National Academies Press: OpenBook
« Previous: Contact Information
Suggested Citation:"References." National Research Council. 1999. Selecting Instructional Materials: A Guide for K-12 Science. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9607.
×

References

AAAS (American Association for the Advancement of Science). 1989. Science for All Americans. New York: Oxford University Press. Internet address: http://project2061.aaas.org/tools/sfaaol/sfaatoc.htm

AAAS. 1993. Benchmarks for Science Literacy. New York: Oxford University Press. Internet address: http://project2061.aaas.org/tools/benchol/bolframe.html

AAAS. 1997. Resources for Science Literacy: Professional Development. New York: Oxford University Press. Internet address: http://project2061.aaas.org/tools/rsl/index.html

AAAS. Forthcoming [a]. Designs for Science Literacy. Internet address: http://project2061.aaas.org/tools/designs/index.html

AAAS. Forthcoming [b]. Middle Grades Science Textbooks: A Benchmarks-based Evaluation.

AAAS. Forthcoming [c]. Resources for Science Literacy: Curriculum Materials Evaluation. Internet address: http://project2061.aaas.org/tools/rslcme/index.html


Brearton, M.A., and S. Shuttleworth. 1999. Racing a comet. Journal of Staff Development winter:30-33. Internet address: http://project2061.aaas.org/newsinfo/research/articles/nsdc_jsd.htm

Brooks, J.G., and M.G. Brooks. 1993. In Search of Understanding: The Case for Constructivist Classrooms. Alexandria, Va: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Bush, W.S., G. Kulm, and D. Surati. Forthcoming. Preparing teachers for mathematics textbook selection.

Bybee, R.W. Ed. 1996. National Standards and the Science Curriculum: Challenges, Opportunities and Recommendations. Dubuque, Iowa: Kendall/Hunt.

Bybee, R.W. 1997. Achieving Scientific Literacy: From Purposes to Practices. N.H.: Heinemann.


CBEDS (California Basic Educational Data System). 1997. California Public School Enrollment. Sacramento: Educational Demographics Unit, California Department of Education.

CCSSO (Council of Chief State School Officers). 1997. Mathematics and science content standards and curriculum frameworks: States' progress on development and implementation. Internet address: http://www.ccsso.org

Celebuski, C. 1998. Status of Education Reform in Public Elementary and Secondary Schools: Principal's Perspective. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Education.

Chubb, J. 1999. Interview about the Edison Project with its director of curriculum and assessment, March 10, 1999.

CPRE (Consortium for Policy Research in Education). 1996. Tracking student achievement in science and math: The promise of state assessment programs. Policy brief RB-17-July 1996, pp. 4-5. Internet address: http://www.upenn.edu/gse/cpre/frames/pubs.html


DoEd (U.S. Department of Education). 1997a. Assessment of student performance: Studies of education reform. Internet address: http://www.ed.gov/pubs/SER/ASP/

DoEd. 1997b. Attaining Excellence: Guidebook to Examine School Curricula. Washington, D.C.: Office of Educational Research and Improvement.

DoEd. 1997c. Guidelines for Submitting Science Programs for Review. Washington, D.C.: Office of Educational Research and Improvement.


Fullan, M. 1991. The New Meaning of Educational Change. New York: Teachers College Press.


Hutchinson, J., and M. Huberman. 1993. Knowledge dissemination and use in science and mathematics education: A literature review. Prepared for the Directorate of Education and Human Resources, Division of Research, Evaluation and Dissemination, National Science Foundation by The Network. Docu-

Suggested Citation:"References." National Research Council. 1999. Selecting Instructional Materials: A Guide for K-12 Science. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9607.
×

ment nsf9375. Internet address:: http://www.nsf.gov/cgi-bin/getpub?nsf9375

IMF (Instructional Materials Fund). 1989. Policy (K-8), California Education Code Section 60242(b) (1989, amd. 1998).


James, C. 1999. Interview with former science teacher, Saint Patrick's Episcopal Day School, Washington, D.C., March 1999.


Kesidou, S. 1999. Producing analytical reports on curriculum materials in science: Findings from Project 2061's 1998 curriculum review study. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching. Boston, Mass., March 28-31.

Kulm, G, and L. Grier. 1998. Mathematics curriculum materials reliability study. Washington, D.C.: Project 2061, American Association for the Advancement of Science.


Lee, O., D.C. Eichinger, C.W. Anderson, G.D. Berkheimer, and T.S. Blakeslee. 1993. Changing middle school students' conceptions of matter and molecules. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 30:249-70.

