一、中文部分
谷瑞勉譯（1999）。鷹架兒童的學習：維高斯基與幼兒教育（L. E. Berk & A. Winsler著）。臺北：心理。
吳裕益（2005）。階層線性模式（HLM）在縱貫資料分析的應用，臺南大學上課講義，未出版。
周玉秀（2006）。從 PISA 看數學素養與中小學數學教育。科學教育月刊，293，2-21。
林素微（2002）。國小高年級學童數感特徵暨電腦化數感動態評量發展的探討。國立臺灣師範大學教育心理與輔導學系博士論文。未出版。
林素微（2008）。PISA數學素養評量的切入與設計。國民教育，48（6），15-21。
林素微、洪碧霞（1997）。國小六年級學童數學解題彈性思考動態測量的研究。教育測驗新近發展趨勢學術研討會。臺南師範學院。
林素微、蕭嘉偉（2011）。學生數學表現分析。載於洪碧霞（主編），臺灣PISA 2009結果報告。（115-149 頁）。臺北市：心理。
林煥祥、劉聖忠、林素微、李暉（2008）。臺灣參加PISA 2006成果報告。行政院國家科學委員會專題研究成果報告（報告編碼：NSC 95-2522-S-026-002），未出版。
林碧珍、謝豐瑞（2011）。臺灣小學數學職前教師培育研究。行政院國家科學委員會專題研究成果報告（報告編碼：NSC 98-2522-S-134-002），未出版。
洪碧霞（2009）。教育部攜手計畫課後扶助網路評量計畫。臺南大學。
洪碧霞、蕭嘉偉、林素微（2010）。PISA數學素養認知成份分析對補救教學的意涵。課程與教學季刊，13（1），47-66。
洪碧霞、蕭嘉偉、楊佩馨（2008）。從認知負荷觀點分析國小二至四年級數與計算成就測驗。教育研究與發展期刊，4（4），151-168。
洪萬生（2008）。從國際教育評比淺論當前數學教育的得失。科學月刊，39（2），84-85。
教育部（2001）。國民中小學九年一貫課程暫行綱要。台北：作者。
教育部（2003）。九年一貫課程數學領域綱要。台北：作者。
陳沅（2007）。資優學生知識移轉鷹架化模式效益之探討-以圖形推理學習系統為例。國立高雄師範大學工業科技教育學系博士論文。未出版。
陳任廣、楊義明（1989）。英漢教育辭典。臺北：五洲。
陳沅、林宜樺、洪碧霞（2003，3月）。心智工具在融入式網路數學專題學習中應用效益的探討。載於國立臺南師範學院舉辦的「網路專題學習與多元動態評量模式發展趨勢研究會論文集（頁103-117）。臺南。
陳彥廷、柳賢（2005）。運用鷹架理論初探國小學生數學學習—以一位五年級學童為例。南大學報，39（1），27-44。
陸昱任、譚克平（2006）。論數學素養的意涵。載於國立臺灣師範大學所舉辦的「中華民國第22屆科學教育學術研討會論文集（頁1092-1097）。台北
張基成（1997）。開發思考與創造力的知識建構工具與認知學習環境的探討：電腦的革新應用。教育科技與媒體，33，36-45。
張菀珍（1997）。鷹架理論在成人教學實務之應用。成人教育雙月刊，40，43-52。
郭慧玲（2002）。探討量化素養的意涵與評量中學生量化素工具的開發。國立臺灣師範大學科學教育研究所碩士論文。未出版。
單維彰（2008）。PISA的數學溝通評量。科學月刊，39（1），12-13。
單維彰（2008）。從PISA 2006看教育問題。科學月刊，39（2），92-93。
臺灣PISA國家研究中心（2011）。臺灣PISA 2009結果報告。臺北市：心理。
潘世尊（2002）。教學上的鷹架要怎麼搭。國立屏東師範學院學報，16，263-294。
蕭嘉偉、洪碧霞（2010）。試算表融入的數學教學與評量設計。數位學習科技期刊，2（3），1-18。
蘇育任（1993）。「兒童的科學」研究之沿革與其對國小自然科教學之啟示。台中師範學院初等教育研究集刊，1，91-104。


二、英文部分
Abramovich, S. (2003). Spreadsheet-enhanced problem solving in context as modeling. Spreadsheets in Education, 1(1), 1-17.
Allsop, D. H., Kyger, M. M., Lovin, L., Gerretson, H., Carson, K. L., & Ray, S. (2008). Mathematics dynamic assessment: Informal assessment that responds to the needs of struggling learners in mathematics. Teaching Exceptional Children, 40(3), 6-16.
