ALLAL, L. Vers un élargissement de la pédagogie de maîtrise: processus de régulation interactive, rétroactive et proactive. In: HUBERMAN, M. (ed.) Assurer la réussite des apprentissages scolaire ?Les propositions de la pédagogie de maîtrise. Neuchâtel: Delachaux & Niestlé, 1988. p. 86-126.
ALLAL, L. Vers une pratique de l'évaluation formative. Bruxelles: De Boeck, 1991.
ASTOLFI, J. P.; DEVELAY, M. La Didactique des sciences. Paris: PUF 1991. (Coll.: Que saisje? 2448)
BACHELARD, G. La Formation de l'esprit scientifique. Paris: Vrin, 1938.
BANGERT-DROWNS, R. L.; KULIK, J. A.; KULIK, C.-L. C. Effects of frequent classroom testing. Journal of Education Research, v.85, n.2, p.89-99, nov./dec. 1991.
BANGERT-DROWNS, R. L.; KULIK, J. A.; KULIK, C.-L. C. Individualized suystems of instruction in secondary schools. Bruxeles: De Boeck, 1983.
BIRZEA, C. La Pédagogie du succés. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 1982.
BLESS, G.; BONVIN, P.; SCHÜPBACH, M. Le Redoublement scolaire: ses déterminants, son efficacité, ses conséquences, Berne: Haupt, 2005.
BLOOM, B. S. Caractéristiques individuelles et apprentissages scolaires. Bruxelles: Labor: Paris: Nathan, 1979.
BURNS, R. B, How time is used in elementary schools: the activity structure of classrooms. In: ANDERSON, L. W. (ed.) Time and school learning: theory, research and practice, London, Canberra: Croom Helm, 1984, p.91-128.
CARDINET, J. Un point de vue constructiviste sur la pédagogie de maîtrise. In: HUBERMAN, M. (ed.) Assurer la réussite des apprentissages scolaires? Les propositions de la pédagogie de maîtrise. Neuchâtel: Delachaux & Niestlé, 1988. p. 155-196.
CLAPARÈDE, E. L'Ecole sur mesure. Lausanne: Payot, 1920.
CRAHAY, M. L'Ecole peut-elle être juste et efficace? De l'égalité des chances à l'égalité des acquis. Bruxelles: De Boeck, 2000. (Coll.: Pédagogies en développement)
CRAHAY, M. Peut-on lutter contre l'échec scolaire? 2e éd. rev. et aug. Bruxelles: De Boeck, 2003.
CRAHAY, M. Psychologie de l'éducation(ler cycle). Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 1999.
DELHAXHE, A. Le Temps comme unité d'analyse dans la recherche sur l'enseignement, Revue Française de Pédagogie. n. 118, p. 107-125, 1997.
DUPRIEZ, V: DRAELANTS, H. Classes homogènes versus classes hétérogènes: les apports de la recherche à l'analyse de la problématique. Revue Française de Pédagogie, n. 148, p. 145-165, 2004.
FISHER, C. W. et al. Teaching and learning in elementary schools: a summary of the BTES. San Francisco: Far West Regional Laboratory for Educational Research and Development, 1978.
FLOYD, C. Meeting children's reading needs in the middle grades: a preliminary report. Elementatry School Journal, n.55, p.99-103, 1954.
GLASS, G. V. et al. School class size: research and policy. Beverly Hills (Ca): Sage Publication, 1982.
HILSON, M. et al. A Controlled experiment evaluating the efiects of a nongraded organization on pupil achievement. Journal of Educational Research, n.57, p.548-550, 1964.
HOLMES, C. T. Grade level retention effects: a meta-analysis of research studies. In: SHEPARD, L. A.; SMITH, M. L. (eds.) Flunking grades: research and policies on retention. Bristol: Falmer Press, 1989. p. 16-33.
HOLMES, C. T; MATTHEWS, K. M. The Effects of nonpromotion on elementary and junior high school pupils: a meta-analysis. Review of Education Research, v.54, n.2, p.225-236, 1984.
HUBERMAN, M. (ed.) Assurer la réussite des apprentissages scolaires? Textes de base en pédagogie. Neuchâtel: Delachaux & Niestlé, 1988.
JACKSON, G. B. The Research evidence on the effects of grade retention. Review of Educational Research, v.45, n.4, p.613-635, 1975,
JIMERSON, S. R. Meta-analysis of grade retention research: implications for practice in the 21st Century. School Psychology Review, v.30, n.3, p.420-437, 2001.
