• Augustine, N. R. (2005). Rising above the gathering storm: Energizing and employing America for a brighter economic future. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
• Ball, D. L., & Cohen, D. K. (1999). Developing practice, developing practitioners: Toward a practice-based theory of professional education. In G. Sykes & L. Darling-Hammond (Eds.), Teaching as the learning profession: Handbook of policy and practice (pp. 3-32). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
• Berman, P., & McLaughlin, M. W. (1976). Implementation of educational innovation. The Educational Forum, 40(3), 345-370.
• Berman, P., & McLaughlin, M. W. (1978). Federal programs supporting educational change: Implementing and sustaining innovations (Vol. VIII). Santa Monica, CA: Rand Corp.
• Birman, B. F., Desimone, L., Porter, A. C., & Garet, M. S. (2000). Designing professional development that works. Educational Leadership, 57(8), 28-33.
• Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. R. (Eds.). (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school: Expanded edition. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
• Brewer, M. B. (2000). Research design and issues of validity. In H. T. Reis & C. M. Judd (Eds.), Handbook of research methods in social and personality psychology (pp. 3-16). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
• Bruschi, B. A., & Anderson, B. T. (1994, February). Gender and ethnic differences in science achievement of nine-, thirteen-, and seventeen-year-old students. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Eastern Educational Research Association, Sarasota, FL.
• Campbell, D. T. (1957). Factors relevant to the validity of experiments in social settings. Psychological Bulletin, 54(4), 297.
• Capraro, R. M., Capraro, M. M., & Morgan, J. (2013). Project based learning: An integrated science technology engineering and mathematics (STEM) approach (2nd edition). Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense Publishers.
• Capraro, M. M., Capraro, R. M., & Oner, A. T. (2011, November). Observations of STEM PBL teachers and their student scores. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the School Science and Mathematics Association, Colorado Springs, CO.
• Capraro, R. M., & Slough, S. W. (2008). Project based learning: An integrated science technology engineering and mathematics (STEM) approach. Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense Publishers.
• Carini, R. M., Kuh, G. D., & Klein, S. P. (2006). Student engagement and student learning: Testing the linkages. Research in Higher Education, 47(1), 1-32.
• Dusenbury, L., Brannigan, R., Falco, M., & Hansen, W. B. (2003). A review of research on fidelity of implementation: Implications for drug abuse prevention in school settings. Health Education Research, 18(2), 237-256.
• Erdogan, N., & Bozeman, D. (2015). Models of project-based learning for the 21st century. In A. Sahin (Ed.), A practice-based model of STEM teaching: STEM students on the stage (S.0.S.) (p. 31-42). Netherlands: Sense Publishers.
• Erdogan, N., Corlu, M. S., & Capraro, R. M. (2013). Defining innovation literacy: Do robotics programs help students develop innovation literacy skills? International Online Journal of Educational Sciences, 5(1), 1-9.
• Erdogan, N., & Stuessy, C. L. (2015a). Modeling successful STEM high schools in the United States: An ecology framework. International Journal of Education in Mathematics, Science and Technology, 3(1), 77-92.
• Erdogan, N., & Stuessy, C. L. (2015b). Examining inclusive STEM schools’ role in the college and career readiness of students in the United States: A multi-group analysis of students’ achievement outcomes. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 15(6), 1517-1529. DOI: 10.12738/estp.2016.1.0072
• Fan, X. (2001). Parental involvement and students’ academic achievement: A growth modeling analysis. The Journal of Experimental Education, 70, 27-61.
• Fan, X. (2003). Power of latent growth modeling for detecting group differences in linear growth trajectory parameters. Structural Equation Modeling, 10, 380-400.
• Feiman-Nemser, S. (2001). From preparation to practice: Designing a continuum to strengthen and sustain teaching. The Teachers College Record, 103(6), 1013-1055.
• Fleischman, H. L., Hopstock, P. J., Pelczar, M. P., & Shelley, B. E. (2010). Highlights from PISA 2009: Performance of U.S. 15-year-old students in reading, mathematics, and science literacy in an international context (NCES 2011-004). U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
• Fullan, M. (2005). Leadership & sustainability: System thinkers in action. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
• Gearing, R. E., El-Bassel, N., Ghesquiere, A., Baldwin, S., Gillies, J., & Ngeow, E. (2011). Major ingredients of fidelity: A review and scientific guide to improving quality of intervention research implementation. Clinical Psychology Review, 31(1), 79-88.
• Gersten, R., Chard, D., & Baker, S. (2000). Factors enhancing sustained use of research-based instructional practices. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 33(5), 445-457.
• Guskey, T. R. (1986). Staff development and the process of teacher change. Educational Researcher, 15(5), 5-12.
• Guskey, T. R. (2002). Professional development and teacher change. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 8(3), 381-391.
• Han, S., Capraro, R., & Capraro, M. M. (2015). How science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) project-based learning (PBL) affects high, middle, and low achievers differently: The impact of student factors on achievement. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 13(5), 1089-1113.
• Han, S., Yalvac, B., Capraro, M. M., & Capraro, R. M. (2015). In-service teachers’ implementation and understanding of STEM project based learning. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 11(1), 63-76.
• Heubert, J. P., & Hauser, R. M. (Eds.). (1998). High stakes: Testing for tracking, promotion, and graduation. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
• Huberman, A. M., & Miles, M. B. (1984). Innovation up close: How school improvement works. New York: Plenum Press.
• Johnson, C. C., Kahle, J. B., & Fargo, J. D. (2006). A study of the effect of sustained, whole-school professional development on student achievement in science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44(6), 775-786.
