參考文獻
中文部分：
方炳隆（2000）。澳門地區教科書選用制度。論文發表於中華民國教材研究發展學會、國立臺北師範學院主辦：教科書往何處去？教科書制度研討會。線上檢索日期：2007年9月5日。取自網址：http://www.trd.org.tw/Cpast/895030/890530-4.htm
方崇雄、林坤誼、張聖麟（2004）。生活科技學域能力指標詮釋之研究。教育研究資訊,，12(2)，35-58。
王素芸（2001）。基本能力指標之發展與概念分析。教育研究資訊，9(1)，1-14。王彩芬（1998）。國民小學社會科部編本與審定本教科書內容之比較研究 。臺南師院學生學刊，第19期，235-251。
王詩婷（2004）。自然與生活科技領域能力指標詮釋、轉化與驗證之研究。國立臺灣師範大學工業科技教育學系碩士論文，未出版，臺北市。
丘愛鈴（2006）。國小高年級綜合活動教科書之評鑑。課程與教學，9（3），121-138。司琦（2005）。小學教科書發展史：小學教科書紙上博物館。臺北市：國立編譯館。
史密斯（Smith, M. J.）（2004）。社會科學概說：方法論的探索（吳翠松譯）。臺北縣：韋伯文化國際。
余民寧、韓珮華（2009）。教學方式對數學學習興趣與數學成就之影響：以TIMSS 2003臺灣資料為例 。測驗學刊，56(1)，19-48。克蘭頓（Cranton, P.）(1996)。了解與促進轉化學習──成人教育指南（李素卿 譯）。臺北市：五南。
吳清山、黃美芳、徐瑋平（2002）。教育績效責任研究。臺北市：高等教育。吳莉蓉（2004）。臺中市國小藝術與人文教師對藝術與人文教科書之使用現況與意見調查研究。國立新竹教育大學美勞教育學研究所碩士論文，未出版，新竹市。
呂佳華(2009)。藝術與人文學習領域教育政策與其落實情形之檢證：以雲林縣清新國小的施行現況為例。南華大學美學與視覺藝術學報，1，1~14。呂燕卿（1994）。國小美勞課程標準修訂與審美領域教學之研究。 新竹市：玟晟。
呂燕卿（1999a）。談藝術與人文學習領域的統整性課程設計之觀念。教師天地，100， 40~51。
呂燕卿（1999b）。藝術與人文學習領域綱要與統整性互融式課程設計之觀念。美育，106，29~38。
呂燕卿（2002）。九年一貫藝術與人文學習領域之能力指標轉化與實踐。國教世紀，202，5-18。
呂燕卿、陳淑文、趙雯津、田娟禎、余珮君、胡慕昀、蔡秀鷹、吳貞儀、徐介美（2007）。九年一貫課程藝術與人文教科書評鑑報告摘要。論文發表於中華民國課程與教學學會。臺北市立教育大學主辦：教科書制度與影響研討會。線上檢索日期：2007年10月26日。網址：http://www.aci-taiwan.org.tw/pdf/proceedings%2001-20071020.pdf
李坤崇（2002）。國民中小學成績評量準則之多元評量理念。載於教育部主編。國中小校長與督學培訓手冊（137-154）。臺北市：教育部。
李坤崇（2003）。能力指標解讀轉化的理念。載於林生傳（主編）。九年一貫課程理論基礎叢書（一）：理念篇（142-170）。臺北市：教育部。
李坤崇（2004a）。能力指標轉化教學、評量的理念與實例。教育研究，126(10)，122-135。李坤崇（2004b）。綜合活動學習領域概論。臺北市：心理出版社。
李坤崇（2006）。教學目標、能力指標與評量。臺北市：高等教育。李宜玫、王逸慧、林世華（2004）。社會學習領域分段能力指標之解讀--由Bloom教育目標分類系統（修訂版）析之。國立臺北師範學院學報：教育類，17(2)，1-34.李惠鈴（2005）。屏東縣國小英語教師對教科書使用意見之調查研究。國立屏東教育大學教育行政研究所碩士論文，未出版，屏東市。
李璍（2004）。歷年國民中學視覺藝術教科書演變過程探討。藝術論文集刊，3，121-144。林公欽（2003）。分段能力指標：在九年一貫課程所代表的意涵---以藝術與人文學習領域為例。美育，131，42-43。
林世華（2004）。國民中小學九年一貫課程發展學習成就評量指標與方法研究報告。教育部委託國立臺北師範學院九年一貫課程推動工作小組之專案研究，未出版。
林炎旦（2001）。國民小學藝術與人文教師領域共同能力指標分析。國民教育，42(2)，29~36。
林曼麗（2000）。臺灣視覺藝術教育研究。臺北市：雄獅美術。林清山（1992）。心理與教育統計學。臺北市：東華書局。
林碧珍、蔡文煥（2005）。TIMSS 2003臺灣國小四年級學生的數學成就及其相關因素之探討 。科學教育，285（2-38）。
阿普爾、克麗斯蒂安-史密斯(Apple, M. W. & Christian-Smith L. K.)（2005）。教科書政治學（侯定凱譯）（The Politics of the Textbook）。上海：華東師範大學出版。（原著出版年：1991）
柯普朗、諾頓（Kaplan, R. S. & Norton, D. P.）（2006）。策略校準：應用平衡計分卡創造組織最佳綜效（高子梅、何霖譯）（ALIGNMENT: using the balanced scorecard to create corporate synergies）。臺北市：臉譜。（原著出版年：1996）
洪詠善（2005）。國小藝術與人文領域「環境藝術」敘事課程行動探究。新竹師院學報，20,131-170。范靜月（1999）。國小英文教科書評鑑：以教師與學生角度評析。國立中正大學外國語文研究所碩士論文，未出版，嘉義縣。
夏林清（1990）。行動科學。臺北市：遠流。.
