This study examined reading comprehension in adolescents with and without attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Forty-five youth with ADHD (26 males, 19 females) and 42 adolescents without ADHD (20 males, 22 females) between the ages of 13 and 18 completed standardized tests of achievement. The results of multiple regression analyses indicated that orthographic and semantic abilities were related to reading comprehension. Both the orthographic (i.e., spelling) measure and the semantic (i.e., oral vocabulary) measure explained unique amounts of variance on the reading comprehension measure. Next, it was found that adolescents with ADHD were significantly more likely to have a Specific Reading Comprehension Disability (S-RCD) than adolescents without ADHD. Last, it was found that adolescents with ADHD and an S-RCD demonstrated poorer performance on academic measures that depend in part on comprehension (e.g., math problem solving) than adolescents with ADHD without an S-RCD.

This study examined reading comprehension in adolescents with and without attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Forty-five youth with ADHD (26 males, 19 females) and 42 adolescents without ADHD (20 males, 22 females) between the ages of 13 and 18 completed standardized tests of achievement. The results of multiple regression analyses indicated that orthographic and semantic abilities were related to reading comprehension. Both the orthographic (i.e., spelling) measure and the semantic (i.e., oral vocabulary) measure explained unique amounts of variance on the reading comprehension measure. Next, it was found that adolescents with ADHD were significantly more likely to have a Specific Reading Comprehension Disability (S-RCD) than adolescents without ADHD. Last, it was found that adolescents with ADHD and an S-RCD demonstrated poorer performance on academic measures that depend in part on comprehension (e.g., math problem solving) than adolescents with ADHD without an S-RCD.

Aboriginal peoples are the fastest growing population in Canada. Over half of the Aboriginal population is under the age of 24, yet the voices of Aboriginal young adults are absent within the literature. Aboriginal young adults, between the ages of 18 and 24, are two to three times more likely to be unemployed than their non-Aboriginal counterparts. Very little is known about the career-related experiences of Aboriginal young adults, even less is known about how their identity as an Aboriginal person affects these experiences. This study employs a narrative inquiry method to explore the work-life narratives of Aboriginal young adults living in Toronto. Results identified three metathemes that employers have in regards to cultural identity for Aboriginal youth. These themes are: cultural respect in the workplace, racism and oppression in the workplace, and inspiring youth. Limitations, implications and future research directions are discussed.

Aboriginal peoples are the fastest growing population in Canada. Over half of the Aboriginal population is under the age of 24, yet the voices of Aboriginal young adults are absent within the literature. Aboriginal young adults, between the ages of 18 and 24, are two to three times more likely to be unemployed than their non-Aboriginal counterparts. Very little is known about the career-related experiences of Aboriginal young adults, even less is known about how their identity as an Aboriginal person affects these experiences. This study employs a narrative inquiry method to explore the work-life narratives of Aboriginal young adults living in Toronto. Results identified three metathemes that employers have in regards to cultural identity for Aboriginal youth. These themes are: cultural respect in the workplace, racism and oppression in the workplace, and inspiring youth. Limitations, implications and future research directions are discussed.

The current study explored whether there are more pervasive teacher-centred expectations than the typical studies that find specific teacher-student expectation effects. Groups of teachers who had uniformly high or low expectations for their students were identified, and their instructional practices, beliefs and effects on the academic and social outcomes for their students were explored in four studies. Study One explored the academic outcomes for students in the high and low expectation teachers' classrooms over a year. Students in the classes of teachers with uniformly high expectations for their students made significantly greater progress in reading than their counterparts in the classes of teachers who had low expectations for their students. Study Two involved observations of the instructional and interactional practices of the different groups of teachers. Those with high expectations for all their students spent more time instructing their students, more frequently provided their students with a framework for their learning, questioned their students more and provided them with more feedback on their learning than the teachers who had uniformly low expectations. It also appeared from the observational data that the teachers who had uniformly high expectations for their students' learning provided a more positive socioemotional climate in which instruction took place. In Study Three the different groups of teachers were interviewed regarding their beliefs about how learning should be provided to students with high or low ability. It was found that the high expectation teachers believed there should be less differentiation in the learning opportunities provided to their low and high ability students than did the low expectation teachers. The former group of teachers also reported providing their students with more choice in their learning than did the latter group of teachers. Study Four focused on the academic and social self-perceptions of the students. The academic self-perceptions of the students who were in the classes with teachers who had high iii expectations for their learning increased across the school year while those in classrooms with teachers who had low expectations for their learning decreased. A model is built whereby it is suggested that teachers' expectations for their classes can have major effects on opportunities to learn, instructional practices, interactional patterns, student self-perceptions and academic outcomes.

