<p> Community colleges in California are the primary source for preparing the early childhood care and education (ECE) workforce. The California child development lab school mission is to prepare ECE practitioners, provide a laboratory where college students can study and research child development/education, and offer a service to children and families. There are many benefits that are derived from laboratory schools but many community college lab schools have been reduced and/or closed over the past three years. The purposes of this Delphi study were (a) to examine the most pressing issues, problems and barriers facing California community colleges child development labs schools; (b) rate the importance of the issues, problems, and barriers identified; and (c) elicit experts' recommendations for the most viable solutions to help California child development laboratory programs maintain viability. A Delphi method was utilized procuring a panel of ECE experts that identified and rated the most pressing issues, problems and barriers, and generated viable solutions for California child development laboratory schools' viability. The key statistical processes used in this Delphi research were measures of central tendency and measures of dispersion. The ECE experts recommended solutions to increase a greater understanding of early childhood care and education, allow more support, and secure more financial assistance for the lab schools. A comprehensive infrastructure approach of government, policymakers, and community college leaders is required for California community college child development lab schools' viability. The data gathered from this study develops five potential benefits for laboratory schools including: (1) providing rationale for policy construction regarding statewide community college lab programs; (2) deciphering the most pressing problems and barriers that California community college child development laboratories are facing; (3) soliciting solutions to maintain viability for child development lab programs; (4) contributing to the development of statewide recognition and possibly legislation on funding sources for California community college child development laboratories; and (5) ensuring the survival of California community college child development laboratory schools.</p>

<p> Student retention poses a major challenge to higher education in America. Research has demonstrated colleges that foster student engagement have higher retention rates than colleges that fail to do so. Writing centers are student services that improve student engagement and retention. This study focused upon the Fall 2013 cohort of developmental composition students in one Missouri community college, to determine if students' use of the writing center made a positive difference upon student engagement or successful completion of their course. The study was designed with a two-pronged approach to answer four questions. The first question was posed to determine a statistical difference existed between the retention rates of developmental composition students who visited the writing center and students who did not. A Chi-square Goodness of Fit statistical analysis determined with 95% accuracy that a difference did exist. The remaining questions were posed to obtain student perceptions regarding prospects for persisting in school, level of engagement with the college, and effects the writing center made upon engagement and persistence. These questions were answered with an online survey employing 19 Likert-scale statements to which the student could express level of agreement; responses were subjected to descriptive analysis. Student respondents expressed nearly 100% belief they would persist in school; expressed a high degree of engagement while claiming they were not engaged with the college; and expressed over 75% belief that the writing center had improved their engagement and persistence in school. These findings suggest writing centers do offer a valuable tool for improving student engagement and persistence. Future studies should be designed to provide a more global assessment of what writing centers do and how they might improve their services.</p>

<p> Journaling is an effective tool for the development of writing skills and creative thinking; however, research has not revealed how it improves writing skills in the college classroom. The majority of the studies related to journaling are elementary school studies, which do not provide statistics on how journaling can improve writing skills for undergraduates. The purpose of this study is to compare the writing skills of students in freshman college composition classes who make journal entries at the beginning of each class, and those who do not. The theoretical base for the study was provided by Thorndike's laws of exercise and effect and Mezirow's transformational learning theory. This is a quantitative, quasi-experimental study, and data were gathered using a pretest-posttest design using a sample of 106 freshman students in a small two-year community college in the Midwest. A rubric was used to score a writing sample from each student at the beginning and end of the semester, and the samples were independently evaluated by three experienced college writing instructors. The significance for the study was measured by using an independent t-test. Results indicated no significant difference between the pretest and posttest writing scores of the students who wrote in journals and those who did not. The study can foster social change by helping teachers to understand the potential benefits of journaling in the development of critical thinking skills. Further study with a larger sample and an advanced writing class would be beneficial in examining whether extensive journaling would result in improved writing skills.</p>

Thesis (Ed.D.)--University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 2006. / Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 68-02, Section: A, page: 0447. Adviser: Debra D. Bragg. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 187-192) Available on microfilm from Pro Quest Information and Learning.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--Capella University, 2006. / (UnM)AAI3216020. Adviser: Daniel Bruch. Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 67-04, Section: A, page: 1196.

Thesis (Ed.D.)--University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 2007. / Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 68-07, Section: A, page: 2839. Adviser: Kern Alexander. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 88-96) Available on microfilm from Pro Quest Information and Learning.

Thesis (Ed.D.)--University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 2007. / Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 68-07, Section: A, page: 2779. Adviser: Debra D. Bragg. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 172-180) Available on microfilm from Pro Quest Information and Learning.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 2008. / Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 69-11, Section: A, page: 4511. Adviser: Winifred Poster. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 167-177) Available on microfilm from Pro Quest Information and Learning.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Texas at Austin, 2005. / Vita. Includes bibliographical references.

Thesis (Ed.D.)--University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 2006. / Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 67-11, Section: A, page: 4119. Adviser: Steven Aragon. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 152-159) Available on microfilm from Pro Quest Information and Learning.