INVENTED STRATEGIES CHANGING TEACHERS’ PEDAGOGICAL CONTENT

KNOWLEDGE
Jana Lunt
Southern Utah University
[email protected]
This study investigates how utilizing student-invented strategies in the classroom can inform
teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge. Two elementary school teachers participated in
professional development discussing the benefits of invented strategies. Data was then gathered
as the participants implemented this practice in their classrooms. Data was analyzed
qualitatively to show the ways in which invented strategies can be useful in a teacher’s
development of their pedagogical content knowledge, including their Knowledge of Content and
Students, Knowledge of Content and Teaching, as well as Knowledge of Content and
Curriculum.
Keywords: Teacher Knowledge, Instructional Activities and Practices, Elementary School
Education, Curriculum
As one elementary school teacher in this study told me, “In 20 years of teaching I have never
come across a math curriculum that encourages teachers to ask students to solve problems with
their own invented strategies.” In her experience, teaching in three different states, she had not
been exposed to the importance of giving students time to develop their own algorithms. After
the first day of implementing this practice, I talked with the teacher, expecting to hear validation
of the research about students’ capacity for thought and their flexibility in their understanding
(Carpenter, Franke, Jacobs, Fennema, & Empson, 1998; Chambers, 1996). I was surprised that
the conversation centered on what she, as the teacher, had learned. Her understanding of the
students, of her own teaching, and of the curriculum changed after watching students invent their
own strategies to solve problems.
The teachers in this study reveal how their pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) increased.
Some of this growth was pleasing to them. It amplified their current beliefs and ways of thinking.
It resonated with past experiences and harmoniously pushed them in ways that excited them. On
the other hand, some of this growth was jarring for the teachers to experience. They found this
practice confusing, and claimed that it created dissonance between their past teaching practices
and what they wanted to accomplish. This study investigates how teachers can increase their
PCK directly from observing their students use invented strategies.

Objectives
We know the value of invented strategies for students (Carroll, 1999). In this study I begin to
uncover the value of using student-invented strategies for the teachers themselves. My study is
exploratory in nature and seeks out possible ways in which teachers can use this practice to
change how they see and understand their students, what they teach and how they teach, and how
they use the curriculum in their teaching.

Framework
My research uses Deborah Ball’s construct of the mathematical knowledge needed for
teaching (Ball, Phelps, & Thames, 2008). As Ball illustrates, there are several components of
PCK. Knowledge of Content and Students (KCS) is knowledge that involves the dynamic

Lischka, A. E., Dyer, E. B., Jones, R. S., Lovett, J. N., Strayer, J., & Drown, S. (2022). Proceedings of the forty-fourth annual meeting 680
of the North American Chapter of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education. Middle Tennessee
State University.
between understanding specific mathematical concepts, and familiarity with students and their
thinking about those concepts. This includes knowing student conceptions as well student
misconceptions. Teachers need to be able to predict how students will perform on a task, and
what students will find challenging, what students will find easy, and what students will find
confusing. As students are developing their own concepts, even while those concepts are still
incomplete, teachers need to be able to understand the students’ language and ideas.
Knowledge of content and teaching (KCT), is knowledge that combines knowing about
teaching and knowing about mathematics. Teachers need to understand the architecture of a task
and what types of responses will be elicited by the design of the task. Teachers need to know
how to sequence particular content for instruction. They need to discern the advantages and
disadvantages of different tasks, manipulative, and technologies. When developing content with
students, they need to make decisions about which student ideas to pursue, when to pause for
clarification, and when to pursue a new avenue.
Knowledge of Content and Curriculum (KCC), the intersection between knowledge of
mathematical content and knowledge of the curriculum from which it is taught, is not developed
in the literature, but Ball theorizes that KCC is a factor in a teacher’s PCK. As Hill suggests,
currently KCC is an “interim placement…still in need of revision and refinement…it may run
across several categories or be a category of its own” (Hill, Ball, & Schilling, 2008)
My study also relies on the importance of student-invented strategies in the classroom.
Carpenter’s longitudinal study of invention and understanding in multi-digit addition and
subtraction with children shows that students benefit from inventing their own algorithms and
strategies in a variety of ways (Carpenter, Franke, Jacobs, Fennema, & Empson, 1998). The
authors explain that, in contrast to standard algorithms, invented strategies generally are derived
directly from the underlying concepts. Therefore, students who are asked to devise and use their
own strategies demonstrate knowledge of underlying concepts before students who relied
primarily on standard algorithms. Invented strategies demonstrate a characteristic hallmark of
understanding, and children who use them are able to use them flexibly to transfer their use to
new situations.
In this study, I helped practicing elementary school teachers understand the benefits of
invented strategies. They implemented this practice in their classrooms and, in doing so, they
learned more about their students, they discovered benefits of and problems with their teaching
methods, and changed their relationship to the curriculum.

