Porter, A. C., Chester, M. D., & Schlesinger, M. D. (2004, June). Framework for an effective assessment and accountability program: The Philadelphia example. Teachers College Press 106(6), 1358-1400.

Porter, A., & Chester, M. (2002). Building a high-quality assessment and accountability program: The Philadelphia example. In D. Ravitch (Ed.), Brookings papers on education policy 2002 (pp. 285-337). Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.

Porter, A. C., Youngs, P., & Odden, A. (2001). Advances in teacher assessments and their uses. In V. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (4th edition) (pp. 259-297). Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.

Porter, A. (2000, December). Doing high-stakes assessment right. The School Administrator 11(57), 28-31.

Porter, A. C. (1998). Dilemmas in assessing academic achievement. In N. M. Lambert & B. L. McCombs, How students learn: Reforming schools through learner-centered education (pp. 339-350). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

Porter, A. C. (1991). Assessing national goals: Some measurement dilemmas. In The assessment of national educational goals: Proceedings of the 1990 ETS Invitational Conference (pp. 21-42). Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.

Porter, A. (1988). Understanding teaching: A model for assessment. Journal of Teacher Education 39(4), 2-7. (Also reprinted in Pedagogicka Revue 1991 53(1), 3-14; Occasional Paper No. 124, East Lansing: Michigan State University, Institute for Research on Teaching.)

Porter, A. C., & Freeman, D. J. (1986). Professional orientations: An essential domain for teacher testing. Journal of Negro Education 55, 284-292.

Porter, A. C. (1983). The role of testing in effective schools. American Education 19, 25-28.

Schmidt, W. H., Porter, A. C., Schwille, J. R., Floden, R. E., & Freeman, D. J. (1983). Validity as a variable: Can the same certification test be valid for all students? In G. F. Madaus (Ed.), The courts, validity, and minimum competency testing (pp. 75-115). Boston: Kluwer-Nijhoff. (Also Occasional Paper No. 53, East Lansing, MI: Michigan State University, Institute for Research on Teaching, 1983.)

Freeman, D. J., Kuhs, T. M., Knappen, L., & Porter, A. C. (1982). A closer look at standardized tests. The Arithmetic Teacher 29, 50-54. (Also Research Series No. 48, East Lansing: Michigan State University, Institute for Research on Teaching, 1979.)

Floden, R. E., Porter, A. C., Schmidt, W. H., & Freeman, D. (1980). Don’t they all measure the same thing? Consequences of standardized test selection. In E. L. Baker & E. S. Quellmalz (Eds.), Educational testing and evaluation: Design, analysis and policy. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. (Also Research Series No. 25, East Lansing: Michigan State University, Institute for Research on Teaching, 1978.)

Porter, A. C. (1973, February). Some comments on “Empirical criteria for distinguishing and validating aptitude and achievement measures,” by George Burket and “Fitting a model of school learning to aptitude and achievement data over grade levels,” by John Carroll. In R. Green (Ed.), The aptitude achievement distinction. Monterey, CA: Proceedings of the Second CTB/McGraw Hill Conference in Educational Measurement.

Porter, R. B., & Porter, A. C. (1969). Psychological evaluation of the hearing handicapped. In J. Griffith (Ed.), Persons with hearing loss. Springfield: Charles C. Thomas Publishers.

Porter, A.C. & Polikoff, M.S. (2007). NCLB: State Interpretations, Early Effects, and Suggestions for Reauthorization. Social Policy Report, Vol. XXI (4)

Porter, A. C. (2007). In A. Gamoran (Ed.). Lessons learned from standards-based reform: Implications for the reauthorization of NCLB. Standards-based Reform and the Poverty Gap: Lessons for "No Child Left Behind." Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.

Porter, A.C., Linn, R.L., & Trimble C.S. (2005, Winter). The effects of state decisions about NCLB adequate yearly progress targets. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, Vol. 24(4), 32-39.

Porter, A. C. (2005). Prospects for school reform and closing the achievement gap. In C.A. Dwyer (Ed.), Measurement and research in the accountability era(pp. 59-95). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Porter, A. C. (2005). Getting the content of instruction right. Orbit 35(3), 11-13.

Porter, A. C. (1998). The effects of upgrading policies on high school mathematics and science. In D. Ravitch (Ed.), Brookings papers on education policy 1998 (pp. 123-172). Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.

