References

CHAPTER 1

Adelman, C. (1999). Answers in the tool box: Academic intensity, attendance patterns, and bachelor’s degree attainment. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Research and Improvement.


Campbell, P., Jolly, E., Hoey, L., and Perlman, L. (2002). Upping the numbers: Using research-based decision making to increase diversity in the quantitative disciplines. A report commissioned by the GE Fund. Newton, MA: Education Development Center. Available: http://www.ge.com/foundation/GEFund_UppingNumbers.pdf [11/5/03].

Cuban, L. (1992). Curriculum stability and change. In P. Jackson (Ed.), Handbook for research on curriculum: A project of the American Educational Research Association. New York: Macmillan.


Goodlad, J. (1984). A place called school. New York: McGraw-Hill.


Klein, D., Askey, R., Milgram, J., Wu, H., Scharlemann, M., and Tsang, B. (1999). An open letter to United States Secretary of Education, Richard Riley. Available: http://www.mathematicallycorrect.com/riley.htm [8/5/03].


Lutzer, D. J. (2003). Mathematics majors 2002. Notices of the American Mathematical Society, 50(2), 235-237.


McKnight, C., Crosswhite, J., Dossey, J., Kifer, L., Swafford, J., Travers, K., and Cooney, T. (1987). The underachieving curriculum: Assessing U.S. school mathematics from an international perspective. A national report on the Second International Mathematics Study. Champaign, IL: Stipes.


National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (1989). Curriculum and evaluation standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.

National Research Council. (2002). Scientific research in education. Committee on Scientific Principles for Education Research. R. J. Shavelson and L. Towne (Eds.). Center for Education. Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.



The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement



Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page 206
On Evaluating Curricular Effectiveness: Judging the Quality of K-12 Mathematics Evaluations References CHAPTER 1 Adelman, C. (1999). Answers in the tool box: Academic intensity, attendance patterns, and bachelor’s degree attainment. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Research and Improvement. Campbell, P., Jolly, E., Hoey, L., and Perlman, L. (2002). Upping the numbers: Using research-based decision making to increase diversity in the quantitative disciplines. A report commissioned by the GE Fund. Newton, MA: Education Development Center. Available: http://www.ge.com/foundation/GEFund_UppingNumbers.pdf [11/5/03]. Cuban, L. (1992). Curriculum stability and change. In P. Jackson (Ed.), Handbook for research on curriculum: A project of the American Educational Research Association. New York: Macmillan. Goodlad, J. (1984). A place called school. New York: McGraw-Hill. Klein, D., Askey, R., Milgram, J., Wu, H., Scharlemann, M., and Tsang, B. (1999). An open letter to United States Secretary of Education, Richard Riley. Available: http://www.mathematicallycorrect.com/riley.htm [8/5/03]. Lutzer, D. J. (2003). Mathematics majors 2002. Notices of the American Mathematical Society, 50(2), 235-237. McKnight, C., Crosswhite, J., Dossey, J., Kifer, L., Swafford, J., Travers, K., and Cooney, T. (1987). The underachieving curriculum: Assessing U.S. school mathematics from an international perspective. A national report on the Second International Mathematics Study. Champaign, IL: Stipes. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (1989). Curriculum and evaluation standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author. National Research Council. (2002). Scientific research in education. Committee on Scientific Principles for Education Research. R. J. Shavelson and L. Towne (Eds.). Center for Education. Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

