Bibliography of NISE-Related Publications

 
 

 

Adelman, C. (1997). Leading, concurrent, or lagging? The knowledge content of computer science in higher education and the labor market (ED Publication No. PLLI 97-8046). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education. 

 

Adelman, C. (1998). Women and men of the engineering path: A model for analysis of undergraduate careers (ED Publication No. PLLI 98-8055).. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.


Boone, W. J., & Kahle, J. B. (1998). Student perceptions of instruction, peer interest, and adult support for middle school science: Differences by race and gender. Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering, 4(4), 333-340.


Bowen, C. W. (2000). A quantitative literature review of cooperative learning effects on high-school and college chemistry achievement. Journal of Chemical Education, 77(1), 116-119.


Britton, E., Raizen, S.  Kaser, J., & Porter, A. (2000). Beyond description of the problems: Directions for research on diversity and equity issues in K-12 mathematics and science education. Washington, DC: National Center for Improving Science Education.


Century, J. R. (2000). Capacity. In N. L. Webb, J. R. Century, N. Dávila, D. Heck, & E. Osthoff (Eds.), Evaluation of systemic reform in mathematics and science (Wisconsin Center for Education Research, University of Wisconsin–Madison). Manuscript in preparation.


Century, J. R. (2000). Equity. In N. L. Webb, J. R. Century, N. Dávila, D. Heck, & E. Osthoff (Eds.), Evaluation of systemic reform in mathematics and science. (Wisconsin Center for Education Research, University of Wisconsin–Madison). Manuscript in preparation.


Century, J. R. (2000). Role of evaluator. In N. L. Webb, J. R. Century, N. Dávila, D. Heck, & E. Osthoff (Eds.), Evaluation of systemic reform in mathematics and science. (Wisconsin Center for Education Research, University of Wisconsin–Madison). Manuscript in preparation.


Century, J. R. (2000). Sustainability. In N. L. Webb, J. R. Century, N. Dávila, D. Heck, & E. Osthoff (Eds.), Evaluation of systemic reform in mathematics and science. (Wisconsin Center for Education Research, University of Wisconsin–Madison). Manuscript in preparation.


Clune, W. H. (1998). The national standards in math and science: Developing consensus, unresolved issues, and unfinished business. Teachers College Record, 100(1), 6-7.


Clune, W. H. (1998). The “standards wars” in perspective. Teachers College Record, 100(1), 144-149.


Clune, W. H., Osthoff, E. J., & White, P. A. (2000). Theory and practice of systemic reform of mathematics and science education. Manuscript in preparation.


Clune, W. H., Porter, A. C., & Raizen, S. A. (1999, September 29). Systemic reform: What is it? How do we know? Education Week, 19(5), 31.


 
Committee on Undergraduate Science Education, Center for Science, Mathematics, and Engineering, and Technology, National Research Council. (1999). Transforming undergraduate education in science, mathematics, engineering, and technology. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
 

Cooper, J., & Robinson, P. (1998). Small group instruction in science, mathematics, engineering, and technology: A discipline status report and a teaching agenda for the future. Journal of College Science Teaching, 27(6), 383-388.


Dávila, N. (2000). Design of evaluation of systemic reform. In N. L. Webb, J. R. Century, N. 


Dávila, D. Heck, & E. Osthoff, Evaluation of systemic reform in mathematics and science. Madison, WI: Wisconsin Center for Education Research, University of Wisconsin. Manuscript in preparation.


Dávila, N. (2000). Instruction. In N. L. Webb, J. R. Century, N. Dávila, D. Heck, & E. Osthoff (Eds.), Evaluation of systemic reform in mathematics and science. (Wisconsin Center for Education Research, University of Wisconsin–Madison). Manuscript in preparation.


Dávila, N. (2000). Linkages. In N. L. Webb, J. R. Century, N. Dávila, D. Heck, & E. Osthoff, (Eds.), Evaluation of systemic reform in mathematics and science. (Wisconsin Center for Education Research, University of Wisconsin–Madison.) Manuscript in preparation.


Derry, S. J., DuRussel, L. A., & O’Donnell, A. M. (1998). Individual and distributed cognitions in interdisciplinary teamwork: A developing case study and emerging theory. Educational Psychology Review, 10, 25-56.


Derry, S. J., Gance, S. P., Gance, L. L., & Schlager, M. (2000). Toward assessment of knowledge building practices in technology-mediated work group interactions. To appear in S. Lajoie (Ed.), Computers as cognitive tools II: No more walls. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.


Derry, S. J., & Gernsbacher, M. (Eds.). (2000). The problems and promises of interdisciplinary scholarship: Perspectives from cognitive science. (University of Wisconsin–Madison). Manuscript in preparation.