Little, J.W. 1993. Teachers' Professional Development and Education Reform. CPRE Policy Brief No. RB-11-10/93, pp. 1-7. Internet address: http://www.upenn.edu/gse/cpre/frames/pubs.html

Loucks-Horsley, S., K. Stiles, and P. Hewson. 1996. Principles of Effective Professional Development for Mathematics and Science Education. NISE Policy Briefs, vol 1, no. 1. Madison, Wisc.: National Institute for Science Education. Internet address: http://www.wcer.wisc.edu/nise/Publications/Briefs/default.html


McArthur Parker, C. 1999. Interview with chemistry teacher, Edmund Burke School, Washington, D.C., March 1999.

Massell, D., M. Kirst, and M. Hoppe. 1997. Persistence and Change: Standards-based Systemic Reform in Nine States. Consortium for Policy Research in Education Policy Brief No. RB-21-March 1997. Internet address: http://www.upenn.edu/gse/cpre/frames/pubs.html


NCEE (National Commission of Excellence in Education). 1983. A Nation at Risk: The Imperative for Educational Reform. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office.

NCES (National Center for Education Statistics). 1998a. Facing the Consequences: Using TIMSS for a Closer Look at United States Mathematics and Science Education. London: Kluwer Academic.

NCES. 1998b. NAEP 1996 Science Cross-state Data Compendium for the Grade 8 Assessment. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office.

NEGP (National Education Goals Panel). 1998. Mathematics and Science Achievement State by State (1998). Washington, D.C: U.S. Government Printing Office.

NAS (National Academy of Sciences). 1998. Teaching About Evolution and the Nature of Science. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press. Internet address: http://books.nap.edu/catalog/5787.html

NRC (National Research Council). 1996. National Science Education Standards. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press. Internet address: http://books.nap.edu/catalog/4962.html

NRC. 1997a. Introducing the National Science Education Standards. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press. Internet address: http://books.nap.edu/catalog/5704.html

NRC. 1997b. Science Teacher Preparation in an Era of Standards-based Reform. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press. Internet address: http://books.nap.edu/catalog/9078.html

NRC. 1998. Every Child a Scientist: Achieving Scientific Literacy for All. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press. Internet address: http://books.nap.edu/catalog/6005.html

NRC. 1999a. Designing Mathematics or Science Curriculum Programs: A Guide for Using Mathematics and Science Education Standards. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.

NRC. 1999b. How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience, and School. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press. Internet address: http://www.nap.edu/catalog/6160.html

NRC. Forthcoming. Inquiry and the National Science Education Standards. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.

NSB (National Science Board). 1998. Failing Our Children: Implications of the Third International Mathematics and Science Study. Arlington, Va.: National Science Foundation.

Suggested Citation:"References." National Research Council. 1999. Selecting Instructional Materials: A Guide for K-12 Science. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9607.
×

Internet address: http://www.nsf.gov/nsb/documents/1998/nsb98154/nsb98154.htm

NSB. 1999. Preparing our Children: Math and Science Education in the National Interest. Arlington, Va.: National Science Foundation. Internet address: http://www.nsf.gov/nsb/documents/1999/nsb9931/nsb9931.htm

NSF (National Science Foundation). 1997. Review of Instructional Materials for Middle School Science. Document number NSF 97 54. Washington, D.C.: Directorate for Education and Human Resources, Division of Elementary, Secondary and Informal Education. Internet address: http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/1997/nsf9754/nsf9754.htm>.

NSRC (National Science Resources Center). 1988. Science for Children: Resources for Teachers . Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.

NSRC. 1996. Resources for Teaching Elementary School Science. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press. Internet address: http://books.nap.edu/catalog/4966.html

NSRC. 1998. Resources for Teaching Middle School Science. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press. Internet address: http://books.nap.edu/catalog/5774.html

Ohio Systemic Initiative. 1998. The NSES-based Inventory of Middle Level Science Curriculum Study. Internet address: http://www.discovery.k12.oh.us/nses/nses.html>

Orpwood, G. 1998. The logic of advice and deliberation: Making sense of science curriculum talk. In Problems of Meaning in Science Curriculum, eds., D.A. Roberts and L. Östman, pp. 133-49. New York: Teachers College Press.


