Taylor and Francis Group is part of the Academic Publishing Division of Informa PLC

This site is operated by a business or businesses owned by Informa PLC and all copyright resides with them. Informa PLC's registered office is 5 Howick Place, London SW1P 1WG. Registered in England and Wales. Number 3099067.



Reports: A Framework for K-12 Science Education: Practices, Crosscutting Concepts, and Core Ideas and draft Next Generation Science Standards (2012)

America’s Academic Future: A Report of the Presidential Young Investigator Colloquium on U.S. Engineering, Mathematics, and Science Education for the Year 2010 and Beyond. Washington, D.C.: National Science Foundation. January, 1992.

American Association for the Advancement of Science—Project 2061. (1993). Benchmarks for Science Literacy. New York: Oxford University Press. [MISL and free on the AAAS website: www.aaas.org]

Anderson, R. D. (2002). Reforming Science Teaching: What Research says about Inquiry. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 13(1), 1–12.

Content Curriculum Framework. (1994). Salem, OR: Oregon Department of Education. [MISL]

Decade of Achievement: Educational Leadership in Mathematics, Science and Engineering. Washington, D.C.: National Science Foundation. 1991.

Enger, Sandra K., and Robert Eugene Yager (2001). Assessing Student Understanding in Science: A Standards-based K-12 Handbook. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.

Flick, L. B. (2000). Cognitive Scaffolding that Fosters Scientific Inquiry in Middle Level Science. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 11(2), 109–129.

Gardner, A. L. and K. Cochran (Eds.) (1993).Critical Issues in Reforming Elementary Teacher Preparation in Mathematics and Science: Conference Proceedings. Greeley, CO: University of Northern Colorado.

Goldston, M. Jenice (2004). Stepping up to Science and Math: Exploring the Natural Connections. Arlington, VA: NSTA.

Heil, David (1999). Family Science. Portland, Or.: Foundation for Family Science.

Kesidou, S., and J. E. Roseman. (2002). How Well Do Middle School Science Programs Measure Up? Findings from Project 2061’s Curriculum Review. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(6), 522–549.

Meece, J. L. (2003). Applying Learner-Centered Principles to Middle School Education. Theory into Practice, 42(2), 109–116.

National Research Council, National Committee on Science Education Standards and Assessment. (1995). National Science Education Standards. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.

National Research Council, Report of a Convocation. From Analysis to Action: Undergraduate Education in Science, Mathematics, Engineering, and Technology. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press, 1996.

Nelson, Gordon L. (1988). ChemCom—an Exciting New Approach to Teaching. Chemical and Engineering News, 66(39), 47, 71.

Programs for the Improvement of Practice. Washington, D.C.: Office of Educational Research and Improvement. October, 1990.

Rutherford, F. J. (1990). Science for All Americans (2nd edition). American Association for the Advancement of Science. New York: Oxford University Press.

Rutherford, F. J. (1993).“Where is Project 2061 Today?” Educational Leadership, May, pp. 19–22.

Science and Mathematics Education for the CIM and CAM Project Report. A project supported by the 21st Century Education Innovations. Oregon System of Higher Education. 1994.

Sussman, A. (Ed.). (1993). Science Education Partnerships: Manual for Scientists and K-12 Teachers. National Academy of Sciences. San Francisco, CA: University of California Press.

Siverston, M. L. (Ed.). (1990). Science Education Programs That Work: A Collection of Proven Exemplary Educational Programs and Practices in the National Diffusion Network. Washington, D.C.: Office of Educational Research.

Windschitl, M., Thompson, J., and M. Braaten. (2008). Beyond the Scientific Method: Model-Based Inquiry as a New Paradigm of Preference for School Science Investigations. Science Education, 92(5), 941–967.