No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

This purpose of this study is to provide a description and chronology of the development of general education in the history of the U. S. Marine Corps. A review of the various general education activities, with particular emphasis on the establishment of the Vocational Schools Detachment and the Marine Corps Institute accomplished this purpose. The review encompassed 1739 to 1992. The problem investigated in this study posed particular questions about the establishment of general education activities. Several research questions guided the investigation through specific periods of Marine Corps history. These questions concerned the establishment of general education activities affected by (1) general education initiatives, (2) Marine Corps leaders and other individuals and their contributions, (3) relationships of the changing size and mission, (4) conditions surrounding their creation, (5) educational styles established, (6) purposes for each, and (7) support measures required by each general education activity. The historical research method provided the means to reconstruct the past systematically and objectively by collecting, evaluating, verifying, and synthesizing evidence to establish facts and reach defensible conclusions. The researcher collected, categorized, analyzed, integrated, and synthesized data from a mass of sources and interpreted this evidence in context with the sources. The study found that Marine Corps general education activity development resulted in unique circumstances from a variety of influential change agents throughout five major periods. However, the most influential factor was the occasional leader who interpreted the significance of need and provided leadership to establish or modify a general education activity to meet the need. General John A. Lejeune and Secretary of the Navy Josephus Daniels were the most efficacious in this regard. Other Marine Corps Commandants and various general education activity directors also contributed to the employment and continuance of these activities. The study concluded general education activities resulted from strong leaders with well founded philosophies and vision, and the aptitude to put their concepts into practice. / Ed. D.

The purpose of this study was to investigate the areas of disagreement among experts on important issues in the education of the gifted in the United States, and to answer the following questions: (1) Which key issues are perceived by the panel of experts as being the most important? (2) Which of the issues deserves top priority? (3) On issues deemed most important, what action should be taken at the national, state, and local levels? (4) What are the experts' definitions of the term "gifted"? Two pilot studies were conducted in which 12 issues important to gifted education emerged. Data for the main study were collected by means of a modified Policy Delphi method in which a selected panel of people knowledgeable about the issues was surveyed. The study, consisting of three rounds of questions, was conducted by mail over several months with a panel of 29 acknowledged experts in the field. The six critical issues in gifted education, in order of panelists' priorities, were: (a) curriculum for the gifted; (b) procedures for identifying children for gifted programs; (c) selection and training of teachers for the gifted; (d) special populations of gifted (handicapped, females, minorities, underachievers, pre-school, and the highly gifted); (e) goals of gifted programs; and (f) definition of the term "gifted." Panelists agreed on 53 actions that should be taken at the federal, state and local levels. At the federal level, actions should be in the form of catalytic support, research on the issues, and dissemination of research results. At the state level, guidelines, standards, and procedures regarding the various issues were suggested. At the local level, the majority of panelists' suggestions concerned policies and procedures regarding curriculum for the gifted and teacher training. The definition of the term "gifted" was divided into three components: giftedness, the gifted child, and the gifted adult. The definition statements agreed upon by panelists for the gifted child emphasized potential; for the gifted adult, performance; and for giftedness, both potential and performance. / Ed. D.

The purpose of this study was to determine the technological, organizational, legislative, and research events that should be included in a 1989 revision of A Chronology of Business Education in the United States last updated in 1968 by Samuel J. Wanous with selected events added in 1977 by National Business Education Association staff. To achieve this objective a modified Delphi technique was employed using a 29-member panel. The Delphi panel was comprised of 23 members of the Policies Commission and 6 John Robert Gregg award winners. The panel members provided expertise in business education, a national perspective, and representation of the major professional organizations. The members of the Policies Commission in effect define business education and are considered to be experts in the field. The John Robert Gregg award winners have made outstanding contributions to the development and advancement of business education. Additionally, the Delphi panel members represented the five geographic regions of the United States (i.e., Eastern, Mountain-Plains, North-Central, Southern, and Western). The professional organizations in business education (i.e., American Vocational Association, National Business Education Association, and Delta Pi Epsilon) were all represented. / Master of Science

Multiple-teacher departments of vocational agriculture resulting from consolidations are fairly stable as indicated by the number of years the older departments included in this study had existed. Multiple-teacher departments of vocational agriculture are increasing in number. This conclusion is substantiated by the fact that 10 of the 30 departments studied had become multiple-teacher departments by adding the second teacher at the beginning of the current year. / Master of Science

The purpose of this study was to examine the teaching practices and perceptions of teachers, and how those perceptions and practices contributed to or perpetuated gender equity and inequity in elementary classrooms. Data for this study were collected in three elementary classrooms (third, fourth, and fifth grade) in an urban public school in southern Los Angeles. All three teacher participants were female and were self-identified feminists. The data collected for this study showed coeducational settings to be biased in favor of boys in classroom interactions, students calling-out, teachers calling on students, gender geography, negative student behavior, teacher discipline, early finishers, teacher feedback, the reinforcement of gender roles and stereotypes, classroom climate, lack of feminist pedagogy, classroom practice, gendered language, textbooks, and the use of color in the classroom. The gender-equitable practices the teachers in this study were implementing in their classrooms such as calling on male and female students equally, seating children in coed groups, and making sure that classrooms were gender-balanced was gender-equitable teaching practice, but it only scratched the surface of gender equity. The bias in favor of boys observed in these classrooms was at odds with the teachers' beliefs that they were creating a gender-equitable environment by providing only surface interventions which led to the finding surface equity. Although these teachers were implementing some gender-equitable teaching practices, they were not implementing any revolutionary pedagogy, like feminist pedagogy, which could negate inequity and provide for more than just surface equity. It is recommended that changes be made to policy in teacher education requirements and programs. Ongoing professional development must also be provided to classroom practitioners and educational leaders in order to move beyond surface equity. There must be continued research on gender and the creation of equity to create gender-equitable learning environments that move beyond surface equity to create social change.