Abstract
The foregoing review rests on several assumptions about the role of the instructional context on student learning, the structure of subjects such as reading, and the nature of educational innovations. These assumptions influence the selection of studies for review and the interpretation of findings. An examination of these assumptions in light of recent theory and research produces a different perspective on the conclusions of the review. This examination suggests that, although the review provides an interesting historical analysis, its conclusions and recommendations are inadequate for guiding future research, policy, and practice.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
