SEARCH

SEARCH BY CITATION

References

  • Amrein, A.L., & Berliner, D.C. (2002). High-stakes testing, uncertainty, and student learning. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 10(18), Retrieved [2/05/09] from http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/v10n18/
  • Blumenfeld, P., Fishman, B., Krajcik, J., Marx, R.W., & Soloway, E. (2000). Creating useable innovations in systemic reform: Scaling-up technology-embedded project-based science in urban schools. Educational Psychologist, 35(3), 149164.
  • Coburn, C.E. (2003). Rethinking scale: Moving beyond numbers to deep and lasting change. Educational Researcher, 32(6), 312.
  • Davis, E., & Krajcik, J. (2005). Designing educative curriculum materials to promote teacher learning. Educational Researcher, 34(3), 314.
  • Desimone, L.M. (2009). Improving impact studies of teachers' professional development: Toward a better conceptualizations and measures. Educational Researcher, 38(3), 181199.
  • Fishman, B., Marx, R., Blumenfeld, P., Krajcik, J.S., & Soloway, E. (2004). Creating a framework for research on systemic technology innovations. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(1), 4376.
  • Gamoran, A., Anderson, C.W., Quiroz, P.A., Secada, W.G., Williams, T., & Ashmann, S. (2003). Transforming teaching in math and science: How schools and districts can support change. New York: Teachers College Press.
  • Garet, M.S., Porter, A.C., Desimone, L., Birman, B.F., & Yoon, K.S. (2001). What makes professional development effective? Results from a national sample of teachers. American Educational Research Journal, 38(4), 915945.
  • Geier, R., Blumenfeld, P., Marx, R., Krajcik, J., Fishman, B., & Soloway, E. (2008). Standardized test outcomes for students engaged in inquiry-based science curriculum in the context of urban reform. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45(8), 922939.
  • Krajcik, J., McNeill, K.L., & Reiser, B. (2008). Learning-goals-driven design model: Developing curriculum materials that align with National Standards and incorporate project-based pedagogy. Science Education, 92(1), 132.
  • Lee, O., Maerten-Rivera, J. (in press) Teacher change in elementary science instruction with English language learners: Multi-year professional development intervention across multiple grades. Teachers College Record.
  • Lee, O., Maerten-Rivera, J., Penfield, R.D., LeRoy, K., & Secada, W.G. (2008). Science achievement of English language learners in urban elementary schools: Results of a first-year professional development intervention. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45(1), 3152.
  • Lee, O., Penfield, R.D., & Maerten-Rivera, J. (2009). Effects of fidelity of implementation on science achievement gains among English language learners. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46(7), 836859.
  • Marx, R.W., Blumenfeld, P.C., Krajcik, J.S., Fishman, B., Soloway, E., Geier, R., & Revital, T.T. (2004). Inquiry-based science in the middle grades: Assessment of learning in urban systemic reform. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(10), 10631080.
  • Marx, R.W., & Harris, C.J. (2006). No Child Left Behind and science education: Opportunities, challenges, and risks. The Elementary School Journal, 106(5), 467477.
  • McDonald, S.-K., Keesler, V.A., Kauffman, N.J., & Schneider, B. (2006). Scaling-up exemplary interventions. Educational Researcher, 35(3), 1524.
  • Moje, E., Collazo, T., Carillo, R., & Marx, R.W. (2001). “ Maestro, what is quality?”: Examining competing discourses in project-based science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(4), 469495.
  • National Research Council. (2011). A framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. Washington, DC: National Research Council.
  • O'Donnell, C. (2008). Defining, conceptualizing, and measuring fidelity of implementation and its relationship to outcomes in K-12 curriculum intervention research. Review of Educational Research, 78(1), 3384.
  • Raudenbush, S.W. (2007). Designing field trials of educational innovations. In: B. Schneider & S. McDonald (Eds.), Scale up in education, vol. 2: Practice (pp. 2340). Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
  • Remillard, J.T. (2005). Examining key concepts in research on teachers' use of mathematics curricula. Review of Educational Research, 75(2), 211246.
  • Schneider B. & McDonald S. (Eds.), (2007a). Scale up in education, vol. 1: Ideas in principle. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
  • Schneider B. & McDonald S. (Eds.), (2007b). Scale up in education, vol. 2: Practice. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
  • Settlage, J., & Meadows, L. (2002). Standards-based reform and its unintended consequences: Implications for science education within America's urban schools. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(2), 114127.
  • Southerland, S., Smith, L.K., Sowell, S.P., & Kittleson, J.M. (2007) Resisting unlearning: Understanding science education's response to the United States' national accountability movement. In: L. Parker, (Ed.), Review of research in education, vol. 31 (pp. 4577). Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.