The purpose of this article is to describe several conceptual areas that warrant attention by scholars and practitioners interested in improving access and opportunity to science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) learning in urban cities. Thinking conceptually about the urban context has been a part of intellectual traditions in the social sciences for decades. Like in other fields of study, for example, economics, sociology, and political science, the treatment of urban communities as unique geospatial organizations in terms of sites of intervention and policy reform has a history in STEM education, but the aligned research and development strategy is best characterized as nascent.
AckermanB.BrownE. (2010). Physical and psychosocial turmoil in the home and cognitive development. In EvansG.WachsT. (Eds.), Chaos and its influence on children’s development: An ecological perspective (pp. 35-48). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
2.
AlcarazK. I.KreuterM. W.DavisK. L.RogersV. L.SamwaysT. W.BryanR. P. (2008). Increasing awareness of and interest in public health and cancer control careers among minority middle school students. Public Health Reports, 123, 533-539.
3.
AndersonM. R.SimonsenU.UldbjergN.AalkjaerC.StenderS. (2009). Smoking cessation early in pregnancy and birth weight, length, head circumference, and endothelial nitric oxide synthase activity in umbilical and chorionic vessels: An observational study of health singleton pregnancies. Circulation, 119, 765-767.
BarnettW. S. (1998). Long-term effects on cognitive development and school success. In BarnettW. S.BoocockS. S. (Eds.), Early Care and Education for Children in Poverty (pp. 11-44). Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
6.
BradleyR. H.CorwynR. F. (2002). Socioeconomic status and child development. Annual Review of Psychology, 53, 371-399.
7.
BransfordJ. D.BrownA. L.CockingR. R. (Eds.). (1999). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
8.
Brooks-GunnJ.DuncanG. J. (1997). The effects of poverty on children. Children and Poverty, 7(2), 55-71.
9.
Brooks-GunnJ.DuncanG.MaritatoN. (1997). Poor families, poor outcomes: The well-being of children and youth. In DuncanG.Brooks-GunnJ. (Eds.), Consequences of growing up poor (pp. 1-17). New York, NY: Russell Sage.
10.
CannonJ.GinsbergH. P. (2008). “Doing the math”: Maternal beliefs about early mathematics versus language learning. Early Education and Development, 19, 238-260.
11.
Center on Education Policy (2008, February). NCLB year 5: Instructional time in elementary schools: A closer look at changes for specific subjects. Washington, DC: Author.
12.
CooperD. (2007). The potential of cumulative voting to yield fair representation. Journal of Theoretical Politics, 19, 277-295.
13.
CorcoranJ. (2003). Clinical applications of evidence-based family interventions. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
DeWaltD. A.BerkmanN. D.SheridanS.LohrK. N.PignoneM. P. (2004). Literacy and health outcomes: A systematic review of the literature. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 19, 1228-1239.
17.
EntwisleD. R.AlexanderK. L. (1992). Summer setback: Race, poverty, school composition, and mathematics achievement in the first two years in school. American Sociological Review, 57(1), 72-84.
18.
EstradaC.BarnesV.CollinsC.ByrdJ. C. (1999). Health literacy and numeracy. Journal of the American Medical Association, 281, 545-551.
19.
EstradaC.Martin-HryniewiczM.PeekB. T.CollinsC.ByrdJ. C. (2004). Literacy and numeracy skills and anticoagulation control. American Journal of Medical Science, 328, 88-93.
20.
EvansG. W. (2004). The environment of childhood poverty. American Psychologist, 59(2), 77-92.
21.
EvansG. W.SchambergM. A. (2009). Childhood poverty, chronic stress, and adult working memory. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 106, 6545-6549.
22.
FalkJ. H.NeedhamM. D. (2011). Measuring the impact of a science center on its community. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 48(1), 1-12.
23.
FarahM. J.SheraD. M.SavageJ. H.BetancourtL.GiannettaJ. M.BrodskyN. L.HurtH. (2006). Childhood poverty: Specific associations with neurocognitive development. Brain Research, 1110, 166-174.
FenderJ. G.CrowleyK. (2007). How parents explanation changes what children learn from everyday thinking. Journal of Applied Development Psychology, 28, 189-210.
26.
GalamaT.HosekJ. (2008). U.S. competitiveness in science and technology. Santa Monica, CA: RAND.
27.
GazmararianJ. A.BakerD. W.WilliamsM. V.ParkerR. M.ScottT. L.GreenD. C. . . .KoplanJ. P. (1999). Health literacy among Medicare enrollees in a managed care organization. Journal of the American Medical Association, 281, 545-551.
28.
GazmararianJ. A.CurranJ. W.ParkerR. M.BernhardtJ. M.DeBuonoB. A. (2005). Public health literacy in America: An ethical imperative. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 28, 317-322.
29.
GolbeckA. L.Ahlers-SchmidtC. R.PaschalA. M.DismukeS. E. (2005). A definition and operational framework of health numeracy. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 29, 375-376.