OCR for page 206
On Evaluating Curricular Effectiveness: Judging the Quality of K-12 Mathematics Evaluations National Research Council. (2003). BIO 2010: Transforming undergraduate education for future research biologists. Committee on Undergraduate Biology Education to Prepare Research Scientists for the 21st Century. Board on Life Sciences, Division on Earth and Life Studies. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. National Science Foundation. (1989). Materials for middle school mathematics instruction: Program solicitation. Arlington, VA: Author, Division of Materials Development, Research, and Informal Science Education. Schmidt, W., McKnight, C., and Raizen, S. (1996). A splintered vision: An investigation of U.S. science and mathematics education. U.S. National Research Center for the Third International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) at Michigan State University. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Kluwer Academic. Takahira, S., Gonzales, P., Frase, M., and Salganik, L. H. (1998). Pursuing excellence: A study of U.S. twelfth-grade mathematics and science achievement. Initial Findings from the Third International Mathematics and Science Study. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. CHAPTER 2 Achieve, Inc. (2002). Foundations for success: Mathematics expectations for the middle grades. Available: http://www.achieve.org/dstore.nsf/Lookup/Foundations/$file/Foundations.pdf [12/1/03]. Education Market Research. (2001). Mathematics market, grades K-8: Teaching methods, textbooks/materials used and needed, and market size. Rockaway Park, NY: Author. Available: http://www.ed-market.com [11/5/03]. Fuson, K. C., Diamond, A., and Fraivillig, J. L. (n.d.). Implementation of reform norms in Everyday Mathematics classrooms. (Unpublished manuscript). National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (1989). Curriculum and evaluation standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author. National Science Foundation. (1989). Materials for middle school mathematics instruction: Program solicitation. Arlington, VA: Author, Division of Materials Development, Research, and Informal Science Education. National Science Foundation. (1991). Instructional materials for secondary school mathematics: Program solicitation and guidelines. Arlington, VA: Author, Directorate for Education and Human Resources. Simba Information Inc. (2002). Print publishing for the school market 2001-2002 (yearly report). Available: http://www.simbanet.com/products/pr_edusr.html#rpt1 [11/5/03]. Simba Information Inc. (2003). Monthly newsletter. Available: http://www.simbanet.com/products/pr_edusr.html#nl1 [11/5/03]. The K-12 Mathematics Curriculum Center. (2002). Curriculum summaries (6th ed.). Newton, MA: Education Development Center. Available: http://www2.edc.org/mcc/images/currsum6.pdf [11/5/03]. Thompson, D. R., Witonsky, D., Senk, S. L., Usiskin, Z., and Kaeley, G. (2003). An evaluation of the second edition of UCSMP geometry. (Unpublished manuscript). U.S. Department of Education. (1999). U.S. Department of Education’s mathematics and science expert panel exemplary & promising mathematics program. Available: http://www.enc.org/professional/federalresources/exemplary/promising/ [11/5/03]. U.S. Department of Education. (2001). Unpublished data from common core of data, 2000–01. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics. Available: http://nces.ed.gov/Pubs2003/Hispanics/figures.asp?FigureNumber=2_3b [10/1/03].

OCR for page 206
On Evaluating Curricular Effectiveness: Judging the Quality of K-12 Mathematics Evaluations Weiss, I. R., Banilower, E. R., McMahon, K. C., and Smith, P. S. (2001). Report on the 2000 national survey of science and mathematics education. Chapel Hill, NC: Horizon Research. Available: http://2000survey.horizon-research.com/reports/status/complete.pdf [11/5/03]. CHAPTER 3 Agodini, R., and Dynarski, M. (2001). Are experiments the only option: A look at dropout prevention programs. Princeton, NJ: Mathematica Policy Research. Available: http://www.mathematica-mpr.com/3rdLevel/propensityscore.htm [9/11/03]. Boruch, R. F. (1997). Randomized experiments for planning and evaluation: A practical guide. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Campbell, D. T. (1969). Reforms as experiments. American Psychologist, 24(April), 409-429. Campbell, D. T., and Stanley, J. C. (1966). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for research. Skokie, IL: Rand McNally. Caporaso, J. A., and Roos, L. L. (1973). Quasi-experimental approaches: Testing theory and evaluating policy. Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press. Chen, H. T. (1990). Theory driven evaluations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Cook, T. D. (in press). Beyond advocacy: Putting history and research on research into debates about the merits of social experiments. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Cook, T. D., and Campbell, D. T. (1979). Quasi-experimentation: Design and analysis issues for field settings. Chicago: Rand McNally. Cordray, D. S., and Fischer, R. L. (1994). Synthesizing evaluation findings. In J. S. Wholey, H. P. Hatry, and K. E. Newcomer (Eds.), Handbook of practical program evaluation. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Cronbach, L. J. (1982). Designing evaluations of educational and social programs. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Eisner, E. W. (2001). The educational imagination: On the design and evaluation of school programs (3rd Ed.). New York: Macmillan. Fine, M. (1993). [Ap]parent involvement: Reflections on parents, power and urban public schools. Teachers College Record, 94(4), 682-729. Ingersoll, R. M. (2003, November). The teacher shortage: A case of wrong diagnosis and wrong prescription. A presentation to the Mathematical Sciences Education Board on November 7. Lincoln, Y. S., and Guba, E. G. (1986). Naturalistic inquiry. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Lipsey, M. W. (1997). What can you build with thousands of bricks? Musings on the cumulation of knowledge in program evaluation. Progress and future directions in evaluation: Perspectives on theory, practice, and methods: New directions for evaluation (Issue 76, 7-24). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Loucks-Horsley, S., Hewson, P., Love, N., and Stiles, K. (1998). Designing professional development for teachers of science and mathematics. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press. Ma, L. (1999). Knowing and teaching elementary mathematics: teachers’ understanding of fundamental mathematics in China and the United States. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. McKnight, C., Crosswhite, J., Dossey, J., Kifer, L., Swafford, J., Travers, K., and Cooney, T. (1987). The underachieving curriculum: Assessing U.S. school mathematics from an international perspective. A national report on the Second International Mathematics Study. Champaign, IL: Stipes.