The current study explored whether there are more pervasive teacher-centred expectations than the typical studies that find specific teacher-student expectation effects. Groups of teachers who had uniformly high or low expectations for their students were identified, and their instructional practices, beliefs and effects on the academic and social outcomes for their students were explored in four studies. Study One explored the academic outcomes for students in the high and low expectation teachers' classrooms over a year. Students in the classes of teachers with uniformly high expectations for their students made significantly greater progress in reading than their counterparts in the classes of teachers who had low expectations for their students. Study Two involved observations of the instructional and interactional practices of the different groups of teachers. Those with high expectations for all their students spent more time instructing their students, more frequently provided their students with a framework for their learning, questioned their students more and provided them with more feedback on their learning than the teachers who had uniformly low expectations. It also appeared from the observational data that the teachers who had uniformly high expectations for their students' learning provided a more positive socioemotional climate in which instruction took place. In Study Three the different groups of teachers were interviewed regarding their beliefs about how learning should be provided to students with high or low ability. It was found that the high expectation teachers believed there should be less differentiation in the learning opportunities provided to their low and high ability students than did the low expectation teachers. The former group of teachers also reported providing their students with more choice in their learning than did the latter group of teachers. Study Four focused on the academic and social self-perceptions of the students. The academic self-perceptions of the students who were in the classes with teachers who had high iii expectations for their learning increased across the school year while those in classrooms with teachers who had low expectations for their learning decreased. A model is built whereby it is suggested that teachers' expectations for their classes can have major effects on opportunities to learn, instructional practices, interactional patterns, student self-perceptions and academic outcomes.

The current study explored whether there are more pervasive teacher-centred expectations than the typical studies that find specific teacher-student expectation effects. Groups of teachers who had uniformly high or low expectations for their students were identified, and their instructional practices, beliefs and effects on the academic and social outcomes for their students were explored in four studies. Study One explored the academic outcomes for students in the high and low expectation teachers' classrooms over a year. Students in the classes of teachers with uniformly high expectations for their students made significantly greater progress in reading than their counterparts in the classes of teachers who had low expectations for their students. Study Two involved observations of the instructional and interactional practices of the different groups of teachers. Those with high expectations for all their students spent more time instructing their students, more frequently provided their students with a framework for their learning, questioned their students more and provided them with more feedback on their learning than the teachers who had uniformly low expectations. It also appeared from the observational data that the teachers who had uniformly high expectations for their students' learning provided a more positive socioemotional climate in which instruction took place. In Study Three the different groups of teachers were interviewed regarding their beliefs about how learning should be provided to students with high or low ability. It was found that the high expectation teachers believed there should be less differentiation in the learning opportunities provided to their low and high ability students than did the low expectation teachers. The former group of teachers also reported providing their students with more choice in their learning than did the latter group of teachers. Study Four focused on the academic and social self-perceptions of the students. The academic self-perceptions of the students who were in the classes with teachers who had high iii expectations for their learning increased across the school year while those in classrooms with teachers who had low expectations for their learning decreased. A model is built whereby it is suggested that teachers' expectations for their classes can have major effects on opportunities to learn, instructional practices, interactional patterns, student self-perceptions and academic outcomes.

