Referências sobre Educação Baseada em Evidências

1. Em Língua Portuguesa
2. Em língua estrangeira

Referências sobre Alfabetização

1. Em Língua Portuguesa
2. Em língua estrangeira

Referências sobre Ensino da Língua Portuguesa

1. Fundamentação científica sobre ensino de leitura e escrita
2. Referências básicas sobre literatura e ensino de literatura
3. Discussões sobre o ensino da Língua
4. Ensino de gêneros

Referências sobre Educação Baseada em Evidências

I. Em Língua Portuguesa

• Thomas, G. e Pring, R. e colabs. Educação baseada em evidências. Porto Alegre: ARTMED, 2007. 
  
  
• Marzano, R. , Pickering, D. e Pollock, J. O ensino que funciona: estratégias baseadas em evidências para melhorar o desempenho dos alunos. Porto Alegre: ARTMED, 2007. 

topo da página

II. Em língua estrangeira

• Abrami, P. C., & Bernard, R. M. (2007). Statistical control vs. classification of study in meta-analysis. Manuscript submitted for publication.
  
  
• Agodini, R., & Dynarski, M. (2004). Are experiments the only option? A look at dropout prevention programs. Review of Economics and Statistics, 86(1), 180–194.

• Baker, S., Gersten, R., & Keating, T. (2000). When less may be more: A 2-year longitudinal evaluation of a volunteer tutoring program requiring minimal training. Reading Research Quarterly, 35(4), 358–366.

• Barker, T. A., & Torgesen, J. K. (1995). An evaluation of computerassisted instruction in phonological awareness with below average readers. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 13(1), 89–103.

• Borman, G. D. (2002). Experiments for educational evaluation and improvement. Peabody Journal of Education, 77(4), 7–27.

• Borman, G. D., Hewes, G. M., Overman, L. T., & Brown, S. (2003). Comprehensive school reform and achievement: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 73(2), 125–230. Available from http://www.bestevidence.org

• Borman, G. D., Slavin, R. E., Cheung, A., Chamberlain, A., Madden, N. A., & Chambers, B. (2007). Final reading outcomes of the national randomized field trial of Success for All. American Educational Research Journal, 44(3), 701–703.

• Boruch, R. (2006, April). Ethical standards, evidence standards, and randomized trials: Error flees but slowly. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago. Briggs, D. C. (2005). Meta-analysis: A case study. Evaluation Review, 29(2), 87–127.

• Carroll, W. (1998). Geometric knowledge of middle school students in a reform-based mathematics curriculum. School Science and Mathematics, 98(4), 188–197.

• Coalition for Evidence-Based Policy. (2003). Identifying and implementing educational practices supported by rigorous evidence: A user friendly guide. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.

• Cook, T. D. (2001). Reappraising the arguments against randomized experiments in education: An analysis of the culture of evaluation in American schools of education. Unpublished manuscript, Northwestern University.
  Cooper, H. (1998). Synthesizing research (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

• Crawford, D. B., & Snider, V. E. (2000). Effective mathematics instruction: The importance of curriculum. Education and Treatment of Children, 23(2), 122–142.

• Cronbach, L. J., Ambron, S. R., Dornbusch, S. M., Hess, R. O., Hornik, R. C., Phillips, D. C., et al. (1980). Toward reform of program evaluation: Aims, methods, and institutional arrangements. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

• Dear, K., & Begg, C. (1992). An approach for assessing publication bias prior to performing a meta-analysis. Statistical Science, 7(2), 237–245.

• Dehejia, R. H., & Wahba, S. (1999). Causal effects in nonexperimental studies: Reevaluating the evolution of training programs. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 94, 1053–1062.

• Donner, A., & Klar, N. (2000). Design and analysis of cluster randomized trials in health research. New York: Oxford University Press.

• Elbaum, B., Vaughn, S., Hughes, M. T., & Moody, S. W. (2000). How effective are one-to-one tutoring programs in reading for elementary students at risk for reading failure? A meta-analysis of the intervention research. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92(4), 605–619.

• Foster, K., Erickson, G., Foster, D., Brinkman, D., & Torgesen, J. (1994). Computer administered instruction in phonological awareness: Evaluation of the Daisyquest program. Journal of Research and Development in Education, 27(2), 126–137.

• Givens, G., Smith, D., & Tweedie, R. (1997). Publication bias in metaanalysis: A Bayesian data-augmentation approach to account for issues exemplified in the passive smoking debate. Statistical Science, 12(4), 221–250.

• Glazerman, S., Levy, D. M., & Myers, D. (2002). Nonexperimental replications of social experiments: A systematic review. Washington, DC: Corporation for the Advancement of Policy Evaluation.

• Hedges, L. (1992). Modeling publication selection effects in meta-analysis. Statistical Science, 7(2), 246–255.

• Heinsman, D. T., & Shadish, W. R. (1996). Assignment methods in experimentation: When do nonrandomized experiments approximate answers from randomized experiments? Psychological Methods, 1(2), 154–169.

• Juni, P., Witschi, A., Bloch, R., & Egger, M. (1999). The hazards of scoring the quality of clinical trials for meta-analysis. Journal of the American Medical Association, 282(11), 1054–1060.

• Kulik, J. A. (2003). Effects of using instructional technology in elementaryand secondary schools: What controlled evaluation studies say (SRI Project Number P10446.001). Arlington, VA: SRI International.
  Available from http://www.bestevidence.org

• Lipsey, M. W., & Wilson, D. B. (2001). Practical meta-analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

• Mosteller, F., & Boruch, R. (Eds.). (2002). Evidence matters: Randomized trials in educational research. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.

• Murray, D. M. (1998). Design and analysis of group-randomized trials.New York: Oxford University Press.