OCR for page 206
On Evaluating Curricular Effectiveness: Judging the Quality of K-12 Mathematics Evaluations National Center for Education Statistics. (1996). Student learning, teacher quality, and professional development: Theoretical linkages, current measurement, and recommendations for future data collection. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education. Available: http://nces.ed.gov/pubs96/9628.pdf [11/11/03]. National Center for Education Statistics. (2003). The condition of education 2003. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education. Available: http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2003/2003067.pdf [11/11/03]. National Commission on Teaching and America’s Future. (2003). No dream denied: A pledge to America’s children. Washington, DC: Author. Available: http://www.nctaf.org/dream/report.pdf [11/10/03]. National Research Council. (1992). Assessing evaluation studies: The case of bilingual education strategies. Panel to Review Evaluation Studies of Bilingual Education. M. M. Meyer and S. E. Fienberg (Eds.). Committee on National Statistics, Commission on Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. National Research Council. (1999a). Designing mathematics or science curriculum programs: A guide for using mathematics and science education standards. Committee on Science Education K-12 and the Mathematical Sciences Education Board. Center for Science, Mathematics, and Engineering Education. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. National Research Council. (1999b). High stakes: Testing for tracking, promotion, and graduation. Committee on Appropriate Test Use. J. P. Heubert and R. M. Hauser (Eds.). Board on Testing and Assessment, Commission on Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. National Research Council. (2001a). Adding it up: Helping children learn mathematics. Mathematics Learning Study Committee. J. Kilpatrick, J. Swafford, and B. Findell (Eds.). Center for Education, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. National Research Council. (2001b). Investigating the influence of standards: A framework for research in mathematics, science, and technology education. Committee on Understanding the Influence of Standards in K-12 Science, Mathematics, and Technology Education. I. R. Weiss, M. S. Knapp, K. S. Hollweg, and G. Burrill (Eds.). Center for Education, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. National Research Council. (2002). Scientific research in education. Committee on Scientific Principles for Education Research. R. J. Shavelson and L. Towne (Eds.). Center for Education, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. National Science Foundation. (1989). Materials for middle school mathematics instruction: Program solicitation. Arlington, VA: Author, Division of Materials Development, Research, and Informal Science Education. Orfield, G., and Kornhaber, M. (2001). Raising standards or raising barriers: Inequity and high stakes testing in public education. New York: The Century Foundation. Porter, A. C. (1995). The uses and misuses of opportunity-to-learn standards. Educational Researcher, 24(1), 21-27. Rossi, P., Freeman, H. E., and Lipsey, M. W. (1999). Evaluation: A systematic approach. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Sconiers, S., Isaacs, A., Higgins, T., McBride, J., and Kelso, C. R. (2002). Three-state student achievement study project report. A report by the Arc Center at the Consortium for Mathematics and Its Applications, Boston, MA. (Unpublished manuscript). Stigler, J. W., and Hiebert, J. (1999). The teaching gap: Best ideas from the world’s teachers for improving education in the classroom. New York: The Free Press.

