Do new teaching standards undermine performance on old tests?

Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis

Volumn 20, Issue 2, 1998, Pages 53-73

  Mayer, Daniel P ^a  

^a MATHEMATICA POLICY RESEARCH   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0032373154     PISSN: 01623737     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3102/01623737020002053     Document Type: Article

References (54)

1. Black, P. J., & Atkin, J. M. (Eds.). (1996). Changing the subject: Innovations in science, mathematics, and technology education. New York: Routledge.
2. Blank, R. K., Hemphill, C., Sardina, S. L., Langesen, D., & Brathwaite, B. (1995). State education policies on K-12 curriculum, student assessment, and teacher certification: 1995. Washington, DC: Council of Chief State School Officers.
3. Blank, R. K., & Pechman, E. M. (1995). State curriculum frameworks in mathematics and science: How are they changing across the states? Washington, DC: Council of Chief State School Officers.
4. Brophy, J., & Good, T. L. (1986). Teacher behavior and student achievement. In M. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (3rd ed., pp. 328-375). New York: Macmillan.
5. Bryk, A. S., & Raudenbush, S. W. (1992). Hierarchical linear models: Applications and data analysis methods. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
6. Burstein, L., McDonnell, L. M., Van Winkle, J., Ormseth, T., Mirocha, J., & Guitton, G. (1995). Validating national curriculum indicators. Santa Monica, CA: RAND.
7. Campbell, F. P. (1995, April). Project IMPACT: Mathematics achievement in predominately minority elementary classrooms attempting reform. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco.
8. Carpenter, T. P., Fennema, E., Peterson, P., Chiang, C. P., & Loef, M. (1989). Using knowledge of children's mathematics thinking in classroom teaching: An experimental study. American Educational Research Journal, 26(4), 499-531.
9. Case, R., & Bereiter, C. (1984). From behaviorism to cognitive development. Instructional Science, 13, 141-158.
10. Center for Research on the Context of Teaching. (1994). Survey of elementary mathematics education in California. Stanford, CA: Author.
11. Choike, J. R. (1993). Math as a lever for reform: Excerpts from the EQUITY 2000 national committee report. New York: College Board.
12. Cobb, P., Wood, T., Yackel, E., Wheatley, G., Trigatti, B., & Perlwitz, M. (1991). Assessment of a problem-centered second-grade mathematics project. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 22(1), 3-29.
13. Cobb, R., & Steffe, L. P. (1983). The constructivist researcher as teacher and model builder. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 14, 83-94.
14. Cook, T. D., & Campbell, D. T. (1979). Quasi-experimentation: Design & analysis issues for field settings. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
15. Hambleton, R. K., Swaminathan, H., & Rogers, J. H. (1991). Fundamentals of item response theory (Vol. 2). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
16. Hiebert, J. (Ed.). (1986). Conceptual and procedural knowledge: The case of mathematics. Hillside, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
17. Hiebert, J., & Wearne, D. (1993). Instructional tasks, classroom discourse, and students' learning in second-grade arithmetic. American Educational Research Journal, 30, 393-425.
18. Hirsch, E. D., Jr. (1996). The schools we need: Why we don't have them. New York: Doubleday.
19. Kirst, M., & Masseo, C. (1996). The rise, fall, and rise of state assessment in California 1993-96. Phi Delta Kappan, 78, 319-323.
20. Knapp, M. S., & Associates. (1995). Teaching for meaning in high-poverty classrooms. New York: Teachers College Press.
21. Koretz, D., Linn, R. L., Dunbar, S. B., & Shepard, L. A. (1991, April). The effects of high-stakes testing on achievement: Preliminary findings about generalization across tests. Paper presented at the annual meetings of the American Educational Research Association and the National Council on Measurement in Education, Chicago.
22. Lampert, M. (1986). Knowing, doing and teaching mathematics. Cognition and Instruction, 3, 305-342.
23. Lawton, M. (1997, January 6). States turn to a mix of tests in hopes of a clearer picture. Education Week, p. 6.
24. Lesh, R., & Landau, M. (Eds.). (1983). Acquisition of mathematics concepts and processes. New York: Academic Press.
25. Light, R. J., Singer, J. D., & Willett, J. B. (1990). By design: Planning research on higher education. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
26. Marshall, S., Fuhrman, S., & O'Day, J. (1994). National curriculum standards: Are they desirable and feasible? In R. Elmore & S. Fuhrman (Eds.), The governance of curriculum: 1994 yearbook of the Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development (pp. 12-29). Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
