Is there a de facto national intended curriculum? evidence from state content standards

Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis

Volumn 31, Issue 3, 2009, Pages 238-268

  Porter, Andrew C ^a   Polikoff, Morgan S ^a   Smithson, John ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN MADISON   (United States)

Author keywords

Content analysis; Content standards; National curriculum; Standards based reform

Indexed keywords

EID: 74349092039     PISSN: 01623737     EISSN: 19351062     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3102/0162373709336465     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. American Federation of Teachers. (2001). Making standards matter 2001: A fifty-state report on efforts to implement a standards-based system. Washington, DC: Author.
2. Blank, R.K., Langesen, D., Bush, M., Sardina, S., Pechman, E., & Goldstein, D. (1997). Mathematics and science content standards and curriculum frameworks: States progress on development and implementation. Washington, DC: CCSSO.
3. Finn, C.E., Julian, L., & Petrilli, M.J. (2006). To dream the impossible dream: Four approaches to national standards and tests for America's schools. Washington, DC: Thomas B. Fordham Foundation.
4. Finn, C.E., Petrilli, M.J., & Julian, L. (2006). The state of state standards 2006. Washington, DC: Thomas B. Fordham Foundation.
5. Freeman, D.J., Kuhs, T.M., Porter, A.C., Floden, R.E., Schmidt, W.H., & Schwille, J.R. (1983). Do textbooks and tests define a national curriculum in elementary school mathematics? Elementary School Journal, 83, 501-513.
6. Freeman, D.J., & Porter, A.C. (1989). Do textbooks dictate the content of mathematics instruction in elementary schools? American Educational Research Journal, 26, 403-421.
7. Gamoran, A., Porter, A.C., Smithson, J., & White, P.A. (1997). Upgrading high school mathematics instruction: Improving learning opportunities for low-achieving, low-income youth. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 19, 325-338.
8. Hogan, T.P. (1992, April). Prospects and problems for a national test: Some reflections of a test author. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Council on Measurement in Education, San Francisco.
9. Jennings, J.F. (1998). Why national standards and tests? Politics and the quest for better schools. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
10. Joftus, S., & Berman, I. (1998). Great expectations? Defining and assessing rigor in state standards for mathematics and English language arts. Washington, DC: Council for Basic Education.
11. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.
12. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2006). Curriculum focal points for prekindergarten through grade 8 mathematics: A quest for coherence. Reston, VA: Author.
13. National Research Council. (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
14. Porter, A.C. (1989). A curriculum out of balance: The case of elementary school mathematics. Educational Researcher, 18(5), 9-15.
15. Porter, A.C. (2002). Measuring the content of instruction: Uses in research and practice. Educational Researcher, 31(7), 3-14.
16. Porter, A.C., Floden, R.E., Freeman, D.J., Schmidt, W.H., & Schwille, J.R. (1988). Content determinants in elementary school mathematics. In D. Grouws & T. Cooney (Eds.), Perspectives on research on effective mathematics teaching (pp. 96-113). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
17. Porter, A.C., Polikoff, M.S., Zeidner, T., & Smithson, J. (2008). The quality of content analyses of state student achievement tests and state content standards. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 27(4), 2-14.
18. Ravitch, D. (1995). National standards in American education: A citizen's guide. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.
19. Ravitch, D. (1996). 50 states, 50 standards? The continuing need for national voluntary standards in education. Brookings Review, 14(3), 6-9.
20. Reys, B. (Ed.). (2006). The intended mathematics curriculum as represented in state-level curriculum standards: Consensus or confusion. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.
21. Reys, B., Chval, K., Dingman, S., McNaught, M., Regis, T.P., & Togashi, J. (2007). Grade-level learning expectations: A new challenge for elementary mathematics teachers. Teaching Children Mathematics, 14(1), 6-11.
22. Schmidt, W.H., McKnight, C.C., Houang, R.T., Wang, H., Wiley, D.E., Cogan, L.S.,et al.(2001). Why schools matter: A cross-national comparison of curriculum and learning. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
23. Schmidt, W.H., Wang, H., & McKnight, C.C. (2005). Curriculum coherence: An examination of US mathematics and science standards from an international perspective. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 37, 525-559.
24. Smith, M.S., & O'Day, J. (1990). Systemic school reform. In S. H. Fuhrman & B. Malen (Eds.), The politics of curriculum and testing. Politics of education association yearbook (pp. 233-267). London: Taylor & Francis.
25. Webb, N.L. (2002). Alignment study of language arts, mathematics, science, and social studies of state standards and assessments in four states. Washington, DC: Council of Chief State School Officers.