OCR for page 206
On Evaluating Curricular Effectiveness: Judging the Quality of K-12 Mathematics Evaluations Thompson, D. R., Witonsky, D., Senk, S. L., Usiskin, Z., and Kaeley, G. (2003). An evaluation of the second edition of UCSMP geometry. (Unpublished manuscript). Weiss, C. H. (1997). Theory-based evaluation: Past, present, and future. In D. J. Rog and D. Fournier (Eds.), Progress and future directions in evaluation: Perspectives on theory, practice, and methods: New directions for evaluation (Issue 76, 40-55). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Yin, R. K. (1994). Case study research: Design and methods (2nd edition). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Yin, R. K. (1997). The abridged version of case study research. In L. Bickman and D. Rog (Eds.), Handbook of applied social research methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Yin, R. K., and Bickman, L. (2000). Reforms as non-experiments: A new paradigm. In L. Bickman (Ed.), Validity and social experimentation: Donald Campbell’s legacy. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. CHAPTER 4 Adams, L., Tung, K.K., Warfield, V.M., Knaub, K., Mudavanhu, B., and Yong, D. (2000, November). Middle school mathematics comparisons for Singapore mathematics, Connected Mathematics Program, and Mathematics in Context (including comparisons with the NCTM Principles and Standards 2000). A report to the National Science Foundation, November 2. Seattle, WA: University of Washington. (Unpublished manuscript). American Association for the Advancement of Science: Project 2061. (1999a). Algebra textbooks: A standards-based evaluation. Washington, DC: Author. Available: http://www.project2061.org/research/textbook/hsalg/criteria.htm [7/14/03]. American Association for the Advancement of Science: Project 2061. (1999b). Middle grades mathematics textbooks: A benchmarks-based evaluation. Washington, DC: Author. Available: http://www.project2061.org/tools/textbook/matheval/ [7/14/03]. Bishop, W. (1997). An evaluation of selected mathematics textbooks. Available: http://mathematicallycorrect.com/bishop4.htm [7/14/03]. (Unpublished manuscript). Blank, R. (2004, April). Findings on alignment of enacted curriculum, standards, and assessments: Implications for school improvement strategies under no child left behind. Presentation at the meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Diego, CA. Braams, B. (2003a). The many ways of arithmetic in UCSMP Everyday Mathematics. Available: http://www.math.nyu.edu/mfdd/braams/links/em-arith.html [8/27/03]. (Unpublished manuscript). Braams, B. (2003b). Spiraling through UCSMP Everyday Mathematics. Available: http://www.math.nyu.edu/mfdd/braams/links/em-spiral.html [8/27/03]. (Unpublished manuscript). Bush, W. (1996). Kentucky middle grades mathematics teacher network: An evaluation of four middle grades mathematics curriculum projects funded by the National Science Foundation (ESI-9253194). (Unpublished manuscript). Carroll, W. M. (2001). A longitudinal study of children in the Everyday Mathematics curriculum. (Unpublished manuscript). Clopton, P., McKeown, E., McKeown, M., and Clopton, J. (1998). Mathematically correct Algebra 1 reviews. Available: http://mathematicallycorrect.com/algebra.htm [7/14/03]. (Unpublished manuscript). Clopton, P., McKeown, E., McKeown, M., and Clopton, J. (1999a). Mathematically correct fifth grade mathematics review. Available: http://mathematicallycorrect.com/books5.htm [7/14/03]. (Unpublished manuscript).

OCR for page 206
On Evaluating Curricular Effectiveness: Judging the Quality of K-12 Mathematics Evaluations Clopton, P., McKeown, E., McKeown, M., and Clopton, J. (1999b). Mathematically correct second grade mathematics review. Available: http://mathematicallycorrect.com/books2.htm [7/14/03]. (Unpublished manuscript). Clopton, P., McKeown, E., McKeown, M., and Clopton, J. (1999c). Mathematically correct seventh grade mathematics review. Available: http://mathematicallycorrect.com/books7.htm [7/14/03]. (Unpublished manuscript). Cobb, P., Confrey, J., diSessa, A., Lehrer, R., and Schauble, L. (2003). Design experiment in education research. Education Researcher, 32(1), 9-13. Eisner, E. W. (2001). The educational imagination: On the design and evaluation of school programs (3rd ed.). New York: Macmillan. Gagne, R. M. (1985). The conditions of learning and theory of instruction (4th ed.). New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. Kentucky Department of Education. (1996). Core content for assessment. Frankfort, KY: Author. Available: http://www.kde.state.ky.us/KDE/Instructional+Resources/Curriculum+Documents+and+Resources/Core+Content+for+Assessment.htm [11/13/03]. Klein, D. (2000). Weaknesses of everyday mathematics K-3. Available: http://www.math.nyu.edu/mfdd/braams/nychold/report-klein-em-00.html [8/27/03]. (Unpublished manuscript). Kulm, G., Morris, K., and Grier, L. (1999). Middle grades mathematics textbooks: A benchmark-based evaluation. Washington, DC: American Association for the Advancement of Science: Project 2061. Available: http://www.project2061.org/tools/textbook/matheval/appendx/appendc.htm [11/13/03]. Milgram, R. J. (2003). An evaluation of CMP. Available: ers/milgram/report-on-cmp.html” ftp://math.stanford.edu/pub/papers/milgram/report-on-cmp.html [6/4/03]. (Unpublished manuscript). National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (1989). Curriculum and evaluation standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author. Porter, A., Flooden, R., Freeman, D., Schmidt, W., and Schwille, J. (1988). Content determinants in elementary school mathematics. In D. A. Grouws and T. J. Cooney (Eds.), Perspectives on research on effective mathematical teaching (pp. 96-113). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Robinson, E., and Robinson, M. (1996). A guide to standards-based instructional materials in secondary mathematics. (Unpublished manuscript). Romberg, T. A., de Lange, J., and Foster, S. (1995). Welcome to Mathematics in Context: A grade 5 to grade 8 curriculum that meets the NCTM standards. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin–Madison. Schmidt, W., McKnight, C., and Raizen, S. (1996). A splintered vision: An investigation of U.S. science and mathematics education. U.S. National Research Center for the Third International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) at Michigan State University. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Kluwer Academic. Schmidt, W. H., McKnight, C. C., Houang, R. T., Wang, H., Wiley, D., Cogan, L. S., and Wolfe, R. G. (2001). Why schools matter: A cross-national comparison of curriculum and learning. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. U.S. Department of Education’s Mathematics and Science Expert Panel. (1999) U.S. Department of Education’s mathematics and science expert panel exemplary & promising mathematics programs. Available: http://www.enc.org/professional/federalresources/exemplary/promising/ [7/14/03]. CHAPTER 5 Abrams, B. J. (1989). A comparison study of the Saxon Algebra I text. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Colorado at Boulder.

