Anderson-Inman, L. & Reinking, D. (1998). Learning from text in a technological society. In C. Hynd, S. Stahl, B. Britton, M. Carr, & S. Glynn (Eds.) Learning from Text Across Conceptual Domains in Secondary Schools (pp 165-191). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.
Becker, H.J. (2000). Who's wired and who's not: Children's access to and use of computer technology. Future of Children, 10(2), 44-75. Los Altos, CA: The David and Lucile Packard Foundation. Retrieved charts from: http://www.gse.uci.edu/doehome/DeptInfo/Faculty/Becker/packard/saveall.html#top.
Becker, H.J., & Ravitz, J. (1997, August). The equity threat of promising innovations: The Internet in schools. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Society for the Psychological Study of Social Issues in Chicago.
Becker, H. J., Ravitz, J. L., & Wong, Y. (1999). Teacher and teacher-directed student use of computers and software. Center for Research on Information Technology and Organizations, University of California, Irvine, and University of Minnesota.
Benton Foundation (2002).Great expectations: Leveraging America's investment in educational technology. Washington, D.C.: Benton Foundation.
The Bertelsmann Foundation and the AOL Time Warner Foundation.(2002, March). 21st century literacy in a convergent media world.White paper from the 21st Century Literacy Summit: Berlin. http://www.21stcenturyliteracy.org.
Biancarosa, G., and Snow, C. E. (2004.) Reading next—A vision for action and research in middle and high school literacy: A report to Carnegie Corporation of New York. Washington,DC: Alliance for Excellent Education.
Boster, F.J., Meyer, G.S., Roberto, A.J., & Inge, C.C. (2002). A report on the effect of the unitedstreamingTM application on educational performance.
Bowe, F. G. (2000). Universal design in education: Teaching non-traditional students. Westport,CT: Bergen & Garvey.
Brunner, C., Fasca, C., Heinze, J., Honey, M., Light, D., Mandinach, E., & Wexler, D.(2005). Linking data and learning: The Grow Network study.Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk. 10(3), 241-267.
Brunner, C., & Honey, M. (2001). The consortium for technology in the preparation of teachers: Exploring the potential of handheld technology for preservice education. New York: EDC Center for Children and Technology.
Byrom, E., Bingham, M. (2001).Factors influencing the effective use of technology for teaching and learning: Lessons learned from SEIR*TEC Intensive Site Schools, 2nd edition.Greensboro,NC:SERVE.
Casonato, R. & Morello, D. (2002, July) The deployee: At the forefront of workforce transformation. Research note. Stamford,CT: Gartner Research.
Cavanaugh, C. S. (2001). The effectiveness of interactive distance education technologies in K-12 learning: A meta-analysis. International Journal of Educational Telecommunications, 7, 73-88.
CEO Forum on Education and Technology. (1999, February). School technology and readiness report: Professional development: A link to better learning. Washington,DC: Author. Available: http://www.ceoforum.org/downloads/99report.pdf
CEO Forum on Education and Technology. (2000, Summer). School technology and readiness report: The power of digital learning. Washington, DC: Author. Available: http://www.ceoforum.org/downloads/report3.pdf
CEO Forum on Education and Technology. (2001, June). School technology and readiness report: Key building blocks for student achievement in the 21st century: Integrating digital content. Washington,DC: Author. Available: http://www.ceoforum.org/downloads/report4.pdf
Confrey, J., & Makar, K. (2002). Developing secondary teachers' statistical inquiry through immersion in high-stakes accountability data. In D. Mewborn, P. Sztajn, & D. White (Eds.), Proceedings of the twenty-fourth annual meeting of the North American Chapter of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education PME-NA24 (pp. 1267-1279), 3, Athens, GA.
