The Elevated Achievement approach is built on a broad base of research. Our job is to turn that research into practice that can be implemented in every district, every school, every classroom, every day.
Alberti, S. (2013). Making the shifts. Education Leadership, 70.
Beck, I.L., McKeown, M.G., & Kucan, L. (2013). Bringing words to life: Robust vocabulary instruction (second edition). New York: The Guildford Press.
Boucher, D. (2018). Encouraging student self-reflection. Retrieved from https://www.mathcoachscorner.com/2016/10/student-self-reflection/.
California Department of Education. (2013a). California common core state standards for English language arts and literacy in history/social studies, science, and technical subjects. Sacramento, CA.
California Department of Education. (2013b). California common core state standards for mathematics. Sacramento, CA.
California Department of Education. (2013c). Overview of the standards chapters of the mathematics framework for California public schools: Kindergarten through grade twelve. Sacramento, CA. Retrieved from https://www.cde.ca.gov/Ci/ma/cf/documents/mathfwoverview.pdf.
Chan, P. et al. (2014). Beyond involvement: Promoting student ownership of learning in classrooms. Intervention in School and Clinic. 50(2), 105-113.
Chick, Nancy. (2017). Metacognition. CFT Teaching Guides. Retrieved from https://cft.vanderbilt. edu/ guides-sub-pages/metacognition/.
Cohen, E.G. (1986). Designing groupwork: Strategies for heterogeneous classrooms. New York: Teachers College Press.
Cohen, E.G. & Chatfield, M. (1991). Complex instruction implementation manual. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University.
Cohen, E.G., et al. (1995). Complex instruction: Higher order thinking in heterogeneous classrooms. In Stahl, R.J. (Ed.). Handbook of Cooperative Learning. Westport, CT: Greenwood Publishing Company.
Cohen, E.G., & Lotan, R.A. (1997). Working for equity in heterogeneous classrooms: Sociological theory in practice. New York: Teachers College Press.
Cohen, E.G., Lotan, R.A., & Leechor, C. (1989). Can classrooms learn? Sociology of Education, 62.
Cornelius-White, J. (2007). Learner-centered teacher-student relationships are effective: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 113-143.
Crowe, R. & Kennedy, J. (2018). Developing student ownership: Supporting students to own their learning through the use of strategic learning practices. West Palm Beach, FL: Learning Sciences International.
Datta, D.K., & Narayanan, V.K. (1989). A meta-analytic review of the concentration-performance relationship: Aggregating findings in strategic management. Journal of Management, 15(3), 469-483.
Dunn, R., Griggs, S.A., Olson, J., Beasley, M., & Gorman, B.S. (1995). A meta-analytic validation of the Dunn and Dunn model of learning-style preferences. Journal of Educational Research, 88(6), 353-362.
Dusek, J.B., & Joseph, G., (1985). The bases of teacher expectancies. In J. B. Dusek (Ed.), Teacher Expectancies (pp.229-249). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Duzinski, G. A. (1987). The educational utility of cognitive behavior modification strategies with children: A quantitative synthesis. Unpublished Ph.D., University of Illinois at Chicago, IL.
Elmore, R.F. (1992). Why restructuring alone won’t improve teaching. Educational Leadership, 49(7), 44–48.
Emeny, W. (2013). Metacognition…thoughts on teaching mathematical problem solving skills. Retrieved from http://www.greatmathsteachingideas.com/2013/07/23/metacognition-thoughts-on-teaching-mathematical-problem-solving-skills/; dated 7/23/2013.
Fendick, F. (1990). The correlation between teacher clarity of communication and student achievement gain: A meta-analysis. Unpublished Ph.D., University of Florida, FL.
Friesen, S. (2008). Effective teaching practices—A practice. Toronto: Canadian Education Association.
Fuchs, L.S. & Fuchs, D. (1986a). Curriculum-based assessment of progress toward long-term and short-term goals. Journal of Special Education, 20(1), 69-82.
Fuchs, L.S. & Fuchs, D. (1986b). Effects of systematic formative evaluation: A meta-analysis. Exceptional Children, 53(3), 199-208.
Guskey, T.R. (2003). How classroom assessments improve learning. Educational Leadership, 60(5), 6–11.
