The following HTML text is provided to enhance online
readability. Many aspects of typography translate only awkwardly to HTML.
Please use the page image
as the authoritative form to ensure accuracy.
Adelman, N. (1998a). A Case Study of Delaware’s SSI (Project 21), 1991-1997. In P.M. Shields and A.A. Zucker (Eds.), SSI Case Studies, Cohort 1: Connecticut, Delaware, Louisiana, and Montana. Menlo Park, CA: SRI International.
This is a report of a case study of the Delaware State Systemic Initiative, which was supported by the National Science Foundation. The Delaware SSI focused on professional development and curriculum improvement in 34 schools. By the end of the project, 30 percent of the state’s schools and 25 percent of its mathematics and science teachers had been involved. However, only a few of the schools had made whole-school progress toward school change and reform of instruction. The lack of district support, administrative leadership, and technical assistance for overall school change contributed to the disappointing results of the model schools strategy. During the last year of the project, the SSI mathematics and science specialists produced a database of more than 200 standards-based curriculum materials in mathematics and science for consideration for use by school districts.
Adelman, N. (1998b). A Case Study of Maine’s SSI (Maine: A Community of Discovery), 1992-1997. In P.M. Shields and A.A. Zucker (Eds.), SSI Case Studies, Cohort 2: California, Kentucky, Maine, Michigan, Vermont, and Virginia. Menlo Park, CA: SRI International.
This is a report of a case study of the Maine State Systemic Initiative, which was supported by the National Science Foundation. The goal of the Maine SSI was to improve science and mathematics outcomes in grades K-12 throughout the state. The SSI strongly influenced state policy-making activities, supported seven local demonstrations of systemic reform, provided technical assistance to local school districts on request, and developed statewide and regional leadership. The SSI played a key role in development of a state curriculum framework for science and mathematics and in the development of legislative policy on performance standards aligned with the curriculum framework. Over a five-year period leaders of the SSI estimated that they had introduced approximately 60 percent of the state’s science and mathematics teachers to standards-based educational reform and had worked intensively with about 20 percent of them. A key to the success of the Maine SSI was that it was established as a not-for-profit organization that was independent of governmental agencies. The project had less of an impact on reform in high schools and in the state’s largest cities.
Albert, L.R. and Jones, D.L. (1997). Implementing the Science Teaching Standards through Complex Instruction: A Case Study of Two Teacher-Researchers. School Science & Mathematics.97(6), 283-291.
Alberts, B. (1994, April). Science Education Standards. In Scientists, Educators, and National Standards: Action at the Local Level, Sigma Xi Forum Proceedings, Sigma XI, The Scientific Research Society, Research Triangle Park, NC, April 14-15, 1994.
American Association for the Advancement of Science. (1989). Science for All Americans: A Project 2061 Report on Literacy Goals in Science, Mathematics, and Technology.Washington, DC: Author.
American Association for the Advancement of Science. (1993). Benchmarks for Science Literacy.New York: Oxford University Press.
American Association for the Advancement of Science. (1997a). Project 2061: Science Literacy for a Changing Future. Update 1997.Washington, DC: Author.
This is a report of a yearlong evaluation by SRI International of the impact of Science for All Americans and Benchmarks for Science Literacy. The researchers collected data through expert interviews, reviews of state science curriculum frameworks and textbooks, telephone and mail surveys, and case studies of reform activities in six states. The report claims, “Project 2061 has been a major influence on the development of national science education standards and on reform initiatives sponsored by the National Science Foundation, the U.S. Department of Education, and a number of other national education and science organizations” (p. 2). The report also found that the reform ideas promoted by Project 2061 have not been widely adopted by textbook publishers. The