Confrey, J., & Makar, K.(2005).Critiquing and improving data use from high stakes tests:Understanding variation and distribution in relation to equity using dynamic statistics software.In C. Dede, J. P. Honan, & l. C. Peters (Eds.), Scaling up success:Lessons learned from technology-based educational improvement (pp. 198-226).San Francisco:Jossey-Bass.
Culp, K.M., Honey, M., and
Mandinach, E. (2003). A retrospective on
twenty years of education technology policy. Washington,
DC: U.S. Department of Education.
Available at: http://www.nationaledtechplan.org/participate/20years.pdf
Dirr, P. (2004). Measuring the impact of technology on classroom teaching and learning. ATEC: Alexandria,VA. Available: http://www.the-atec.org/docDownload.asp?docID=44
eMINTS National Center.
(2005, September 15). Fact sheet. Columbia,MO:
eSchool News. (2005a, August).Mich. laptop program shows early success. Staff and wire service reports. p. 15.
eSchool News. (2005b, September). Study: Web use nearly ubiquitous for today's teens. staff and wire service reports. p. 17.
ETS: International ICT Literacy Panel. (2001). Digital transformation: A framework for ICT literacy. Educational Testing Service: http://www.ets.org/research/ictliteracy/index.html
Evaluation Team Policy Brief. (2001). Analysis of the 2001 MAP results for eMINTS students. Available: http://www.emints.org/evaluation/reports/map2001-emints.pdf
Fletcher-Flinn, C. M., & Gravatt, B. (1995). The efficacy of computer assisted instruction (CAI): A meta-analysis. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 219-241.
Fullan, M. (1999). Change forces: The sequel. London: Falmer.
Fulton, K. Yoon, I. & Lee, C. (2005, August). Induction into learning communities. National Commission on Teaching and America's Future. Available: http://www.nctaf.org/documents/nctaf/NCTAF_Induction_Paper_2 005.pdf
Hammerman, J. K., & Rubin, A. (2002) Visualizing a statistical world. Hands On!, 25(2).
Hammerman, J. K., & Rubin, A. (2003). Reasoning in the presence of variability. Paper presented at the The Third International Research Forum on Statistical Reasoning, Thinking, and Literacy (SRTL-3), Lincoln,NB.
Haycock, K. (2001, March). Closing the achievement gap. Educational Leadership, 58(6), 6-11. Available online: http://www.ascd.org/readingroom/edlead/0103/haycock.html
Heinze, J. & Hupert, N. (in press). Results in the palms of their hands:Using handheld computers to support data-driven decision making. Draft chapter. Presented at Improving Achievement through Linking Data and Learning, Wingspread Conference, October 30-November 1, 2005.
J., & Gribbons, B. (2001). Lessons
learned in using data to support school inquiry and continuous
improvement:Final report to the Stuart
Foundation (CSE Technical Report 535).Los Angeles:
Hiebert, J. C. (1999). Relationships between research and the NCTM Standards. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 30, 3-19.
Hitlin, P. & Rainie, L. (2005, August). Teens, technology, and school. Data memo.Washington,D.C.: Pew Internet & American Life Project.
Honey, M., Brunner, C., Light, D., Kim, C., McDermott, M., Heinze, C., Breiter, A., & Mandinach, E.(2002).Linking data and learning:The Grow Network study.New York: EDC's Center for Children and Technology.
Hupert, N., Martin, W., Heinze, J., Kanaya, T., & Perez, H. (2004).New Mexico Reading First evaluation report: year one summary of findings.New York: EDC Center for Children and Technology.
International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE). (1999). National education technology standards for students - Connecting curriculum and technology. Eugene,Oregon: Author.
International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE). (2002). Educational technology standards and performance indicators for administrators. National education technology standards for administrators (NETS•A). Available: http://cnets.iste.org/administrators/a_stands.html
Johnson, J. H. (1996, May). Data-driven school improvement. OSSC Bulletin Series. Eugene, OR:Oregon School Study Council, 38 pages.