Haertel, G.D., Walberg, H.J.,& Haertel, E.H. (1980). Classroom socio-psychological environments and learning: A quantitative synthesis. British Educational Research Journal, 7(1), 27-36.
Hammond, Z. (2015). Culturally responsive teaching & the brain: Promoting authentic engagement and rigor among culturally and linguistically diverse students. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin, A Sage Company.
Hanover Research. (2014). The impact of formative assessment and learning interventions on student achievement [White paper]. Retrieved February 4, 2019 from Hanover Research District Administration Practice: https://www.hanoverresearch.com/media/The-Impact-of-Formative-Assessment-and-Learning-Intentions-on-Student-Achievement.pdf.
Hart, B. & Risley, T.R. (1995). Meaningful differences in the everyday experience of young American children. Baltimore: Brookes Publishing Co.
Hattie, J. (2009). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. New York, NY: Routledge.
Hattie, J. (2011). Visible learning for teachers. New York, NY: Routledge.
Hattie, J. & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81–112.
Huang, Z. (1991). A meta-analysis of self-questioning strategies. Unpublished Ph.D., Hofstra University, NY.
Hunter, M. (1967). Teach More-Faster! Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Hunter, M. (1982). Mastery Teaching. El Segundo, CA: TIP Publications.
Kluger, A.N., & NeNisis, A. (1996). The effects of feedback interventions on performance: A historical review, meta-analysis, and a preliminary feedback intervention theory. Psychological Bulletin, 119(2), 254.
Knowles, M.S. (1984). The modern practice of adult education: From pedagogy to andragogy. Wilton, CT: Association Press.
Kulhavy, R.W. (1997). Feedback in written instruction. Review of Educational Research, 47(2), 211-232.
Kumar, D.D. (1991). A meta-analysis of the relationship between science instruction and student engagement. Educational Review, 43(1), 49-61.
Lane, H.B. & Allen, S. (2010). The vocabulary-rich classroom: Modeling sophisticated word use to promote word consciousness and vocabulary growth. The Reading Teacher, 63(5), 362–370.
Larson, M. R., & Kanold, T. D. (2016). Balancing the equation: A guide to school mathematics for educators and parents. Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree.
Locke, E.A., & Latham, G. P. (1990). A theory of goal setting and task performance. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Marzano, R. J. (1998). A theory-based meta-analysis of research on instruction. Aurora, CO: Mid-Continent Regional Education Lab.
Marzano, R.J. (2000). A new era of school reform: Going where the research takes us. Aurora, CO: Mid-Continent Regional Education Lab.
McTighe, J. & Wiggins, G. (2012). Understanding by design® framework [White paper]. Retrieved February 4, 2019 from ASCD: https://www.ascd.org/ASCD/pdf/siteASCD/publications/UbD_WhitePaper0312.pdf.
Morrison, J. (2008/2009). Why teachers must be data experts. Educational Leadership, 66(4).
Nagy, W.E. (1988). Teaching vocabulary to improve reading comprehension. Urbana, IL: NCTE.
NAEYC. (2009). Developmentally appropriate practice in early childhood programs serving children from birth through age 8. Washington, DC: The National Association for the Education of Young Children.
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
National Governors Association Center for Best Practices & Council of Chief State School Officers. (2010a). Common core state standards for English language arts and literacy in history/social studies, science, and technical subjects. Washington, DC: Authors.
National Governors Association Center for Best Practices & Council of Chief State School Officers. (2010b). Common core state standards for English language arts and literacy in history/social studies, science, and technical subjects: Appendix A. Washington, DC: Authors.
National Governors Association Center for Best Practices & Council of Chief State School Officers. (2010c). Common core state standards for mathematics. Washington, DC: Authors.
National Governors Association Center for Best Practices, Council of Chief State School Officers. (2013). K–8 publishers’ criteria for the common core state standards for mathematics. Washington, D.C.: National Governors Association Center for Best Practices, Council of Chief State School Officers.
National Mathematics Advisory Panel. (2008). Foundations for success: The final report of the National Mathematics Advisory Panel. Washington, DC: Department of Education.
National Research Council. (2001). Adding it up: Helping children learn mathematics. J. Kilpatrick, J. Swafford, and B. Findell (Eds.). Mathematics Learning Study Committee, Center for Education, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
NCSU (National Center on Scaling Up). (2014). Developing student ownership and responsibility in high schools. Practitioner Brief.
