Structures of curriculum governance and classroom practice in mathematics

Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis

Volumn 18, Issue 2, 1996, Pages 123-139

  Westbury, Ian ^a   Hsu, Chao Sheng ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT URBANA CHAMPAIGN   (United States)

^b National Taiwan Police College   (Taiwan)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0039930079     PISSN: 01623737     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3102/01623737018002123     Document Type: Article

References (12)

1. Cohen, D. K., & Spillane, J. P. (1992). Policy and practice: The relations between governance and instruction. In G. Grant (Ed.), Review of research in education, 18 (pp. 1-49). Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.
2. Glidden, P. L. (1994). The effects of central control on classroom practice. In I. Westbury, C. Ethington, L. K. Sosniak, & D. P. Baker (Eds.), In search of more effective mathematics education: Examining data from the IEA Second International Mathematics Study (pp. 169-206). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
3. Meyer, J. W. (1980). Levels of the educational system and schooling effects. In C. E. Bidwell & D. M. Windham (Eds.), The analysis of educational productivity, Vol. 2, Issues in macroanalysis (pp. 15-63). Cambridge, MA: Ballinger.
4. Meyer, J. W. (1987). Implications of an institutional view of education for the study of educational effects. In M. T. Hallihan (Ed.), The social organization of schools: New conceptualizations of the learning process (pp. 157-175). New York: Plenum.
5. Meyer, J. W., & Scott, W. R. (1992). Organizational environments: Ritual and rationality. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
6. Meyer, J. W., Kamens, D. H., & Benavot, A. (1992). School knowledge for the masses: World models and national primary curricular categories in the twentieth century. London: Falmer.
7. National Council on Education Standards and Testing. (1992). Raising standards for American education: A report to Congress, the Secretary of Education, the National Education Goals Panel, and the American people. Washington, D.C.: U. S. Government Printing Office.
8. Oakes, J. (1985). Keeping track: How schools structure inequality. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
9. Oakes, J., Gamoran, A., & Page, R. N. (1992). Curriculum differentiation, opportunities, outcomes, and meanings. In P. W. Jackson (Ed.), Handbook of research on curriculum (pp. 570-608). New York: Macmillan.
10. Stevenson, D. L., & Baker, D. P. (1991). State control of the curriculum and classroom instruction. Sociology of Education, 64(1), 1-10.
11. Travers, K. J., & Westbury, I. (1989). The IEA study of mathematics I: Analysis of mathematics curricula. Oxford, England: Pergamon.
12. Westbury, I. (1994). Introduction: The Second International Mathematics Study. In I. Westbury, C. Ethington, L. K. Sosniak, & D. P. Baker (Eds.), In search of more effective mathematics education: Examining data from the IEA Second International Mathematics Study (pp. 1-29). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.