徐秀菊（2001）。藝術與人文領域課程設計之觀念與實踐。花師院刊，36，12~15。
秦葆琦（1999a）。國民小學社會科第五冊「人際關係」單元之各版本教師用書分析研究。國教學報，11，347-384。
秦葆琦（1999b）。社會科四年級上學期（第七冊）各版本分析（2）--教材內容的分析。研習資訊，16(6)，33-42。
秦葆琦（2003）。從國小生活課程教科書中能力指標與教學目標的關係分析教學設計的統整情形--以康軒版為例。國教學報，15，1-28。
秦葆琦（2004）。從國小生活課程教科書中能力指標與教學目標的關係分析教學設計的統整情形--以翰林版為例。國教學報，16，123-152。
秦葆琦（2005）。從國小生活課程教師手冊中能力指標與教學目標的關係分析能力指標落實的情形:以仁林版為例。國教學報，17，127~152。
高新建（2002）。能力指標課程轉化模式（一）：能力指標之分析與教學轉化。載於黃炳煌主編，社會學習領域課程設計教學策略（頁51~99）。臺北市：師大書苑。
張玉山 （2002）。「藝術與人文」學習領域的整合教學設計。教育研究，102，126~137。張芳全（2008）數學成就的城鄉差距探討：以TIMSS 2003為例 。國民教育，48(6), 22-29。
張美玉、羅珮華（2005）。TIMSS 2003臺灣國小四年級學生的科學成就及其相關因素之探討。科學教育，284, 36-59。
張富棠（2004）。國民小學教師對藝術課程評鑑知覺之研究。私立明道管理學院教學藝術研究所碩士論文，未出版，彰化縣。
張曉華（2004）。 表演藝術在「藝術與人文」領域的教學定位。國民教育，45(2)，15~21。
教育部（2000）。國民中小學九年一貫課程暫行綱要。臺北市：教育部。教育部（2002）。國民中小學九年一貫課程綱要。臺北市：教育部。教育部（2003）。國民中小學九年一貫課程綱要藝術與人文學習領域。臺北市：教育部。梁蕙蓉（2003）。能力指標之解析與教學轉換。中等教育，54(4)，62-79。郭榮瑞（2004）。藝術與人文能力指標轉化之前提：以視覺藝術為例。教師天地，130，4~13。
郭榮瑞（2004）。藝術與人文能力指標轉化之前提---以視覺藝術為例。教師天地，130，4-13。
陳佑翔（2006）。國小教師實踐知識之研究-以藝術與人文領域為例。臺北市立教育大學課程與教學研究所碩士論文。
陳怡芳（2008）。九年一貫藝術與人文領域教科書之後設分析---以國內碩士論文為例。載於 數位藝術教育網路期刊，第十卷。線上檢索日期：2009年5月13日。網址：http://www.aerc.nhcue.edu.tw/journal/Journal10/10_005.pdf
陳亭儒、謝政達（2003）藝術感通統整藝術與人文領域的教學初探。載於藝術與人文學習領域教學理論與實務研討會論文集（頁33-47）。國立新竹師院美勞教育學系主辦。
陳政帆（2006）。我國八年級學生在TIMSS 2003中之科學自信心、價值觀分析 。科學教育，291, 2-10。
陳秋瑾（2002）。精緻藝術與流行文化：九年一貫藝術與人文教育的課題。現代教育論壇，7，272-279。
陳美如（2006）。地方層級課程改革評鑑指標系統建構之研究。教育政策論壇，9(4)，181-204。陳朝平、黃壬來（1995）。國小美勞科教材教法。臺北市：五南。
陳雅芸（2005）。藝術與人文學習領域能力指標解析與轉化之研究－－以第三冊教科書音樂課程內涵為探討主軸。國立臺南大學音樂教育學系碩士班碩士論文，未出版，臺南市。
陳新轉（2004）。九年一貫社會學習領域課程發展：從課程綱要與能力指標出發。臺北市：心理。
陳錫祿、劉英淑（2005）。藝術與人文領域併在生活課程適切性之調查研究。國教學報，17，69~99。
陳瓊花（2003）。「後」九年一貫之再思考：「藝術與人文」學習領域課程綱要與視覺藝術教材之選取。現代教育論壇，第十一期。407-420。陳瓊花（2004）。視覺藝術教育。臺北市：三民書局。陳瓊花（2005）。視覺文化藝術教育之特質與「藝術與人文課程」內涵之建構。教育研究，130，111-118。陳麗華（2003）。社會學習領域七年級能力指標在各版本教科書落實情形之研究。收錄於。社會學習領域國中課程計畫與教學說明。中華民國社會科課程發展學會出版。
陳麗華（2005）。九年一貫生活課程教科書評鑑規準之研究：課程統整取向。初等教育學刊，20，1-37。曾秀鳳（2002）。國小教科書選用及相關問題之研究 。國民教育研究學報，9 ，15-45。曾玲珠（2004）。國民小學生活課程教科書能力指標轉化－－藝術與人文部分。國立新竹師範學院進修部課程與教學碩士班碩士論文，未出版，新竹市。
曾朝安（2001）。能力指標轉換教學活動設計。載於 學校課程計畫百面通，32~34。臺北市：康軒。
曾慶豹（1998）。哈伯瑪斯。臺北市：生智。黃壬來（1998）。美勞課程標準評議。載於 1998 視覺藝術與美勞教育國際學術研討會論文集（311-338）。屏東師院。
