El análisis de los efectos de la escuela sobre el rendimiento académico en matemáticasun análisis multinivel con datos de PISA 2003

Erreferentzia bibliografikoak

• Aitkin, M., & Longford, N. (1986). Statistical modelling in school effectiveness. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society A, 149, 1-43.
• Amador, M., & López-Gonzalez, E. (2007). Una aproximación bibliométrica a los modelos multinivel, 13 (1), 67-82. Recuperado el 5 de Septiembre de 2008, de http://www.uv.es/RELIEVE/v13n1/RELIEVEv13n1_3.htm.
• Bock, R. D. (Ed.). (1988). Multilevel analysis of educational data. San Diego: Academic Press.
• Bolen, R. (1997). La Eficacia Escolar y la Mejora de la Escuela: El contexto social y cultural. En D. Reynolds (Ed.). Las escuelas eficaces. Claves para mejorar la enseñanza (pp. 17-35). Madrid: Santillana-Aula XXI.
• Bowles, S., & Levin, H. M. (1968). The determinants of scholastic achievement –an appraisal of some recent evidence. Journal of Human Resources, 3, 3-24.
• Braun, H., & Kanjee, A. (2006). Using assessment to improve education in developing nations. En H. Braun, A. Kanjee, Bettinger, R., & Kremer, M. (Eds.), Improving education through assessment, innovation, and evaluation (1-46). Cambridge, MA: American Academy of Arts and Sciences.
• Brophy, J., & Good, T. (1986). Teacher Behaviour and Student Achievement. En M C Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of Research on Teaching, (pp. 328-375). New York: Macmillan.Bryk, A. S., & Raudenbush, S. W. (1992). Hierarchical linear models for social and behavioural research: Applications and data analysis methods. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
• Castejón, J.L. (1996). Determinantes del rendimiento académico de los estudiantes y de los centros educativos: modelos y factores. Alicante: Editorial Club Universitario.
• Castejón, J.L., Navas, L., & Sampascual, G. (1996). Un modelo estructural del rendimiento académico en matemáticas en la educación secundaria. Revista de psicología general y aplicada: Revista de la Federación Española de Asociaciones de Psicología, 49, 27-43.
• Creemers, B. (1994). The effective classroom. London: Castell.
• Creemers, B. P. M., & Kyriakides, L. (2006) Critical analysis of the current approaches to modeling educational effectiveness: the importance of establishing a dynamic model. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 17, 347-366.
• Creemers, B. P. M. (2002). From school effectiveness and school improvement to effective school improvement: Background, theoretical analysis, and outline of the empirical study. Educational Research and Evaluation, 8, 343-362.
• De la Orden Hoz, A. (1993) La escuela en la perspectiva del producto educativo: reflexiones sobre evaluación de centros docentes. Bordón. Revista de pedagogía, 45(3), 263-270.
• De Miguel, M., Mora, J. G., & Rodríguez, S. (1991). La evaluación de las instituciones universitarias. Madrid: Consejo de Universidades.
• Edmonds, R. R (1981). Improving the Effectiveness of New York City. Public. Reports-General; Speeches/Meeting Papers (No. de servicio de reproducción ERIC ED243980).
• Ellis, A. (1975). Success and failure: A summary of findings and recommendations for improving elementary reading in Massachussetts city schools. Waterton, MA: Educational Research Corporation.
• Fernández, T. (2003). Métodos estadísticos de estimación de los efectos de la escuela y su aplicación al estudio de las escuelas eficaces. Revista Electrónica Iberoamericana sobre Calidad, Eficacia y Cambio en Educación, 1 (2). Recuperado el 22 de Noviembre de 2004, de http://redalyc.uaemex.mx/redalyc/src/.
• Fitz-Gibbon, C. T. (1991). Multilevel modelling in an indicator system. En S.W. Raudenbush y J.D. Willms (Eds.), Schools, classrooms and pupils: international studies of schooling from multilevel perspective, (pp. 67-83). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
• Fuentes, A. (1988). Procesos funcionales y eficacia de la escuela. Un modelo causal. Madrid: Universidad Complutense.
• Fullarton, S. (2002). Student engagement with school: Individual and school-level influences. (ACER Research Monograph No. 27). Melbourne: Australian Council for Educational Research.