• Joint Economic Committee Chairman’s Staff Senator Bob Casey, Chairman. (2012). STEM Education: Preparing for the jobs of the future. U.S. Congress Joint Economic Committee, Washington, DC.
• Jones, B. F., Rasmussen, C. M., & Moffitt, M. C. (1997). Real-life problem solving: A collaborative approach to interdisciplinary learning. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
• Kennedy, M. M. (1991). Implications for teaching. In E. A. Ramp & C. S. Pederson (Eds.), Follow through: Program and policy issues (pp. 57-71). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Education Research and Improvement.
• Kline, R. B. (2011). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. New York: The Guilford Press.
• Kuh, G. D. (2001). Assessing what really matters to student learning inside the national survey of student engagement. Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning, 33(3), 10-17.
• Linnenbrink, E. A., & Pintrich, P. R. (2003). The role of self-efficacy beliefs in student engagement and learning in the classroom. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 19(2), 119-137.
• Little, J. W. (1993). Teachers’ professional development in a climate of educational reform. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 15(2), 129-151.
• McLaughlin, M. W. (1990). The Rand change agent study revisited: Macro perspectives and micro realities. Educational Researcher, 19(9), 11-16.
• McLaughlin, M. W. (1994). Strategic sites for teachers’ professional development. In P. P. Grimmett & J. Neufeld (Eds.), Teacher development and the struggle for authenticity: Professional growth and restructuring in the context of change (pp. 31-51). New York: Teachers College Press.
• Muller, P. A., Stage, F. K., & Kinzie, J. (2001). Science achievement growth trajectories: Understanding factors related to gender and racial–ethnic differences in precollege science achievement. American Educational Research Journal, 38(4), 981-1012.
• Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (1998-2012). Mplus user’s guide (7th ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén.
• National Commission on Teaching and America’s Future. (1996). What matters most: Teaching for America’s future. New York: Author.
• National Science Board. (2012). Science and engineering indicators 2012 (NSB 12-01). Arlington, VA: National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics.
• National Research Council. (2011). Successful K-12 STEM education: Identifying effective approaches in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. Committee on Highly Successful Science Programs for K-12 Science Education. Board on Science Education and Board on Testing and Assessment, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
• Navruz, B., Erdogan, N., Bicer, A., Capraro, R. M., & Capraro, M. M. (2014). Would a STEM school ‘by any other name smell as sweet’?. International Journal of Contemporary Educational Research, 1(2), 67-75.
• O’Donnell, C. L. (2008). Defining, conceptualizing, and measuring fidelity of implementation and its relationship to outcomes in K–12 curriculum intervention research. Review of Educational Research, 78(1), 33-84.
• Paik, S., Zhang, M., Lundeberg, M. A., Eberhardt, J., Shin, T. S., & Zhang, T. (2011). Supporting science teachers in alignment with state curriculum standards through professional development: Teachers’ preparedness, expectations, and their fulfillment. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 20(4), 422-434.
• Penuel, W. R., & Means, B. (2004). Implementation variation and fidelity in an inquiry science program: Analysis of GLOBE data reporting patterns. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(3), 294-315.
• Provasnik, S., Kastberg, D., Ferraro, D., Lemanski, N., Roey, S., & Jenkins, F. (2012). Highlights from TIMSS 2011: Mathematics and science achievement of U.S. fourth- and eighth-grade students in an international context (NCES 2013-009). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education.
• Rampey, B. D., Dion, G. S., & Donahue, P. L. (2009). NAEP 2008: Trends in Academic Progress (NCES 2009-479). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, and U.S. Department of Education.
• Schmidt, W. H. (2011, May). STEM reform: Which way to go? Paper prepared for the National Academies Board on Science Education and Board on Testing and Assessment for “Highly Successful STEM Schools or Programs for K-12 STEM Education: A Workshop,” Washington, DC.
• Slough, S. W., & Milam, J. O. (2008). Theoretical framework for STEM project-based learning. In R. M. Capraro & S. W. Slough (Eds.), Project based learning: An integrated science technology engineering and mathematics (STEM) approach, (pp. 19-37). Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense Publishers.
• Smylie, M. A. (1988). The enhancement function of staff development: Organizational and psychological antecedents to individual teacher change. American Educational Research Journal, 25(1), 1-30.
• Stearns, L. M., Morgan, J., Capraro, M. M., & Capraro, R. M. (2012). A teacher observation instrument for PBL classroom instruction. Journal of STEM Education: Innovations and Research, 13(3), 7-16.
• Supovitz, J. A., & Turner, H. M. (2000). The effects of professional development on science teaching practices and classroom culture. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(9), 963–980.
• Talbot-Smith, M., Abell, S. K., Appleton, K., & Hanuscin, D. L. (Eds.). (2013). Handbook of research on science education. New York: Routledge.
• Texas Education Agency. (2014). Texas assessment of knowledge and skills (TAKS) resources. Retrieved from http://www.tea.state.tx.us/student.assessment/taks/
• Thomas, J. W., Mergendoller, J. R., & Michaelson, A. (1999). Project-based learning: A handbook for middle and high school teachers. Novato, CA: The Buck Institute for Education.
• Thompson, B. (1984). Canonical correlation analysis: Uses and interpretation. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
• Thompson, B. (2006). Foundations of behavioral statistics: An insight based approach. New York, NY: The Guilford Press.
• Weinburgh, M. (1995). Gender differences in student attitudes toward science: A metaanalysis of the literature from 1970 to 1991. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 32(4), 387-398.