黃壬來（2001）。視覺藝術教學與評量。論文發表於現代學校視覺藝術教育研討會。澳門藝術博物館。
黃壬來（2002）。全球情勢與臺灣藝術教育的改革。載於 藝術與人文教育(上)。 藝術教育研究委員會編(65-98)。臺北市:桂冠圖書。
黃壬來（2003）。「藝術與人文」主要理念解析與評議。美育，134，44-45。
黃壬來（2004a）。主要國家及香港中小學視覺藝術素養指標研究。香港特別行政區教育統籌局課程發展處藝術教育組委託研究計畫，未出版。
黃壬來（2004b）。國際視覺藝術教育趨勢。香港特別行政區教育統籌局課程發展處藝術教育組委託研究計畫。線上檢索日期：2009年5月5日。網址：http://cd1.edb.hkedcity.net/cd/ae/LOF_va/research1_9_2005.pdf
黃政傑（1998）。建立優良的教科書審定制度。課程與教學，1(1)，1-15。黃嘉勝（2005）。國小「社區藝術地圖」課程與創新教學之行動研究。臺中師院學報，19(1)，185-212。黃嘉雄（2011）。 九年一貫課程該實施學習領域之合科教學或分科教學。教育資料與研究，98，27~54。黃儒傑（2004）。國小教科書選用方式及其滿意度與使用效能之研究。臺東大學教育學報，15（2），59-86。楊孟哲（1999）。日治時代臺灣美術教育。臺北市：前衛。
楊思偉（1999）。規劃國民中小學九年一貫課程基本能力實踐策略。教育部委託專案研究報告。臺北市：臺灣師範大學教育研究中心。
楊馥如（2005）。當代「藝術統整課程」理論與實踐之研究。國立臺灣師範大學藝術研究所博士論文，未出版，臺北市。
廖文卿（2010）。國小高年級視覺藝術教學評量之個案研究：全國性藝術與人文學習成效評量模式。國立彰化師範大學碩士論文，未出版，彰化市。
廖順約（2006）。表演藝術教教看:三年級表演藝術教學實例。美育，152，56~62。
劉興欽（2005）。國民小學教科書選用評鑑規準之探討。學校行政，39，95-122。
劉興欽（2006）。紮根理論應用於苗栗縣藝術與人文教科書評鑑規準之研究。學校行政，46，246-278。
劉豐榮（1991）。艾斯納藝術教育思想研究。臺北市：水牛。劉興欽（2003）。苗栗縣國民小學藝術與人文教科書評鑑規準之研究。國立新竹師範學院國民教育研究所碩士論文，未出版，新竹市。
歐用生（2003）。內容分析法及其在教科書研究上的應用。載於莊梅枝（主編），歐用生教授教科書之旅，149-170。臺北縣：中華民國教材研究發展學會。歐用生、黃政傑等人（1997）。國小審定本教科書評鑑報告（第一、二冊）。臺北市：中華民國課程與教學學會。
歐用生、黃政傑等人（1998）。國小審定本教科書評鑑報告（第三、四冊）。臺北市：中華民國課程與教學學會。
鄭蕙如、林世華（2004）。Bloom認知領域教育目標分類修訂版理論與實務之探討--以九年一貫課程數學領域分段能力指標為例。臺東大學教育學報，15(2)，247-274。賴光真（2000）。教科書審查規準建構之研究－以九年一貫課程社會學習領域為例 。國立政治大學教育學系博士論文，未出版，臺北市。賴志峰（2004）。課程連結理論之探究:課程標準、教學與評量之關係。教育研究集刊，50(1)，63-90。錢初熹（2000）。外國中小學美術教科書的現狀與啟示。中國美術教育，第六期，42-44。
駱賢穎、王延煌（2002）。從能力指標的發展看九年一貫課程。師友月刊，11，41-43。
戴玉清（2003）。戲劇教學於九年一貫「藝術與人文」學習領域之實踐。國教輔導，42(6)，11956-11960。
謝政達（2002a）。以創意戲劇整合「藝術與人文領域」的課程。美育，126，86-91。
謝政達（2002b）。藝術與人文領域統合課程的探索:以多感官學習的統合為例。國教新知48（4），61-70。
謝政達（2008）。國小藝術教科書與九年一貫課程能力指標的校準研究。課程與教學季刊，11(4)，109-136。謝政達（2010）。初探國中藝術與人文教科書教學和能力指標之校準研究。教科書研究，3(1)，41-71。謝素月（2002）。藝術與人文學習領域課程銜接問題與因應之道。國民教育，42(3)，49~55。
譚克平（2004）。一綱多本政策下是否要念多個版本？飛揚國中基本學力測驗專刊，29。線上檢索日期：2007年9月10日。網址：取自http://www.bctest.ntnu.edu.tw/flying/flying21-30/flying29-5.htm
蘇郁雯（2002）。國中藝術與人文領域課程設計與教學實例探討。美育，129，76~83。
英文部分:
Abrams, J. D. (1981). Precise teaching is more effective teaching. Educational Leadership. (39.2), p. 138-140.