• Prater, D. L. & Bermudez, A. B. (1993). Using peer response groups with limited English proficient writers. Bilingual Research Journal, 17(1/ 2), 99–116.

• Rashotte, C. A., MacPhee, K., & Torgesen, J. K. (2001). The effectiveness of a group reading instruction program with poor readers in multiple grades. Learning Disabilities Quarterly, 24(2), 119–134.

• Raudenbush, S. W. (1997). Statistical analysis and optimal design for cluster randomized trials. Psychological Methods, 2, 173–185.

• Raudenbush, S. W., & Bryk, A. S. (2002). Hierarchical linear models:Applications and data analysis methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

• Rothstein, H. R., Sutton, A. J., & Borenstein, M. (Eds.). (2005). Publication bias in meta-analysis: Prevention, assessment, and adjustments. Chichester, UK: John Wiley.

• Sconiers, S., Isaacs, A., Higgins, T., McBride, J., & Kelso, C. (2003). The Arc Center tri-state student achievement study. Lexington, MA: COMAP.

• Shadish, W. R., Cook, T. D., & Campbell, D. T. (2002) Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for generalized causal inference. Boston: Houghton-Mifflin.

• Shavelson, R. J. & Towne, L. (Eds.). (2002). Scientific research in education. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

• Slavin, R. E. (1989). PET and the pendulum: Faddism in education and how to stop it. Phi Delta Kappan, 70, 752–758.

• Slavin, R. E. (2002). Evidence-based education policies: Transforming educational practice and research. Educational Researcher, 31(7), 15–21.

• Slavin, R. E. (in press). Comprehensive school reform. In T. Good (Ed.), 21st century education: A reference handbook. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

• Slavin, R. E., Cheung, A., Groff, C., & Lake, C. (in press). Effective reading programs for middle and high schools: A best-evidence synthesis. Reading Research Quarterly.

• Slavin, R. E., & Lake, C. (in press). Effective programs in elementary mathematics. Review of Educational Research. Available from http://www.bestevidence.org

• Slavin, R. E., Lake, C., & Groff, C. (2007). Effective programs in middle and high school mathematics. Baltimore: Center for Data-Driven Reform in Education, Johns Hopkins University. Manuscript submitted for publication. Available from http://www.bestevidence.org

• Slavin, R. E., & Madden, N. A. (2001). One million children: Success for All. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.

• Sterne J., Gavaghan, D., & Egger, M. (2000). Publication and related bias in meta-analysis: Power of statistical tests and prevalence in literature. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 53, 1119–1129.

• Stevens, R. J., Madden, N. A., Slavin, R. E., & Farnish, A. M. (1987). Cooperative Integrated Reading and Composition: Two field experiments. Reading Research Quarterly, 22(4), 433–454.

• Stevens, R. J., & Slavin, R. E. (1995a). The cooperative elementary school: Effects on students’ achievement, attitudes, and social relations. American Educational Research Journal, 32(2), 321–351.

• Stevens, R. J., & Slavin, R. E. (1995b). Effects of cooperative learning approach in reading and writing on academically handicapped and non-handicapped students. Elementary School Journal, 95(3), 241–262.

• Stevens, R. J., Slavin, R. E., & Farnish, A. M. (1991). The effects of cooperative learning and direct instruction in reading comprehension strategies on main idea identification. Journal of Educational Psychology, 83(1), 8–16.

• Taylor, S., & Tweedie, R. (1998). A non-parametric “trim and fill” method of assessing publication bias in meta-analysis. Denver: University of Colorado Health Sciences Center.

• Torgesen, J., Wagner, R., Rashotte, C., Rose, E., Lindamood, P., Conway, T., et al. (1999). Preventing reading failure in young children with phonological processing disabilities: Group and individual responses to instruction. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91, 579–593.

• Torgerson, C. J. (2006). Publication bias: The Achilles’ heel of systematic reviews? British Journal of Educational Studies, 54(1), 89–102.

• Torgerson, C. J. (2007). The quality of systematic reviews of effectiveness in literacy learning in English: A “tertiary” review. Journal of Research in Reading, 32(3), 287–315.

• Towne, L., Wise, L. L., & Winters, T. M. (Eds.). (2005). Advancing scientific research in education. Washington, DC: National Academies Press. Available from http://www.NAP.edu

• U.S. Department of Education. (2002a). No Child Left Behind: A desktop reference. Washington, DC: Author. Available from http://www.ed.gov/offices/OESE/reference

• U.S. Department of Education. (2002b). Strategic plan, 2002–2007.Washington, DC: Author.

• Van Dusen, L., & Worthen, B. (1994). The impact of integrated learning system implementation on student outcomes: Implications for research and evaluation. International Journal of Educational Research, 21, 13–24.

• Waite, R. E. (2000). A study on the effects of Everyday Mathematics on student achievement of third-, fourth-, and fifth-grade students in a large North Texas urban school district. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of North Texas.

• What Works Clearinghouse. (2007a). Beginning reading topic report.Retrieved December 19, 2007, from http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/reports/beginning_reading/

• What Works Clearinghouse. (2007b). Intervention report, Saxon Middle School Math, technical appendix. Retrieved December 19, 2007, from http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/pdf/techappendix03_17.pdf

• What Works Clearinghouse. (2007c). Technical details of WWC-conducted computations. Retrieved December 19, 2007, from http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/pdf/conducted_computations/pdf

• Williams, D. D. (1986). The incremental method of teaching Algebra I. Unpublished research report, University of Missouri, Kansas City.

• Ysseldyke, J., Spicuzza, R., Kosciolek, S., Teelucksingh, E., Boys, C., & Lemkuil, A. (2003). Using a curriculum-based instructional management system to enhance math achievement in urban schools. Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk, 8(20), 247–265.

topo da página