• Goldstein, H., & Spiegelhalter, D. (1996). League Tables and Their Limitations: Statistical Issues in Comparisons of Institutional Performance. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, A, 159, 385-443.
• Goldstein, H. (1998). Multilevel Models for analysing social data. En Encyclopaedia of Social research Methods. Recuperado el 20 de Mayo de 2000, de http://www.ioe.ac.uk/hgpersonal/multilevel-models-for-socialdata.pdf.
• Goldstein, H. (2003). Multilevel Stadistical Models (3a ed.). London: Hodder Arnold.
• González-Romá, V. (2008). Modelos multinivel en la investigación psicosocial. En J.F. Morales, C. Huici, E. Gaviria y A. Gómez (Coords.). Método, Teoría e Investigación en Psicología Social (pp.70-84).Madrid: Prentice Hall.
• Hanushek, E. A., & Kain, J.F. (1972). On the value of equality of educational opportunity as a guide to public policy. En F. Mosteller & D.P. Moynihan (Eds.). On equality 33 of educational opportunity (pp. 116-145). New York: Random House.
• Hargreaves, D. H. (2001). A Capital Theory of School Effectiveness and Improvement. British Educational Research Journal, 27 (4), 487-503.
• Hox, J. J. (2002). Multilevel Analysis, Techniques and Applications. Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
• Kane, T. J., & Staiger, D. O. (2002). The promise and pitfalls of using imprecise school accountability measures. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 16, 91-114.
• Kreft, I. G. G. (1987). Models and methods for measurement of school effects. Doctoral Dissertation. University of Amsterdam.
• Lee, V. E., Franco, C., & Albernaz, A. (2006) Quality and Equality in Brazilian Secondary Schools: A Multilevel CrossNational School Effects Study. This paper was presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Diego, CA, April 2004, Second Revision August 30, 2006.
• Luyten, H.,Visscher, A., & Witziers, B. (2005). School Effectiveness Research: From a Review of the Criticism to Recommendations for Further Development. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 16(3), 249-279.
• Mayeske, G. W. et al. (1972). A study of our nation’s schools. Washington, DC: US Department of Health, Education, and Welfare.
• Mcilrath, D., & Huitt, W. (1995, diciembre). The Teaching – Learning Process: A discusión of Models, Educational Psychology Interactive, 4.
• Mortimore, P., Samons, P. Stoll, L. Lewis, D., & Ecob, R. (1988). School matters. The junior years. Somerset: Open Books.
• Murillo, F. J. (Coordinador) (2007). Investigación Iberoamericana sobre Eficacia Escolar. Bogotá: Convenio Andrés Bello.
• Murillo, F. J. (2003a). El movimiento de investigación de Eficacia Escolar. En F.J. Murillo (Coord.). La investigación sobre eficacia escolar en Iberoamérica. Revisión Internacional sobre el estado del arte (pp. 53-92). Bogotá: Convenio Andrés Bello.
• Murillo, F. J. (2003b). Una panorámica de la Investigación Iberoamericana sobre Eficacia Escolar. Revista Electrónica Iberoamericana sobre Calidad, Eficacia y Cambio en Educación, 1 (1). Recuperado el 1 de Junio de 2004, de http://redalyc.uaemex.mx/src/inicio/ArtPdfRed.jsp?iCve=55110104&iCveNum.
• Newby, M. Rickards, T., & Fisher, D. (2001). A model of the Relationship between Teacher and Student Perceptions of Classroom Interactions. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of The American Educational research Association. Seattle, WA.
• Osborne, W. (2000). Advantages of hierarchical linear modeling. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 7(1).
• Pena Brandão, H., Puente-Palacios, K., & Borges-Andrade, J. A (2008). Análise Multinível Aplicada ao Estudo da Competência: em Busca de uma Compreensão mais Integrada e Abrangente sobre a Noção de Competência. In: XXXII ENANPAD.
• Puente-Palacios, K., & Laros, J. A. (2009). Efeitos do contexto no comportamento humano: Contribuições da análise multinível (no prelo). Estudos e Pesquisas em Psicologia, 1-30.