American Association for the Advancement of science (1993). Benchmarks for Science Literacy. New york: Oxford University Press.
American Association for the Advancement of Science(AAAS) (1989). Science for all Americans. New york: Oxford University Press.
Ananda, S. (2003). Rethinking issues of alignment under No Child Left Behind. San Francisco: WestEd.
Anderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D. R. (Eds.). (2001). A Taxonomy for Learning,Teaching, and Assessing: A Revision of Bloom's Taxonomy of Educational Objectives. New York: Longman.
Apple, M. (1991). Regulating the text: The socio-historical roots of state control. In G.. P. Altbach, G. P. Kelly, H. G. Petrie & L.Weis (Eds.), Textbooks in American education (pp. 7-26), Albany: State University of New York Press.
Arlington Independent School District (AISD)(2007). AISD philosophy of curriculum alignment. Retrieved April 24, 2008, from http://www.academy.k12.tx.us/pages/administration/documents/curriculum/Philosophy%20of%20Curriculum%20Alignment.pdf
Armstrong, C. L. (1994). Designing assessment in art. Reston, VA: The National Art Education Association.
Ball, D. L., & Felman-Nemser, S. (1986). Using textbookd and teacher’s guides: What beginning elementary teacher learn and what they need to know(Research series No. 174). East Lansing, MI: Michigan State University, Institute for research on teaching.
Blank, R. K.(2002). Using Surveys of Enacted Curriculum to Advance Evaluation of Instruction in Relation to Standards. Peabody Journal of Education, 77(4), 86-120.
Blank, R. K., Nunnaley, D., Kaufman, M., Porter, A.C., Smithson, J., Osthoff, E., et al. (2004). Data on enacted curriculum study: Summary of findings. Experimental design study of effectiveness of DEC professional development model in urban middle schools. Washington, DC: Council of Chief State School Officers. Retrieved April 29, 2005, from http://www.ccsso.org/content/pdfs/DECStudy.pdf
Blank, R.K., Porter, A.C., & Smithson, J. (2001). New tools for analyzing teaching, curriculum and standards: Results from the surveys of enacted curriculum project. Washington, DC: Council of Chief State School Officers.
Block, J. H. (1971). Mastery Learning: Theory and Practice. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
Block, J. H. (1974). Mastery learning in the classroom: A overview of recent research. In J. H. Block (Ed.), Schools, society and mastery learning. (28-69). New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart and Winston
Block, J. H., & Burns, R. B. (1976). Mastery learning. In L. S. Shulman (Ed.), Review of Research in Education. Itasca IL: Peacock.
Bloom, B. S. (1968). Learning for mastery. Evaluation Comment, 1(2), 1–12. University of California, Los Angeles. (ERIC Document Reproduction No. ED053 419).
Bloom, B. S. (1976). Human characteristics and school learning. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Bloom, B. S. (Ed.). (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals. Handbook I: Cognitive domain. White Plains, NY: Longman.
Bloom, B. S., Madaus, G. F., & Hastings, J. T. (1981). Evaluation to improve learning. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Bolster, L. (1991). Exploring mathematics grades 7. Glenview, IL: Scott, Foreman.
Brent, G., & DiObilda, N. (1993). Effects of curriculum alignment versus direct instruction: Effects on stable and mobile urban children. The Journal of Educational Research, 86(6), 333-338.
Brown, J. K. (1973). Textbook use by teachers and student of geometry and secondyear algebra. Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Illinois, Urbana, Champaign. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 098053)
Burns, R., & Squires, D. (1987). Curriculum organization in outcome-based education. The OBE Bulletin, 3. San Francisco: Far West Laboratory for Educational Research and Development.
Case, B. J., Jorgensen, M. A., & Zucker, S. (2004). Alignment in educational assessment. Retrieved April 23, 2007 from http://harcourtassessment.com/hai/Images/pdf/assessmentReports/AlignEdAss.pdf
Ceperley, P. E., & Squires, D. A. (2000). Standards Implementation Indicators: Charting your Course to High Achievement. Charleston, WV: AEL.