Gamoran, A., Porter, A. C., Smithson, J., & White, P. A. (1997, Winter). Upgrading high school mathematics instruction: Improving learning opportunities for low-achieving, low-income youth. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis 19(4), 325-338.

White, P. A., Gamoran, A., Smithson, J., & Porter, A. C. (1996, Winter). Upgrading the high school math curriculum: Math course-taking patterns in seven high schools in California and New York. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis 18(4), 285-307.

Archbald, D. A., & Porter, A. C. (1994). Curriculum control and teachers’ perceptions of autonomy and satisfaction. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis 16(1), 21-39.

Porter, A. C. (1994). National equity and school autonomy. Educational Policy 8(4), 489-500.

Porter, A. C. (1994). National standards and school improvement in the 1990s: Issues and promise. American Journal of Education 102(4), 421-449.

Porter, A. C., Smithson, J., & Osthoff, E. (1994). Standard setting as a strategy for upgrading high school mathematics and science. In R. F. Elmore & S. H. Fuhrman (Eds), The governance of curriculum: 1994 yearbook of the Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development (pp. 138-166). Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Porter, A. C., Archbald, D. A., & Tyree, A. K., Jr. (1991). Reforming the curriculum: Will empowerment policies replace control? In S. Fuhrman & B. Malen (Eds.), The politics of curriculum and testing: The 1990 yearbook of the Politics of Education Associations (pp. 11-36). London: Taylor & Francis Ltd.

Freeman, D. T., & Porter, A. C. (1989). Do textbooks dictate the content of mathematics instruction in elementary schools? American Educational Research Journal 26(3), 343-356. (Also Research Series No. 189, East Lansing: Michigan State University, Institute for Research on Teaching.)

Porter, A. C. (1989). External standards and good teaching: The pros and cons of telling teachers what to do. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis 11(4), 343-356. (Also Occasional Paper No. 126, East Lansing: Michigan State University, Institute for Research on Teaching.)

Porter, A., Floden, R., Freeman, D., Schmidt, W., & Schwille, J. (1988). Content determinants in elementary school mathematics. In D. A. Grouws & T. J. Cooney (Eds.), Perspectives on research on effective mathematical teaching (pp. 96-113). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. (Also Research Series 179, East Lansing: Michigan State University, Institute for (Research on Teaching.)

Floden, R. E., Porter, A. C., Alford, L. M., Freeman, D. T., Irwin, S., Schmidt, W. H., & Schwille, J. R. (1988). Instructional leadership at the district level: A closer look at autonomy and control. Educational Administration Quarterly 24(2), 96-124. (Also Research Series No. 182, East Lansing: Michigan State University, Institute for Research on Teaching.)

Schwille, J., Porter, A., Alford, L., Floden, R., Freeman, D., Irwin, S., & Schmidt, W. (1988). State policy and the control of curriculum decisions. Educational Policy 2(1), 29-50. (Also Research Series No. 173, East Lansing: Michigan State University, Institute for Research on Teaching, 1986.)

Schmidt, W. H., Porter, A. C., Floden, R. E., Freeman, D. T., & Schwille, J. R. (1987). Four patterns of teacher content decision making. Journal of Curriculum Studies 19(5), 439-455.

Alford, A., & Porter, A. (1986). Research report: Alignments between content of textbooks and tests in mathematics. Arithmetic Teacher 34(3), 25.

Freeman, D., Porter, A., Alford, L., Floden, R., Irwin, S., Schmidt, W., & Schwille, J. (1986). Deciding what to teach in elementary school mathematics: Interplay between external policies and teachers’ convictions. Proceedings of the 8th annual meeting of the North American Chapter of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education. East Lansing: Michigan State University.

Porter, A. C. (1986). Can a book be the curriculum? In Caroline B. Cody (Ed.), A policymaker’s guide to textbook selection. VA: National Association of State Boards of Education.

Porter, A. C. (1986). What next? More leverage for teachers. (Edited by Joslyn Green). Contributor via interview; remarks transcribed and grouped with comments of other interviews. Denver, CO: Education Commission of the States.

Kuhs, T., Porter, A., Floden, R., Freeman, D., Schmidt, W., & Schwille, J. (1985). Differences among teachers in their use of curriculum-embedded tests. Elementary School Journal 86(2), 141-154. (Also Research Series No. 133, East Lansing: Michigan State University, Institute for Research on Teaching.)

