References

Anderson, D., Campbell, K., & Steinkuehler, C. (2019). Building persistence through failure: The role of challenge in video games. FDG '19: Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on the Foundations of Digital Games. https://doi.org/10.1145/3337722.3337741.

Association of Mathematics Teacher Educators (AMTE) (2017). AMTE Standards for Preparing Teachers of Mathematics. https://amte.net/sptm.

Bass, J., Beecham, S., & Noll, J. (2018). Experience of industry case studies: a comparison of multicase and embedded case study methods. University of Salford Manchester. http://usir.salford.ac.uk/id/eprint/46284/.

Bradley, B. (2021, July 29). Spending on tech-based curriculum jumps during the pandemic, new survey of IT leaders finds. EdWeek Market Brief. https://marketbrief.edweek.org/marketplace-k-12/spending-tech-based-curriculum-jumps-pandemic-new-survey-leaders-finds/

Buentello-Montoya, D. A., Lomelí-Plascencia, M. G., & Medina-Herrera, L. M. (2021). The role of reality enhancing technologies in teaching and learning of mathematics. Computers & Electrical Engineering, 94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compeleceng.2021.107287

Cargile, L. A., & Harkness, S. S. (2015). Flip or flop: Are math teachers using Khan Academy as envisioned by Sal Khan? Tech Trends, 59(6), 21–27.

Cauthen, L. (2020). The 2020 digital transition survey results are in: Just how large is the K12 ed-tech market? The Learning Counsel. https://thelearningcounsel.com/article/2020-digital-transition-survey-results-are-just-how-large-k12-ed-tech-market#:~:text=Digital%20curriculum%20spend%20in%202020,spend%20does%20not%20include%20staffing.

Choppin, J. (2016). Analysis of eight digital curriculum programs. In M. Bates & Z. Usiskin (Eds.), Curricula in school mathematics (pp. 161–176). Information Age Publishing.

Choppin, J., & Borys, Z. (2017). Trends in the design, development, and use of digital curriculum materials. Paper presented at the 2016 American Educational Research Association Annual Meeting, Washington, DC.

Confrey, J., & Krupa, E. (2010). Curriculum design, development and implementation in an era of Common Core State Standards. Paper presented at the Summary Report of a Conference, Arlington, VA. http://mathcurriculumcenter.org/conferences/ccss/SummaryReportCCSS.

Daro, P. (2016). Digitally enhancing learning. In M. Bates & Z. Usiskin (Eds.), Curricula in school mathematics (pp. 285–296). Information Age Publishing.

Dove, A., & Dove, E. (2017). Flipping preservice elementary teachers’ mathematics anxieties. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education (CITE Journal), 17(3).

Donnelly, S. (2021). A study of the effectiveness of iXL math online software on student achievement in an urban middle school. [Doctoral dissertation, Saint John’s University]. Theses and Dissertations. 172.

​​Driskell, S. O., Rhine, S., Wheeler, A., & Harrington, R. (2019). Enactment of digital curricula in elementary classrooms and impact on mathematical practices. In Proceedings of the 41st Annual Conference of the North American Chapter of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education. St. Louis, MO.

Driskell, S. O., Rhine, S., & Harrington, R. (2018). Developing a research agenda of K–8 teachers’ implementation of digital curricula. In T. E. Hodges, G. J. Roy, & A. M. Tyminski (Eds.), Proceedings of the 40th Annual Conference of the North American Chapter of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education. Greeneville, SC.

DuFour, R., & Marzano, R. (2011). Leaders of learning: How district, school, and classroom leaders improve student achievement. Solution Tree Press.

Empirical Education. (2013). A study of student achievement, teacher perceptions, and IXL math. IXL.com. https://www.ixl.com/research/IXL-Research-Study-2013.pdf.

Gleason, J., Livers, S., & Zelkowski, J. (2017). Mathematics Classroom Observation Protocol for Practices (MCOP^2): A validation study. Investigations in Mathematics Learning, ​9.

Guler, G., Sen, C., Ay, Z. S., & Ciltas, A. (2019). Engineering skills that emerge during model-eliciting activities (MEAs) based on 3D modeling done with mathematics pre-service teachers. International Journal of Education in Mathematics, Science and Technology, 7(3), 251–270.

Haciomeroglu, G. (2014). Elementary pre-service teachers’ mathematics anxiety and mathematics teaching anxiety. International Journal for Mathematics Teaching and Learning, 1–10.

Harrington, R., & Rhine, S. (2020). Digital tools for increasing preservice teachers’ effectiveness. In M. Khosrow-Pour (Ed.) Research anthologies critical exploration: Pre-service and in-service teacher education. Hershey, PA: IGI Global.

Heine, S., Krepf, M., & König, J. (2022). Digital resources as an aspect of teacher professional digital competence: One term, different definitions–a systematic review. Education and Information Technologies, 1–28.

Herold, B. (2016, February 5). Technology in education: An overview. Education Week. http://www.edweek.org/ew/issues/technology-in-education/index.html.

