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.

Interventions created to alter challenging behaviour should be preceded by a thorough investigation into the purpose of the behaviour. Functional Assessment is a framework created to investigate the purpose, or function, of behaviour viewed as a problem. Careful analysis of the behaviour through interviews, questionnaires, rating scales and direct observations, are combined to form hypotheses pertaining to the reasons why a particular behaviour might be of value to the individual.

Doctor of Education / Department of Educational Leadership / Sarah Jane Fishback / The purpose of this study was to investigate the association between cognitive complexity and creativity. This research was conducted with a sample (n = 126) of field grade officers at the Joint and Combined Warfighter School in Norfolk, VA, as part of class 08-02 (N = 250), in early 2008. The Department of Defense (DoD) challenges its officers to operate in ambiguity, solve complex problems and be creative. The DoD needs its officers to apply a creative imagination, supported by skill, knowledge, and experience, to design integrated operational plans that employ military forces. In order to do this, the DoD teaches its officers cognitive thinking skills and creativity at the same time. Are cognitive thinking skills and creativity correlated? Two valid and reliable tests were used to test for cognitive complexity and creativity: the Learning Environments Preference (LEP) and the Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking (TTCT), both the Figural-A and the Verbal-A forms. A small positive but statistically insignificant (τ = .083) correlation was found between the measured levels of cognitive development (LEP CCI) and the measured level of creativity (TTCT). In addition, this research analyzed the effect that branch of service, combat experience, gender, age, and education level had on creativity and cognitive complexity. There was a strong positive correlation between cognitive complexity and level of civilian education level ([Tau] = .345, p < .001). There was a strong positive correlation between creativity and level of civilian education level ([Tau] = .341, p < .001). When LEP CCI scores (cognition) were correlated to TTCT creativity scores while controlling for combat experience there was a medium positive correlation (r = .285, p = .007). When combat experience was correlated to the LEP CCI scores (cognition) there was a medium positive correlation ([Tau] = .246, p = .002). There was a medium positive correlation between military rank and LEP CCI (cognition) scores ([Tau] = .228, p = .002). There was a small positive correlation between military rank and TTCT creativity scores ([Tau] = .15, p = .042). When gender was correlated to the TTCT scores (creativity), there was a statistically significant positive correlation for females ([Tau] = .151, p = .041). A small positive but statistically insignificant (r = .111) correlation was present between the level of creativity, the level of cognitive development, and age. There was a small positive but statistically insignificant (r = .109) correlation between the level of creativity, the level of cognitive development, and branch of service.

Teachers' conceptions are powerful in shaping the quality of their instructional practice. The purpose of this thesis is to defend a four-facet model of teachers' conceptions of assessment, which revolves around emphasising improvement or school accountability, or student accountability purposes or treating assessment as irrelevant. Further, it explores how those conceptions relate to teachers' conceptions of learning, teaching, curriculum, and teacher efficacy. A literature review is used to identify the major conceptions. Multiple studies led to a 50-item Teachers' Conceptions of Assessment (COA-III) questionnaire based on the four main conceptions of assessment. Structural equation modelling showed a close fit of a hierarchical, multi-dimensional model to the data. Teachers moderately agreed with the improvement conceptions and the system accountability conception. Teachers disagreed that assessment was irrelevant. However, teachers had little agreement that assessment was for student accountability. Improvement, school, and student accountability conceptions were positively correlated. The irrelevance conception was inversely related to the improvement conception and not related to the system accountability conception. A four-factor structure of teachers' beliefs about assessment, curriculum, teaching, learning, and teacher efficacy, was found. Teachers agreed that assessment influences and improves their teaching and student learning. They agreed less strongly that assessment, measuring surface learning only, makes schools, teachers, and students accountable and that teachers are able to conduct assessment through a systematic technological approach. They agreed at a similar level with student centred learning that involves deep approaches to learning, divorced from assessment. They disagreed with a telling type of teaching that focuses only on intellectual development of students or on reconstruction or reform of society. Use of the CoA-III makes teachers' conceptions of assessment more explicit and will assist in the development of teacher training programs, the design of assessment policy, and enhance further research into educational assessment practices. Furthermore, explicit attention to teachers' conceptions of assessment is expected to be a precursor to teachers' self-regulation of their assessment beliefs and practices.

Teachers' conceptions are powerful in shaping the quality of their instructional practice. The purpose of this thesis is to defend a four-facet model of teachers' conceptions of assessment, which revolves around emphasising improvement or school accountability, or student accountability purposes or treating assessment as irrelevant. Further, it explores how those conceptions relate to teachers' conceptions of learning, teaching, curriculum, and teacher efficacy. A literature review is used to identify the major conceptions. Multiple studies led to a 50-item Teachers' Conceptions of Assessment (COA-III) questionnaire based on the four main conceptions of assessment. Structural equation modelling showed a close fit of a hierarchical, multi-dimensional model to the data. Teachers moderately agreed with the improvement conceptions and the system accountability conception. Teachers disagreed that assessment was irrelevant. However, teachers had little agreement that assessment was for student accountability. Improvement, school, and student accountability conceptions were positively correlated. The irrelevance conception was inversely related to the improvement conception and not related to the system accountability conception. A four-factor structure of teachers' beliefs about assessment, curriculum, teaching, learning, and teacher efficacy, was found. Teachers agreed that assessment influences and improves their teaching and student learning. They agreed less strongly that assessment, measuring surface learning only, makes schools, teachers, and students accountable and that teachers are able to conduct assessment through a systematic technological approach. They agreed at a similar level with student centred learning that involves deep approaches to learning, divorced from assessment. They disagreed with a telling type of teaching that focuses only on intellectual development of students or on reconstruction or reform of society. Use of the CoA-III makes teachers' conceptions of assessment more explicit and will assist in the development of teacher training programs, the design of assessment policy, and enhance further research into educational assessment practices. Furthermore, explicit attention to teachers' conceptions of assessment is expected to be a precursor to teachers' self-regulation of their assessment beliefs and practices.