Schwille, J. R., Porter, A. C., Belli, G., Floden, R. E., Freeman, D. J., Knappen, L. B., Kuhs, T. M., & Schmidt, W. H. (1983). Teachers as policy brokers in the content of elementary school mathematics. In L. Shulman & G. Sykes (Eds.), Handbook on teaching and policy (pp. 370-391). New York: Longman. (Also Research Series No. 113, East Lansing, MI: Michigan State University, Institute for Research on Teaching, 1983.)

Freeman, D. J., Belli, G. M., Porter, A. C., Floden, R. E., Schmidt, W. H., & Schwille, J. R. (1983). The influence of different styles of textbook use on instructional validity of standardized tests. Journal of Educational Measurement 20, 259-270. (Also Research Series No. 107, East Lansing: Michigan State University, Institute for Research on Teaching, 1983.)

Freeman, D. J., Kuhs, T. M., Porter, A. C., Floden, R. E., Schmidt, W. H., & Schwille, J. R. (1983). Do textbooks and tests define a national curriculum in elementary school mathematics? Elementary School Journal 83, 501-513. (Reprinted in The Education Digest, 1984, March, 47-49.)

Floden, R. E., Porter, A. C., Schmidt, W. H., Freeman, D. J., & Schwille, J. R. (1981). Responses to curriculum pressures: A policy capturing study of teacher decisions about content. Journal of Educational Psychology 73, 129-141. (Also Research Series No. 74, East Lansing: Michigan State University, Institute for Research on Teaching, 1980.)

Porter, A. C., Floden, R. E., Freeman, D. J., Kuhs, T., Schmidt, W. H., & Schwille, J. R. (1981). The content of elementary school mathematics in the United States. Proceedings of the Fourth International Congress on Mathematics Education, August 14, 1980. Berkeley, CA: University of California.

Schwille, J. R., Porter, A. C., & Gant, M. (1980). Content decision-making and the politics of education. Educational Administration Quarterly 16, 21-40. (Also Research Series No. 52, East Lansing: Michigan State University, Institute for Research on Teaching, 1979.)

Porter, A. C. (2005). Prospects for school reform and closing the achievement gap. In C.A. Dwyer (Ed.), Measurement and research in the accountability era (pp. 59-95). Mahway, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Porter, A. C. (2004, November). Twelfth grade NAEP as an indicator of college readiness: Validity issues and methodological options. Paper written for the National Assessment Governing Board.

Porter, A. C. (2001, Summer). Invited commentary: Uses and limitations of indicator data. Education Statistics Quarterly 3(2), 14-16.

Porter, A. C. (1995). The uses and misuses of opportunity-to-learn standards. In D. Ravitch (Ed.), Debating the future of American schools (pp. 40-65). Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution.

Porter, A. C. (1995). The uses and misuses of opportunity-to-learn standards. Educational Researcher 24(1), 21-27.

Porter, A. C. (1995). Guaranteeing good instruction. In P. Brown (Ed.), Strategies for linking school finance and students’ opportunity to learn (pp. 36-41). Washington, DC: National Governors’ Association.

Porter, A. C. (1994). Defining and measuring opportunity to learn. In S. L. Traiman (Ed.), The debate on opportunity-to-learn standards. Washington, DC: National Governors’ Association.

Porter, A. C. (1993). School delivery standards. Educational Researcher 22(5), 24-30. (Reprinted in Network News & Views 12(8), August 1993, 63-69 and in S. L. Traiman (Ed.), (1994), The debate on opportunity-to-learn standards. Washington, DC: National Governors’ Association.)

Porter, A. C. (1991). Creating a system of school process indicators. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis 13(1), 13-29.

Porter, A. C. (1988). Indicators: Objective data or political tool?

Phi Delta Kappan 67(9), 503-508.

Porter, A.C., Polikoff, M.S., Zeidner, T., & Smithson J. (2008). The Quality of Content Analyses of State Student Achievement Tests and Content Standards. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 27(4), 2-14.

Porter, A.C., Smithson, J.L., Blank, R. & Zeidner, T. (2007). Alignment as a Teacher Variable. Applied Measurement in Education, Vol. 20 (1) 27-51

Porter, A. C. & Polikoff, M. (in press). Thomas L. Good (Ed.), National curriculum. 21st Century Education: A Reference Handbook. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Porter, A. C. (2006). Curriculum assessment. In J. L. Green, G. Camilli, & P. B. Elmore (Eds.), Complementary methods for research in education (3rd edition). Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.