Kagan, S. L., & Stewart, V. (2004). Putting the world into world-class education. Phi Delta Kappan, 86(3), 195-197.
Kamil, M. L. (2003). Adolescents and literacy: Reading for the 21st century. Washington,DC: Alliance for Excellent Education.
Kanaya, T. & Light, D. (2005). Duration and relevance of a professional development program: Using Intel Teach to the Future to illuminate successful programmatic features. Presented at Society for Information Technology and Teacher Education International Conference 2005. Norfolk,VA: AACE.
Kay, K. & Honey, M. (in press). Beyond technology competency: A vision of ICT literacy to prepare students for the 21st century. The Institute for the Advancement of Emerging Technologies in Education. Charleston, W.V.: Evantia.
Kearns, D. T., & Harvey, J.(2000). A legacy of learning.Washington,DC:Brookings Institution Press.
Knox, C., and Anderson-Inman, L. (2001). Migrant ESL high school students succeed using networked laptops. Learning and Leading with Technology, 28(5).
Kulik, J. A. (1994). Meta-analytic studies of findings on computer-based instruction. In E. Baker & H. O'Neil (Eds.), Technology Assessment in Education and Training. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Kulik, C. C., & Kulik, J. A. (1991). Effectiveness of computer-based instruction: An updated analysis. Computers in Human Behavior, 7, 75-94.
Lau, J. & Lazarus, W. (2002). Pathways to our future: A multimedia training program for youth that works. Santa Monica,CA: The Children's Partnership.
Lenhart, A., Rainie, L., & Lewis, O. (2001). Teenage life online. Research report.Washington,D.C.: Pew Internet & American Life Project
Light, D., Wexler, D., & Henize, J.(2004, April).How practitioners interpret and link data to instruction:Research findings on New York City Schools' implementation of the Grow Network.Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Diego, CA.
Looney, M.A. (2005, September). Giving students a 21st century education. Technology Horizons in Education Journal, p.58.
Love. N. (2004, Fall). Taking
data to new depths. Journal of Staff
Love, N. (2002). Using data/getting results: A practical guide for school improvement in mathematics and science. Norwood,MA: Christopher-Gordon Publishers.
Mandinach, E. B., Honey, M., Light, D., Heinze, C., &
Rivas, R.(2005, June). Creating an evaluation framework for
data-drive instructional decision making.Paper presented at the meeting of the National Educational Computing
Mandinach, E. B., & Honey, M. (2005, October). A theoretical framework for data-driven decision making. Paper presented at the Wingspread Conference on data-driven decision making, October 30-November 1, Racine, WI.
Marshall, J.M. (2002). Learning with technology: Evidence that technology can, and does, support learning. San Diego, CA: Cable in the Classroom.
McHale, T. (2005, September). Portrait of a digital native: Are digital-age students fundamentally different from the rest of us? Technology & Learning. p.33-34.
McLaughlin, M.J., Embler, S. & Nagle, K. (2004, September). Students with disabilities and accountability: the promise and the realities. Should there be alternatives? Center on Education Policy.
Mitchell, D., Lee, J., & Herman, J. (October, 2000).Computer software systems and using data to support school reform.Paper prepared for Wingspread Meeting, Technology's Role in Urban School Reform: Achieving Equity and Quality.Sponsored by the Joyce and Johnston Foundations. New York: EDC's Center for Children and Technology.
Morello, D. (2003, May). Unlocking the business value of people: building versatility. Research note. Stamford,CT: Gartner Research.
Mosaic. (2000a, Summer). Introduction: Inclusive Practices: What Special Education Has to Offer Whole-School Reform. Newton,MA: Education Development Center, Inc.
Mosaic. (2000b, Summer). Interview: The evolution of inclusion. An interview with Thomas Hehir and Judith Zorfass. Newton,MA: Education Development Center, Inc.
