Revisiting Curriculum Potential

References

• Apple, M. W. (1979). Ideology and curriculum. Boston: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
   Google Scholar
• Bernstein, B. (1971). On the classification and framing of educational knowledge. In M. F. D. Young (Ed.), Knowledge and control: New directions for the sociology of education (pp. 47–69). London: Collier-Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Ball, D., & Cohen, D. K. (1996). Reform by the book: What is-or might be-the role of curriculum materials in teacher learning and instructional reform? Educational Researcher, 25, 6–8, 14.
   Google Scholar
• Ben-Peretz, M. (1975). The concept of curriculum potential. Curriculum Theory Network, 5(2), 151–159.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ben-Peretz, M. (1990). The teacher-curriculum encounter: Freeing teachers from the tyranny of texts. Albany: State University of New York Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ben-Peretz, M., & Silberstein, M. (1982). Curriculum interpretation and its place in teacher education programs. Interchange, 13(4), 47–55.
   Google Scholar
• Brown, M., & Edelson, D. C. (2003). Teaching as design: Can we better understand the ways in which teachers use materials so we can better design materials to support their changes in practice? Evanston, IL: The Center for Learning Technologies in Urban Schools. Retrieved February 3, 2010, from http://www.inquirium.net/people/matt/teaching_as_design-Final.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Curriculum Development Council and Hong Kong Examination and Assessment Authority (CDC & HKEAA). (2007). Liberal studies: Curriculum and assessment guide (Secondary 4–6). Hong Kong: Education Bureau. Retrieved February 3, 2010, from http://www.edb.gov.hk/FileManager/EN/Content_5999/ls_final_e_070508.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Clandinin, D. J., & Connelly, F. M. (1992). Teacher as curriculum maker. In P. W. Jackson (Ed.), Handbook of research in curriculum (pp. 402–435). New York: Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Cohen, D. K., & Ball, B. L. (1990a). Policy and practice: A commentary. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 12(3), 331–338.
   Google Scholar
• Cohen, D. K., & Ball, B. L. (1990b). Policy and practice: An overview. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 12(3), 233–239.
   Google Scholar
• Cohen, D. K., Raudenbush, S. W., & Ball, D. L. (2003). Resources, instruction, and research. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 25(2), 119–142.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Collopy, R. (2003). Curriculum materials as a professional development tool: How a mathematics textbook affected two teachers' learning. Elementary School Journal, 103(3), 287.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Connelly, F. M., & Clandinin, D. J. (1988). Teachers as curriculum planners: Narratives of experience. New York: Teachers College Press.
   Google Scholar
• Davis, E. A. (2006). Preservice elementary teachers' critique of instructional materials for science. Science Education, 90(2), 348–375.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Davis, E. A., & Krajcik, J. S. (2005). Designing educative curriculum materials to promote teacher learning. Educational Researcher, 34(3), 3–14.
   Google Scholar
• Deng, Z. (2007a). Knowing the subject matter of a secondary school science subject. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 39(5), 503–535.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Deng, Z. (2007b). Transforming the subject matter: Examining the intellectual roots of pedagogical content knowledge. Curriculum Inquiry, 37(3), 279–295.
   Web of Science ®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(5), 585–604.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Deng, Z., & Luke, A. (2008). Subject matter: Defining and theorizing school subjects. In F. M. Connelly, M. F. He, & J. Phillion (Eds.), The Sage handbook of curriculum and instruction (pp. 66–87). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Doyle, W. (1992a). Constructing curriculum in the classroom. In F. K. Oser, A. Dick, & J. Patry (Eds.), Effective and responsible teaching: The new syntheses (pp. 66–79). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
   Google Scholar
• Doyle, W. (1992b). Curriculum and pedagogy. In P. W. Jackson (Ed.), Handbook of research on curriculum (pp. 486–516). New York: Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Doyle, W. (2008, August). Competence as a blurred category in curriculum theory. Paper presented at “Research on vocational education and training for international comparison and as international comparison,” Georg-August-Universität, Göttingen, Germany.
