CarrJ. F.HarrisD. E. (2001). Succeeding with standards: Linking curriculum, assessment, and action planning. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
4.
Education Week. (2004b). Quality counts 2004: Count me in. Special Education in an Era of Standards, 22(17). Bethesda, MD.
5.
GuskeyT. P. (2005). Mapping the road to proficiency. Educational Leadership, 63(2), 32–38.
6.
Individuals With Disabilities Education Improvement Act (IDEA) — Reauthorized Statute Alignment with the No Child Left Behind Act, Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services (OSERS). Retrieved April 4, 2006, from www.ed.gov/about/offices/list/osers/index.html.
7.
JamentzK. (2003). The instructional demands of standards reform. Washington, DC: American Federation of Teachers.
8.
MarzanoR. J. (2003). What works in schools: Translating research into action. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
9.
MarzanoR. J. (2007). The art and science of teaching. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
10.
McLaughlinM. W.ShepardL.A.O'DayJ. (1995). Improving education through standards-based reform: A report by the national academy of educational panel on standards-based education reform. Stanford, CA; National Academy of Education Panel on Standards-Based Education Reform.
No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 P.L. 107–110, 115 Stat. 1425 (2002).
13.
O'SheaM. R. (2005). From standards to success. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
14.
QuenemoenR. (2003). Civil rights, No Child Left Behind, assessments, accountability, and students with disabilities. Written comments to United States Commission on Civil Rights for National Center on Educational Outcomes. Retrieved May 26, 2006, from http://cehd.umn.edu/nceo/Presentations/usccr.pdf.
15.
ThurlowM. L., (2003, February). Linking standards, assessments and instructional practices. Presentation at the Pacific Rim Conference, Waikiki, HI. National Center on Educational Outcomes. Retrieved February 3, 2008, from http://cehd.umn.edu.nceo/PresentationsArchives.html.
16.
WienerD. (2005). One state's story: Access and alignment to the GRADE-LEVEL content for students with significant cognitive disabilities (Synthesis Report 57). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota, National Center on Educational Outcomes. Retrieved September 15, 2007, from http://education.umn.edu/NCEO/OnlinePubs/Synthesis57.html.
17.
WigginsG. P.McTigheJ. (2005). Understanding by design. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.