National Academies Press: OpenBook

Keeping Score (1999)

Chapter: References

« Previous: Chapter 5: Alignment and Standards-Based Assessments
Suggested Citation:"References." National Research Council. 1999. Keeping Score. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9635.
×

References

Arcavi, A., Kessel, C., Meira, L., & Smith, J. (1998). Teaching mathematical problem solving: A microanalysis of an emergent classroom community. In A. Schoenfeld, E. Dubinsky, & J. Kaput (Eds.), Research in Collegiate Mathematics Education III (pp. 1-70). Providence, RI: American Mathematical Society.


Beck, P. (1998). Alignment analysis: Assessment to standards. Unpublished manuscript.

Bell, A. (1993). Some experiments in diagnostic teaching. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 24, 115-137.

Bell, A. W., Swan, M., Onslow, B., Pratt, K., & Purdy, D. (1985). Diagnostic teaching: Teaching for long term learning. Report of ESRC Project HR 8491 / 1, Nottingham, UK: University of Nottingham, Shell Centre for Mathematical Education.

Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Inside the black box: Raising standards through classroom assessment. Phi Delta Kappan, 80(2), 139-148.

Bond, L. (1995). Unintended consequences of performance assessment: Issues of bias and fairness. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 14(4), 21-24.

Borasi, R. (1996). Reconceiving mathematics instruction: A focus on errors. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.


Close, G. (1996). Developing criterion-referenced, open-response, national test items. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, San Diego, CA.

Cobb, P., & Lampert, M. (1998). Communication. White paper prepared for the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. Reston, VA.

Suggested Citation:"References." National Research Council. 1999. Keeping Score. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9635.
×

Doyle, W. (1988). Work in mathematics classes: The context of students' thinking during instruction. Educational Psychologist, 23, 167-180.


Floden, R.E. (1996). Teachers' choices about content: The Standards in use. Unpublished paper prepared for November 1996 symposium sponsored by the Board on International Comparative Studies in Education of the National Research Council. Washington, DC.


Graeber, A.O., & Campbell, P.F. (1993). Misconceptions about multiplication and division. Arithmetic Teacher, 39, 408-411.

Greeno, J., & Hall, R. (1997). Practicing Representation: Learning with and about representational forms. Phi Delta Kappan, 78, 361-367.


Hartocollis, A. (1999, April 8). In Bronx, Regents coaching is extended to teachers, too . New York Times, pp. B1, B3.

Heid, M.K. (1988). Resequencing skills and concepts in applied calculus using the computer as a tool. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 19(1), 3-25.

Henningsen, M. & Stein, M.K. (1996). Mathematical tasks and student cognition: Classroom-based factors that support and inhibit high-level mathematical thinking and reasoning.

Hiebert, J. (1999). Relationships between research and the NCTM Standards. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 30(1), 3-19.

Hiebert, J. & Carpenter, T. (1992). Learning and teaching with understanding. In D. Grouws (Ed.), Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning, (p. 65-97). New York: Macmillan.

Hiebert, J. & Wearne, D. (1996). Instruction, understanding and skill in multidigit addition and subtraction. Cognition and Instruction, 14(3), 251-283.


Jakwerth, P.R., Stancavage, F.B., & Reed, E.D. (1999). An investigation of why students do not respond to questions. Report commissioned by the NAEP Validity Studies (NVS) Panel. Palo Alto, CA: American Institutes for Research.


Learning First Alliance. (1998). Every child mathematically proficient: An action plan. Washington, DC: Author.

Lesh, R., Lamon, S.J., Lester, F., & Behr, M. (1992). Future directions for mathematics assessment. In R. Lesh & S. J. Lamon (Eds.), Assessment of authentic performance in school mathematics (pp. 379-425). Washington, DC: American Association for the Advancement of Science.

Linn, R. (1994). Performance assessment: Policy promises and technical measurement standards. Educational Researcher, 23(9), 4-14.


Massell, D., Kirst, M., & Hoppe, M. (1997). Persistence and change: Standards-based reform in nine states. Brunswick, NJ: Consortium for Policy Research in Education.