OCR for page 206
On Evaluating Curricular Effectiveness: Judging the Quality of K-12 Mathematics Evaluations Austin, J., Hirstein, J., and Walen, S. (1997). Integrated mathematics interfaced with science. School Science and Mathematics, 97(1), 45-49. Ben-Chaim, D., Fey, J. T., Fitzgerald, W., Benedetto, C., and Miller, J. (1998). Proportional reasoning among seventh grade students with different curricula experiences. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 36(3), 247-273. Boruch, R. F. (1997). Randomized experiments for planning and evaluation: A practical guide. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Briars, D., and Resnick, L. (2000). Standards, assessments—and what else? The essential elements of standards-based school improvement. Los Angeles: UCLA, Center for the Study of Evaluation at the National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing. Available: http://www.cse.ucla.edu/CRESST/Reports/TECH528.pdf [8/ 27/03]. Brown, R. G., Dolciani, M. P., Sorgenfrey, R. H., and Cole, W. L. (1990). Algebra: Structure and method book–I. Evanston, IL: McDougal Littel. Bryk, A. S., and Raudenbush, S. W. (1992). Hierarchical linear models. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Bryk, A. S., Lee, V. E., and Holland, P. B. (1993). Catholic schools and the common good. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Campbell, D. T., and Stanley, J. C. (1966). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for research. Skokie, IL: Rand McNally. Caporaso, J. A., and Roos, L. L. (1973). Quasi-experimental approaches: Testing theory and evaluating policy. Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press. Carroll, W. M. (2001). A longitudinal study of children in the Everyday Mathematics curriculum. (Unpublished manuscript). Carter, A., Beissinger, J., Cirulis, A., Gartzman, M., Kelso, C., and Wagreich, P. (2002). Student learning and achievement with Math Trailblazers. In S. L. Senk and D. R. Thompson (Eds.), Standards-based school mathematics curricula: What are they? What do students learn? (pp. 45-78). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Cohen, J. (1969). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. New York: Academic Press. Collins, A. M. (2002). What happens to student learning in mathematics when a multi-faceted, long-term professional development model to support standards-based curricula is implemented in an environment of high stakes testing? Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Boston College, Boston, MA. Cook, T. D., and Campbell, D. T. (1979). Quasi-experimentation: Design and analysis issues for field settings. Chicago: Rand McNally. Franke, R. H., and Kaul, J. D. (1978). The Hawthorne experiments: First statistical interpretation. American Sociological Review, 43(5), 623-643. Glass, G. V., McGaw, B., and Smith, M. L. (1981). Statistical methods for meta-analysis. New York: Academic Press. Goodrow, A. (1998). Children’s construction of number sense in traditional, constructivist, and mixed classrooms. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Tufts University, Medford, MA. Hawkins, W. (2003, November). The Strengthening Underrepresented Minority Mathematics Achievement (SUMMA) program. Presentation at the meeting of the Mathematical Science Education Board on November 7, Washington, DC. Heckman, J., and Hotz, J. (1989). Choosing among alternative nonexperimental methods for estimating the impact of social programs. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 84(408), 862-880. Hirsch, C. R., and Schoen, H. L. (2002). Developing mathematical literacy: A Core-Plus mathematics project longitudinal study progress report. (Unpublished manuscript).