Chang, S., & Raths, J. (1971). The school’s contribution to the cumulating deficit. Journal of Educational Research, 64, 272.
Chapman, L. H. (1985). Discover art (Teacher Ed.). Worcester, MA: Davis.
Cohen, S. A. (1994). Instructional alignment. In T. Husen & T. N. Postlethwaite (Eds.), International encyclopedia of education: Vol. 5 (2nd Ed., pp. 2852-2856). Tarrytown, NY: Elsevier Science.
Cohen, S. A., & Hyman, J. S. (1991). Can fantasies become facts? Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 10(1), 20–23.
Cohen, S.A. (1987). Instructional alignment: Searching for a magic bullet. Educational Researcher, 16(8), 16-19.
Cook, G. H. (2006). Aligning English language proficiency tests to English language learning standards. In Aligning assessment to guide the learning of all students. State collaborative an assessment and student standards. Washington, DC: Council of Chief State School Officers.
Cornbleth,C.(1990). Curriculum in context. New York: The Falmer Press.
Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO) (2002). Models for alignment analysis and assistance to states. Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved September 17, 2007 from http://www.ccsso.org/content/pdfs/AlignmentModels.pdf
Cronbach, L. J. (1955). The text in use. In L. J. Cronbach (Ed.), Text materials in Modern educational. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois press.
Crowell, R., & Tissot, P. (1986). Curriculum alignment. Elmhurst, IL: North Central Regional Educational Laboratory. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED280874)
Davey, B. (1988). How do classroom teacher use their textbooks? Journal of reading,31 (4), 340-345.
Davis, J. (1997). The “U” and the wheel of “C”: Development and devaluation of graphic symbolization and the cognitive approach at Harvard Project Zero. In A. M. Kindler (Ed.), Child development in art (pp. 45-56). Reston, VA: National Art Education Association.
Dewey, J. (1934). Art as Experience. New York: Van Rees.
DiBiase, W. J., Warren, J., & Wagner, E. P. (2002). Aligning general chemistry laboratory with lecture at a large university. School Science and Mathematics, 102(4), 158-171.
Drake, S. M., & Burns, R. C.(2004). Meeting Standards Through Integrated Curriculum. Association for Supervision & Curriculum Deve press.
Efland, A. D. (1987). Curriculum antecedents of discipline based art education. Journal of aesthetic education, 21(2), 57-94.
Efland, A. D. (1990). A history of art education: intellectual and social currents in teaching the visual arts. New York: Teachers College Press.
Eisner, E. W. (1987). Why the textbook influences curriculum. Curriculum Review, 26(3), 11-13.
English, F. (1992). Deciding what to teach and test: Developing, aligning, and auditing the curriculum. Newbury Park, CA: Corwin Press, Inc. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED351805)
English, F. W., & Steffy, B. E. (2001). Deep curriculum alignment: Creating a level playing field for all children on high-stakes tests of accountability. Lanham, MD: Scarecrow Press.
English, F. W., & Steffy, B. F. (1997). Using film to teach leadership in educational administration. Educational Administration Quarterly, 33 (1), 107-115.
English, F.W., & Larson, R. L. (1996). Curriculum management for educational and social service organizations(2nd Ed.), Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas.
Erickson, H. L. (2001). Stirring the head, heart, and soul: Redefining curriculum and instruction. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Ferguson, L.C. (1995). A strategy to improve student achievement: A detailed step-by- step strategy to increase student achievement, particularly in low performing school districts. Scottsdale, AR: Evans Newton.
Fischer, L., & Lamont, B. (1986). An investigation of school board practices in the purchase and utilization of textbooks and other classroom-based learning materials. Toronto, Ontario: Ontraio department of education.
Floden, R. E., Porter, A.C., Schmidt, W. H., Freeman, D. J., & schwille, J. R. (1981). Responses to curriculum pressures: A policy-capturing study of teacher decisions about content. Journal of educational psychology,73(2), 129-141.
Forbes, J. E. (1970). Textbooks and supplementary materials. The teaching of secondary school mathematics (32nd yearbook). National council of teachers of mathematics.
Freeman, D. J., & Porter, A.C. (1989). Do textbooks dictate the content of mathematics instruction in slementary schools? American educational research journal,26(3), 403-421.
Freeman, D. J., Kuhs, T. M., Porter, A. C., Floden, R. E., Schmidt, W. H., & Schwille, J. R. (1983). Do textbooks and tests define a national curriculum in elementary school mathematics? Elementary School Journal, 83, 501-513. (Reprinted in The Education Digest, 1984, March, 47-49.)
Freeman, D., Kuhs, T., Porter, A., Knappen, L., Floden, R., Schmidt, W., & Schwille, J. (1980). The fourth grade mathematics curriculum as inferred from textbooks and tests . East Lansing, MI: Institute for Research on Teaching, Michigan State University.
Freire, P.（1970 ). Pedadogy of the oppressed. New York: Continum.
Fuhrman, S.H., & Elmore, R.F.(2004). Redesigning accountability systems for education. New York: Teachers College Press.
Gagne, R. M., & Briggs, L. J. (1974). Principles of Instructional Design. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc.
