Using teacher logs to measure the enacted curriculum: A study of literacy teaching in third-grade classrooms

Elementary School Journal

Volumn 105, Issue 1, 2004, Pages 75-101

  Rowan, Brian ^a   Camburn, Eric ^a   Correnti, Richard ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 7044226438     PISSN: 00135984     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1086/428803     Document Type: Article

References (40)

1. Barr, R., & Dreeben, R. (1983). How schools work. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
2. Blank, R., Porter, A. C., & Smithson, J. (2001). New tools for analyzing teaching, curriculum, and standards in mathematics and science. Washington, DC: Council of Chief State School Officers.
3. Bloom, B., Englehart, M., Furst, E., Hill, W., & Krathwohl, D. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals: Handbook I. Cognitive domain. New York: Longmans Green.
4. Brewer, D. J., & Stasz, C. (1996). Enhancing opportunity to learn measures in NCES data. Santa Monica, CA: RAND.
5. Burstein, L., McDonnell, L., Van Winkle, J., Ormseth, T., Mirocha, J., & Guiton, G. (1995). Validating national curriculum indicators (Report prepared for the National Science Foundation). Santa Monica, CA: RAND.
6. Camburn, E., & Barnes, C. (2004). Assessing the validity of a language arts instruction log through triangulation. Elementary School Journal, 105, 49-73.
7. Carroll, J. B. (1963). A model of school learning. Teachers College Record, 64, 723-733.
8. Cooley, W. W., & Leinhardt, G. (1980). The instructional dimensions study. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 2, 7-25.
9. Embretson, S. E., & Reise, S. P. (2000). Item response theory for psychologists. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
10. Fisher, C., Filby, N., Marliave, R., Cahen, L., Dishaw, M., Moore, J., & Berliner, D. (1978). Teaching behaviors, academic learning time, and student achievement (phase III-B, final report): Beginning teacher evaluation study. San Francisco: Far West Laboratory for Educational Research and Development.
11. Hilton, M. (1989). A comparison of a prospective diary and two summary recall techniques for recording alcohol consumption. British Journal of Addiction, 84, 1085-1092.
12. Hoppe, M., Gillmore, M., Valadez, D., Civic, D., Hartway, J., & Morrison, D. (2000). The relative costs and benefits of telephone interviews versus self-administered diaries for daily data collection. Evaluation Review, 24(1), 102-116.
13. Husen, T. (Ed.). (1967). International study of achievement in mathematics: Comparison of twelve countries (Vols. 1 & 2). New York: Wiley.
14. Knapp, M., Adelman, N., Marder, C., McCollum, H., Needels, M. C., Padilla, C., Shields, P. M., Turnbull, B. J., & Zucker, A. A. (1995). Teaching for meaning in high-poverty classrooms. New York: Teachers College Press.
15. Leigh, B. (2000). Using daily reports to measure drinking and drinking patterns. Journal of Substance Abuse, 12, 51-65.
16. Lemmens, P., Knibbe, R., & Tan, F. (1988). Weekly recall and diary estimates of alcohol consumption in a general population survey. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 49, 131-135.
17. Lemmens, P., Tan, E., & Knibbe, R. (1992). Measuring quantity and frequency of drinking in a general population survey: A comparison of five indices. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 53, 476-486.
18. Linacre, J. M., & Wright, B. D. (2000). A user's guide to WINSTEPS rasch model computer program. Chicago: MESA.
19. Martin, J., Veldman, D., & Anderson, L. M. (1980). Within-class relationships between student achievement and teacher behaviors. American Educational Research Journal, 17(4), 479-490.
20. Mayer, D. P. (1999). Measuring instructional practice: Can policymakers trust survey data? Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 21(1), 29-46.
21. Medley, D. M., & Mitzell, H. E. (1963). Measuring classroom behavior by systematic observation. In N. L. Gage (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (pp. 247-328). Chicago: Rand McNally.
22. Menon, G. (1991). Judgements of behavioral frequencies. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
23. Mullens, J., & Kasprzyk, D. (1999). Validating item responses on self-report teacher surveys (NCES working paper). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
24. Oakes, J., Gamoran, A., & Page, R. (1992). Curriculum differentiation: Opportunities, outcomes, and meanings. In P. W. Jackson (Ed.), Handbook of research on curriculum (pp. 570-608). New York: Macmillan.
25. Porter, A. C. (2002). Measuring the content of instruction: Uses in research and practice. Educational Researcher, 31(7), 3-14.
26. 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: University of Wisconsin, Wisconsin Center for Educational Research.
27. Porter, A. C., Youngs, P., & Odden, A. (2001). Advances in teacher assessments and their uses. In V. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (4th ed., pp. 259-297). New York: Longman.
28. Rasch, G. (1960). Probabilistic models for some intelligence and attainment tests. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
29. Raudenbush, S. W., & Bryk, A. (2002). Hierarchical linear models: Applications and data analysis methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
30. Raudenbush, S. W., Bryk, A., Cheong, Y. F., & Congdon, R. (2000). HLM 5. Chicago: Scientific Software International.
31. Rosenshine, B., & Furst, N. (1973). The use of direct observation to study teaching. In R. M. W. Travers (Ed.), Second handbook of research on teaching (pp. 122-183). Chicago: Rand McNally.
32. Rowan, B. R., Correnti, R., & Miller, R. J. (2002). What large-scale survey research tells us about teacher effects on student achievement: Insights from the Prospects Study of elementary schools. Teachers College Record, 104(8), 1525-1567.
33. Rowan, B., Raudenbush, S. W., & Kang, S. J. (1991). School climate in secondary schools: A multilevel analysis. In S. W. Raudenbush & D. J. Willms (Eds.), Pupils, classrooms, and schools: Multilevel studies in education from an international perspective (pp. 203-224). New York: Academic.
34. Schmidt, W. H., McKnight, C., & Raizen, S. (1997). A splintered vision: An investigation of U.S. science and mathematics education. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
35. Shavelson, R. J., & Webb, N. M. (1991). Generalizability theory: A primer. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
36. Shavelson, R. J., Webb, N. M., & Burstein, L. (1986). Measurement of teaching. In M. C. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (3d ed., pp. 50-91). New York: Macmillan.
37. Smithson, J. L., & Porter, A. C. (1994). Measuring classroom practice: Lessons learned from efforts to describe the enacted curriculum - The Reform Up Close Study (CPRE Research Report Series Report No. 31). New Brunswick, NJ: Consortium for Policy Research in Education.
38. Stedman, L. C. (1997). International achievement differences: An assessment of a new perspective. Educational Researcher, 26(3), 4-14.
39. Sudman, S., & Bradburn, N. M. (1982). Asking questions: A practical guide to questionnaire design. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.
40. Westbury, I. (1992). Comparing American and Japanese achievement: Is the United States really a low achiever? Educational Researcher, 21(5), 18-24.