Porter, A. C., & Smithson, J. L. (2004). From policy to practice: The evolution of one approach to describing and using curriculum data. In M. Wilson (Ed.), Towards coherence between classroom assessment and accountability, NSSE Yearbook 103:2. Chicago, IL: The National Society for the Study of Education.

Porter, A. C. (2002, October). Measuring the content of instruction: Uses in research and practice. Educational Researcher 31(7), 3-14.

Porter, A. C., & Smithson, J. L. (2001). Are content standards being implemented in the classroom? A methodology and some tentative answers. In S. H. Fuhrman (Ed.), From the capitol to the classroom: Standards-based reform in the states—One hundredth yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education, Part II (pp. 60-80). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Porter, A., & Smithson, J. (2001). Defining, developing, and using curriculum indicators. Research Report Series RR-048. Philadelphia, PA: Consortium for Policy Research in Education, University of Pennsylvania.

Blank, R. K., Porter, A., & Smithson, J. (2001, July). New tools for analyzing teaching, curriculum and standards in mathematics and science. Results from Survey of Enacted Curriculum Project. (Final Report to the National Science Foundation on Contract No. REC98-03080). Washington, DC: Council of Chief State School Officers.

Porter, A. C., & Smithson, J. L. (1995, November; 2nd edition 1997, April). Enacted curriculum survey items catalogue: Middle school and high school mathematics and science. Madison: Wisconsin Center for Education Research, University of Wisconsin-Madison.

Porter, A. C. (1989). A curriculum out of balance : The case of elementary school mathematics. Educational Researcher 18(5), 9-15. (Also Research Series No. 191, East Lansing: Michigan State University, Institute for Research on Teaching.)

Porter, A.C., Smithson, J.L., Blank, R. & Zeidner, T. (2007). Alignment as a Teacher Variable. Applied Measurement in Education, Vol. 20 (1) 27-51

Blank, R.K,, Smithson, J., Porter, A.C., Nunnaley, D., Osthoff, E. (2006, Spring). Improving Instruction through Schoolwide Professional Development: Effects of the Data-on-Enacted-Curriculum Model. ERS Spectrum, Journal of Research and Information, Vol. 24(2), 9-23.

Porter, A. C., Garet, M. S., Desimone, L. M., & Birman, B. F. (2003, Spring). Providing effective professional development: Lessons from the Eisenhower Program. Science Educator 12(1), 23-40.

Desimone, L., Porter, A. C., Birman, B. F., Garet, M. S., & Suk Yoon, K. (2002, October). How do district management and implementation strategies relate to the quality of the professional development that districts provide to teachers? Teachers College Record 104(7), 1265-1312.

Desimone, L., Porter, A. C., Garet, M., Suk Yoon, K., & Birman, B. (2002, Summer). Effects of professional development on teachers' instruction: Results from a three-year longitudinal study. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis 24(2), 81-112.

Garet, M. S., Porter, A. C., Desimone, L., Birman, B. F., & Yoon, K. S. (2001, Winter). What makes professional development effective? Results from a national sample of teachers. American Educational Research Journal 38(4), 915-945.

Birman, B., Desimone, L., Porter, A. C., & Garet, M. (2000). Designing professional development that works. Educational Leadership 57(8), 28-33.

Porter, A. C., Garet, M. S., Desimone, L., Yoon, K. S., & Birman, B. F. (2000, October). Does professional development change teaching practice? Results from a three-year study. (Report to the U.S. Department of Education, Office of the Under Secretary on Contract No. EA97001001 to the American Institutes for Research). Washington, DC: Pelavin Research Center.

Garet, M. S., Birman, B. F., Porter, A. C., Desimone, L., & Herman, R. (with K. S. Yoon). (1999,October). Designing effective professional development: Lessons from the Eisenhower Program. (Report to the U.S. Department of Education, Office of the Under Secretary on Contract No. EA97001001 to the American Institutes for Research). Washington, D.C.: Pelavin Research Center.

Porter, A. C. (1991). Good teaching of worthwhile mathematics to disadvantaged students. In M. S. Knapp & P. M. Shields (Eds.), Better schooling for the children of poverty: Alternatives to conventional wisdom (pp. 125-148). Berkeley, CA: McCutchan Publishing Corporation.

