@article {1973191,
	title = {Can Intermediary-based Science Standards Crosswalking Work? Some Evidence from Mining the Standard Alignment Tool (SAT)},
	journal = {Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology},
	volume = {63},
	year = {2012},
	month = {2012},
	pages = {1843-1858},
	abstract = {We explore the feasibility of intermediary-based crosswalking and alignment of K-12 science education standards. With increasing availability of K-12 science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) digital library content, alignment of that content with educational standards is a significant and continuous challenge. Whereas direct, one-to-one alignment of standards is preferable but currently unsustainable in its resource demands, less resource-intensive intermediary-based alignment offers an interesting alternative. But will it work? We present the results from an experiment in which the machine-based Standard Alignment Tool (SAT) {\textemdash}incorporated in the National Science Digital Library (NSDL){\textemdash} was used to collect over half a million direct alignments between standards from different standard-authoring bodies. These were then used to compute intermediary-based alignments derived from the well-known AAAS Project 2061 Benchmarks and NSES standards. Results show strong variation among authoring bodies in their success to crosswalk with best results for those who modeled their standards on the intermediaries. Results furthermore show a strong inverse relationship between recall and precision when both intermediates where involved in the crosswalking.},
	keywords = {Accounting, BIS},
	url = {http://people.oregonstate.edu/~marshaby/Papers/ReitsmaMarshallChart_StandardsCrosswalking_JASIST2012.pdf},
	author = {Reitsma,Reindert and Marshall,Byron and Chart,Trevor}
}
@article {1974506,
	title = {Comparison of Human and Machine-based Educational Standard Assignment Networks},
	journal = {International Journal on Digital Libraries},
	volume = {11},
	year = {2011},
	month = {2011},
	pages = {209-223},
	abstract = {Increasing availability of digital libraries of K-12 curriculum resources, coupled with an increased emphasis on standard-based teaching necessitates assignment of the standards to the available curriculum. Since such assignment is a laborious and ongoing task, machine-based standard assignment tools have been under development for some time. Unfortunately, data on the performance of these machine-based classifiers are mostly lacking. In this paper we explore network modeling and layout to gain insight into the differences between human assignments and those by one of the better known machine-based classifiers. To build the standard assignment networks we define standards to be linked if they are jointly assigned to the same curricular item. Comparative analysis of the mapped networks shows that that unlike the machine-based assignment maps, the human-based maps elegantly reflect the rationales and principles of the assignment; i.e., clusters of standards separate along lines of lesson content and pedagogical principles. In addition, comparison of the maps clearly indicates that the machine classifier has trouble assigning so-called {\textquoteright}method{\textquoteright} standards.},
	keywords = {BIS},
	author = {Reitsma,Reindert and Diekema,Anne R}
}
@article {1974561,
	title = {Construction Kit for Visual Programming of River-Basin Models},
	journal = {Journal of Computing in Civil Engineering},
	volume = {8},
	year = {1994},
	month = {1994},
	pages = {378-384},
	keywords = {BIS},
	author = {Reitsma,Reindert and Sautins,A. and Wehrend,S.}
}
@article {1974571,
	title = {A Causal Typology of Migration: The Role of Commuting. Regional Studies},
	journal = {Regional Studies},
	volume = {22},
	year = {1988},
	month = {1988},
	pages = {331-340},
	keywords = {BIS},
	author = {Reitsma,Reindert and Vergoossen,A.}
}