30.
GoldschmidtP.JungH. (2010, May). Evaluation of seeds of science/roots of reading effective tools for developing literacy through science in the early grades. Los Angeles, CA: National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing, UCLA.
31.
GordonE. W. (1970). Education for socially disadvantaged (Special Issue). Review of Educational Research, 40(1), 1-12.
32.
HackmanD. A.FarahM. J. (2009). Socioeconomic status and the developing brain. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 13(2), 65-73
33.
HeckmanJ. (2006). Skill formation and the economics of investing in disadvantaged children. Science, 312, 1900-1902.
34.
HugB.KrajcikJ. S.MarxR. W. (2005). Using innovative learning technologies to promote learning and engagement in an urban science classroom. Urban Education, 40, 446-472.
35.
HurdP. D. (1997). Inventing science education for the new millennium. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
36.
HustedtJ. T.BarnettW. S.FriedmanA. H. (2010, November). The New Mexico Pre-K evaluation: Impacts from the fourth fear (2008-2009) of New Mexico’s state-funded Pre-K program. New Brunswick, NJ: National Institute for Early Education Research, Rutgers University.
37.
Institute of Medicine. (2004). Health literacy: A prescription to end confusion. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
38.
JacksonS. A. (1993). Opportunity to learn: The health connection. Journal of Negro Education, 62, 377-393.
39.
Jones-WebbR.WallM. (2008). Neighborhood racial/ethnic concentration, social disadvantage, and homicide risk: An ecological analysis of 10 U.S. cities. Journal of Urban Health, 85, 662-675.
40.
KimJ. J.CrascoL. M.BlankR. K.SmithsonJ. (2001). Survey results of urban school classroom practices in mathematics and science: 2000 report. Norwood, MA: Systemic Research.
41.
KreuterM. W.McClureS. M. (2004). The role of culture in health communication. Annual Review of Public Health, 25, 439-455.
42.
Learning for Tomorrow’s World: First Results from PISA 2003. (2004). Paris, France: Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development.
43.
LillardD. R.DeCiccaP. P. (2001). Higher standards, more dropouts? Evidence within and across time. Economics of Education Review, 20, 459-473.
44.
LoebS.BridgesM.BassokD.FullerB.RumbergerR. W. (2007). How much is too much? The influence of preschool centers on children’s social and cognitive development. Economics of Education Review, 26(1), 52-66.
45.
LukeD.EsmundoE.BloomY. (2000). Smoke signs: Patterns of tobacco billboard advertising in a metropolitan region. Tobacco Control, 9(1), 16-23.
46.
MasseyD. S. (2009). The age of extremes: Concentrated affluence and poverty in the twenty-first century. In HynesH. P.LopezR. (Eds.), Urban health: Readings in the social, built, and physical environments of U.S. cities (pp. 5-36). Sudbury, MA: Jones and Bartlett.
47.
Mathematical Sciences Education Board. (1998). High school mathematics at work: Essays and examples for the education of all students. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
48.
McCombsJ. S.AugustineC. H.SchwartzH. L.BodilyS. J.McInnisB.LichterD. S.CrossA. B. (2011). Making summer count: How summer programs can boost children’s learning. Santa Monica, CA: RAND.
49.
McLoydV. C. (1998). Socioeconomic disadvantage and child development. American Psychologist, 53, 185-204.
50.
Mead (2011, April). Prek-3rd: Principals as crucial instructional leaders (Policy to Action Brief No. 2). New York, NY: Foundation for Child Development.
MosesR. P.CobbC. E. (2001). Radical equations: Math literacy and civil rights. Boston, MA: Beacon.
55.
NaisbittJ.AburdeneP. (1990). Megatrends 2000: Ten new directions for the 1990’s. New York, NY: William Morrow.
56.
NICHD Early Child Care Research Network. (2000). Characteristics and quality of child care for toddlers and preschoolers. Applied Developmental Science, 4(3), 116-135.
57.
National Research Council. (2008). Assessing the role of K-12 academic standards in states. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
58.
National Research Council. (2011a). Successful K-12 STEM education identifying effective approaches in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
59.
National Research Council. (2011b). A framework for K-12 science education: Practice, cross-cutting concepts, and core ideas. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
60.
NobleK. G.McCandlissB. D.FarahM. J. (2007). Socioeconomic gradients predict individual differences in neurocognitive abilities. Developmental Science,10, 464-480.
61.
NobleK. G.NormanM. F.FarahM. J. (2005). Neurocognitive correlates of socioeconomic status in kindergarten children. Developmental Science, 8(1), 74-87.
62.
O’DayJ. A.SmithM. S. (1993). Systemic reform and educational opportunity. In FuhrmanS. H. (Ed.), Designing coherent education policy: Improving the system (pp. 250-312). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
63.