OCR for page 206
On Evaluating Curricular Effectiveness: Judging the Quality of K-12 Mathematics Evaluations Huntley, M. A., Rasmussen, C. L., Villarubi, R. S., Sangtong, J., and Fey, J. T. (2000). Effects of standards-based mathematics education: A study of the Core-Plus mathematics project algebra and functions strand. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 31(3), 328-361. Joint Committee on Standards for Educational Evaluation. (1994). The program evaluation standards. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Kahan, J. A. (1999). Relationships among mathematical proof, high school students, and a reform curriculum. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Maryland at College Park. Kilpatrick, J. (2002). What works? In S. L. Senk and D. R. Thompson (Eds.), Standards-oriented school mathematics curricula: What are they? What do students learn? (pp. 471-488). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Lipsey, M. W. (1997). What can you build with thousands of bricks? Musings on the cumulation of knowledge in program evaluation. New Directions for Evaluation, 76, 7-23. Lundin, M. A. (2001). A comparison of former SIMMS and non-SIMMS students on three college-related measures. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Montana State University. Mathison, S., Hedges, L. V., Stodolsky, S., Flores, P., and Sarther, C. (1989). Teaching and learning algebra: An Evaluation of UCSMP algebra. (Unpublished manuscript). McCaffrey, D. F., Hamilton, L. S., Stecher, B. M., Klein, S. P., Bugliari, D., and Robyn, A. (2001). Interactions among instructional practices, curriculum and student achievement: The case of standards-based high school mathematics. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 32(5), 493-517. Merlino, F. J., and Wolff, E. (2001). Assessing the costs/benefits of an NSF “standards-based” secondary mathematics curriculum on student achievement: The Philadelphia experience: Implementing the Interactive Mathematics Program (IMP). (Unpublished manuscript). National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (1989). Curriculum and evaluation standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author. National Research Council. (1992). Assessing evaluation studies: The case of bilingual education strategies. Panel to Review Evaluation Studies of Bilingual Education. M. M. Meyer and S. E. Fienberg (Eds.). Committee on National Statistics, Commission on Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. National Science Foundation. (1988). Materials for middle school mathematics instruction: Program solicitation. Arlington, VA: Author, Directorate for Education and Human Resources. National Science Foundation. (1989). Materials development, research and informal science education: Program announcement. Arlington, VA: Author, Division of Materials Development, Research, and Informal Science Education. National Science Foundation. (1991). Instructional materials for secondary school mathematics: Program solicitation and guidelines. Arlington, VA: Author, Directorate for Education and Human Resources. Peters, K. G. (1992). Skill performance comparability of two algebra programs on an eighth-grade population. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, The University of Nebraska–Lincoln. Peterson, P., Boruch, R., Cook, T., Gueron, J., Hyatt, H., and Mosteller, F. (1999, December). Can we make education policy on the basis of evidence? What constitutes high quality educational research and how can it be incorporated into policymaking? Transcript of a Brookings Press Forum, December 8. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution. Available: http://www.brookingsinstitution.org/dybdocroot/comm/transcripts/19991208.htm [8/27/03].