National Assessment Governing Board. (1995). Mathematics framework for the 1996 National Assessment of Educational Progress. Washington, DC: Author.

Suggested Citation:"References." National Research Council. 1999. Keeping Score. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9635.
×

National Center on Education and the Economy. (1998). Core assignment: Volume. Washington, DC: Author.

National Center on Education and the Economy & University of Pittsburgh. (1997). New Standards performance standards. (Volumes 1-3). Washington, DC: Author.

National Center on Education and the Economy & University of Pittsburgh. (1997-1999). New Standards mathematics reference examinations. Washington, DC: Author.

National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (1989). Curriculum and evaluation standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.

National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (1991). Professional standards for teaching mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.

National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (1995). Assessment standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.

National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (1998). Principles and standards for school mathematics: Discussion draft. Reston, VA: Author.

National Council of Teachers of Mathematics & National Research Council. (1997). Improving student learning in mathematics and science: The role of national standards and state policy. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

National Research Council. (1989). Everybody counts: A report to the nation on the future of mathematics education. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

National Research Council. (1990). Reshaping school mathematics: A philosophy and framework for curriculum. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

National Research Council. (1991). For good measure: Principles and goals for mathematics assessment . Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

National Research Council. (1993a). Measuring up: Prototypes for mathematics assessment. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

National Research Council. (1993b). Measuring what counts: A conceptual guide for mathematics assessment. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

National Research Council (1997). Learning from TIMMS: Results of the Third International Mathematics and Science Study, summary of a symposium. A. Beatty, (Ed.), Board on International Comparative Studies in Education, Board on Testing and Assessment, Committee on Science Education K-12, and Mathematical Sciences Education Board. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

National Research Council. (1998). High school mathematics at work: Essays and examples for the education of all students. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

Suggested Citation:"References." National Research Council. 1999. Keeping Score. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9635.
×

Porter, A.C., Kirst, M.W., Osthoff, E.J., Smithson, J.L., & Schneider, S.A. (1993). Reform up close: A classroom analysis. Final report to the NSF on Grant No. SPA-8953446 to the Consortium for Policy Research in Education. Madison, WI: Wisconsin Center for Education Research.


Resnick, L., & Nolan, K.J. (1995). From aptitude to effort: A new foundation for our schools. Daedalus, 124(4), 55-52.

Romberg, T.A., Zarinnia, E.A., & Williams, S.R. (1990). Mandated school mathematics testing in the United States: A survey of state mathematical supervisors. Madison, WI: National Center for Research in Mathematical Sciences Education.


Schmidt, W.H., & Cogan, L.S. (1999). The rest of the story: Putting the U.S. twelfth grade TIMSS mathematics achievement results in perspective. Focus on Calculus: A Newsletter for the Calculus Consortium Based at Harvard University, No. 16, 6-8.

Schmidt, W.H., McKnight, C.C., & Raizen, S.A. (1997). A splintered vision: An investigation of U.S. science and mathematics education . Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.

Schmidt, W.H., McKnight, C.C., Valverde, G.A., Houang, R.T., & Wiley, D.E. (1997). Many visions, many aims: A cross-national investigation of curricular intentions in mathematics. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.

Schoen, H.L., & Ziebarth, S.W. (1998). Assessment of students' mathematical performance (A Core-Plus Mathematics Project Field Test Progress Report). Iowa City, IA: Core-Plus Mathematics Project Evaluation Site, University of Iowa.

Schoenfeld, A. H. (1985). Mathematical problem solving. Orlando, FL: Academic Press.

Schoenfeld, A. H. (1987). What's all the fuss about metacognition? In A. H. Schoenfeld (Ed.), Cognitive science and mathematics education (pp. 189-215). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Schoenfeld, A.H. (1988). When good teaching leads to bad results: The disasters of ''well taught" mathematics classes. Educational Psychologist, 23, 145-166.

Schoenfeld, A.H. (1989). Explorations of students' mathematical beliefs and behavior. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 20, 338-355.

Schoenfeld, A.H., Burkhardt, H., Daro, P., & Stanley, R. (1993). A framework for balance. Unpublished manuscript, Balanced Assessment & New Standards projects.