Niemi, D., Vallone, J., Wang, J., & Griffin, N. (2007). Recommendations for building a valid benchmark assessment system: Interim report to the Jackson public schools. CRESST Report 723. National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing (CRESST). University of California, Los Angeles, CA.
Nuthall, G. (2005). The cultural myths and realities of classroom teaching and learning: A personal journey. Teachers College Record, 107(5), 895-934.
Nuthall, G. (2007). The hidden lives of learners. Wellington, New Zealand: NZCER Press.
O’Connell, M. & Vandos, K. (2015). Partnering with students: Building ownership of learning. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction–Washington State. (2010). Standards for mathematical practices progression through grade levels. Retrieved from https://www.masonk12.net/sites/default/files/documents/Buildings/CO/wa%20smp%20unpacked%20k-12.pdf.
RAND Education. (2012). Teachers matter: Understanding teachers’ impact on student achievement. Santa Monica, CA: https://www.rand.org/pubs/corporate_pubs/CP693z1-2012-09.html.
Reeves, D. (2018). Engaging every learner (presentation). San Bernardino City Unified School District. Retrieved July 9, 2018 from: University of California, San Bernardino and www.CreativeLeadership.net.
Risko, V.J. & Vogt, M. (2016). Professional learning in action: An inquiry approach for teachers of literacy. New York: Teachers College Press.
Robinson, V. (2011). Student-centered leadership. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Rosenshine, B., & Meister, C. (1994). Reciprocal teaching: A review of the research. Review of Educational Research, 64(4), 479-530.
Rothman, R. (2011). Something in common: the common core standards and the next chapter in American education. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.
Samson, G.E., Strykowski, B., Weinstein, T., & Walberg, H.J. (1987). The effects of teacher questioning levels on student achievement: A quantitative synthesis. Journal of Educational Research, 80(5), 290-295.
Scott, J.A., Skobel, B.J., & Wells, J. (2008). The word-conscious classroom: Building the vocabulary readers and writers need. New York: Scholastic Inc.
Seidel T., & Shavelson, R.J. (2007). Teaching effectiveness research in the past decade: The role of theory and research and research design in disentangling meta-analysis results. Review of Educational Research, 77(4), 454-499.
Shanahan, Timothy. (2012). Shanahan on literacy (blog). Retrieved from http://www.shanahanonliteracy.com/2012/06/what-isclose-reading.html.
Stevens, R.J., & Slavin, R.E. (1990). When cooperative learning improves the achievement of students with mild disabilities: A response to Tateyama-Sniezek. Exceptional Children, 57(3), 276-280.
Swanson, H.L., & Hoskyn, M. (1998). Experimental intervention research on students with learning disabilities: A meta-analysis of treatment outcomes. Review of Educational Research, 68(3), 277-321.
Taylor, L. & Parsons, J. (2011). Improving student engagement. Current Issues in Education, 14(1). Retrieved from http://cie.asu.edu/.
Test, J.E., Cunningham, D.D., & Lee, A.C. (2010). Talking with young children: How teachers encourage learning. Dimensions of Early Childhood, 38(3), 3–14.
Thomas, R. S. (2011). My nine ‘truths’ of data analysis: Data-driven strategies alone won’t boost student achievement. Education Week Spotlight, 30(35), 29, 36.
Timperley, H. (2011). Realizing the power of professional learning. New York, NY: Open University Press.
Walker, D., Greenwood, C., Hart, B., & Carta, J. (1994). Prediction of school outcomes based on early language production and socioeconomic factors. Child Development, 65(2), 606-621.
Weimer, M. (2012). Deep learning vs. surface learning: Getting students to understand the difference. Retrieved from the Teaching Professor Blog: http://www.facultyfocus.com/articles/teaching-professor-blog/deep-learning-vs-surface-learning-getting-students-to-understand-the-difference/.
Wiggins, G. & McTighe, J. (2005). Understanding by design. Alexandria, VA: The Association for Supervision and Curriculum Department.
Fostering student ownership can be an effective and practical way to support all students in meeting academic and behavioral goals.
Can you imagine building an environment full of motivated, engaged, and eager students who own their learning?