Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Wisconsin--Madison, 1947. / Typescript. Vita. eContent provider-neutral record in process. Description based on print version record. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 283-293).

Dissertation (Ph.D.)--The University of North Carolina at Greensboro, 2009. / Directed by Gerald Duffy; submitted to the Dept. of Curriculum and Instruction. Title from PDF t.p. (viewed May 10, 2010). Includes bibliographical references (p. 173-180).

Thesis (Ed. D.)--Illinois State University, 2006. / Title from title page screen, viewed on April 27, 2007. Dissertation Committee: Thomas P. Crumpler, Thomas S. Haynes (co-chairs), Aimee D. Adkins, Barbara B. Meyer. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 173-180) and abstract. Also available in print.

Thesis (M.A.)--University of Missouri-Columbia, 2008. / The entire dissertation/thesis text is included in the research.pdf file; the official abstract appears in the short.pdf file (which also appears in the research.pdf); a non-technical general description, or public abstract, appears in the public.pdf file. Title from title screen of research.pdf file (viewed on August 12, 2009) Includes bibliographical references.

The purpose of this study was to investigate the effectiveness of an evaluation procedure designed to assist special educators improve their instruction. A single subject, multiple baseline across subjects design was used to test this evaluation procedure, the Special Educator Improvement Procedure (SEIP), with six teachers of self-contained special education students over a seven week period. The SEIP was composed of the following components: (1) presenting multiple videotaped samples of the subject's teaching performance to a team of evaluators, including the subject, the subject's supervisor, a peer and another educator chosen by the subject; (2) having the evaluation team assess the subject's instruction using the revised Teacher Performance Assessment Instruments (TPAI-R); (3) allowing the subject to compare his or her self assessment with the assessments of other evaluation team members; and (4) having team members make specific suggestions as to how the evaluatee might improve his or her instruction. Following the seventh week of the study, two independent observers used the TPAI-R to rate videotaped samples of the subjects' teaching. These ratings were used to test the prediction that subjects who participated in the SEIP would be ranked higher on the TPAI-R than would subjects who had not yet participated in the SEIP. However, the results of statistical analyses using Revusky's R(,n) statistic and Tukey's HSD procedure did not support this prediction. At the conclusion of the study, evaluation team members completed an experimenter developed questionnaire. An analysis of their responses supported the predictions that (1) the participants would rate the SEIP as being very beneficial for helping special educators improve their teaching and (2) the TPAI-R was a good instrument for assessing the adequacy of special educator's teaching, but failed to support the prediction that the participants would rate their participation in the SEIP feedback session as being very beneficial. It was concluded that the results of the study were inconclusive regarding the effectiveness of the SEIP in assisting special educators to improve their instruction. It was suggested that additional research be conducted using a revised version of the SEIP.

Thesis (M.Ed.)--University of North Carolina Wilmington, 2009. / Title from PDF title page (February 16, 2010) Includes bibliographical references (p. 45-46)

Thesis (Ph. D.)--Oregon State University, 1998. / Typescript (photocopy). Includes bibliographical references (leaves 105-108). Also available on the World Wide Web.

The way in which a school division addresses the problem of an unsatisfactory teacher varies. A school division may choose to tolerate the problem, dismiss the teacher, or provide assistance to foster the development of the skills needed to meet minimum performance standards. The design of teacher assistance programs varies in the type of personnel who provide remediation and the extent to which events in the program are documented. This study describes the status of teacher assistance programs that were operational in Virginia during the 1988-89 school year. A survey instrument was distributed to each school division in the Commonwealth of Virginia. First, all of the existing programs were identified. Each program was classified by degree of formality: informal, semi-formal, and formal. Each program was further classified by the type of staff utilized: school-based and central office-based staff. Secondly, the categories were developed into a model of teacher assistance programs for comparison. / Ed. D.

The purpose of this project was to create a booklet useful to teachers, one that would increase their technological competence and so encourage them to use new technologies.