Ansari, D. & Karmiloff-Smith, A. (2002). Atypical trajectories of number development: a neuroconstructivist perspective. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 6(12), 511-516.
Baker, J. & Sugden, S. J. (2003). Spreadsheets in education –the first 25 years. Spreadsheets in Education, 1(1), 18-43.
Ball, D. L. (2003). Mathematical Proficiency for All Students: Toward a Strategic Research and Development Program in Mathematics Education. Rand.
Battista, M. T. (1999). The Mathematical Miseducation of America''s Youth Ignoring Research and Scientific Study in Education. Phi Delta Kappan, 80(6), 424-433.
Battista, M. T. & Clements, D. H. (2000). Mathematics curriculum development as a scientific endeavor. I, A. E. Kelly & R. A. Lesh (Eds.), Handbook of research design in mathematics and science education. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Campione, J. C., & Brown, A. L. (1985). Dynamic assessment: one approach and some initial data. Nation Inst. of Child Health and Human Development (Eds.), Teachnical report .Washington, DC.
Chen, G. H. & Chen, H. C. (2007). The learning and transfer effect of computer-based dynamic assessment on time concepts. Journal of Information Technology and Applications, 2(2), 85-92.
Cockcroft, W. H. (1982), Mathematics Counts. London: HMSO.
Dimitrov, D. M. & Raykov, T. (2003). Validation of cognitive structures: a structural equation modeling approach. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 38(1), 1-23.
Dimitrov, D. M. (2007). Least squares distance method of cognitive validation and analysis for binary items using their item response theory parameters. Applied Psychological Measurement, 31(5), 367-387.
diSessa, A.A. (2000). Changing minds: Computers, learning and literacy. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Doerr, H., & English, L. D. (2003). A Modeling perspective on students’ mathematical reasoning about data. Journal of Research in Mathematics Education, 34(2), 110-136.
Drier, H. S. (2001). Teaching and learning mathematics with interactive spreadsheets. School Science and Mathematics, 101(4), 170-179.
English, L.D. (2006). Mathematical Modeling in the primary school. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 63(3), 303-323.
Figueira-Sampaio, A. S., dos Santos, E. E. F., & Carrijo, G. A. (2009). A constructivist computational tool to assist in learning primary school mathematical equations. Computers & Education, 53(2), 484-492.
Green, J. (2009). Using spreadsheet to make algebra more accessible. Australian Mathematics Teacher, 65(1), 17-21,
Harvey, F. A. & Charnitski, C. W. (1998). Improving Mathematics Instruction Using Technology: A Vygotskian Perspective. (Report No. IR019058). St. Louis, MO: National Convention of the Association for Educational Communications and Technology. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED423837)
Jetter, A. (1993). “Mississippi Learning.” The New York Times Magazine, 28-32.
Jonassen, D. H. (1996). Mindtools: Computers in the classroom. Prentice Hall: Englewood.
Jonassen, D. H., Carr, C., & Yueh, H. P. (1998). Computers as mindtools for engaging learners in critical thinking. ProQuest Education Journals, 43(2), 24-32.
Kirschner, P. A. & Erkens, G. (2006). Cognitive tools and mindtools for collaborative learning. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 35(2), 199-209.
Lamontagne, C., Desjardins, F., & Bénard, M. (2007). Flatbrain spreadsheets: mindtool outside the box? British Journal of Educational Technology, 38(4), 687-698.
Lesh, R., & Lehrer, R. (2003). Models and modeling perspectives on the development of students and teachers. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 5(2&3), 109-130.
Lesh, R., Middleton, J. A., Caylor, E., & Gupta, S. (2008). A science need: Designing tasks to engage students in modeling complex data. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 68(2), 113-130.
Lesh, R. & Zawojewski, J. S. (2007). Problem solving and modeling. In F. Lester (Ed.), The Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (2 nd ed.) (Joint Publication) Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics; Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.
Mousoulides, N., Sriraman, B., & Christou, C. (2008). A modeling perspective in mathematical problem solving. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 10(3), 293-304.
National Council of Teacher of Mathematics [NCTM]. (1989). Curriculum and valuation standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics [NCTM]. (2000). The principles and standards for cchool mathematics [PSSM]. Reston, VA: Author.