JONES, H. E. Experimental studies of college teaching: the effect of examination on permanence of learning. Archives of Psychology, n. 10, p. 1-70, 1923.
KULIK, J.A.; KULIK, C.-L. Effects of accelerated instruction on students. Review of Educational Research, n.54, p.409-425, 1984.
KULIK, J.A.; KULIK, C.-L. Mastery testing and student learning: a meta-analysis. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, n. 15, p.325-345, 1987.
KULIK, C.-L.C,; KULIK, J.A.; BANGERT-DROWNS, R. L. Effectiveness of mastery learning programs: a meta-analysis. Review of Educatbnal Research, n.60, p.265-299, 1990.
KULP, D. H. Weekly tests for graduate students? School and Society, n.38, p. 157-159, 1933.
MARTINAND, J. L. Connaître et transformer la matière. Berne: Peter Lang, 1986.
MAWHINNEY, V. T. et al. A Comparison of students studying-behavior produced by daily, weekly, and three-week testing schedules. Journal of Applid Behavior Analysis, n.4, p.257-264, 1971.
MC KEACHIE, W J. Research on teaching at the college and university level. In: GAGE, N. L. (ed.) Handbook of Research on Teaching. Chicago: Rand McNally, 1963. p. 1.118-1.172.
MOLNAR, A. Smaller classes and educational vouchers: a research update. Harrisburg: Keystone Research Center, 1999.
MORGAN. E. F; STUCKER, G. R. The Joplin Plan of reading vs. a traditional method. Journal of Education at Psychology, n.51, p.69-73, 1960.
OAKES, J. Can tracking research inform practice? Technical, normative and political considerations. Educational Researcher, v.21, n.4, p. 12-21, may 1992.
PIKETTY, T. L'impact de la taille des classes et de la ségrétion sociale sur la réussite scolaire dans les écoles françaises: une estimation à partir du panel primaire 1997. Paris-Jourdan: ENS-EHESS, 2004.
PROGER, B. B.; MANN, L. An historical review of theoretical and experimental literature on the teaching valu es of informal (non-standardized), teacher-made achievement tests. 1913-1968. Blue Bell (PA): Montgomery County Intermediate Unit 23, 1973, (ERIC Document Reproduction Service n. ED 084 292)
RICHARDS, J. Adjunct postcluestions in text: a critical review of methods and processes. Review of Educational Research, n.49, p. 181-196, 1979.
RIEBEN, L. Un point de vue constructiviste sur la pédagogie de maîtrise. In: HUBERMAN, M. (ed.) Maîtriser les processus d'apprentissage: fondements et perspectives de la pedagogie. Neuchâtel: Delachaux & Niestlé, 1988. p. 127-154.
SHULMAN, L. S. Paradigms and research programs in the study of teaching: a contemporary perspective. In: WITTROCK, M. C. (ed.) The Third handbook of the research on teaching. New York: MacMillan, 1986. p.2-35.
SLAVIN, R. E. Ability grouping and student achievement in elementary schools: a best-evidence synthesis. Review of Educational Research, v.57, n.3, p.293-336, 1987.
SLAVIN, R. E. Achievement effects of ability grouping in secondary schools: a best evidence synthesis. Review of Educational Research, v.60, n.3, p.471-499, 1990.
SLAVIN, R. E. Best-evidence synthesis: an alternative to meta-analytic and traditional reviews. Educational Researcher, v. 15, n.9, p.5-11, 1986.
SLAVIN, R. E. Mastery learning reconsidered. Review of Educational Research, n.57, p. 175-213, 1987a.
SLAVIN, R. E. Mastery learning re-reconsidered. Review of Educational Research, n.60, p.300-302, 1990a.
SLAVIN, R. E. Preventing school failure: research, policy and practice. Boston: Allyn and Bacon, 1994,
SNOW, R. Aptitude-treatment interaction models. In: HUSEN, T; POSTLETHWAITE, T. N. (eds.) The International encyclopedia of education. Oxford: Pergarnon, 1985. p. 301-305.
SPITZER, H. F. Studies in retention. Journal of Educational Psychology, n.30, p.641-656, 1939.
TRONCIN, T. Le Redoublement: radiographie d'une décision à la recherche de sa légitimité, Djon, 2005. Thèse (doct.) Université de Dijon.
TURNEY. A.H. The Effect of frequent short objective tests upon the achievement of college students in edcuational pychology. School and Society, n.33, p.760-762, 1931.
