No description available.

No description available.

"The purpose of this study is to compile useful information regarding the merits of a specific kind of multi-level reading program. Another purpose in this study is to ascertain, insofar as is possible, the reaction of both educators and students to such a program. The scope of the study encompasses two major areas: (1) an historical approach, consisting of a review of the literature in the entire field of multi-level reading materials, (2) an evaluation, through the use of an opinionnaire, which was sent to Florida educators who have used the materials"--Introduction. / Typescript. / "June, 1961." / "Submitted to the Graduate Council of Florida State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science." / Advisor: Mildred Swearingen, Professor Directing Study. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 51-53).

No description available.

No description available.

The purpose of this survey was to identify and compare the specific factors relating to merit pay that teachers, principals, and superintendents in Central Florida would accept in the development and implementation of a merit pay plan. A questionnaire, based on an instrument that was used in a previous study on merit pay factors in 1970, was developed that consisted of 38 factors. A five-point ordinal scale was used to measure the educators' degree of acceptance for each factor. There were 14 Central Florida school districts that participated in the survey including 433 teachers, 211 principals, and 12 superintendents. The response rate was 62.6 percent. The chi square test was the primary test used for the statistical analysis. The test was utilized to compare group responses on a factor-by-factor basis. Some conclusions made based upon the analysis of data were: 1. Agreement existed by the educators in Central Florida on a majority of 38 factors. 2. Teachers and principals rejected the following factors: a. Set a quota on the number of teachers eligible for merit pay each year. b. Teacher evaluation should include summer work experiences which relate to teacher's field. c. Teacher evaluation should include as a criteria an advanced degree or certificate. d. Teacher evaluation should include college/university training beyond a degree or certificate. e. Teacher evaluation should include conference and convention participation. f. Teacher evaluation should include scores achieved on standardized tests. 3. Teachers rejected having the principal-be the primary evaluator, whereas principals and superintendents were in general agreement with this factor. 4. Teachers showed a difference on more factors when divided on the basis of experiential level (1 to 10 years versus 11 years and over). In summary, although there were statistically significant differences identified, the comparisons were more alike than different with the majority being differences in degree only.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

Study done on 15 teachers in 2 counties in North Florida--P. xvi. / Kimberly R. Burgess. / Typescript. / Thesis (Ph. D.)--Florida State University, 2003. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 328-339).