State-based curriculum-making, Part 2, the tool-kit for the state’s curriculum-making

References

• Bähr, K., Fries, A.-V., Ghisla, G., Künzli, R., Rosenmund, M., & Seliner-Müller, G. (2000). Curriculum-making: Structures, expectations, perspectives: Implementation report (National Research Programme 33: Effectiveness of Our Education Systems). Aarau: Schweizerische Koordinationsstelle für Bildungsforschung (SKBF).
   Google Scholar
• Bernstein, B. (1996). Pedagogy, symbolic control and identity: Theory, research, critique. London: Taylor & Francis.
   Google Scholar
• Cohen, D. K., & Spillane, J. P. (1992). Policy and practice: The relations between governance and instruction. In G. Grant (Ed.), Review of research in education (Vol. 18, pp. 3–49). Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.
   Google Scholar
• Deng, Z. (2009). The formation of a school subject and the nature of curriculum content: An analysis of liberal studies in Hong Kong. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 41, 585–604.10.1080/00220270902767311
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Doyle, W. (1992). Curriculum and pedagogy. In P. W. Jackson (Ed.), Handbook of research on curriculum (pp. 486–516). New York, NY: Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Goodlad, J. I. and Associates. (1979). Curriculum inquiry: The study of curriculum practice. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
   Google Scholar
• Haft, H. (1986). Lehrplanarbeit in Kommissionen: Ergebnisse einer Untersuchung [Curriculum work in commissions. Results of an investigation]. Kiel: Christian-Albrechts-Universität, Institut für Pädagogik der Naturwissenschaften.
   Google Scholar
• Haft, H., & Hopmann, S. (1990). Curriculum administration as symbolic action. In H. Haft & S. Hopmann (Eds.), Case studies in curriculum administration history (pp. 159–173). London: Falmer.
   Google Scholar
• Haller, H.-D. (1973). Prozess-Analyse der Lehrplanentwicklung in der BRD [Process analysis of curriculum development in the Federal Republic of Germany]. Constance, Germany: Universität Konstanz, Zentrum I Bildungsforschung).
   Google Scholar
• Hellberg, S. (2012). First language paradigms in conflict: Hidden dialogue in Swedish curricula 1962–2011. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 44, 381–402.10.1080/00220272.2011.637183
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hendricks, M. (2005, June 13). Teachers can ignore the State Board. The Kansas City Star.
   Google Scholar
• ‘High flyers and sad failures: A misguided effort to fix a school system that leaves too many losers behind’. (2015 May 16). The Economist.
   Google Scholar
• Hopmann, S. (1988a). Lehrplanarbeit als Verwaltungshandeln [Curriculum development as an administrative action]. Kiel: Christian-Albrechts-Universität, Institut für Pädagogik der Naturwissenschaften.
   Google Scholar
• Hopmann, S. (1988b). Zugänge zur Geschichte staatlicher Lehrplanarbeit [Ways of approaching the history of state-level curriculum-making]. Kiel: Christian-Albrechts-Universität, Institut für Pädagogik der Naturwissenschaften.
   Google Scholar
• Hug, B. (2008). Re-examining the practice of dissection: What does it teach? Journal of Curriculum Studies, 40, 91–105.10.1080/00220270701484746
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Illinois State Board of Education. (1997). Illinois learning standards. Springfield, IL: Author.
   Google Scholar
• Lundgren, U. P. (2003). The political governing (governance) of education and evaluation. In P. Haug & T. A. Schwandt (Eds.), Evaluating educational reforms: Scandinavian perspectives (pp. 99–110). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Press.
   Google Scholar
• Lundgren, U. P. (2015). What’s in a name? That which we call a crisis? A commentary on Michael Young`s article ‘Overcoming the crisis in curriculum theory’. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 47, 787–801.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Meyer, J. W., & Rowan, B. (1977). Institutionalized organizations: Formal structure as myth and ceremony. American Journal of Sociology, 83, 340–363.10.1086/226550
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Morris, P., & Chan, K. K. (1997). Cross-curricular themes and curriculum reform in Hong Kong: Policy as discourse. British Journal of Educational Studies, 45, 248–262.10.1111/1467-8527.00050
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• National Board of Education. (1994). Framework curriculum for the senior secondary school 1994. Helsinki: Author.
   Google Scholar
• Rosenmund, M. (2006). The current discourse on curriculum change: A comparative analysis of national reports on education. In A. Benavot & C. Braslavsky (Eds.), School knowledge in comparative and historical perspective: Changing curricula in primary and secondary education (CERC Studies in Comparative Education, No. 19) (pp. 173–194). Hong Kong: University of Hong Kong, Comparative Education Research Centre.
   Google Scholar
• Rosenmund, M. (2016). Propedeutics to international comparative analysis of state-based curriculum-making. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 48(6), 815–832.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Royal Ministry of Education, Research, and Church Affairs. (1999). The curriculum for the 10-year compulsory school in Norway. Oslo: Author.
   Google Scholar
• Rutkowski, D. J. (2007). Converging us softly: How intergovernmental organizations promote neoliberal educational policy. Critical Studies in Education, 48, 229–247.10.1080/17508480701494259
   Google Scholar
• Singh, P. (2002). Pedagogising knowledge: Bernstein’s theory of the pedagogic device. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 23, 571–582.10.1080/0142569022000038422
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sivesind, K., & Westbury, I. (2016). State-based curriculum-making, Part 1. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 48(6), 744–756.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weniger, E. (2000). Didaktik as a theory of education. In I. Westbury, S. Hopmann, & K. Riquarts (Eds.), Teaching as a reflective practice: The German Didaktik tradition (pp. 111–125). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
   Google Scholar
• Westbury, I. (2003). Evaluating a national curriculum reform. In P. Haug & T. A. Schwandt (Eds.), Evaluating educational reforms: Scandinavian perspectives (pp. 189–207). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Press.
   Google Scholar
• Westbury, I. (2008). Making curricula: Why states make curricula, and how. In F. M. Connelly (Ed.), SAGE handbook of curriculum and instruction (pp. 45–65). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Westbury, I., Aspfors, J., Fries, A.-V., Hansén, S.-E., Ohlhaver, F., Rosenmund, M. & Sivesind, K. (2016). Organizing curriculum change: an introduction. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 48, 729–743.
   Google Scholar