DuRussel, L. A., & Derry, S. J. (1996). Sociocultural approaches to analyzing cognitive development in interdisciplinary teams. In Proceedings of the Eighteenth Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 529-533). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.


DuRussel, L. A., & Derry, S. J. (1998). Analogical reasoning in a natural working group. Proceedings of the Twentieth Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society.


DuRussel, L. A., & Derry, S. J. (2000). Mental models of teamwork. (University of Wisconsin–Madison). Manuscript in preparation.


Eisenhower National Clearinghouse. (1998). Ideas that work: Mathematics professional development. Columbus, OH: Author. (Digest of math portion of Loucks-Horsley,  Hewson, Love, & Stiles, 1997)


Eisenhower National Clearinghouse. (1999). Ideas that work: Science professional development. Columbus, OH: Author. (Digest of science portion of Loucks-Horsley,  Hewson, Love, & Stiles, 1997)


Eveland, W. P., Jr., & Dunwoody, S. (1997, August). Applying research on the uses and effects of hypermedia to the study of the World Wide Web. Paper presented to the Communication Technology & Policy division at the annual meeting of the AEJMC, Chicago.


Eveland, W. P., Jr., & Dunwoody, S. (1997, October). Communicating science to the public via “The Why Files” World Wide Web site. Paper presented to the International Conference on the Public Understanding of Science and Technology, Chicago.


Eveland, W. P., Jr., & Dunwoody, S.  (1998).  Users and navigation patterns of a science World Wide Web site for the public. Public Understanding of Science, 7, 285-311.


Eveland, W. P., Jr., & Dunwoody, S. (1999, August). Examining information processing on the World Wide Web using think-aloud protocols. Paper presented to the Communication Technology & Policy division at the annual meeting of the AEJMC, New Orleans, LA.


Eveland, W. P., Jr., & Dunwoody, S. (2000). Examining information processing on the World Wide Web using think-aloud protocols. Media Psychology, 2, 219-244.


Eveland, W. P., Jr., & Dunwoody, S. (2000, June). A test of competing hypotheses about the impact of the World Wide Web versus traditional print media on learning. Paper presented to the Information Systems division at the annual meeting of International Communication Association, Acapulco, Mexico.


Eveland, W. P., Jr., & Dunwoody, S. (in press). Applying research on the uses and cognitive effects of hypermedia to the study of the World Wide Web. Communication Yearbook #25.


Eveland, W. P., Jr., & Dunwoody, S. (2000). A test of competing hypotheses about the impact of the World Wide Web versus traditional print media on learning.  Manuscript submitted for publication.


Eveland, W. P., Jr., & Dunwoody, S. (2000). An investigation of the cognitive mediators and moderators of learning from the Web versus print.  Manuscript submitted for publication.


Foertsch, J. (2000). Models for undergraduate instruction: The potential of modeling and visualization technology in science and math education. In Targeting curricular change: Reform in undergraduate education in science, math, engineering, and technology (pp. 37-40). Washington, DC: American Association for Higher Education.


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(4), 325-338. 


Gernsbacher, M. A., & Derry, S. J. (Eds.). (1998). Proceedings of the twentieth annual meeting of the Cognitive Science Society. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.


Haimo, D. T. (1998). Are the NCTM standards suitable for systemic adoption? Teachers College Record, 100(1), 45-65.


Heck, D. J. (1998). Evaluating equity in statewide systemic initiatives: Asking the right questions. Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering, 4(2,3), 161-181.


Heck, D. (2000). Purposes and questions for evaluation of systemic reform. In N.L. Webb, J.R. Century, N. Dávila, D. Heck, & E. Osthoff, Evaluation of systemic reform in mathematics and science. Madison, WI: Wisconsin Center for Education Research, University of Wisconsin. Manuscript in preparation.


Heck, D. (2000). Saturation. In N. L. Webb, J.R. Century, N. Dávila, D. Heck, & E. Osthoff, Evaluation of systemic reform in mathematics and science. Madison, WI: Wisconsin Center for Education Research, University of Wisconsin. Manuscript in preparation.


Horsley, D. L., & Loucks-Horsley, S. (1998). CBAM brings order to the tornado of change. Journal of Staff Development, 19(4),17-20.


Kahle, J. B. (1997). Systemic reform: Challenges and changes. Science Educator, 6(1), 1-6. 


Kahle, J. B., & Rogg, S. R. (1997). Assessing systemic change: Ohio's Statewide Systemic Initiative, Discovery. Systemic Initiatives, 1(3), 10-11. Available: http://www.ehr.nsf.gov/ehr/esr/sysinit/news.htm


Kahle, J. B. (1998). Equitable systemic reform in science and mathematics: Assessing progress. Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering, 4(2,3), 91-112.

