Thesis (M.S.)--University of North Texas, May, 2009. / Title from title page display. Includes bibliographical references.

No description available.

Thesis (M.P.A.)--Kutztown University of Pennsylvania, 1994. / Source: Masters Abstracts International, Volume: 45-06, page: 2947. Abstract precedes thesis as [1] preliminary leaf. Typescript. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 78-80).

No description available.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Wisconsin--Madison, 1969. / Typescript. Vita. eContent provider-neutral record in process. Description based on print version record. Includes bibliographical references.

No description available.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--Michigan State University. Dept. of Education Policy, 2008. / Dissertation committee: Gary Sykes, Barbara Schneider, Peter Youngs, Sandra Schneider, and Larry Schweinhart--From acknowledgments. Title from PDF t.p. (viewed on Aug. 19, 2009) Includes bibliographical references (p. 151-158). Also issued in print.

Literacy is a fundamental to all areas of learning. Early reading experiences prior to elementary school and kindergarten years are critical factors for later reading success. This study evaluated the effect Direct Instruction® reading procedures vs. Scholastic Early Childhood Program® reading procedures on the production of letter names, letter sounds, CV and CVC blends by preschool-aged students in a Head Start program. Results showed the intervention group improved in all areas, while the control group improved only in letter naming and letter sounds. This study discusses reading as a behavioral cusp as well as limitations, and recommendations for future research.

This study examined the effectiveness of training Head Start teachers and aides in child teacher relationship training (CTRT). CTRT is based on child parent relationship therapy (CPRT) (Landreth & Bratton, 2006), a filial therapy model based on the principles of child-centered play therapy, and was adapted for the classroom. In this quasi-experimental design, 12 teacher/aide pairs (n = 24) were assigned to the experimental (n = 12) or active control group (n = 12). Children who scored in the Borderline or Clinical range on at least one scale of the Child Behavior Checklist-Caregiver/Teacher Report Form (C-TRF) at pretest qualified for the study (n = 54). Nine hypotheses were analyzed using a two factor repeated measures multivariate analysis to determine if the CTRT group and the active control group performed differently across time according to pre-, mid-, and posttest results of the C-TRF. Additionally, effect sizes were calculated to determine practical significance. Five hypotheses were retained at the .05 level of significance. Post hoc analysis was conducted to analyze the effects of the two phases of treatment. Results indicated that children in the experimental group made statistically significant improvements in externalizing problems (p = .003). Children of focus made statistically significant improvements in externalizing (p = .003) and total behavior (p = .01) problems. Results are particularly significant for the non-children of focus, who only received the in-classroom intervention. The non-children of focus made statistically significant improvements in externalizing behavior problems (p = .04) and practical significance was large. Results indicate that a school based intervention such as CTRT is a viable treatment option for many children with externalizing behavior problems.