Methods
After teaching a series of professional development courses at an elementary school, one
second-grade teacher, Julie (all names used are pseudonyms), approached me and asked me to
look over the text they were using to “see what was missing.” I noticed that student-invented
strategies were not addressed in the text, nor in her curriculum. She was very interested in
exploring the use of this practice. For the second half of that school year, Julie intermittently
gave time to students to try their own strategies before teaching them the standard algorithm. She
was impressed with what the students gained from this experience, and I was surprised by and
interested in what she was learning from the experience. This informal interaction developed into
a pilot study. I began observing Julie teach each time she used invented strategies in her class
and interviewed her afterwards. There was so much she was learning that we decided to continue
the study the following school year and to include other teachers at the school.
Julie approached all of the other second and third-grade teachers at her school to see if they
were interested in participating. Over the summer I met with four teachers to discuss the research

Lischka, A. E., Dyer, E. B., Jones, R. S., Lovett, J. N., Strayer, J., & Drown, S. (2022). Proceedings of the forty-fourth annual meeting 681
of the North American Chapter of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education. Middle Tennessee
State University.
regarding invented strategies and the benefits for students. Unfortunately, by the end of the
summer two of the teachers had left the school. This was the summer of 2020, and it was unclear
if we were going to be able to continue the study at all because of the COVID-19 pandemic.
However, this particular school district did teach face-to-face for the 2020-21 academic year. So,
although the number of participating teachers was down to just two, these two teachers were still
willing to take on this new challenge, in the midst of all of the other pandemic-related
difficulties, and learn more about student-invented strategies.
I met with Julie, a second-grade teacher, and Kamila, a third-grade teacher, several times
during the summer and at the beginning of the school year to discuss general benefits of invented
algorithms. We focused on things teachers should know about the importance of and reasons for
employing invented algorithms (Trafton, P., & Thiessen, D., 2004). We also discussed content-
specific invented strategies such as children’s conceptual structures for addition and subtraction
(Fuson, Wearne, Hiebert, Murray, Human, Olivier, & Fennema, 1997; Huinker, Freckman, &
Steinmeyer, 2003). The teachers decided, completely on their own, how they would use this
knowledge to change and enhance their teaching over the following year. Both teachers decided
to use invented strategies before each section that involved a new algorithm.
I observed and took notes during any class time during which teachers were using invented
strategies. I made copies of materials used by the teacher, took photographs of board work, and
recorded other relevant data including occasional student work. After each observed class, I
interviewed the teachers. I audio-recorded those interviews as well as took field notes. The field
notes, curricular materials, board work, student work, and teacher interviews were used to
analyze how the teachers’ PCK was being affected by utilizing student-invented strategies.
The analysis was conducted qualitatively. Learning what the teachers noticed, what surprised
them, what they expected, and what changes they made to future lessons due to their findings all
provided me with an important avenue for investigating what they were learning. I reviewed the
materials looking for patterns, and ultimately found evidence of several developments in the
teachers. It was not until after I looked for patterns that I began thinking of the teachers’ growth
as improving their PCK. This became the avenue for how I grounded by research and began
analyzing the data

Results
I discovered ways in which students using invented algorithms informed each aspect of the
teachers’ PCK. The following paragraphs will highlight some of the ways that teachers
experienced change in their Knowledge of Content and Students (KCS), Knowledge of Content
and Teaching, (KCT) as well as possibly Knowledge of Content and Curriculum (KCC).
Examples of Change in Teacher’s Knowledge of Content and Students
Students as imparters and constructors of knowledge. Because students were given more
of a voice in the classroom, teachers were able to get to know their students’ capabilities on a
deeper level. The teacher, as well as the students, began to see the children as ‘imparters of
information,” according to Julie. Everyone in the classroom saw the students as “capable of
knowing and sharing things” and not just the teacher. Julie and Kamila frequently described how
they watched the students build confidence as they displayed their thinking to others or made
connections to previous strategies. As Julie said, “I’d never asked what they already know. I
know much more about that now.” The teachers were able to see even their struggling students in
a different way, focusing not just on what these students did not understand, but also seeing what
they did understand. After a day of student-invented strategies Julie reported, “One of my
struggling students today was able to solve a subtraction problem on her own today, without