Porter, A. & Brophy, J. (1988). Good teaching: Insights from the work of the Institute for Research on Teaching. Educational Leadership 45(8), 75-84. (Also Occasional Paper No. 114, East Lansing: Michigan State University, Institute for Research on Teaching, 1987; a chapter in R. S. Brandt (Ed.), Readings on research from educational leadership (pp. 217-226). Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development; a chapter in Readings from educational leadership: Coaching and staff development (pp. 66-75), a companion volume edited by R. S. Brandt for ASCD.

Porter, A. C. (1986). From research on teaching to staff development: A difficult step. Elementary School Journal 87(2), 159-164.

Porter, A.C., Linn, R.L., & Trimble C.S. (2005, Winter). The effects of state decisions about NCLB adequate yearly progress targets. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, Vol. 24(4), 32-39.

Porter, A. C., Blank, R., Smithson, J., & Osthoff, E. (2005, May). Place-based randomized trials to test the effects on instructional practices of a mathematics/science professional development program for teachers. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 599, 147-175.

Birman, B. F., & Porter, A. C. (2002). Evaluating education funding streams. Peabody Journal of Education.

Porter, A. C., & Gamoran, A. (2002). Progress and challenges for large-scale studies. In A. C. Porter & A. Gamoran (Eds.), Methodological advances in large-scale cross-national education surveys. Washington, DC: National Research Council.

Porter, A. C. (1997). Comparative experiments in educational research. In R. Jaeger (Ed.), Complementary methods for research in education (2nd edition) (pp. 523-551). Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association. (Revised chapter and reading from 1998 edition.)

Porter, A. C., & Raudenbush, S. W. (1987). Analysis of covariance: Its model and use in psychological research. Journal of Counseling Psychology 34, 383-392.

Levine, D. B. (Ed.). (1986). Creating a Center for Education Statistics: A time for action. Published for the Panel to Evaluate the National Center for Educational Statistics by National Academy Press, Washington, DC(A. Porter, panel member).

Blumberg, C. J., & Porter, A. C. (1983). Analyzing quasi-experiments: Some implications of assuming continuous growth models. The Journal of Experimental Education 31, 150-159.

Olejnik, S. F., & Porter, A. C. (1981). Bias and mean square errors of estimation as criteria for evaluating competing analysis strategies in quasi-experiments. Journal of Educational Statistics 6, 33-53.

Porter, A. C., Schmidt, W. H., Floden, R. E., & Freeman, D. J. (1978, Fall). Practical significance in program evaluation. American Educational Research Journal 15(4), 529-539. (Also Research Series No. 2, East Lansing: Michigan State University, Institute for Research on Teaching, 1978.)

Porter, A. C., & Chibucos, T. R. (1975, Winter). Common problems of design and analysis in evaluative research. Sociological Methods and Research.

Porter, A. C. (1976). Small scale evaluation. In C. Abt (Ed.), The evaluation of social programs. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

Porter, A. C., & Chibucos, T. R. (1974). Selecting analysis strategies. In G. Borich (Ed.), Evaluating educational programs and products. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Press.

Stanley, J. C., & Porter, A. C. (1972). ANOVA analysis of unweighted and weighted Fisher z’s. Social Science Research 1.

Murphy, J., Elliot, S.N., Goldring, E., & Porter, A.C. (in press). M. Brundrett & M. Crawford (Eds.) Leaders for productive schools. Developing School Leaders: An International Perspective. London: Routledge.

Goldring, E., Cravens, X., Murphy, J., Porter, A., Elliott, S., & Carson, B. (in press). The Evaluation of Principals: What and How do States and Urban Districts Assess Leadership? Elementary School Journal.

Murphy, J., Goldring, E., Cravens, X., Elliott, S.N., & Porter, A.C. (In Press). The Vanderbilt Assessment of Leadership in Education: Measuring learning-centered leadership. East China Normal University Journal.

Goldring, E., Porter, A.C., Murphy, J., Elliott, S., Cravens, X. (2009). Assessing Learning-centered Leadership: Connections to Research, Professional Standards, and Current Practices. Leadership and Policy in Schools.

Murphy, J., Elliott, S.N., Goldring, E. & Porter, A.C. (2007, April). Leadership for learning: A research-based model and taxonomy of behaviors. School Leadership and Management, Vol. 27(2), 179-201.