Noss, R. & Hoyles, C. (1996). Windows on Mathematical Meanings: Learning Cultures and Computers. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
The National Assessment of Educational Progress [NAEP](2009). NAEP Mathematics Framework, 2009. Retrieved November 7, 2009, from Web site: http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/
Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development [OECD] (1995). Literacy, Economy and Society：Results of the first international adult literacy survey. Paris: Author.
Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development [OECD] (2002). PISA 2000 technical report. Paris: Author.
Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development [OECD] (2004). Learning for tomorrow’s world: first results from PISA 2003. Paris: Author.
Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development [OECD] (2010a). PISA 2009 Results: What Students Know and Can Do. Student Performance in Reading, Mathematics and Science. Paris: Author.
Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development [OECD] (2010b). Draft 2012 PISA mathematics framework, Governing Board.
EDU/PISA/GB(2010)2/REV1.
Papanastasiou, E. C. & Ferdig, R. E. (2006). Computer use and mathematical literacy: an analysis of existing and potential relationships. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 25(4), 361-371.
Peltenburg, M., van den Heuvel-Panhuizen, M., & Doig, B. (2009). Mathematical power of special-needs pupils: an ICT-based dynamic assessment format to reveal weak pupils'' learning potential. British Journal of Educational Technology, 40(2), 273-284.
Pellegrino, J. W., Chudowsky, N., & Glaser, R. (2001). Knowing what students know: The science and design of educational assessment. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Pena, E., Iglesias, A., & Lidz, C. S. (2001). Reducing test bias through dynamic assessment of children''s word learning ability. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 10(2), 138-152.
Ploger, D., Klingler, L., & Rooney, M. (1997, February). Spreadsheets, Patterns, and Algebraic Thinking. Teaching Children Mathematic, 330-334.
Ponte, J. P., Nunes, F., & Veloso, E. (1991). Using Computers in Mathematics Teaching. A Collection of Case Studies. (Report No. IR015856). Commission of the European Communities, Brussels (Belgium). (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED352925 )
Rasmussen, J (2001). The importance of communication in teaching: a systems-theory approach to the scaffolding metaphor. Curriculum Studies, 33(5), 569-582.
Rochowicz, J. A. (1998). Sequences, Series, and Spreadsheets: A Mathematical Excursion. (Report No. GCT-RR-98-6). Alvernia, R: Alvernia University. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 421357)
Sáenz, C. (2009). The role of contextual, conceptual and procedural knowledge in activation mathematical competencies (PISA). Educational Studies in Mathematics, 71(2), 123-143.
Salomon, G., Perkins, D. N., & Globerson, T. (1991). Partners in cognition: Extending human intelligences with intelligent technologies. Educational Researcher (April), 2-9.
Steen, L. A. (Ed.). (1997). Why numbers count: Quantitative literacy for tomorrow''s America. New York: The College Board.
Steffe, L. P., Von Glasersfeld, E., Richards, J., & Cobb, P. (1983).Children''s counting types: Philosophy, theory and application. New York. Praeger.
Tzuriel, D. & Shamir, A. (2002). The effects of mediation in computer assisted dynamic assessment. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 18(1), 21-32.
Van de Wiel, M. W. J., Schaper, N. C., Scherpbier, A. J. J. A., Van der Vleuten, C. P. M., & Boshuizen, H. P. A. (1999). Students'' experiences with real-patient tutorials in problem-based curriculum. Teaching and Learning in Medicine, 11(1), 12-20.
Vankúš, P. (2008). Game based learning in teaching of mathematics at lower secondary school. Acta Didactica Universitatis Comenianae Mathematics, 8, 103-120.
Wertsch, J. V. & Rogoff, B. (1984). Editor''s Notes. In B. Rogoff & J. V. Wertsch (Eds.), Children''s Learning in the “Zone of Proximal Development”: New Directions for Child Development. San Francisco, CA: Jossey Bass Inc.
Wirth, J. & Klieme, E. (2003). Computer-based assessment of problem-solving competence. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy, and Practice, 10, 329-345.
Wood, D., Bruner, J.S., & Ross, G. (1976). The role of tutoring and problem solving. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 17, 89-100.
Woodward, J. & Rieth, H. (1997). A historical review of technology research in special education. Review of Educational Research, 67(4), 503-536.
Woodward, J., Gallagher, D., & Rieth, H. (2001) The instructional effectiveness of technology for students with disabilities, in J. Woodward and L. Cuban (eds). Technology, Curriculum and Professional Development: Adapting Schools to Meet the Needs of Students with Disabilities. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Vygotsky, L. S.(1978). Mind in society: The development of higher mental processes, eds. & trans. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.