Lischka, A. E., Dyer, E. B., Jones, R. S., Lovett, J. N., Strayer, J., & Drown, S. (2022). Proceedings of the forty-fourth annual meeting 682
of the North American Chapter of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education. Middle Tennessee
State University.
having been taught how. I think the flexibility in solving problems in different ways has enabled
her to get better at using the strategy that makes most sense to her. Even when posed with the
traditional algorithm she uses drawings to help her solve problems and is making great
gains. This is so exciting!”
Students spent a lot of time comparing and critiquing other students’ strategies. The teachers
realized this forced students to explain themselves more clearly and visibly. It encouraged
everyone to participate. As Kamila said, “Everyone is working on something. No one is just
sitting there. They are all willing to come up and share and talk about strategies. They feel
successful and proud.” Both teachers saw the benefits of students working with partners. They
acknowledged that they often used partner-work with reading, but rarely with math. Now they
could see how working in partnerships allowed students to help one another, and built
confidence and ownership of their work.
Julie used invented strategies in the previous school year, as part of our pilot study. One day
after school, one of the students from the previous year approached Julie and asked, “Did you
teach them my strategy yet?” Julie did not immediately remember which strategy the student
claimed as hers, but the student quickly reminded her. Julie told me, “It made me realize how
powerful invented strategies are because kids take ownership of them. They are the constructors
of their own knowledge. For her to remember that a year later made quite an impression on me!”
The teachers began to look at their students differently: they were now capable of constructing
their own knowledge and sharing it with other students.
Student learning styles. The teachers frequently talked about understanding individual
students’ ways of thinking more clearly. They did not only view their class as a whole, but the
teachers could describe each student, what types of strategies each preferred and which strategies
posed a struggle. This understanding helped the teachers group students more effectively. Julie
described this process:
After the lesson I sorted the student work into three categories: 1) students who have at least
one strategy and were able to solve all of the problems, 2) students who had a start (part of a
strategy or a whole strategy, but may have had a misconception or mistakes, and 3) those
who don’t seem to have any strategies at their disposal. In thinking about these groups of
students, it confirmed for me which students have solid strategies and can work
independently and most likely transfer these skills. It also showed me which students would
benefit from scaffolding…which students need to work with concrete base ten blocks before
working with pictures or abstract problems.
Teachers could describe individual students’ learning styles after watching them repeatedly
invent strategies because they could see which strategies their students relied on, and which
strategies the students were using when they made mistakes. As one teacher reported, “When
kids get to the standard algorithm they won’t use it if they don’t understand it. They will fall
back on other strategies they have used.” The teachers were more aware of how their students
thought, how the students could best express themselves, and what tools helped them learn.
Student misconceptions. Julie and Kamila are seasoned teachers, each having taught their
grade level for over 20 years. They were both surprised that letting students use invented
strategies revealed student misconceptions of which they were previously unaware. For example,
many of the strategies in these grades relied on an understanding of place value. But, as some
students used their invented strategies, it became clear to the teachers that the students had
unanticipated misconceptions about place value. Frequently, these misconceptions surfaced
when students were discussing their strategies and they would use words incorrectly,