• Puente-Palacios, K. E., & Borgesandrade, J. E. A. (2004). Aplicação da análise multinível para o estudo do comportamento humano em Instituições. In: I Congresso Brasileiro de Psicologia Organizacional e do Trabalho, 2004, Salvador. Resumos do I Congresso Brasileiro de Psicologia Organizacional e do Trabalho, 2004.
• Puente-Palacios, K. E. (2004). Multilevel theory, research, and methods in organizations: Foundations, extensions, and new directions. Curitiba: Revista de Administração Contemporânea, (Reseña de libro). RAC. Revista de Administração Contemporânea, Curitiba, 7, 2, 213-217.
• Raudenbush, S. W., & Bryk, A. S. (2002). Hierarchical linear models: Applications and data analysis methods. 2ndedition. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
• Reezigt, G. J., Guldemond, H., & Creemers B. (1999). Empirical validity for a comprehensive model on educational effectiveness. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 10(2), 193-216.
• Reynolds, D., & Cuttance, P. (1992). (Eds). School Effectiveness Research, Policy and Practice, London: Cassell.
• Reynolds, D., Creemers, B. P. M., Nesselrodt, P.S., Schaffer, E.C., Stringfield, S., & Teddlie, S. (Eds). (1994). Advances in School Effectiveness Research and Practice, Oxford: Elsevier Science.
• Ribeiro de Jesús, G., & Arie Laros, J., (2004). Eficácia escolar: Regressao Multinivel com Dados de Avaliaçao em Larga Escala. Avaliação Psicológica, 3(2), 93-106.
• Rutter, M., Maughan, B., Mortimer, P., Ouston, J., & Smith, A. (1979). Fifteen Thousand Hours: Secondary Schools and Their Effects on Children. Somerset: Open Books.
• Sammons, P. (1996). Complexities in the judgement of school effectiveness. Educational Research and Evaluation, 2, 113-49.
• Sammons, P., Hillman, J. & Mortimore, P. (1995). Key Characteristics of Effective Schools: A review of school effectiveness research. London: Office for Standards in Education [OFSTED].
• Sammons, P., Thomas, S., & Mortimore, P. (1997). Forging links: effective schools and effective departments. London: Paul Chapman Publishing.
• Sanders, W. L., & Horn, S. P. (1995). Educational assessment reassessed: the usefulness of standardized and alternative measures of student achievement as indicators for the assessment of educational outcomes. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 3, 1-16. Recuperado el 18 de Septiembre de 2000, de http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/v3n6.html.
• Sarason, S. (1990). The predictable failure of educational reform. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
• Scheerens, J. (1992). Effective schooling: research, theory and practice. London: Casell.
• Scheerens, J. (1999). School effectiveness in developed and developing countries; a review of the research evidence. The World Bank: University of Twente.
• Scheerens, J. (2000). Improving school effectiveness. Paris: International Institute for Educational Planning IIEP/UNESCO.
• Subramanian, S. V., Jones, K., Kaddour, A., & Krieger N. (2009). Revisiting Robinson: The perils of individualistic and ecologic fallacy. International Journal of Epidemiology, 38(2), 342 – 360.
• Taylor, J., & Nguyen, A. N. (2006). An Analysis of the Value Added by Secondary Schoolsin England: Is the Value Added Indicator of Any Value? Oxford Bulletin of Economics y Statistics, 68, 203- 224.
• Teddlie, C., & Reynolds, D. (2001). Countering the critics: Responses to recent criticism of school effectiveness research. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 12 (1), 41-82.
• Thrupp, M. (2001). Recent School Effectiveness Counter-critiques: Problems and Possibilities. British Educational Research Journal, 27 (4), 443-457.
• Turner, R. (2006). El Programa Internacional para la evaluación de los alumnos (PISA). Una perspectiva general. Revista de Educación, Número extraordinario 2006, 45-74. Madrid: INECSE/MEC.
• UNESCO (2005). The Quality Imperative EFA Global Monitoring Report 2005. Recuperado el 6 de Noviembre de 2006, de http://www.unesco.org/en/efareport/reports/2005.
• Venezky, R. L., & Winfield, L. F. (1979). Schools that succeed beyond expectations in reading (Studies on Education Technical Report No. 1). Newark: University of Delaware, (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 177 484).
• Wyatt, T. (1996). School effectiveness research: Dead end, damp squib or smouldering fuse? Issues in Educational Research, 6 (1), 79- 112.