Office of the Vice President for Research. (2010). Annual Report Fiscal Year 2010. St. Louis, MO: Washington University in St. Louis.
64.
OrfieldM. (2002). American metropolitics: The new suburban reality. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
65.
PayneC. M. (2008). So much reform so little change: The persistence of failure in urban schools. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.
66.
PeressiniD. D. (1998). The portrayal of parents in school mathematics reform literature: Locating the context for parental involvement. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 29, 555-582.
RodriguezA. J. (2004). Turning despondency into hope: Charting new paths to improve students’ achievement and participation in science education. Greensboro, NC: Southeast Eisenhower Regional Consortium for Mathematics and Science.
69.
RomanceN. R.VitaleM. R. (2001). Implementing an in-depth expanded science model in elementary schools: Multi-year findings, research issues, and policy implications. International Journal of Science Education, 23, 373-404.
70.
RomanceN. R.VitaleM. R. (1992). A curriculum strategy that expands time for in-depth elementary science instruction by using science-based reading strategies: Effects of a year-long study in Grade 4. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29, 545-554.
71.
RuskD. (2003). Cities without suburbs (3rd ed.). Washington, DC: Woodrow Wilson Press.
72.
SchillingerD.GrumbachK.PietteJ.WangF.OsmondD.DaherC. . . .BindmanA. B. (2002). Association of health literacy with diabetes outcomes. Journal of the American Medical Association, 288, 475-482.
73.
SchmidtW. H. (2011). Building bridges between research and the worlds of policy and practice: Lessons learned from PROM/SE and TIMSS. In TateW. F.KingK. D.AndersonR. (Eds.), Disrupting tradition: Research and practice pathways in mathematics education (pp. 45-52). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
74.
SchoenbachR.GreenleafC.CzikoC.HurwitzL. (2000). What is reading?Quarterly, 22(3), 38-39.
75.
ShonkoffJ. P.PhillipsP. A. (Eds.). (2000). From neurons to neighborhoods: The science of early childhood development. Washington, DC: National Research Council and Institute of Medicine.
76.
SnowC. E.BurnsM. S.GriffinP. (Eds.). (1998). Preventing reading difficulties in young children. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
77.
SpencerM. B.SwansonD. P.EdwardsM. C. (2010). Sociopolitical contexts of development. In PhillipsD. A.EdwardsM. C.SpencerM. B. (Eds.), Adolescence: Development during a global era (pp. 1-27). London, UK: Elsevier.
78.
SpillaneJ. (2011). The distributed leadership studies: A case study of research in and for school practice. In TateW. F.KingK. D.AndersonC. R. (Eds.), Disrupting tradition: Research and practice pathways in mathematics education (pp. 7-19). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
79.
StiffL. V.JohnsonJ. J.AkosP. (2011). Examining what we know for sure: Tracking in middle grades mathematics. In TateW. F.KingK. D.AndersonC. R. (Eds.), Disrupting tradition: Research and practice pathways in mathematics education (pp. 63-77). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
80.
TateW. F. (Ed.). (1996). Urban schools and mathematics reform: Implementing new standards (Special Issue). Urban Education, 30, 371-521.
81.
TateW. F. (2001). Science education as a civil right: Urban schools and opportunity to learn considerations. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38, 1015-1028.
82.
TateW. F. (2008a). Putting the “Urban” in mathematics
education scholarship. Journal of Urban Mathematics Education, 1, 5-9.
83.
TateW. F. (2008b). “Geography of opportunity”: Poverty, place, and educational outcomes. Educational Researcher, 37, 397-411.
84.
TateW. F.KingK. D.AndersonC. R. (Eds.). (2011). Disrupting tradition: Research and practice pathways in mathematics education. Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
85.
TateW. F.RousseauC. (2007). Engineering change in mathematics education: Research, policy, and practice. In LesterF. (Ed.), Second handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp.1209-1246). Charlotte, NC: Information Age.
VitaleM. R.RomanceN. R.KlentschyM. (2006, April). Improving school reform by changing curriculum policy toward content-area instruction in elementary schools: A research-based model. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, CA.
89.
WangF. (2006). Quantitative methods and applications in GIS. New York, NY: Taylor & Francis.
90.
WebbN.HeckD.TateW. (1996). A case study of the Urban Mathematics Collaborative. In RaizenS. A.BrittonE. D. (Eds.), Case studies in U.S. innovations in mathematics education (pp. 245-360). Dordrecht, Netherlands: Kluwer.
91.
WeissI. R.KnappM. S.HollwegK. S.BurrillG. (2002). Investigating the influence of standards: A framework for research in mathematics, science, and technology education. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
92.
WhitakerA. H.FeldmanJ. F.LorenzJ. M.ShenS.McNicholasF.NietoM. . . .PanethN. (2006). Motor and cognitive outcomes in nondisabled low-birth-weight adolescents. Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine, 160, 1040-1046.