Mullis, I.V.S., Martin, M.O., Gonzalez, E.J., and Chrostowski, S.J. (2004). TIMSS 2003 international mathematics report: Findings from IEA's trends in international mathematics and science study at the eight and fourth grades. Chestnut Hill, MA: Boston College.
Murphy, R., Penuel, W., Means, B., Korbak, C., Whaley, A. (2001). E-DESK: A Review of Recent Evidence on the Effectiveness of Discrete Educational Software. Menlo Park, CA: SRI International.
Murray, C. (2005, October). Tech helps special-needs kids pass high-stakes tests. eSchool News, p. 22-23.
Nagle, K. (2005, May). Topical Review 4 - Emerging State-Level Themes: Strengths and Stressors in Educational Accountability Reform. The Educational Policy Reform Research Institute. College Park,MD: The Institute for the Study of Exceptional Children and Youth.
National Research Council (1996). National science education standards. Washington,DC: National Academy Press.
National Staff Development Council. (2001). NSDC standards for staff development. Archived at http://www.nsdc.org/library/standards2001.html.
North Central Regional Educational Laboratory (2002). EnGauge 21st century skills: Digital literacies for a digital age. Available: http://www.ncrel.org/engauge
Olsen, L. (2003, May 21). Study relates cautionary tale of misusing data. Education Week, 22(37), 12.
O'Dwyer, L.M., Russell, M., Bebell, D., and Tucker-Seeley, K.R. (2005, January). Examining the relationship between home and school computer use and students' English/Language Arts test scores. The Journal of Technology, Learning, and Assessment. (Vol. 3 No. 3). Available: www.bc.edu/research/intasc/studies/USEIT/pdf/USEIT_r10.pdf
Papanastasiou, E., Zemblyas, M., & Vrasidas, C. (2003). Can computer use hurt science achievement? Journal of Science Education and Technology, 12 (3), 325-332.
Parsad, B., and Jones, J.(2005).Internet access in U.S. public schools and classrooms: 1994-2003 (NCES 2005-015).U.S. Department of Education. Washington,DC:National Center for Education Statistics.
Partnership for 21st Century Skills. (2003).Learning for the 21st century. Washington,D.C.: Author. Available: http://www.21stcenturyskills.org/downloads/P21_Report.pdf
Partnership for 21st Century Skills. (2005a). The assessment of 21st century skills: The current landscape. Pre-publication draft. Washington, D.C.: Author. Available: http://www.21stcenturyskills.org/images/stories/otherdocs/Assessment_Landscape.pdf
Partnership for 21st Century Skills. (2005b). Road to 21st century learning: A policymakers' guide to 21st century skills. Washington,D.C.: Author. Available: http://www.21stcenturyskills.org/images/stories/otherdocs/P21_Policy_Paper.pdf
Perez-Prado, A., & Thirunarayanan, M. (2002). A qualitative comparison of online and classroom-based sections of a course: Exploring student perspectives. Education Media International, 39(2), 195-202.
Prensky, M. (2001, October). Digital natives, digital immigrants. In On the Horizon. NCB University Press, Vol. 9 No. 5.
Prensky, M. (2005). What can you learn from a cell phone? Almost anything! Innovate: Journal of Online Education, 1(5).
Quality Education Data (QED). (2004). Technology Purchasing Forecast, 2003-2004. Denver,CO: Scholastic, Inc.
Renyi, J. (1996). Teachers take charge of their learning: Transforming professional development for student success. Washington,DC: National Foundation for the Improvement of Education. Available online: http://www.nfie.org/publications/takecharge.htm
Reeves, T. C. (1998). The impact of media and technology in schools: A research report prepared for The Bertelsmann Foundation.
Ridgeway, J. MCCusker, S. & Pead, D. (2004). Literature review on e-assessment.United Kingdom: Nesta Futurelab Series. Report 10.