OCR for page 206
On Evaluating Curricular Effectiveness: Judging the Quality of K-12 Mathematics Evaluations Rentschler, R. V., Jr. (1995). The effects of Saxon’s incremental review of computational skills and problem-solving achievement of sixth-grade students. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Walden University. Riordan, J. E., and Noyce, P. E. (2001). The impact of two standards-based mathematics curricula on student achievement in Massachusetts. Journal for Research in Mathematical Education, 32(4), 368-398. Romberg, T. A., Schafer, M. C., and Webb, N. (in press). The design of the longitudinal / cross-sectional study. In T. A. Romberg and M. C. Schafer (Eds.), The impact of teaching mathematics using Mathematics In Context on student achievement. Rossi, P., Freeman, H. E., and Lipsey, M. W. (1999). Evaluation: A systematic approach. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Saxon, J. (1981). Algebra I: An incremental development. Norman, OK: Grassdale. Schneider, C. (2000). Connected mathematics and the Texas assessment of academic skills. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, The University of Texas at Austin. Schoen, H. L., Hirsch, C. R., and Ziebarth, S. W. (1998, April 15). An emerging profile of the mathematical achievement of students in the Core-Plus mathematics project. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Diego, CA. (Unpublished manuscript). Schoenfeld, A. (2002). Making mathematics work for all children: Issues of standards, testing, and equity. Education Researcher, 31(1), 13-25. Available: http://www.aera.net/pubs/er/pdf/vol31_01/AERA310104.pdf [8/27/03]. Sconiers, S., Isaacs, A., Higgins, T., McBride, J., and Kelso, C. R. (2002). Three-state student achievement study project report. A report by the Arc Center at the Consortium for Mathematics and Its Applications, Boston, MA. (Unpublished manuscript). Secada, W., Fennema, E., and Byrd, L. (1995). New directions for equity in mathematics education. New York: Cambridge University Press. Senk, S. L. (1991, April). Functions, statistics, and trigonometry with computers at the high school level. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, IL. (Unpublished manuscript). Shafer, M. C. (in press). Expanding classroom practices. In T. A. Romberg (Ed.), Insight stories: Assessing middle school mathematics. New York: Teachers College Press. Souhrada, T. A. (2001). Secondary school mathematics in transition: A comparative study of mathematics curricula and student results. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Montana. Thompson, D. R., Senk, S. L., Witonsky, D., Usiskin, Z., and Kaeley, G. (2001). An evaluation of the second edition of UCSMP advanced algebra. (Unpublished manuscript). Thompson, D. R., Witonsky, D., Senk, S. L., Usiskin, Z., and Kaeley, G. (2003). An evaluation of the second edition of UCSMP geometry. (Unpublished manuscript). U.S. Department of Education. (2001). No Child Left Behind Act of 2001. Available: http://www.ed.gov/legislation/ESEA02/107-110.pdf [11/18/03]. Usiskin, Z. (1997). The evaluation of new curricula. (Unpublished manuscript). Walker, R. K. (1999). Students’ conceptions of mathematics and the transition from a standards-based reform curriculum to college mathematics. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Western Michigan University. Wasman, D. (2000). An investigation of algebraic reasoning of seventh- and eighth-grade students who have studied from the Connected Mathematics curriculum. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Missouri, Columbia. Webb, N. L., and Dowling, M. (1995a). Impact of the Interactive Mathematics Program on the retention of underrepresented students: Class of 1993 transcript report for school 1, Brooks High School. Project Report 95-3. Madison: University of Wisconsin–Madison, Wisconsin Center for Education Research.

OCR for page 206
On Evaluating Curricular Effectiveness: Judging the Quality of K-12 Mathematics Evaluations Webb, N. L., and Dowling, M. (1995b). Impact of the Interactive Mathematics Program on the retention of underrepresented students: Class of 1993 transcript report for school 2, Hill High School. Project Report 95-4. Madison: University of Wisconsin–Madison, Wisconsin Center for Education Research. Webb, N. L., and Dowling, M. (1995c). Impact of the Interactive Mathematics Program on the retention of underrepresented students: Class of 1993 transcript report for school 3, Valley High School. Project Report 95-5. Madison: University of Wisconsin–Madison, Wisconsin Center for Education Research. White, P., Gamoran, A., and Smithson, J. (1995). Math innovations and student achievement in seven high schools in California and New York. Madison: Consortium for Policy Research (CPRE) and Wisconsin Center for Education Research, School of Education, University of Wisconsin–Madison. Zahrt, L. T. (2001). High school reform math programs: An evaluation for leaders. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Eastern Michigan University. CHAPTER 6 Baxter, J., Woodward, J., and Olson, D. (2001). Effects of reform-based mathematics instruction on low-achievers in five third-grade classrooms. The Elementary School Journal, 101(5), 529-547. Bay, J. M. (1999). Middle school mathematics curriculum implementation: The dynamics of change as teachers introduce and use standards-based curricula. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Missouri, Columbia. Bickman, L. (1987). Using program theory in evaluation. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Campbell, D. T. (1994). Foreword. In R. K. Yin (Ed.), Case study research: Design and methods (2nd ed., pp. ix-xi). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Carroll, W. M., and Isaacs, A. (2002). Achievement of students using the University of Chicago School Mathematics Project’s Everyday Mathematics. In S. L. Senk and D. R. Thompson (Eds.), Standards-oriented school mathematics curricula: What are they? What do students learn? (pp. 79-108). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Cobb, P., Boufi, A., McClain, K., and Whitenack, J. (1997). Reflective discourse and collective reflection. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 28(3), 258-277. Cobb, P., Wood, T., Yackel, E., Nicholls, J., Wheatley, G., and Trigatti, B. (1991). Assessment of a problem-centered second grade mathematics project. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 22(2), 3-29. Collins, A. M. (2002). What happens to student learning in mathematics when a multi-faceted, long-term professional development model to support standards-based curricula is implemented in an environment of high stakes testing? Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Boston College, Boston, MA. Dapples, B. C. (1994). Teacher-student interactions in SIMMS and non-SIMMS mathematics classrooms. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Montana State University. de Groot, C. (2000). Three female voices: The transition to high school mathematics from a reform middle school mathematics program. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, New York University. Easley, J. A. Jr. (1977). On clinical studies in mathematics education. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education. Available: ERIC #: ED146015 [11/20/03]. Fuson, K. C., Diamond, A., and Fraivillig, J. L. (Unknown). Implementation of reform norms in Everyday Mathematics classrooms. (Unpublished manuscript). Greeno, J., and Goldman, S. (1998). Thinking practices in mathematics and science learning. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

