Home Articles Reader Opinion Editorial Book Reviews Discussion Writers Guide About TCRecord
transparent 13
Topics
Discussion
Technology - Good for Students AND Teachers
Fiddling with Indicators while using Toxic Tests
Ode to Dewey
Clearly Articulated Proposal--Thank You!
VAM Sham BAM
Announcements
Call for Book Chapters
Call for PROPOSALS "Distraction: Girls, School, and Sexuality"
Call for PROPOSALS "Distraction: Girls, School, and Sexuality"
CALL FOR PAPERS for World Future Forum- Education Research!
Call for Proposals! Social Studies Conference in Orlando FL!
CALL FOR PAPERS IMMIGRATION, BEING IMMIGRANT OR REFUGEE IN THE CONTEXT OF EDUCATION POLICIES IN THE WORLD- IJEP 2018 ISSUES
Call for Papers- International Journal of Management, Economics and Social Sciences
 

Reforming Reading, Writing and Mathematics: Teachers' Responses and the Prospects for Systemic Reform


reviewed by William F. Tate — 1999

coverTitle: Reforming Reading, Writing and Mathematics: Teachers' Responses and the Prospects for Systemic Reform
Author(s): S.G. Grant
Publisher: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc., Mahwah, NJ
ISBN: 0805828400, Pages: 237, Year: 1998
Search for book at Amazon.com

Some scholars and policymakers attribute the language and arguments for “standards-based” reform to the mathematics education community (O’Day & Smith, 1993). In 1980, the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM), a professional organization of mathematics teachers, supervisors, and college professors, published An Agenda for Action, which described a 10-year reform process. Subsequently, but not as a direct result of An Agenda for Action, NCTM published a series of standards documents that called for a movement away from a strictly basic-skills curriculum to a problem-solving conception of mathematics content and pedagogy. Other professional organizations followed with content and teaching standards for their subject area domains. Many states have used these content standards as guides to develop their own state curriculum frameworks. Fuhrman (1993) argued that curriculum standards alone lack the incentive and accountability mechanisms required for systemic change. O’Day and Smith (1993) posited that systemic change calls for states to... (preview truncated at 150 words.)


To view the full-text for this article you must be signed-in with the appropriate membership. Please review your options below:

Sign-in
Email:
Password:
Store a cookie on my computer that will allow me to skip this sign-in in the future.
Send me my password -- I can't remember it
 
Purchase this Article
Purchase Reforming Reading, Writing and Mathematics: Teachers' Responses and the Prospects for Systemic Reform
Individual-Resource passes allow you to purchase access to resources one resource at a time. There are no recurring fees.		$12
Become a Member
Online Access
With this membership you receive online access to all of TCRecord's content. The introductory rate of $25 is available for a limited time.		$25
Print and Online Access
With this membership you receive the print journal and free online access to all of TCRecord's content.		$210


Cite This Article as: Teachers College Record Volume 101 Number 2, 1999, p. 261-265
http://www.tcrecord.org ID Number: 10685, Date Accessed: 10/15/2018 8:13:43 PM

Purchase Reprint Rights for this article or review
 
Article Tools
Full Text in PDF Format
Email this article
Print this article
Post a Comment
Related Articles

Related Discussion
 
Post a Comment | Read All

About the Author
  • William Tate
    University of Wisconsin, Madison
 
Member Center
Welcome!
Sign-in
Submit My Work
TCR @ Your Library
Book Reviews @ Your Library
In Print
This Month's Issue

Submit
EMAIL

Twitter

RSS
 
Add TC Record RSS feeds to your site
Copyright 2018 Teachers College, Columbia University. All rights reserved.
Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Copyright Agreement