 

Kirst, M. W., & Bird, R. L. (1997). The politics of developing and sustaining mathematics and science curriculum content standards. Advances in Educational Administration, 5, 107-132.


Knapp, M. S. (1997 ). Between systemic reforms and the mathematics and science classroom: The dynamics of innovation, implementation, and professional learning. Review of Educational Research, 67(2), 227-266.


Lee, O. (1999). Equity implications based on the conceptions of science achievement in major reform documents. Review of Educational Research, 69(1), 83-115.


Lee, O., & Fradd, S. H. (1988). Science for all, including students from non-English language backgrounds. Educational Researcher, 27(4), 12-21.


Lee, O., & Paik, S. (2000). Conceptions of science achievement in major reform documents. School Science and Mathematics, 100(1), 16-26.


Loucks-Horsley, S. (1998). The role of teaching and learning in systemic reform: A focus on professional development. Science Educator, 7(1), 1-6.


Loucks-Horsley, S. (1998). JSD forum: I have changed my emphasis. Journal of Staff Development, 19(3), 7-8.


Loucks-Horsley, S., Bybee, R.W. (1998). Implementing the National Science Education Standards. The Science Teacher, 65(6), 22-25.


Lynch, S. (2000). Equity and science education reform. Mahway, NJ: Erlbaum.


Mathieu, R. (2000). Assessment tools to drive learning: FLAG, SALG, and other proven assessments available online. In Targeting curricular change: Reform in undergraduate education in science, math, engineering, and technology (pp. 26-31). Washington, DC: American Association for Higher Education.


Millar, S. (2000). Opening doors to new spaces: The processes of implementing education reform. In Targeting curricular change: Reform in undergraduate education in science, math, engineering, and technology (pp. 41-45). Washington, DC: American Association for Higher Education.


Millar, T., & Porter, A. (1998, January-March). Harnessing the Web for educational impact: The science behind the news. Envision, 13(1), 20-21.


Mintzes, J. J., Wandersee, J. H., & Novak, J. D. (Eds.). (1998). Teaching science for understanding: A human constructivist view. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.


Mintzes, J. J., Wandersee, J. H., & Novak, J. D. (Eds.). (2000). Assessing science understanding: A human constructivist view. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.


Mundry, S., Britton, E., Raizen, S., & Loucks-Horsley, S. (2000). Designing successful professional meetings and conferences in education: Planning, implementation, and evaluation. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press. 


Mundry, S., Spector, B., Loucks-Horsley, S., & Morrison, N. (1999, December 1). From novice to pro: Improving science and mathematics teaching by improving teacher learning. Education Week, 19(14), 21. 


Mundry, S., Spector, B., Loucks-Horsley, S., & Morrison, N. (2000, January-February). From novice to pro: Improving science and mathematics teaching by improving teacher learning. NSTA Reports, 11(4), 53. 


National Institute for Science Education. (1998). Descriptions of programs and strategies for change: Strengthening graduate education in science and engineering (Promising practices and strategies for implementation from the Graduate Education Forum). Madison: University of Wisconsin-Madison, Author.


Osthoff, E. (2000). Incentives. In N. L. Webb, J. R. Century, N. Dávila, D. Heck, & E. Osthoff, (Eds.), Evaluation of systemic reform in mathematics and science. (Wisconsin Center for Education Research, University of Wisconsin–Madison). Manuscript in preparation.


Paik, S., & Lee, O. (1998). Analysis of the conceptions of science achievement in major reform documents in the United States and Korea. Journal of the Korean Association for Research in Science Education, 18(4), 571-587.


Paik, S., & Lee, O. (in press). Science achievement: Synthesis of current conceptions in major reform documents in the United States and Korea. Elementary Science Education in South Korea.


Porter, A. C. (1994). National standards and school improvement in the 1990s: Issues and promise. American Journal of Education, 102(4), 421-449.


Porter, A. C. (1995). The uses and misuses of opportunity-to-learn standards. Educational Researcher, 24(1), 21-27.


Porter, A. C. (1998a). Dilemmas in assessing academic achievement. In N. M. Lambert & B. L. McCombs (eds.), How students learn: Reforming schools through learner-centered education (pp. 339-350). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.


Porter, A. C. (1998b). The effects of upgrading policies on high school mathematics and science. In D. Ravitch (Ed.), Brookings papers on education policy (pp. 123-172).Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press. 


Porter, A. C., Youngs, P., & Odden, A. (in press). Advances in teacher assessments and their uses. In V. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (4th edition).


Preparing our children: Math and science in the national interest (NSB 99-31). (1999). Arlington, VA: National Science Board. (also available at http://www.nsf.gov/nsb/documents/)


Raizen, S. (1998). Standards for science education. Teachers College Record, 100(1), 66-121.


