rather than as a set of arbitrary rules; to value communication in mathematics learning more highly than students in conventional classes; and to be more likely than their conventionally-taught peers to see a mathematical element in everyday activity. These outcomes occurred while the IMP students maintained performance levels on the mathematics portion of the SAT at or above those of their peers in conventional classes. If student achievement outcomes are comparable, the mathematics education community must decide whether it values these consequences of a problem-based curriculum. David Clarke 2004D>Researching Classroom Learning and Learning Classroom ResearchThe Mathematics Educator142ˆ 2-6December, 2004 Editorial Cyril Julie 2004Œ…Can the Ideal of the Development of Democratic CompetenceBe Realized Within Realistic Mathematics Education? The Case of South AfricaThe Mathematics Educator142 34-37December, 2004 editorial& Norma G. Rueda Carole Sokolowski 2004:4Mathematics Placement Test: Helping Students SucceedThe Mathematics Educator142¤ 27-33December, 2004ľA study was conducted at Merrimack College in Massachusetts to compare the grades of students who took the recommended course as determined by their mathematics placement exam score and those who did not followthis recommendation. The goal was to decide whether the mathematics placement exam used at Merrimack College was effective in placing students in the appropriate mathematics class. During five years, first-year students who took a mathematics course in the fall semester were categorized into four groups: those who took the recommended course, those who took an easier course than recommended, those who took a course more difficult than recommended, and those who did not take the placement test. Chi-square tests showed astatistically significant relationship between course grade (getting a CÐ or higher grade) and placement advice.The results indicate that students who take the recommended course or an easier one do much better than those who take a higher-level course or do not take the placement exam. With achievement in coursework as the measure of success, we concluded that the placement test is an effective tool for making recommendations to students about which courses they should take.