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.
Gardner, H. (1990). Art education and human development. Los Angeles: The Getty Center for education in the arts.
Glaser, R. (1963). Instructional technology and the measurement of learning outcomes: Some questions American Psychologist, 18, 519–521.
Goals 2000: Educate America Act (1994). Pub. Law 103-227 (108 Stat. 125).
Goodman, K. S., Shannon, P., Freeman, Y. S., & Murphy, S. (1988). Report card on basalreaders. Katonah, NY: Richard C. Owen.
Goodwin, A. L. (1997). Assessment for equity and inclusion: embracing all our children. New York: Routledge.
Haggard, D. J. (1986). Curriculum alignment in North Carolina: Relationships of state mandated tests, textbook, and objectives. Disseration Abstracts International, 47(05), p.1590. (University Microfilms No. AAC86-18484)
Herman, J. L., Webb, N. M., & Zuniga, S. A. (2007). Measurement issues in the alignment of standards and assessments: A case study. Applied Measurement in Education, 20(1), 101-126.
Howson, G. (1995). Mathematics textbooks: A comparative study of Grade 8 texts. TIMSS monograph no. 3. Vancouver: Pacific Educational Press.
Husen, T. (1967). International study of achievement in mathematics: A comparison of twelve countries. Vol.2. NY: John Wiley.
Jacobs, H. H. (1997). Mapping the big picture. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Jang, E. E., & Ryan, K. (2003). Bridging gaps among curriculum, teaching and learning, and assessment: Book review, Kifer, E. (2001). Large-scale assessment: Dimensions, dilemmas, and policy. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 35(4), 499-512
Jennings, J. F. (1998). Why national standards and tests? Politics and the quest for better schools. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.
Kattner, C. (1998). The effects of curriculum alignment on the Texas Assessment of Academic Skills scores of selected seventh grade students in Peet Junior High School in the Conroe Independent School District. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Yexas A & M University, College Station.
Kendall, J. S., & Marzano, R. J. (1997). A comprehsive guide to designing standards-based dustricts, school and classroom. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Kern, E. J. (1985). The purpose of art education in the United States from 1870 to 1980. In B. Wilson & H. Hoffa (Eds.), The history of art education : Proceedings from the Penn state conference (pp. 40-52). Reston, VA : National Art Education Association.
La Marca, P. M., Redfield, D., Winter, P. C., Bailey, A., & Despriet, L. (2000). State standards and state assessment systems: A guide to alignment. Washington, DC: Council of Chief State School Officers.
Lampela, L. A. (1994). A description of art textbooks use in Ohio. A Journal of Issues and research,35(4), 228~336.
Liebling, C. R. (1997). Achieving standards-based curriculum alignment through mindful teaching. Presentation at the New York State Title I Schoolwide Conference for Implementing Schools, Rochester, NY. Retrieved September 17, 2008 from http://r3cc.ceee.gwu.edu/teaching_learning/Curalgn3.pdf
Luke, A. (1991). Basal Reading Textbooks and the Teaching of Literacy. In P. G. Altbach, G. P. Kelly, H. G. Petrie & L. Weis (Eds.) Textbooks in aerican society: Politics, policy, and pedagogy. Altbach: State University of New York Press.
Mabry, L. (1999). Portfolios plus: A critical guide to alternative assessment. Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Corwin Press.
Mager, R. F. (1962). Preparing objectives for programmed instruction. San Francisco, CA: Fearon Publishers.
Malagon, M. H., Rosenberg, M. B., & Winter, P. C. (2006). Developing aligned performance level descriptors for the English language Development Assessment K-2 inventories. In Aligning assessment to guide the learning of all studenst. State collaborative an assessment and student standards. Washington, DC: Council of Chief State School Officers.
Marshall, J. D. (1991). State-Level textbook selection reform: toward the recognition of fundamental control. In P. G. Altbach, G. P. Kelly, H. G. Petrie & L. W. Weis (Eds.), Textbooks in American society: Politics, policy and pedagogy, (pp. 117-143). Albany: State University of New York Press.
Martin, M. O., Mullis, I. V. S., Gonzales, E. J., Gregory, K. D., Smith, T. A., Chrostowski, S. J., Garden, R. A., & O’Connor, K. M. (2000). TIMSS 1999 International Science report: Findings from IEA’s repeat of the third international mathematics and science study at the eighth grade. Chestnut Hill, MA: Boston College.
Marzano, R. J., & Kendall, J. S. (1996). A comprehensive guide to designing standardsbased districts, schools, and classrooms. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
McFarland, M. A. (1984). Question and priorities for improving social studies instruction. Social education,48(2), 117-120.
McGehee, J. J., & Griffith, L. K. (2001). Large-scale assessments combined with curriculum alignment: agents of change. Theory Into Practice, 40(2). 137-143.
Mezirow, J. (1991). Transformative dimensions of adult learning. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Moss-Mitchell, F. (1998). The effects of curriculum alignment on the mathematics achievement of third-grade students as measured by the Iowa Test of Basic Skills: Implication for educational administrators. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Clark University, Atlanta, GA.
National Research Council(NRC)(1996). National science education standards. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.