Rodriguez, A. J. (1998). Busting open the meritocracy myth: Rethinking equity and student achievement in science education. Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering, 4(2,3), 195-216.


Roitman, J. (1999). A mathematician looks at national standards. Teachers College Record, 100(1), 22-44.


Romberg, T. A. (1998). Comments: NCTM's curriculum and evaluation standards. Teachers College Record, 100(1), 8-21.


Springer, L. (1998). Research on cooperative learning in college science, mathematics, engineering, and technology. Cooperative Learning and College Teaching, 8(3), 2-4.


Springer, L., Stanne, M. E., & Donovan, S. S. (1999). Effects of small-group learning on undergraduates in science, mathematics, engineering, and technology: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 69(1), 21-51.


Stein, M. K., & Mundry, S. (1999, October). Professional development for science and mathematics teachers: Dilemmas of design. The High School Principal Magazine, 7(2), 14-19. 


Stein, M. K., Smith, M. S., & Silver, E. A. (1999). The development of professional developers: Learning to assist teachers in new settings in new ways. Harvard Educational Review, 69(3), 237-269.


Stiles, K. E., & Loucks-Horsley, S. (1998). Professional development strategies. The Science Teacher, 65(6), 46-49. 


Tate, W. F. (1997). Race-ethnicity, SES, gender, and language proficiency trends in mathematics achievement: An update. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 28(6), 652-679.


Tenenbaum, D. (1997, Summer). Cyber scribe tells all: Writing for the web. SEJournal [On-line]. Available at: http://www.sej.org/sejournal/sej_su97.html


Thorn, C. A. (2000). Knowledge management for educational information systems: What is the state of the field? ((Wisconsin Center for Education Research, University of Wisconsin–Madison). Manuscript in preparation.


Tobias, S. (1999). Some recent developments in teacher education in mathematics and science. A review and commentary. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 8(1), 21-31.


Webb, N. L. (1998). Conditional equity metrics as tools for evaluating equity in schools and education systems. Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering, 4(2,3), 141-160.


Webb, N. L. (1998b). Judging alignment of assessments and expectations in a mathematics education system. Paper presented at a conference on the quality aspects of mathematics and science education held at the Abo Akademi University, Vasa, Finland.


Webb, N. L. (1998c). Thoughts on assessment in the mathematics classroom. In G. W. Bright & J. N. Joyner (Eds.), Classroom assessment in mathematics: Views from a National Science Foundation working conference (pp. 101-114). Lanham, MD: University Press of America.


Webb, N. L. (1999a). Alignment of mathematics tests and mathematics reform. Mathematicians and Education Reform Forum Newsletter, 11(3). University of Illinois at Chicago.


Webb, N. L. (1999b).  Judging alignment of assessments and expectations in a mathematics education system. In O. Björkqvist (Ed.), Quality aspects of mathematics and science education. Reports from the Faculty of Education, No. 5. Vasa, Finland: Ĺbo Akademi University.


Webb, N. L. (1999c). Professional development for improving assessment in mathematics and science. Paper presented at the conference Weaving Together the Strands of Systemic Reform: Professional Development, Assessment, and Research, Pretoria, South Africa, cosponsored by the South Africa National Research Foundation and the U.S. National Science Foundation, October 27-29.


Webb, N. L. (1999). Tools for understanding systemic reform: Logic-of-action and theory-of-change models. Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association annual meeting, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.


Webb, N. L., Century, J. R., Dávila, N., Heck, D.,  & Osthoff, E. (2000). Evaluation of systemic reform in mathematics and science. Madison, WI: Wisconsin Center for Education Research, University of Wisconsin. Manuscript in preparation.


Webb, N. L., & Smithson, J. (1999). Alignment between standards and assessments in mathematics for grade 8 in one state. Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association annual meeting, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.


Wiese, D., Seymour, E., & Hunter, A. (1999, June). Report on a panel testing of the Student Assessment of their Learning Gains Instrument by faculty using modular methods to teach undergraduate chemistry. Boulder: University of Colorado, Bureau of Sociological Research.


Wright, J. C., & Wright, C. S. (1998). A commentary on the profound changes envisioned by the national science standards. Teachers College Record, 100(1), 122-143.


Wright, J. C., Millar, S. B., Kosciuk, S. A., Penberthy, D. L., Williams, P. H., & Wampold, B. E. (1998). A novel strategy for assessing the effects of curriculum reform on student competence. Journal of Chemical Education, 75, 986-992.



National Institute for Science Education, University of Wisconsin-Madison
Copyright (c) 1999. The University of Wisconsin Board of Regents. All Rights Reserved.
Please send comments to: uw-wcer@education.wisc.edu
Last Updated:  May 05, 2003