APA

Erdogan, N., Navruz, B., Younes, R., & Capraro, R. M. (2016). Viewing How STEM Project-Based Learning Influences Students’ Science Achievement Through the Implementation Lens: A Latent Growth Modeling. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 12(8), 2139-2154. https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2016.1294a

Vancouver

Erdogan N, Navruz B, Younes R, Capraro RM. Viewing How STEM Project-Based Learning Influences Students’ Science Achievement Through the Implementation Lens: A Latent Growth Modeling. EURASIA J Math Sci Tech Ed. 2016;12(8):2139-54. https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2016.1294a

AMA

Erdogan N, Navruz B, Younes R, Capraro RM. Viewing How STEM Project-Based Learning Influences Students’ Science Achievement Through the Implementation Lens: A Latent Growth Modeling. EURASIA J Math Sci Tech Ed. 2016;12(8), 2139-2154. https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2016.1294a

Chicago

Erdogan, Niyazi, Bilgin Navruz, Rayya Younes, and Robert M. Capraro. "Viewing How STEM Project-Based Learning Influences Students’ Science Achievement Through the Implementation Lens: A Latent Growth Modeling". Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education 2016 12 no. 8 (2016): 2139-2154. https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2016.1294a

Harvard

Erdogan, N., Navruz, B., Younes, R., and Capraro, R. M. (2016). Viewing How STEM Project-Based Learning Influences Students’ Science Achievement Through the Implementation Lens: A Latent Growth Modeling. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 12(8), pp. 2139-2154. https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2016.1294a

MLA

Erdogan, Niyazi et al. "Viewing How STEM Project-Based Learning Influences Students’ Science Achievement Through the Implementation Lens: A Latent Growth Modeling". Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, vol. 12, no. 8, 2016, pp. 2139-2154. https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2016.1294a