27. McDonnell, L. M. (1995). Opportunity to learn as a research concept and a policy instrument. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 17(3), 305-322.
28. McLaughlin, M. W., & Talbert, J. E. (1993). Contexts that matter for teaching and learning: Strategic opportunities for meeting the nation's educational goals. Stanford, CA: Center for Research on the Context of Secondary School Teaching.
29. Metz, M. H. (1978). Classrooms and corridors: The crisis of authority in desegregated secondary schools. Berkeley: University of California Press.
30. Murnane, R. J., & Levy, R. (1996). Teaching the new basic skills: Principles for educating children to thrive in a changing economy. New York: The Free Press.
31. Murnane, R. J., & Raizen, S. A. (1988). Improving indicators of the quality of science and mathematics education in grades K-12 . Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
32. National Center for Education Statistics. (1992). A profile of American eighth-grade mathematics and science instruction. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
33. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (1989). Curriculum and evaluation standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.
34. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (1991). Professional standards for teaching mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.
35. National Council of Teacher of Mathematics. (1995). Assessment standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.
36. Oakes, J. (1985). Keeping track: How schools structure inequality. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
37. OERI, State Accountability Study Group. (1988). Creating responsible and responsive accountability systems. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
38. Pallas, A. M. (1988). School climate in American high schools. Teachers College Record, 4, 541-554.
39. Pelavin, S. H., & Kane, M. K. (1990). Changing the odds: Factors increasing access to college. New York: College Entrance Examination Board.
40. Porter, A. C. (1991). Creating a system of school process indicators. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 13(1), 13-29.
41. Porter, A. C., Kirst, M. W., Osthoff, E. J., Smithson, J. L., & Schneider, S. A. (1993). Reform up close: An analysis of high school mathematics and science classrooms. Madison: Wisconsin Center for Education Research.
42. Raudenbush, S. W., Rowan, B., & Cheong, Y. F. (1993). Higher order instructional goals in secondary schools: Class, teacher, and school influences. American Educational Research Journal, 30, 523-553.
43. Resnick, L. B., & Resnick, D. P. (1991). Assessing the thinking curriculum: New tools for educational reform. In B. R. Gifford & M. C. O'Connor (Eds.), Changing assessments: Alternative view of aptitude, achievement, and instruction (pp. 37-75). Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
44. Rogosa, D. R., Brandt, D., & Zimowski, M. (1982). A growth curve approach to the measurement of change. Psychological Bulletin, 90, 726-748.
45. Rogosa, D. R., & Saner, H. (1995). Longitudinal data analysis examples with random coefficient models. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 20(2), 149-170.
46. Rosenbaum, P. R., Rubin, D. B. (1983). The central role of the propensity score in observational studies for causal effects. Biometrica, 70(1), 41-55.
47. Schoenfeld, A. H. (1987). Cognitive science and mathematics education. Hillside, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
48. Shavelson, R. J., McDonnell, L. M., Oakes, J., Carey, N., & Picus, L. (1987). Indicator systems for monitoring mathematics and science education. Santa Monica, CA: RAND.
49. Shulman, L. S. (1986). Paradigms and research programs in the study of teaching: A contemporary perspective. In M. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (3rd ed., pp. 3-36). New York: Macmillan.
50. Simon, M. A., & Schifter, D. (1993). Toward a constructivist perspective: The impact of a mathematics teacher inservice program on students. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 25, 331-340.
51. Smith, J. B. (1996). Does an extra year make any difference? The impact of early access to algebra on long-term gain in mathematics attainment. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 18(2), 141-153.
52. Stevenson, D. L., Schiller, K. S., & Schneider, B. (1994). National sequences of opportunities for learning. Sociology of Education, 67, 184-198.
53. Weiss, I. R., Matti, M. C., Smith, P. S. (1994). Report of the 1993 national survey of science and mathematics education. Chapel Hill, NC: Horizon Research, Inc.
54. Willett, J. B. (1994). Measuring change more effectively by modeling individual change over time. In T. Husen & T. N. Postlethwaite (Eds.), The international encyclopedia of education (2nd ed., pp. 671-678). Oxford, England: Pergamon Press.