The current study explored whether there are more pervasive teacher-centred expectations than the typical studies that find specific teacher-student expectation effects. Groups of teachers who had uniformly high or low expectations for their students were identified, and their instructional practices, beliefs and effects on the academic and social outcomes for their students were explored in four studies. Study One explored the academic outcomes for students in the high and low expectation teachers' classrooms over a year. Students in the classes of teachers with uniformly high expectations for their students made significantly greater progress in reading than their counterparts in the classes of teachers who had low expectations for their students. Study Two involved observations of the instructional and interactional practices of the different groups of teachers. Those with high expectations for all their students spent more time instructing their students, more frequently provided their students with a framework for their learning, questioned their students more and provided them with more feedback on their learning than the teachers who had uniformly low expectations. It also appeared from the observational data that the teachers who had uniformly high expectations for their students' learning provided a more positive socioemotional climate in which instruction took place. In Study Three the different groups of teachers were interviewed regarding their beliefs about how learning should be provided to students with high or low ability. It was found that the high expectation teachers believed there should be less differentiation in the learning opportunities provided to their low and high ability students than did the low expectation teachers. The former group of teachers also reported providing their students with more choice in their learning than did the latter group of teachers. Study Four focused on the academic and social self-perceptions of the students. The academic self-perceptions of the students who were in the classes with teachers who had high iii expectations for their learning increased across the school year while those in classrooms with teachers who had low expectations for their learning decreased. A model is built whereby it is suggested that teachers' expectations for their classes can have major effects on opportunities to learn, instructional practices, interactional patterns, student self-perceptions and academic outcomes.

The current study explored whether there are more pervasive teacher-centred expectations than the typical studies that find specific teacher-student expectation effects. Groups of teachers who had uniformly high or low expectations for their students were identified, and their instructional practices, beliefs and effects on the academic and social outcomes for their students were explored in four studies. Study One explored the academic outcomes for students in the high and low expectation teachers' classrooms over a year. Students in the classes of teachers with uniformly high expectations for their students made significantly greater progress in reading than their counterparts in the classes of teachers who had low expectations for their students. Study Two involved observations of the instructional and interactional practices of the different groups of teachers. Those with high expectations for all their students spent more time instructing their students, more frequently provided their students with a framework for their learning, questioned their students more and provided them with more feedback on their learning than the teachers who had uniformly low expectations. It also appeared from the observational data that the teachers who had uniformly high expectations for their students' learning provided a more positive socioemotional climate in which instruction took place. In Study Three the different groups of teachers were interviewed regarding their beliefs about how learning should be provided to students with high or low ability. It was found that the high expectation teachers believed there should be less differentiation in the learning opportunities provided to their low and high ability students than did the low expectation teachers. The former group of teachers also reported providing their students with more choice in their learning than did the latter group of teachers. Study Four focused on the academic and social self-perceptions of the students. The academic self-perceptions of the students who were in the classes with teachers who had high iii expectations for their learning increased across the school year while those in classrooms with teachers who had low expectations for their learning decreased. A model is built whereby it is suggested that teachers' expectations for their classes can have major effects on opportunities to learn, instructional practices, interactional patterns, student self-perceptions and academic outcomes.

Doctor of Philosophy / Department of Counseling and Educational Psychology / Fred O. Bradley / This study examines the validity of the College Learning Effectiveness Inventory (CLEI). The CLEI is a new instrument designed to assess issues that college students face that affect their performance, including academic success and persistence. The CLEI serves diagnostic and prescriptive functions. Academic advisors, counselors and others whose work involves supporting student success and retention can use the CLEI to assess an individual student’s strengths and weaknesses and use the results to counsel students and provide appropriate remedial activities. This study compares the following six scales of the College Learning Effectiveness Inventory (CLEI) with instruments that have already been established. The six scales of the CLEI are as follows: (1) Academic Self-Efficacy, (2) Organization and Attention to Study, (3) Stress and Time Pressure, (4) Involvement with College Activity, (5) Emotional Satisfaction, and (6) Class Communication. The validation instruments for this cross-validation study included the Concentration, Self-Testing, Study Aids, and Time Management scales from the Learning and Study Strategies Inventory (LASSI), the Time Organization and Study Environment Management subscale of the Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire (MSLQ), the College Adjustment Questionnaire (CAQ), the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale (RSES), and the Student Propensity to Ask Questions (SPAQ) scale. This study answers the following research questions: 1.) Are the CLEI scales reliable measures of the constructs they purport to assess? 2.) Are the CLEI scales valid measures of the dimensions they purport to assess? 3.) What are the CLEI scales attributes for this sample, and how do they compare with those from an earlier normative sample? 4.) How are the CLEI scales related to one another? 5.) Are the CLEI scales gender neutral? and 6.) Does the CLEI differentiate between students who are successful and those who may be at risk? Finally, this study cross-validates the CLEI. The reason for a cross-validation study of new scales is to demonstrate that these new measures actually measure what they purport to assess. Without cross validation, we would have to rely on a scale’s face validity, which is a comparatively weak method of assessing validity.