Schoenfeld, A., Burkhardt, H., Schwartz, J., & Wilcox, S.J. (1999), Balanced assessment for the mathematics curriculum (8 packages). Menlo Park, CA: Dale Seymour Publications.

Suggested Citation:"References." National Research Council. 1999. Keeping Score. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9635.
×

Shannon, A., & Zawojewski, J. (1995). Mathematics performance assessment: A new game for students. Mathematics Teacher, 88(9), 752-757.

Shavelson, R.J., & Baxter, G.P. (1992). What we've learned about assessing hands-on science. Educational Leadership, 49(8), 21-25.

Shavelson, R.J., Gao, X., & Baxter, G.R. (1993). Sampling variability of performance assessments (CSE Tech. Rep. No. 361). Santa Barbara, CA: National Center for Research in Evaluation, Standards and Student Testing.

Shavelson, R.J., Webb, N.M., & Rowley, G. (1989). Generalizability theory. American Psychologist, 44, 922-932.

Stein, M.K., & Lane, S. (1996). Instructional tasks and the development of student capacity to think and reason: An analysis of the relationship between teaching and learning in a reform mathematics project. Educational Research and Evaluation, 2(1), 50-80.

Stigler, J., & Hiebert, J. (1997). Understanding and improving classroom mathematics instruction: An overview of the TIMMS Video Study. Phi Delta Kappan, 79(1), 14-21.

Webb, N. (1997). Criteria for alignment of expectations and assessments in mathematics and science. Madison, WI: National Institute for Science Education and Council of Chief State School Officers.

Wilson, J.W., Fernandez, M.L., & Hadaway, N. (1993). Mathematical problem solving. In Wilson, P.S. (ed.), Research ideas for the classroom: High school mathematics. New York: Macmillan.


Zucker, A.A., & Esty, E.T. (1993). Promoting discourse in mathematics classrooms using a new video series for middle schools. Paper presented as part of a symposium entitled "The Potential of Video-Based Materials to Promote Classroom Discourse in Mathematics," at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Atlanta, GA.

Suggested Citation:"References." National Research Council. 1999. Keeping Score. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9635.
×
Page 81
Suggested Citation:"References." National Research Council. 1999. Keeping Score. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9635.
×
Page 82
Suggested Citation:"References." National Research Council. 1999. Keeping Score. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9635.
×
Page 83
Suggested Citation:"References." National Research Council. 1999. Keeping Score. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9635.
×
Page 84
Suggested Citation:"References." National Research Council. 1999. Keeping Score. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9635.
×
Page 85
Keeping Score Get This Book
×
Buy Paperback | $34.00 Buy Ebook | $27.99
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

Curriculum reform, performance assessment, standards, portfolios, and high stakes testing-what's next? What does this all mean for me in my classroom? Many teachers have asked such questions since mathematics led the way in setting standards with the publication of the Curriculum and Evaluation Standards for School Mathematics (National Council of Teachers of Mathematics [NCTM], 1989). This seminal document and others that followed served as catalysts for mathematics education reform, giving rise to new initiatives related to curriculum, instruction, and assessment over the past decade. In particular, approaches to classroom, school, and district-wide assessment have undergone a variety of changes as educators have sought to link classroom teaching to appropriate assessment opportunities.

Since the publication of Everybody Counts (National Research Council [NRC], 1989), the Mathematical Sciences Education Board (MSEB) has dedicated its efforts to the improvement of mathematics education. A national summit on assessment led to the publication of For Good Measure (NRC, 1991). This statement of goals and objectives for assessment in mathematics was followed by Measuring Up (NRC, 1993a), which provided prototypical fourth-grade performance assessment tasks linked to the goals of the NCTM's Curriculum and Evaluation Standards. Measuring What Counts (NRC, 1993b) demonstrated the importance of mathematics content, learning, and equity as they relate to assessment. The MSEB is now prepared to present perspectives on issues in mathematics education assessment for those most directly engaged in implementing the reform initiatives on a daily basis-classroom teachers, school principals, supervisors, and others in school-based settings.

  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!