Neidermeyer, F., & Yelon, S. (1981). Los Angeles aligns instruction with essential skills. Educational Leadership, 38(8), 618-20.
No Child Left Behind Act(NCLB) (2001), Pub. L. No. 107-110, 3 U.S.C.
Ornstein, A.C., & Hunkins, F. P. (l998). Curriculum: Foundations, principles, & issues. (3rd. Ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
O'Sullivan, C.Y., Reese, C.M., & Mazzeo, J. (1997). NAEP 1996 science report card for the nation and the states. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics.
Pehuniak, P. (2004). Educational assessment in an era of accountability. In Wall, J. E. & Walz, G. R. (Eds.). Measuring up: Assessment issues for teachers, counselors, and administrators. Greensboro, NC: CAPS Press.
Penick, J. E., & Yager, R.E. (1983). The search for excellence in science education. Phi Delta Kappan,64(9), 621-623.
Popham,W. J. (1987). The merits of measurement-driven instruction. Phi Delta Kappan, 68, 679–682.
Porter, A. C. (2002). Measuring the content of instruction: Uses in research and practice. Educational Researcher, 31(7), 3-14.
Porter, A. C. (2006). How SEC Measures aignment. Council of chief state school officers. document last updated 2/6/2006. September 23, 2007. Retrieved from http://www.ccsso.org/content/pdfs/HowSECMeasuresAlignment.pdf
Porter, A. C., & Smithson, J. L. (2001a). Are content standards being implemented in the classroom? A methodology and some tentative answers. In S. H. Fuhrman (Ed.), From the capitol to the classroom: Standards-based reform in the states-one hundredth yearbook of the national society for the study of education, part Ⅱ (pp. 60-80). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Porter, A. C., & Smithson, J. L. (2001b). Defining, developing, and using curriculum indicators. (CPRE Research Report Series RR-048). Philadelphia, PA: Consortium for Policy Research in Education, University of Pennsylvania.
Porter, A. C., Kirst, M. W., Osthoff, E., Smithson, J. L., & Schneider, S. (1994) Reform of high school mathematics and science and opportunity to learn. Consortium for policy research in education policy briefs. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University, Consortium for Policy Research in Education.
Porter, A.C., Kirst, M. W., Osthoff, E. J., Smithson, J. L., & Schneider, S. A.(1993). Reform Up Close: An Analysis of High School Mathematics and Science Classrooms. Final report to the National Science Foundation. Madison: Wisconsin Center for Education Research.
Posner, G. J., & Rudnitsky, A. N. (2006). Course design: A guide to curriculum development for teachers (7th Ed.). Boston: Pearson Education, Inc.
Price-Baugh, R. (1997). Correlation of textbook alignment with student achiwevement scores. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Baylor University.
Quellmalz, E., Kreikemeier, P., Haydel DeBarger, A., & Haertel, G. (2006). A study of the Alignment of the NAEP, TIMSS and New Standards Science Assessment with the inquiry abilities in the National Science Standards. Center for Technology in Learning, SRI International. Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, CA.
Resnick, L. B., Rothman R., Slattery, J. B., & Vranek, J. L. (2003). Benchmarking and alignment of standards and testing. Educational Assessment, 9(1 & 2), 1–27.
Resnick, L.B., & Resnick, D.P. (1992). Assessing the thinking curriculum: New tools for educational reform. In B.R. Gifford & M.C. O'Connor (Eds.), Changing assessments: Alternative views of aptitude, achievement, and instruction(pp.35-75). Boston: Kluwer.
Rich, M. C. (1997). The influence of cognitive psychology on art education as seen in the work of Howard Gardner and Elliot Eisner. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Iowa State University Ph.D. dissertation. Unpublished, Ames.
Robitaille, D.F., McKnight, C., Schmidt, W.H., Britton, E., Raizen, S., & Nicol, C. (1993). Curriculum frameworks for mathematics and science. Vancouver, Canada: Pacific Educational Press.
Schmidt, W. H., McKnight, C. C., & Raizen, S. (1997). A splintered vision: An investigation of U.S. science and mathematics education. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Schmidt, W. H., McKnight, C. C., Houang, R. T., Wang, H. C., Wiley, D. E., Cogan, L. S., & Wolfe, R. G. (2001). Why schools matter: A cross-national comparison of curriculum and learning. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Scott, R. (1983a). Curriculum alignment as a model for school improvement. In S. Anderson (Ed.), School effectiveness: Climate, goals, and leadership. Proceedings of a 1982 Regional Exchange Workshop(pp. 15-27). ERIC Doc. No. ED252508.
Scott, R. (1983b). Achieving curriculum alignment in schools. Paper presented at the annual meeting of American Educational Research Association, Montreal. ERIC Doc. No. ED239379.
Smith, M. S., & O'Day, J. (1991). Systemic school reform. In S. H. Fuhrman & B. Malen (Eds.), The politics of curriculum and testing: The 1990 yearbook of the Politics of Education Association (pp. 233-267). Bristol, PA: Falmer Press.