Jones, D., Hollas, V., & Klespis, M. (2017). The presentation of technology for teaching and learning mathematics in textbooks: Content courses for elementary teachers. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education (CITE Journal), 17(1).

Kafitz, D. (2017). Digital curriculum strategy survey and assessment tool. https://thelearningcounsel.com/article/national-digital-curriculum-strategy-survey-results-released.

Khan, S. (2012). The one world schoolhouse: Education reimagined. Hodder & Stoughton.

K​​oehler, M. J., & Mishra, P. (2009). What is technological pedagogical content knowledge? Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 9(1), 60–70.

Lewis, T. (2018). "i"-Ready mathematics effectiveness on student achievement and teacher evaluation scores: A quantitative study. (Publication No. ED587453) [Doctoral Dissertation, University of Phoenix]. In ProQuest LLC.

McAnallen, R. R. (2010). Examining mathematics anxiety in elementary classroom teachers (Publication No. ED530770) [Dissertation, University of Connecticut]. In ProQuest LLC.

​​Murphy, R., Gallagher, L., Krumm, A., Mislevy, J., & Hafter, A. (2014). Research on the use of Khan Academy in schools: Research brief. Palo Alto, CA: SRI International.

National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2014a). Principles to actions. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.

National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (2014b). Procedural fluency in mathematics. Position Statement. https://www.nctm.org/Standards-and-Positions/Position-Statements/Procedural-Fluency-in-Mathematics.

National Governors Association Center for Best Practices, Council of Chief State School Officers. (2010). Common Core State Standards for Mathematics. Washington, DC: Authors.

Nguyen, D. M., & Kulm, G. (2005). Using web-based practice to enhance mathematics learning and achievement. Journal of Interactive Online Learning (JIOL), 3(3).

Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3rd ed.). Sage Publications, Inc.

Pellegrini, M., Lake, C., Neitzel, A., & Slavin, R. E. (2021). Effective programs in elementary mathematics: A meta-analysis. AERA Open, 7. https://doi.org/10.1177/2332858420986211

Pepin, B., Choppin, J., Ruthven, K. B., & Sinclair, N. (2017). Digital curriculum resources in mathematics education: Foundations for change. ZDM, 49 (5), 645–661.

Remillard, J. T., & Heck, D. J. (2014). Conceptualizing the curriculum enactment process in mathematics education. Mathematics Education, 46, 705–718.

Remillard, J. T., Van Steenbrugge, H., Machalow, R., Koljonen, T., Krzywacki, H., Condon, L., & Hemmi, K. (2021). Elementary teachers’ reflections on their use of digital instructional resources in four educational contexts: Belgium, Finland, Sweden, and U.S. ZDM: Mathematics Education, 53(6), 1331–1345.

Rhine, S., Driskell, S., Harrington, R., & Wheeler, A. (2022). Implementing digital curricula in elementary math classrooms: Discussion of a case study. Annual Meeting of the Association of Mathematics Teacher Educators, New Orleans, LA.

Rhine, S., Driskell, S., Rolf, K., Hurdle, Z., & Bundock, K. (2021). The mathematics digital curricula boom: How are programs selected? Curriculum and Teaching Dialogue, 23(2), 213–228.

Rodgers, D. (2018, January 19). The TPACK framework explained. PowerSchool. https://www.powerschool.com/blog/the-tpack-framework-explained-with-classroom-examples/.

Roschelle, J., Bhanot, R. T., Patton, C., & Gallagher, L. (2015). Strength of research for reasoning mind. SRI International. https://www.sri.com/wp-content/uploads/pdf/reasoning-mind-strength-of-research-sri-report_final.pdf.

Schechtman, N., Roschelle, J., Feng, M., & Singleton, C. (2019). An efficacy study of a digital core curriculum for grade 5 mathematics. AERA Open, 5(2), https://doi.org/10.1177/2332858419850482.

Schwartz, P. (2020). Raising the bar district-wide using Symphony Math. Hanover, NH: Symphony Learning.

Simsek, M., & Yazici, N. (2021). Examining the digital learning material preparation competencies of pre-service mathematics teachers. Participatory Educational Research, 8(3), 323–343.

Singer, J. (2017, June 6). The Silicon Valley billionaires remaking America’s schools. New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/06/technology/tech-billionaires-education-zuckerberg-facebook-hastings.html.

SRI Education. (2018). Efficacy study of an integrated digital elementary school mathematics classroom. SRI International. https://www.sri.com/work/projects/efficacy-study-digital-elementary-mathematics.

Verner, J. M., Sampson, J., Tosic, V., Bakar, N. A. A., & Kitchenham, B. A. (2009). Guidelines for industrially-based multiple case studies in software engineering. Third International Conference on Research Challenges in Information Science, 313–324.

Wedekind, K. O. (2018, June 14). Why iReady is dangerous. Math Exchanges. https://mathexchanges.wordpress.com/2018/06/14/why-iready-is-dangerous/#:~:text=But%20above%20all%20else%2C%20the,broad%20and%20largely%20meaningless%20labels.

Working, C. (2018). The effects of technology-mediated dialogic learning in elementary mathematics instruction. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 37(3), 265–286.