Roseman, J.E. 1997a. Lessons from Project 2061: Practical ways to implement benchmarks and standards. The Science Teacher 64(1):26-29. Internet address: http://project2061.aaas.org/newsinfo/research/roseman/roseman1.html

Roseman, J.E. 1997b. The Project 2061 curriculum-analysis procedure. In Attaining Excellence: Guidebook to Examine School Curricula, ed. M.E. McNeely, pp. 125-40. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Education. Internet address: http://project2061.aaas.org/newsinfo/research/enc/enctims.htm

Roseman, J.E., S. Kesidou, and L. Stern. 1997. Identifying curriculum materials for science literacy: A Project 2061 evaluation tool. Paper presented at the NRC colloquium "Using the National Science Education Standards to Guide the Evaluation, Selection, and Adaptation of Instructional Materials." Washington, D.C. November 1996. Internet address: http://project2061.aaas.org/newsinfo/research/roseman/roseman2.html

Rotberg, I.C. 1998. Interpretation of International Test Score Comparisons. Science 280:1030-31.


Schmidt, W.H., and C.C. McKnight. 1998. What can we really learn from TIMSS? Science 282:1830-31.

Schmidt, W.H., C.C. McKnight, and S.A. Raizen. 1997. A Splintered Vision: An Investigation of U.S. Science and Mathematics Education. Boston: Kluwer Academic. Executive summary available on the Internet: http://ustimss.msu.edu/splintrd.htm

Stedman, J.B. 1993 (and update reports). Goals 2000: Educate America Act, Overview and Analysis. Washington, D.C.: Congressional Research Service, Library of Congress.

Stern, L. 1999. Are you really testing for science literacy? Aiming precisely at benchmarks and standards. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, Boston, Mass., March 28-31.


Tyson, H. 1997. Overcoming structural barriers to good textbooks. Paper prepared for and available from the National Education Goals Panel. Internet address: http://www.negp.gov/Reports/tyson.htm

Tyson-Bernstein, H. 1988. America's Textbook Fiasco: A Conspiracy of Good Intentions. Washington, D.C.: Council for Basic Education.


Webb, N.L. 1997. Determining Alignment of Expectations and Assessments in Mathematics and Science Education. National Institute for Science Education, Brief Vol. 1, No. 2, January 1997. Internet address: http://www.wcer.wisc.edu/NISE/

Weiss, I.R. 1991. Curricular Materials for Mathematics and Science: Usage and Perceived Needs From the Field. Chapel Hill, N.C: Horizon Research.

Suggested Citation:"References." National Research Council. 1999. Selecting Instructional Materials: A Guide for K-12 Science. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9607.
×

Wheeler, G. 1999a. Information reported on a 1996 survey of members of the National Science Teachers Association (NSTA) by the NSTA Office of Public Information.

Wheeler, G. 1999b. Information reported from the National Science Teachers Association's general registry.

Woodward, A., and D.L. Elliott. 1990. Textbooks: Consensus and controversy. In Textbooks and Schooling in the United States: Eighty-ninth Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education, Part I. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Suggested Citation:"References." National Research Council. 1999. Selecting Instructional Materials: A Guide for K-12 Science. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9607.
×
Page 113
Suggested Citation:"References." National Research Council. 1999. Selecting Instructional Materials: A Guide for K-12 Science. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9607.
×
Page 114
Suggested Citation:"References." National Research Council. 1999. Selecting Instructional Materials: A Guide for K-12 Science. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9607.
×
Page 115
Suggested Citation:"References." National Research Council. 1999. Selecting Instructional Materials: A Guide for K-12 Science. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9607.
×
Page 116
Next: Index »
Selecting Instructional Materials: A Guide for K-12 Science Get This Book
×
Buy Paperback | $45.00 Buy Ebook | $35.99
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

The National Science Education Standards set broad content goals for teaching grades K-12. For science teaching programs to achieve these goals—indeed, for science teaching to be most effective—teachers and students need textbooks, lab kits, videos, and other materials that are clear, accurate, and help students achieve the goals set by the standards. Selecting Instructional Materials provides a rigorously field-tested procedure to help education decisionmakers evaluate and choose materials for the science classroom. The recommended procedure is unique, adaptable to local needs, and realistic given the time and money limitations typical to school districts.

This volume includes a guide outlining the entire process for school district facilitators, and provides review instruments for each step. It critically reviews the current selection process for science teaching materials—in the 20 states where the state board of education sets forth a recommended list and in the 30 states where materials are selected entirely by local decisionmakers.

Selecting Instructional Materials explores how purchasing decisions are influenced by parent attitudes, political considerations, and the marketing skills of those who produce and sell science teaching materials. It will be indispensable to state and local education decisionmakers, science program administrators and teachers, and science education advocates.

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    Switch between the Original Pages, where you can read the report as it appeared in print, and Text Pages for the web version, where you can highlight and search the text.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  9. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!