Smithson, J. L. (2005). Surveys of enacted curriculum: Using curricular measures for description & analysis. Retrieved September 17, 2007 from http://www.ccsso.org/content/pdfs/JohnSmithsonsecTampa05.ppt
Spiegel, D. L., & Wright, J. D. (1984). Biology teacher’s preferences in the textbook characteristics. Journal of reading,27(7), 624-628.
Squires, D. A. (1985). The Curriculum matrix: A management system for mastery learning. ERIC Clearinghouse on Educational Management. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. EA017329)
Squires, D. A. (1986). Curriculum development with a mastery learning framework. A paper presented at American Educational Research Association Annual Meeting in San Francisco, CA. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED275059)
Squires, D. A. (1987). Make curriculum decisions with student achievement in mind. Executive Educator,9 (2), 20-21.
Squires, D. A. (2009). Curriculum alignment: research-based strategies for increasing student Achievement. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Squires, D.A. (2005). Aligning and balancing the standards-based curriculum. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Srite, P. Ed. (2005). Visual arts standards. Retrieved November 5, 2008, from http://www.madison.k12.wi.us/tnl/standards/art/art.htm
Steen, L. A. (1989).Teaching mathematics for tomorrow's World. Educational Leadership, 47(1), 18-22. Retrieved May 18, 2009, from http://www.stolaf.edu/people/steen/Papers/edl.html
Stern, L., & Roseman, J. E. (2001).Textbook alignment. The Science Teache, 68 (7), 52-56. ProQuest Education Journals.
Stevens, F.(1984). The effects of testing on teaching and curriculum in a large urban school district. Washington, DC: National Institute of Education, Report No. ERICTM-88. 8 ERIC, ED 252581.
The Proficiency-based Admission Standards System(PASS) (2002). A Summary of Policy Implementation 1993-2002. September 16, 2007. Retrieved from http://pass.ous.edu/binarydata.php?id=policy_framework&n=pass_policy_report_june_02.pdf
Tindall, I. (2006). Alignment of alternate assessments using the webb system. In Aligning assessment to guide the learning of all students: six reports. State collaborative on assessment and standards. Washington, DC: Council of Chief State school Officers.
Tomlinson, C.A., Kaplan, S. N., S., Purcell, J., Leppien, J., Burns, D & Strickland, C. (2002) The Parallel Curriculum in the classroom: Units for application across the content areas, K-12. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
Tyler, R. W. (1949). Basic principles of curriculum and instruction. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago.
Vanesky, R. L. (1991). Textbooks in school and society. In P. W. Jackson (Ed.), Handbook ofresearch on curriculum (pp. 436-461). New York: Macmillan.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Walker, D.F. (1981). Textbooks and the curriculum. In J. Y. Cole & T. G. Sticht (Eds.), The textbooks in American society (pp.2-3). Washington: Library of Congress.
Warren, C. C. (1981). Adopting textbooks. In J. Cole and T. Sticht (Eds.), The Textbook in American Society. Washington, DC: Library of Congress.
Webb, N. L. (1997a). Research monograph No. 6. Criteria for alignment of expectations and assessments in mathematics and science education. Washington, DC: Council of Chief State School Officers.
Webb, N. L. (1997b). Determining alignment of expectations and assessments in mathematics and science education. NISE Brief, 1(2), Retrieved September 17, 2007 from http://facstaff.wcer.wisc.edu/normw/1997alignmentbrief.htm
Webb, N. L. (1997c). Criteria for alignment of expectations and assessments in mathematics and science education (Council of Chief State School Officers and National Institute for Science Education). Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin, Wisconsin Center for Education Research.
Webb, N. L. (1999a). Alignment of science and mathematics standards and assessments in four states. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin-Madison, National Institute for Science Education.
Webb, N. L. (1999b). Research monograph No. 18. Alignment of science and mathematics standards and assessments in four states. Washington, DC: Council of Chief State School Officers.
Webb, N. L., Alt, M., Cormier, R. E., & Vesperman, B. (2006). The web alignment tool: Development, refinement, and dissemination. In Aligning assessment to guide the learning of all students. Washington, DC: Council of Chief State School Officers Report, 1–30.
Whipple, G. M. (1930). The selection of textbook. The American School Board Journal, 89, 51-55.
Wiggins, G. (1998). Educative Assessment: Designing Assessments to Inform and Improve Student Performance. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (1998). Understanding by Design. Alexandria, VA: The Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Wilson, B. (1970). The status of national assessment in Art. Art Education, 23(9), 2-6.
Wise, L. L., Zhang, L., Winter, P., Taylor, L., & Becker, D. E. (2006). Vertical alignment of grade-level expectations for student achievement: Report of a pilot study. Washington, DC: Council of Chief State School Officers.
Wise, L., & Alt, M. (2006). Assessing vertical alignment. Washington, DC: Council of Chief State School Officers.
Wishnick, K. T. (1989). Relative effects on achievements scores of SES, gender, teacher effect and instructional alignment: A study of alignment’s power in mastery learning. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of San Francisco, CA.
Zellmer, M. (1997). Effect on reading test scores when tarchers are provided information that relates local curriculum documents to the test. Unpublished doctoral dissertation,