   Google Scholar
• Doyle, W. (2010, May). Teaching as a curriculum process. Paper presented at the meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Denver, CO.
   Google Scholar
• Eisner, E. (1984). No easy answers: Joseph Schwab’s contributions to curriculum. Curriculum Inquiry, 14(2), 201–210.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eisner, E. W., & Vallance, E. (Eds.). (1974). Conflicting conceptions of the curriculum. Series on Contemporary Educational Issues. Berkeley, CA: McCutchan.
   Google Scholar
• Fiala, R. (2006). Educational ideology and the school curriculum. In A. Benavot & C. Braslavsky (Eds.), School knowledge in comparative and historical perspective: Changing curricula in primary and secondary education (pp. 15–34). CERC Studies in Comparative Education, No. 19. Hong Kong: Comparative Education Research Centre, University of Hong Kong.
   Google Scholar
• Freeman, D. J., & Porter, A. C. (1989). Do textbooks dictate the content of mathematics instruction in elementary schools? American Educational Research Journal, 26(3), 403–421.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goodlad, J. I., & Associates. (1979). Curriculum inquiry: The study of curriculum practice. New York: McGraw-Hill.
   Google Scholar
• Goodson, I. F., Anstead, C. J., & Mangan, J. M. (1998). Subject knowledge: Readings for the study of school subjects. London: Falmer.
   Google Scholar
• Goodson, I. F., & Marsh, C. J. (1996). Studying school subjects. London: Falmer.
   Google Scholar
• Gudmundsdottir, S., Reinertsen, A., & Nordtømme, N. P. (2000). Klafki’s Didaktik analysis as a conceptual framework for research on teaching. In I. Westbury, S. Hopmann, & K. Riquarts (Eds.), Teaching as a reflective practice: The German Didaktik tradition (pp. 319–334). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Hopmann, S. (2007). Restrained teaching: The common cores of Didaktik. European Educational Research Journal, 6(2), 109–124.
   Google Scholar
• Humboldt, W. V. (2000). Theory of Bildung. In I. Westbury, S. Hopmann, & K. Riquarts (Eds.), Teaching as a reflective practice: The German Didaktik tradition (pp. 57–61). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Karseth, B., & Sivesind, K. (2010). Conceptualising curriculum knowledge within and beyond the national context. European Journal of Education, 45(1), 103–120.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Klafki, W. (1998). Characteristics of critical constructive Didaktik. In B. B. Gundem & S. Hopmann (Eds.), Didaktik and/or curriculum: An international dialogue (pp. 307–330). New York: Peter Lang.
   Google Scholar
• Klafki, W. (2000). Didaktik analysis as the core of preparation. In I. Westbury, S. Hopmann, & K. Riquarts (Eds.), Teaching as a reflective practice: The German Didaktik tradition (pp. 139–159). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Krüger, R. A. (2008). The significance of the concepts “elemental” and “fundamental” in didactic theory and practice. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 40(2), 215–250.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McNeil, J. (1996). Curriculum: A comprehensive introduction (5th ed.). New York: HarperCollins.
   Google Scholar
• Meredith, A. (1995). Terry’s learning: Some limitations of Shulman’s pedagogical content knowledge. Cambridge Journal of Education, 25(2), 175–187.
   Google Scholar
• Moore, R. (2000). For knowledge: Tradition, progressivism and progress in education-reconstructing the curriculum debate. Cambridge Journal of Education, 30(1), 17–36.
   Google Scholar
• Nicol, C., & Crespo, S. (2006). Learning to teach with mathematics textbooks: How preservice teachers interpret and use curriculum materials. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 62(3), 331–355.
   Google Scholar
• Popkewitz, T. S. (1987). The formation of school subjects: The struggle for creating an American institution. London: Falmer.