Lischka, A. E., Dyer, E. B., Jones, R. S., Lovett, J. N., Strayer, J., & Drown, S. (2022). Proceedings of the forty-fourth annual meeting 683
of the North American Chapter of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education. Middle Tennessee
State University.
demonstrating to the teachers that the students did not fully understand the math concept behind
the words.
The teachers were more informed when words such as “equal” or “whole,” for example, were
concepts that needed more instruction. It was also apparent to teachers when students did not
understand why they were doing certain algorithms. Teachers described identifying a lack of
connection between tasks within a unit that was building to a cumulative goal. There were many
times when teachers thought the students understood a topic, but recognized that the
understanding was not there when the teachers invited the students to build on that topic for the
next topic, using student invented-strategies.
Student transfer. The teachers were very concerned about and interested in transfer as they
discussed their students with me. Sometimes the teachers saw the students using previous
knowledge to solve new problems more than they had expected. They saw invented strategies as
a tool that students used to help make connections between different topics. There were also
many times when the teachers expressed discouragement that the students were not able to build
on what they had discussed previously. In some ways, invented strategies left as many questions
as answers when it came to students’ ability to transfer knowledge. After a year of using this
teaching strategy, the teachers are still interested in invented strategies to investigate transfer.
Examples of Change in Teacher’s Knowledge of Content and Teaching
Assessment. The teachers immediately saw invented strategies as a form of assessment. Julie
described using invented strategies, and asking the students to articulate their thinking in writing,
as one of the best things she could use to see what her students were understanding. “That was
more helpful than seeing the problem and how they solved it,” she explained. Julie now wants to
use invented strategies mid-chapter as a formative assessment in her teaching.
Julie and Kamila also found themselves thinking more about assessment in general after
using invented strategies. They examined the type of assessments they were using and realized a
need for changes. In a conversation with the two teachers they said, “There needs to be some
changes on a school level about how students are assessed. There should be more one-on-one
assessment with math. We do it with reading; why don’t we do that in math?”
In addition to assessment at the end of, or even during a chapter, the teachers realized
invented strategies were an excellent tool to use for pre-assessment. After the very first day that
Julie taught with invented strategies she said, “Truly today worked as a pre-assessment and
helped me understand what skills my students already have in this arena, as well as helped me
identify some action steps for how to address their needs.” The teachers were looking to see how
students were able to build on concepts they had learned previously and what new boundaries
they could investigate all on their own.
Sometimes the pre-assessment went well and sometimes it did not. When the pre-assessment
did not go well, the teachers learned they might need to go back and address concepts from
previous lessons. As Kamila described, “If their foundation isn’t there, they can’t see it. They
can’t move forward.” Based on how the students performed when trying strategies of their own,
the teachers were able to make decisions about the upcoming lessons. The teachers were able to
look beyond whether the students performed well or not on the pre-assessment. They were able
to decide which concepts they needed to review more, the tasks that would most benefit their
students, which students were best suited to work together, and which students needed more
instruction.
Manipulatives. At the end of the study, when asking the teachers how they had changed,
Kamila expressed that her relationship to manipulatives possibly had changed more than

Lischka, A. E., Dyer, E. B., Jones, R. S., Lovett, J. N., Strayer, J., & Drown, S. (2022). Proceedings of the forty-fourth annual meeting 684
of the North American Chapter of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education. Middle Tennessee
State University.
anything else. She said, “I am the type of person that I like to have everything in its place, but
now my intention is to have manipulatives accessible so that students can take any tool they feel
will help. I already have this math station envisioned in my mind and am so excited about it!”
She was looking forward to a time (past the pandemic) when it would be possible to set up a
table of manipulatives for students to use at their discretion.
Because of COVID-19, each of Julie’s students had access to their own individual bag of
manipulatives that they could use anytime they chose. Even if individualized bags are no longer
necessary after the pandemic, Julie plans to continue this practice so that her students have better
access to a larger number and a larger variety of manipulatives.
Along with deciding that students need to have more freedom and more choices with
manipulatives, teachers were able to tell when, as a classroom, they needed to revert to using a
tangible tool instead of proceeding more abstractly. For example, when transitioning from single
digit subtraction to double digit subtraction in Julie’s classroom, she noticed that many of the
students who tried their version of the traditional algorithm were subtracting the top number
from the bottom number. She said this helped her understand that “I need to go back to using
blocks and have them see that they cannot subtract in any order.” Using invented strategies
helped her see when it would be helpful to revisit using manipulatives.
The teachers also saw how more use of manipulatives changed the students. Julie noticed that
her students seemed less intimidated by new problems that had not been explained to them. The
students knew they could find a tool that could help them think through the problems. “Everyone
has a starting point now,” explained Kamila. The teachers found value in helping students
increase their confidence and independence by giving students autonomous access to
manipulatives when using invented strategies.
Student-led discussions. According to the teachers, using invented strategies has guided
them to a more inquiry-based approach for teaching. Julie learned that getting her students to
think deeply about a topic was more easily done as a discussion that was student-led and
centered on their own approaches. She realized that when she had been relying on the textbook,
the discussions were always teacher-led. She could see that even when the class was not
discussing invented strategies, if she wanted deeper thinking, students needed to become more
involved. She resolved to plan for times when students would lead the dialogue in all subjects.
Kamila discovered that, when she asked her students a question about their strategy, the
students initially would assume that they were wrong. This helped her understand that she was
not routinely asking enough questions about how the students were thinking. Both teachers
suggested that using invented strategies has taught them to use questioning in a different way.
They are more likely to ask questions such as, “What do you already know?” or “What strategy
have you used before that could help you?” They describe using these questions as a way to
maintain a high cognitive demand in the tasks, allowing students to think more deeply over a
longer period of time. In a reflection at the end of the school year Julie said she wants to include
“at least three thinking questions in every math class, no matter if it is a textbook lesson or an
invented strategy lesson.” Using invented strategies changed her teaching style to include more
questioning, which elicited student-led conversations.
Examples of Change in Teacher’s Knowledge of Content and Curriculum
Previous research is unclear about the details of PCK with respect to the teacher’s knowledge
of content and curriculum. As I was listening to the teachers talk about their relationship to the
textbook and how it was changing, I saw possibilities of how using student-invented strategies
could change a teacher’s KCC.