Ringstaff, C., Kelley, L. (2002). The learning return on our educational technology investment. San Francisco: WestEd. Available: http://www.wested.org/cs/we/view/rs/619
Roschelle, J.M. Pea, R.D., Hoadley, C.M., Gordin, D.N. and Means, B.M. (2000). Changing how and what children learn in school with computer-based technologies. The Future of Children, 10:2, 76-101
Rose, D. H. & Meyer, A. (2002). Teaching every student in the digital age: Universal design for learning. Alexandria,VA: ASCD.
Ryan, A. (1991). Meta-analysis of achievement effects of microcomputer applications in
elementary schools. Educational Administration Quarterly, 27(2), 161-184.
Schacter, J. (1999, June). The impact of education technology on student achievement: What the most current research has to say. Santa Monica, CA: Milken Exchange on Education Technology.
Schmoker, M. (1999). Results: The key to continuous improvement (2nd ed.). Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Sharp, D. (2004). Supporting teachers' data-driven instructional conversations: An environmental scan of Reading First and STEP literacy assessments, data visualizations, and assumptions about conversations that matter. Report to the Information Infrastructure Project. Chicago: John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation.
Sharp, D., Risko, V. (2003).All in the Palm of your hand:Lessons from one school's first steps with handheld technology for literacy assessments.Report to the Information Infrastructure Project, Network on Teaching and Learning. John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation.
Sherry, L. & Jesse, D. (2000, October). The impact of technology on student achievement. Denver, CO: RMC Research Corporation. Available: http://carbon.cudenver.edu/~lsherry/pubs/tassp_00.htm
Sivin-Kachala, J. & Bialo, E. (2000). 2000 research report on the effectiveness of technology in schools (7th ed.). Washington,DC: Software and Information Industry Association.
Smith, G., Ferguson, D., & Caris, M. (2001). Teaching college courses online vs. face-to-face [Electronic version]. Technology Horizons in .Education Journal, Vol. 28, No. 9, 18-26.
Snyder, T.D. & Tan, A.G. (2005, October). Digest of education statistics, 2004. U.S. Department of Education.Washington,DC:National Center for Education Statistics.
. (2005). Is America really serious about
educating every child? (Prepared remarks for Secretary Spellings at the
Education Writers Association National Seminar, St. Petersburg,FL,
May 6, 2005). Retrieved from:
Stage, E.K. (2005, Winter). Why do we need these assessments? The Natural Selection: The Journal of BSCS. p.11-13.
Thompson, S. J., Thurlow, M., & Moore, M. (2003). Putting it all together: Including students with disabilities in assessment and accountability systems (Policy Directions No. 16). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, National Center on Educational Outcomes. http://education.umn.edu/NCEO/OnlinePubs/Policy16.htm.
U.S. Bureau of the Census. (2003, October). Current Population Survey, Internet and Computer Use.
U.S. Department of Education.(2001). Enhancing education through technology act of 2001. Sec. 2402. Purposes and Goals. Available: http://www.ed.gov/legislation/ESEA02/pg34.html
U.S. Department of Education. (2005). The Secretary's fourth annual report on teacher quality: A highly qualified teacher in every classroom. Washington, DC: Office of Postsecondary Education.
U.S. Department of Education, Web-Based Education Commission. (2000, December 19). The power of the Internet for learning: Moving from promise to practice. Washington, DC: Author. Available: http://www.ed.gov/offices/AC/WBEC/FinalReport/
Wang, L. The advantages of using technology in second language education. Technology Horizons in Education Journal, May 2005 p.38-41.
Wenglinsky, H. (1998). Does it compute? The relationship between educational technology and student achievement in mathematics. Princeton,N.J.: ETS Policy Information Center.
Zalles, D. (2005). Designs for assessing foundational data literacy. Available online at: http://serc.carleton.edu/files/NAGTWorkshops/assess/ZallesEssay3.pdf
Zuman, J. (2005). Evaluation report: Using data project. Cambridge, MA and Arlington, VA: TERC and INCRE (unpublished).