   Google Scholar
• Reid, W. A. (1984). Curriculum, community, and liberal education: A response to the Practical 4. Curriculum Inquiry, 14(1), 103–111.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reid, W. A. (2006). The pursuit of curriculum: Schooling and the public interest. Greenwich, CT: Information Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Remillard, J. T. (1999). Curriculum materials in mathematics education reform: A framework for examining teachers' curriculum development. Curriculum Inquiry, 29(3), 315–342.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Remillard, J. T. (2000). Can curriculum materials support teachers' learning? Two fourth-grade teachers' use of a new mathematics text. Elementary School Journal, 100(4), 331–350.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Remillard, J. T. (2005). Examining key concepts in research on teachers' use of mathematics curricula. Review of Educational Research, 75(2), 211–246.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schneider, R. M., Krajcik, J., & Blumenfeld, P. (2005). Enacting reform-based science materials: The range of teacher enactments in reform classrooms. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42(3), 283–312.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schwab, J. J. (1964). The structure of the disciplines: Meaning and significance. In G. W. Ford & L. Pugno (Eds.), The structure of knowledge and the curriculum (pp. 1–30). Chicago: Rand McNally.
   Google Scholar
• Schwab, J. J. (1969). The practical: A language for curriculum. School Review, 78, 1–23.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schwab, J. J. (1971). The practical: Arts of eclectic. School Review, 79, 493–542.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schwab, J. J. (1973). The practical 3: Translation into curriculum. School Review, 81, 501–522.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schwab, J. J. (1983). The practical 4: Something for curriculum professors to do. Curriculum Inquiry, 13(3), 239–265.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sherin, M. G., & Drake, C. (2009). Curriculum strategy framework: Investigating patterns in teachers' use of a reform-based mathematics curriculum. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 41(4), 467–500.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shkedi, A. (1998). Can the curriculum guide both emancipate and educate teachers? Curriculum Inquiry, 28(2), 209–229.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shkedi, A. (2009). From curriculum guide to classroom practice: Teachers' narratives of curriculum application. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 41(6), 833–854.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4–14.
   Google Scholar
• Shulman, L. S. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57(1), 1–22.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tanner, D., & Tanner, L. N. (1995). Curriculum development: Theory Into practice (3rd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Merrill.
   Google Scholar
• Wengener, C. (1986). Being practical with Schwab. Curriculum Inquiry, 16(2), 215–232.
   Google Scholar
• Werner, W. (1993). Interpreting curricular potential. Curriculum Inquiry, 23(4), 455–461.
   Google Scholar
• Westbury, I. (1994). Deliberation and the improvement of schooling. In J. T. Dillon (Ed.), Deliberation in education and society (pp. 35–65). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
   Google Scholar
• Westbury, I. (2000). Teaching as a reflective practice: What might Didaktik teach curriculum. In I. Westbury, S. Hopmann, & K. Riquarts (Eds.), Teaching as a reflective practice: The German Didaktik tradition (pp. 15–39). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Westbury, I. (2005). Reconsidering Schwab’s “practicals”: A response to Peter Hlebowitsh’s “Generational ideas in curriculum: A historical triangulation.” Curriculum Inquiry, 35(1), 89–101.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Westbury, I. (2008). The making of formal curricula: Why do states make curricula, and how? In F. M. Connelly, M. F. He, & J. Phillion (Eds.), The Sage handbook of curriculum and instruction (pp. 45–65). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Westbury, I., & Osborne, M. D. (2001). Joseph. J. Schwab 1910–1988. In J. A. Palmer (Ed.), Fifty modern thinkers on education: From Piaget to the present (pp. 73–78). New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Wilson, S. M., Shulman, L. S., & Richert, A. E. (1987). “150 different ways” of knowing: Representations of knowledge in teaching. In J. Calderhead (Ed.), Exploring teachers' thinking (pp. 104–124). London: Cassell.
   Google Scholar
• Young, M. F. D. (Ed.). (1971). Knowledge and control: New directions for the sociology of education. London: Collier-Macmillan.
   Google Scholar