The problem under consideration was an assessment of the effect of teaching physical education, through a health concepts approach, to first-semester male and female college freshmen in a metropolitan junior college. In order to further clarify the problem, the primary purposes were to determine the change in health knowledges, health habits, physical fitness, and attitude toward physical education. from the beginning to the ending of the course. A further purpose was to determine the relationships between the scores on the four instruments used in this study.

Although nearly forty years of research has revealed and confirmed practices related to developmental student success, many developmental programs have failed to provide effective intervention. In an effort to organize for developmental student success, Tyler Junior College restructured its developmental program to reflect the needs of their underprepared students and research proven best practices. In one year, they were able to document dramatic results in improved student success. The purpose of this research was to understand the experiences of those involved in changing this developmental program and to generate a theory which explained how they improved the program’s effectiveness. Three basic research questions guided this information gathering process: 1. What were the experiences of the administrators, faculty and support staff in improving a developmental education program? 2. What were the relationships among the experiences of the administrators, faculty and support staff in improving a developmental education program? 3. How did the perceptions of the administration, faculty and support services staff compare? By using the protocol of Interactive Quantitative Analysis, this case study provided an opportunity for those involved in making these changes to tell their stories. These rich descriptions of experiences and perceptions were synthesized into a theory that described how they improved the program’s effectiveness. When compared to related contexts, the results could be useful for making similar transitions elsewhere. / text

Thesis (Ed.D.)--Teachers College, Columbia University. / Typescript; issued also on microfilm. Includes tables. Sponsor: Walter E. Sindlinger. Dissertation Committee: Ralph R. Fields. Includes bibliographical references.

Mémoire (M.Ed.)--Université du Québec à Chicoutimi, 1995. / Document électronique également accessible en format PDF. CaQCU

Mémoire (M.Ed.)--Université du Québec à Chicoutimi, 1996. / Document électronique également accessible en format PDF. CaQCU

Thesis (Ed. D.)--Illinois State University, 1985. / Title from title page screen, viewed June 23, 2005. Dissertation Committee: Edward R. Hines, Ronald L. Laymon (co-chairs), Ronald S. Halinski, J.H. McGrath, William E. Piland. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 89-92) and abstract. Also available in print.

Thesis (Ed. D.)--Illinois State University, 1981. / Title from title page screen, viewed March 29, 2005. Dissertation Committee: Max R. Rennels (chair), Fred Mills, Marilyn Newby, Jack Hobbs, John McCarthy. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 77-79) and abstract. Also available in print.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--Illinois State University, 1971. / Title from title page screen, viewed Sept. 20, 2004. Dissertation Committee: G. Alan Hickrod (chair), Benjamin Hubbard, Ronald Halinski. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 123-127) and abstract. Also available in print.

Thesis (Ed. D.)--Illinois State University, 1990. / Title from title page screen, viewed November 22, 2005. Dissertation Committee: John R. McCarthy (chair), Vernon A. Adams, Patricia H. Klass, Raymond A. Pietak, Daniel La Vista. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 88-92) and abstract. Also available in print.

Are there personality characteristics statistically significant and of relatively large enough differences to make distinctions between talented achievers and underachievers? Would an identification of those personality characteristics be a necessary value to the institution of remedial procedures that might assist them in the realization of their maximal potential? What are the means by which a talented student is to be measured, aside from intellectual diagnostic procedures, that indicate this particular potential in certain areas or his ability to achieve in academic subjects by G.P.A. designation? The factors that produce achievement and underachievement are recognized in the light of success or failure in the peripheral structure encompassing the subject field itself. The achiever is an achiever only if he can meet the problems existing in the academic subject and solve them according to prescribed criteria. The underachiever, if he falls below the arbitrary standards set for the academic subject, is given a grade that evaluated his lack of performance only as it affects the actual involvement with extrinsic material. These evaluations offer no clues or information as to the specific personality characteristics that are part of the personality matrix of the talented achiever or underachiever that negate or stimulate students’ achieving or underachieving in an academic environment. The problem does not perforce exist in the academic sphere since the situation can be resolved by giving specific grade value to different performance levels. It does exist however, in the means by which certain conditions can be identified as residing in the student, and his social-interaction environment. This social-interaction environment intrudes the classroom as well as his relationships in the social milieu. Therefore, if achievement and underachievement are to have any dimensional values the forces that produce them must be understood not in the terms of a specific G.P.A. but in terms of acceptance or rejection of the procedures that would bring about these end results.