No description available.

Thesis (LL. M.)--Judge Advocate General's School, 1956. / "May 1956." Typescript. Includes bibliographical references. Also issued in microfiche.

Thesis (Ed. D.)--Teachers College, Columbia University. / Typescript; issued also on microfilm. Sponsor: William P. Anderson. Dissertation Committee: Frank L. Smith. Bibliography: leaves 115-123.

Thesis (Ed. D.)--Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, 1993. / Vita. Abstract. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 80-87). Also available via the Internet.

No description available.

Thesis--University of Florida. / Description based on print version record. Typescript. Vita. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 160-170).

There is risk involved in the decision making process. In many cases, individuals are required to rate the risk of one position against the other, to determine which risk is greater, before making a decision. This thesis explores the differences in how the mass public and elites (the Founding Fathers and modern lawyers) evaluate the risky choice involved in taking a position on the role of due process in American society. Utilizing contextual analysis and survey research, the thesis determines whether the groups hold a view of due process as paramount within society or as a danger to public safety, and the consistency of that viewpoint dependent on framing of situations. The results indicate that a mass-elite dichotomy does exist; the conclusion of the thesis suggests this as a possible explanation for why the masses can be swayed by ideological linguistics.

Today's schools face a mounting number of court cases resulting from conflicts between parents of children with special needs and educators tasked with meeting those needs (Osborne, 2009). Principals have the enormous responsibility to ensure appropriate services to educate students with disabilities and, as special education leaders, require a skill set that includes knowledge of current laws, litigation, student learning needs, and how to support parents' decision making rights and responsibilities. A gap is evident between what principals know about special education leadership and case law and what principals are doing in the field. The purpose of this study was to identify effective actions and behaviors that support Virginia principals' leadership in special education decision making. More specifically, the study examined what can be done to minimize special education disputes between parents and schools and identify principals' skill sets to minimize special education disputes. Two concurrent Delphi studies were conducted with 16 member panels; stakeholders with familial responsibilities to children with disabilities and professional experts with responsibility to special education compliance participated. A final round exchanged findings between the panels. The study identified a list of best practices for Virginia school principals to support special education leadership and decision making. / Ed. D.

Zugl.: Uppsala, University, Diss., 2007.

Thesis (M. Phil.)--University of Hong Kong, 1999. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 357-360).