Lischka, A. E., Dyer, E. B., Jones, R. S., Lovett, J. N., Strayer, J., & Drown, S. (2022). Proceedings of the forty-fourth annual meeting 685
of the North American Chapter of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education. Middle Tennessee
State University.
 Freedom from the textbook. After using invented strategies, teachers decided that they
were relying on the textbook too heavily for their curriculum. According to Kamila, “the
Common Core was, at least in part, designed to encourage students to think more critically. But
we are still teaching systematically. We give students more freedom in reading. We need to do
that more with math.” Both teachers realized this could not be done if they taught straight from
the textbook, as they had previously been doing. In a conversation with Kamila, Julie said,
“Teachers need to feel enough freedom, and trust themselves enough, to not rely on the text.
There needs to be willingness from teachers and administration to supplement the text so kids are
getting opportunities to develop conceptual understanding.” She said she felt an expectation to
teach with fidelity to the text but that “if we do it with fidelity, we will never create deep
thinkers.”
Students need to have an opportunity to select and invent strategies and, in their experience,
the text always tells them which strategy to use. The teachers decided that metacognition is not
present when students work from their books because students are merely following procedures,
compared to using invented strategies which gives students opportunities to think about their
thinking. Kamila decided, “teaching the Common core is what we need to do with fidelity, not
the textbook.”
Thinking critically while using textbook. Even when using the textbook, teachers realized
they need to be thinking more about their pedagogical choices. They realized that they could still
facilitate student-led discussions and group work, and start a lesson with invented strategies,
while still approaching the lesson from the text. In their opinion, most textbook lessons were not
complex enough, so they could incorporate activities such as making an argument and critiquing
others’ work using textbook lessons. One of their conclusions at the end of the study, one they
had not previously acknowledged, was that they could omit some parts of the units in the
curriculum and add in other lessons. Invented strategies helped them feel freer to make
pedagogical decisions. They could decide which units needed to be longer or shorter, and use
their assessments to guide their practice. They could use modeling, even if it was not an explicit
part of the textbook lesson. They learned that they needed to decide how to balance things like
invented strategies versus the textbook’s specific algorithms.
The teachers also realized that there were parts of the text they now understood better. By the
end of the year, they discovered sections of the text that were intended as inquiry-based class
activities, but they were not able to recognize them as such before they started using invented
strategies. Kamila described a section in the textbook where the students were asked to write
about their thinking. She realized she had not fully utilized that section in previous years, but was
now able to see the purpose of the activity. Kamila and Julie both believed that teachers would
benefit from professional development regarding textbook use, discussing how to encourage
deeper levels of thinking among students and assessing the curriculum as a group.

Discussion
Learning about new ideas and changing teaching practice is both exciting and interesting, as
well as difficult and discouraging. Kamila and Julie felt all of these emotions as they were asked
to think more critically about their PCK.
Critical Dissonance
It was jarring for the teachers to watch their students fail to see patterns, make connections,
or transfer knowledge in unanticipated ways when the teachers asked students to use invented
strategies. This practice illuminated problems in ways that were occasionally surprising and
disheartening. Teachers sometimes finished a lesson and realized students did not understand the

