Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Wisconsin--Madison, 1967. / Typescript. Vita. Includes bibliographical references.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Wisconsin, 1962. / Typescript. Vita. eContent provider-neutral record in process. Description based on print version record. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 231-232).

This is a case study analyzing the program officers of the Biological Instrumentation Program at the National Science Foundation. It was conducted in order to fill a lacuna in the literature concerning the program officers of science funding agencies. The current literature places the program officer in a black box, implying an autonomous professional. In contrast this study portrays the Program Officer as embedded in a web of relationships extending within and without the Foundation. Constructivist and relativist approaches to science studies argue for the significance of the influence of these 'non-scientific' relationships on all contemporary scientific activity. The study describes the web of resource relationships surrounding the program officer and how the program officer wields power that may affect the content and submission of proposals for scientific research grants. / Master of Science

Title from title page of PDF (University of Missouri--St. Louis, viewed March 2, 2010). Includes bibliographical references (p. 265-274).

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Texas at Austin, 2006. / Vita. Includes bibliographical references.

Thesis (Ed. D.)--Montana State University--Bozeman, 2005. / Title from PDF t.p. (viewed on June 10, 2006). Chairperson, Graduate Committee: Larry Baker. Includes bibliographical references (p. 219-224).

This dissertation investigates the adaptation of a research-based professional development approach, Innovating Instruction, for special education teachers. This adapted approach uses assistive technology (AT) as a catalyst for helping teachers acquire design skills needed to include more inquiry-based practices. The adapted approach introduces effective teaching practices based on the learning sciences and demonstrates multiple ways to use AT to meet the needs of students. To address the “unexamined link between the use of design practices and the introduction of technology within a learning science framework,” (Meier, 2018, p.142), the Innovating Instruction© professional development framework (2018) at the Center for Technology and School Change provides a three-part approach to implement these changes: design, situate, lead. Two recent National Science Foundation grants have established the model’s positive impact on teachers’ ability to design projects, to shift from disciplinary to transdisciplinary project design, and to shift instructional thinking to include inquiry-based approaches. This dissertation responds to an important challenge in special education: the limited opportunities to prepare special education teachers to provide high-quality instruction to support all students. It uses technology as a catalyst to help special education teachers learn about design practices that engage students in inquiry practices that are culturally relevant and build on student strengths. The intervention introduced teachers to inquiry-driven design practices and used technology that supported new ways of understanding the capacity of special needs students through a six-month professional development program. The research design used was a convergent parallel mixed methods approach to analyze both qualitative and qualitative data to capture how special education teachers used AT to design inquiry-based learning. The analysis revealed a statistically significant shift over the period of the professional development, implementation, and reflection phases in terms of teachers’ ability to design inquiry-based projects that integrated AT. Also, the findings showed the importance of “situating” teachers’ needs, encouraging collaborative learning with colleagues, and developing a shared knowledge base of inquiry-based teaching strategies in special education classrooms. Findings from teacher questionnaires and interviews showed emerging leadership activities: teachers took more initiative to design projects and collaborate with other teachers in the school community.

This research provides performance metrics for cooperative research centers that enhance translational research formed by the partnership of government, industry and academia. Centers are part of complex ecosystems that vary greatly in the type of science conducted, organizational structures and expected outcomes. The ability to realize their objectives depends on transparent measurement systems to assist in decision making in research translation. A generalizable, hierarchical decision model that uses both quantitative and qualitative metrics is developed based upon program goals. Mission-oriented metrics are used to compare the effectiveness of the cooperative research centers through case studies. The US National Science Foundation (NSF) industry university cooperative research center (IUCRC) program is the domain of organizational effectiveness because of its longevity, clear organizational structure, repeated use and availability of data. Not unlike a franchise business model, the program has been replicated numerous times gaining recognition as one of the most successful federally funded collaborative research center (CRC) programs. Understanding IUCRCs is important because they are a key US policy lever for enhancing translational research. While the program model is somewhat unique, the research project begins to close the gap for comparing CRCs by introducing a generalizable model and method into the literature stream. Through a literature review, program objectives, goals, and outputs are linked together to construct a four-level hierarchical decision model (HDM). A structured model development process shows how experts validate the content and construct of the model using these linked concepts. A subjective data collection approach is discussed showing how collection, analysis and quantification of expert pair-wise-comparison data is used to establish weights for each of the decision criteria. Several methods are discussed showing how inconsistency and disagreement are measured and analyzed until acceptable levels are reached. Six case studies are used to compare results, evaluate the impact of expert disagreement and conduct criterion-related validity. Comparative analysis demonstrates the ability of the model to efficiently ascertain criteria that are relatively more important towards each center's performance score. Applying this information, specific performance improvement recommendations for each center are presented. Upon review, experts generally agreed with the results. Criterion-related validity discusses how the performance measurement scoring system can be used for comparative analysis among science and engineering focused research centers. Dendrograms highlight where experts disagree and provide a method for further disagreement analysis. Judgment quantification values for different expert clusters are substituted into the model one-at-a-time (OAT) providing a method to analyze how changes in decisions based on these disagreements impact the results of the model's output. This research project contributes to the field by introducing a generalizable model and measurement system that compares performance of NSF supported science and engineering focused research centers.

Not available

Includes Van Allen thesis (M.S.)--University of Iowa, 1936, and thesis (Ph.D.)--University of Iowa, 1939.