OCR for page 206
On Evaluating Curricular Effectiveness: Judging the Quality of K-12 Mathematics Evaluations Herbel-Eisenmann, B. (2000). How discourse structures norms: A tale of two middle school mathematics classrooms. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI. Hetherington, R. A. (2000). Taking collegial responsibility for implementation of standards-based curriculum: A one-year study of six secondary school teachers. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Michigan State University. Keiser, J., and Lambdin, D. (2001). The clock is ticking: Time constraint issues in mathematics teaching reform. The Journal of Educational Research, 90(1), 23-31. Kett, J. R. (1997). A portrait of assessment in mathematics reform classrooms. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Western Michigan University. Kramer, S., and Keller, R. (2003). Tale of synergy: The joint impact of 4 × 4 block scheduling and an NCTM standards-based curriculum on high school mathematics achievement (DRAFT). (Unpublished manuscript). Lehrer, R., Jacobson, C., Kemeny, V., and Strom, D. (1999). Building on children’s intuitions to develop mathematical understanding of space. In E. Fennema and T. Romberg (Eds.), Mathematics classrooms that promote understanding (pp. 63-87). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Lott, J. W., Hirstein, J., Allinger, G., Walen, S., Burke, M., Lundin, M., Souhrada, T., and Preble, D. (2002). Curriculum and assessment in SIMMS Integrated Mathematics. In S. L. Senk and D. R. Thompson (Eds.), Standards-oriented school mathematics curricula: What are they? What do students learn? (pp. 399-423). Mahway, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Lubienski, S. T. (2000). Problem solving as a means toward mathematics for all: An exploratory look through a class lens. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 31(4), 454-482. Manouchehri, A., and Goodman, T. (1998). Mathematics curriculum reform and teachers: Understanding the connections. The Journal of Educational Research, 92(1), 27-41. Manouchehri, A., and Goodman, T. (2000). Implementing mathematics reform: The challenge within. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 42, 1-34. Murphy, L. (1998). Learning and affective issues among higher- and lower-achieving third-grade students in math reform classrooms: Perspectives of children, parents, and teachers. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Northwestern University. National Research Council. (2002). Scientific research in education. Committee on Scientific Principles for Education Research. R. J. Shavelson and L. Towne (Eds.). Center for Education. Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. Nicholls, J., Cobb, P., Wood, T., Yackel, E., and Ptashnick, M. (1990). Dimension of success in mathematics: Individual and classroom differences. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 21, 109-122. Romberg, T. A. (1997). Mathematics in context: Impact on teachers. In E. Fennema and B. S. Nelson (Eds.), Mathematics teachers in transition (pp. 357-380). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Schoen, H. L., Finn, K. F., Griffin, S. F., and Fi, C. (2003). Teacher variables that relate to student achievement in a standards-oriented curriculum. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 34(3), 228-259. Senk, S., and Thompson, D. (2002). Standards-based school mathematics curricula: What are they? What do students learn? Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Shafer, M. C. (in press). Expanding classroom practices. In T. A. Romberg (Ed.), Insight stories: Assessing middle school mathematics. New York: Teachers College Press. Smith, S. Z. (1998). Impact of curriculum reform on a teacher’s conception of mathematics. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Wisconsin, Madison.

OCR for page 206
On Evaluating Curricular Effectiveness: Judging the Quality of K-12 Mathematics Evaluations Thompson, A. G., Philipp, R. A., Thompson, P. W., and Boyd, B. A. (1994). Calculational and conceptional orientations in teaching mathematics. In A. Coxford (Ed.), 1994 yearbook of the NCTM (pp. 79-92). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. Woodward, J., and Baxter, J. (1997). The effects of an innovative approach to mathematics on academically low-achieving students in inclusive settings. Exceptional Children, 63(3), 373-388. Yackel, E., and Cobb, P. (1996). Sociomathematical norms, argumentation, and autonomy in mathematics. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 27(4), 458-476. CHAPTER 7 National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2000). Principals and standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author. National Research Council. (2002). Scientific research in education. Committee on Scientific Principles for Education Research. R. J. Shavelson and L. Towne (Eds.). Center for Education. Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

OCR for page 206
On Evaluating Curricular Effectiveness: Judging the Quality of K-12 Mathematics Evaluations This page intentionally left blank.