Thesis (Ed. D.)--Illinois State University, 1994. / Title from title page screen, viewed April 5, 2006. Dissertation Committee: Pamela H. Wheeler, Ming-Gon John Lian (co-chairs), Carol A. Thornton, Kenneth H. Strand, Maribeth N. Lartz. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 116-127) and abstract. Also available in print.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--Illinois State University, 2000. / Title from title page screen, viewed May 4, 2006. Dissertation Committee: Paul J. Baker (chair), Albert T. Azinger, Elizabeth T. Lugg, William Rau. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 145-149) and abstract. Also available in print.

Thesis (Ed. D.)--Illinois State University, 2004. / Title from title page screen, viewed May 23, 2006. Dissertation Committee: Paul Baker (chair), Amelia D. Atkins, Albert T. Azinger, Donald S. Kachur. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 204-210) and abstract. Also available in print.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--Illinois State University, 2004. / Title from title page screen, viewed May 23, 2006. Dissertation Committee: Dianne Gardner (chair), Mary M. O'Brian, Paul Baker, Mark E. Swerdlik, Norman Durflinger. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 143-154) and abstract. Also available in print.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--Illinois State University, 1996. / Title from title page screen, viewed June 1, 2006. Dissertation Committee: Paul Baker (chair), Dianne Ashby, Patricia Klass, William Rau. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 91-95) and abstract. Also available in print.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--Duquesne University, 2006. / Title from document title page. Abstract included in electronic submission form. Includes bibliographical references (p.165-186) and index.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--Mississippi State University. Department of Political Science and Public Administration. / Title from title screen. Includes bibliographical references.

Thesis (EDD)--University of Montana, 2009. / Contents viewed on November 24, 2009. "Major Subject: School of Education" Title from author supplied metadata. Includes bibliographical references.

The study analysed how the management of the quality of education of Rural Day Secondary Schools has been affected by the internal efficiency of the school system. Both quantitative and qualitative techniques were used in the study. The study measured the internal efficiency of selected Rural Day Secondary Schools, and analysed the views of school managers and school heads on the quality of education of Rural Day Secondary Schools, and strategies that can be used to improve the quality of education thereof.The study found out that the internal efficiency of Rural Day Secondary Schools was low. At least 30% of students entering Rural Day Secondary Schools were overage; and the overall survival rate was 57.4% Dropouts were mainly caused by inability to pay school and examination fees and long distances walked by students to school. Students repeated classes mainly at Form 4. The average "O" level examination pass rate was 9.8%. The reasons for the low pass rates include the calibre of students enrolled; lack of resources; low teacher morale; long distances walked by students to school, and an unsuitable curriculum. BSP (Z) has been the most effective programme in addressing the quality of education, while the Quality Assurance Division is the least effective. ZIMSEC has improved access to "O" level examinations and the relevance of the examination questions, but is fraught with mismanagement, while the Clients' Charter has not been fully implemented due to inadequate training. SDCs have improved the supply of resources in the schools, but lack basic understanding of education policies.The study recommended that more funding be allocated to Rural Day Secondary Schools to boost resources and curtail dropouts, and that low-cost boarding facilities be introduced to deal with the problem of long distances walked by students. There is also a need to re-engineer the curriculum and make it more responsive to the plight of rural students. Training is needed for SDCs, on the Clients' Charter. It was further recommended that BSP (Z) should try to reach out to remote schools; ZIMSEC should improve examinations management, and the Quality Assurance Division should be revamped to carry out effective teacher supervision. / Further Teacher Education / D. Ed. (Education Management)

The Schools Act 84 of 1996 has given governing bodies (SGBs) the responsibility of managing school finances. The Act prescribes that the SGB must prepare a budget annually. A school’s budget is an important financial management tool, which ensures that adequate resources are procured in a cost-effective manner in order to enhance teaching and learning. However, schools are grappling with diminishing financial resources and this factor reduces the school’s capacity to respond to the changing needs of learners. Furthermore, SGBs lack the necessary skills and competence to manage funds. The general aim of this research was to determine whether schools prepare budgets effectively, resulting in the optimum utilization of physical resources which will improve the quality of teaching and learning. A literature study was undertaken relating to effective budgeting for the optimum utilisation of physical resources for effective teaching and learning to take place. It outlined school finances in other countries and the impact that budgets have on effective school management. It also gave a detailed account of the process of budgeting and more importantly it outlined in detail the effect of physical resources on school improvement. A quantitative study was made through a structured questionnaire developed from a literature survey. A discussion of the respondents sampled, their biographical details in the form of graphs and the return-rate of questionnaires were also discussed. The questionnaire was discussed as well as the mean scores of various items. Some pertinent questions relating to effective budgeting was also discussed. Educators regard financial management as an important component of school management. They also regard the optimum utilization of resources as key to effective teaching and learning in the classroom. The data was analysed. The Pearson’s Chi Square value as well as Cramer’s V value was discussed using cross-tabulations. Pertinent questions were analysed using these techniques and possible explanations were given to empirical findings. Taking it from school to school or using cross-tabulation on whether educators are SGB members or not, reveals a similar trend that budgets are being drawn up through very little input from all stakeholders. This is a cause for concern. Few educators agree that the DoE provides schools with the necessary physical resources for teaching. This implies that schools have to provide the necessary resources for effective teaching to take place, which further impacts on the budgetary process. Schools have to levy fees on its learners or embark on fundraising projects to supplement the monies from the state. Finally findings from the literature as well important empirical findings were discussed, together with recommendations. Although some SGB training was provided, it has not been focused and thorough, or it has been done by incompetent trainers. Workshops should be conducted by accountants and financial experts with careful monitoring at each stage. There should be regular feedback and evaluation. SGBs should co-opt financial experts from their communities to assist in this delicate task. The SGB should ensure that they involve all stakeholders when initiating the budget process. In this regard, schools could make use of programme budgeting so that all learning areas are catered for and all educators, parents and the community at large are involved. Effective budgeting will go a long way towards achieving the educational goals of schools by ensuring that all physical resources are utilized optimally. / Prof. R. Mestry