Lischka, A. E., Dyer, E. B., Jones, R. S., Lovett, J. N., Strayer, J., & Drown, S. (2022). Proceedings of the forty-fourth annual meeting 686
of the North American Chapter of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education. Middle Tennessee
State University.
topic to the extent the teachers had supposed. Teachers sometimes realized that they had been
using a word or an expression for some time that the students did not actually understand, but the
teachers did not discover this until the students tried to employ their own strategies. These
realizations were sometimes painful for the teachers, causing teachers to second-guess past
lessons, and wondering what they had missed before. The teachers frequently wished that they
had more time.
Resonant Harmony
Of course, much of what the teachers learned resonated with them perfectly. Imparting a
stronger voice to their students helped the teachers accomplish their goals. Because of COVID-
19 each student was given their own set of manipulatives to use. This was a providential turn of
events that led to teachers learning that students need better access to manipulatives. It was not a
challenging new idea; the teachers already knew the value of manipulatives. However, they
learned how to improve the implementation of this idea.
In addition, learning that their students need to work more with others fit perfectly with the
teachers’ PCK. They were already implementing this practice in other subjects, but they realized
that they were not doing it enough in math. These realizations amplified and improved their
teaching, helping them push through the pandemic’s obstacles to find a better way.
One of the most remarkable things about teachers such as these is their ability to change.
These teachers took in new information about PCK and used it to change the experience of their
students. Regardless of whether the change in PCK was difficult or easy for them, these teachers
knew that it was necessary to improve their teaching. As Julie said, “Invented strategies are a
way to open up the dialogue to include more student-directed discussion, to enable teacher
reflection and analysis of student work, and to allow students to build on their conceptual
understanding. I will include invented strategies in future lessons to ensure more student voice
and encourage a more authentic mathematics community.”

Limitations
There were many limitations to the study, specifically because of COVID-19. I had four
teachers who were excited about participating and were planning on recruiting others in their
grade bands before the pandemic hit. Then two of the teachers decided it was a good time to
retire from teaching and others realized that, with all the difficulties that were facing them, it was
not a good time to be in a study. So only being able to work with two teachers was very limiting.
Additionally, rules for being in classrooms at this time became a lot stricter. Schools were
not interested in having more people interact with students and teachers. In fact, the only way I
was able to attend the classrooms was to become a teacher aide. I was not able to conduct
interviews with or film the students, but I did interact quite a bit with them and even served in
other capacities, such as a running reading groups and going on field trips. This was a major
reason for shifting the data collecting to only interviews with the teachers. This seemed
permissible because the teachers were truly the participants of the study, but videos of the
classroom would clearly have been helpful for data analysis.

References
Ball, D. L., Thames, M., & Phelps, G. (2008). Content knowledge for teaching: What makes it special? Journal for
Research in Mathematics Education, 59(5), 389-407.
Carpenter, T. P., Franke, M. L., Jacobs, V. R., Fennema, E., & Empson, S. B. (1998). A longitudinal study of
invention and understanding in children's multidigit addition and subtraction. Journal for research in
mathematics education, 29(1), 3-20.

Lischka, A. E., Dyer, E. B., Jones, R. S., Lovett, J. N., Strayer, J., & Drown, S. (2022). Proceedings of the forty-fourth annual meeting 687
of the North American Chapter of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education. Middle Tennessee
State University.
Carroll, W. M. (1999). Invented computational procedures of students in a standards-based curriculum. The Journal
of Mathematical Behavior, 18(2), 111-121.
Chambers, D. L. (1996). Direct modeling and invented procedures: Building on students' informal strategies.
Teaching Children Mathematics, 3(2), 92-96.
Fuson, K. C., Wearne, D., Hiebert, J. C., Murray, H. G., Human, P. G., Olivier, A. I., & Fennema, E. (1997).
Children’s conceptual structures for multidigit numbers and methods of multidigit addition and
subtraction. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 28(2), 130-162.
Hill, H.C., Ball, D.L., & Schilling, S.G. (2008). Unpacking pedagogical content knowledge: Conceptualizing and
measuring teachers’ topic specific knowledge of students. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education,
39(4), 372-400.
Huinker, D., Freckman, J. L., & Steinmeyer, M. B. (2003). Subtraction strategies from children's thinking: Moving
toward fluency with greater numbers. Teaching Children Mathematics, 9(6), 347-353.
Trafton, P., & Thiessen, D. (2004). Linking mental and written computation via extended work with invented
strategies. Beyond written computation, 113-125.

Lischka, A. E., Dyer, E. B., Jones, R. S., Lovett, J. N., Strayer, J., & Drown, S. (2022). Proceedings of the forty-fourth annual meeting 688
of the North American Chapter of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education. Middle Tennessee
State University.