The purpose of this study was to evaluate the influence of block scheduling and instructional strategies on student achievement in Algebra I. The study was conducted during the 1997-98 school year. This study was comprised of two components, a quantitative study and a qualitative study. The quantitative study focused on block and traditional scheduling and the influence identified through scores on the Texas End-of-Course exam for Algebra I. The sample for this study consisted of 59 school districts from five counties in the north Texas area. The qualitative portion of this study focused on 10 classrooms, 5 block and 5 traditional, taken from the sample of 59 districts. Data for the qualitative study included questionnaires, interviews, and observations. The End-of-Course scores were analyzed using an ANOVA at the .05 level of significance, no significant difference was identified in the achievement levels of the two groups. The qualitative data was organized by categories derived from the NCTM teaching standards. Data from this portion of the study indicated that teachers in both block and traditionally scheduled classes spend their class time in a similar manner, using similar materials, and using more traditional strategies. Additional analyses of data based upon usage of the graphing calculator and manipulatives also resulted in no significant difference. Although all comparisons between block and traditional scheduling and usage or non-usage of technology and/or manipulatives resulted in no significant difference, the block groups and those using technology and/or manipulatives had higher mean scores. This indicates that allowing teachers more time to use alternative instructional strategies would benefit the student, but this will not take place without the teacher receiving training and support.

This study utilized a causal-comparative design to investigate a relationship between the independent variable, National Board certification, and the dependent variable, perceived use of developmentally appropriate practices (DAP). A self-developed survey, the Early-childhood Teacher Inventory of Practices (E-TIP), was emailed to participants to collect data comparing differences in perceived use of DAP among early childhood teachers. Two hundred and forty-six Non-National Board certified (Non-NBCT) and 135 National Board certified (NBCT) early childhood teachers were surveyed. Inferential and descriptive statistics were used to analyze scores to determine if there was a difference in the mean scores. Descriptives were reported for age, years of teaching experience, grade level currently teaching, ethnicity, degree type, certification type, and degree level. Multiple analysis of variance (MANOVA) and univariate analysis of variance (ANOVA) were used to understand the differences between perceived use of DAP. NBCTs scored significantly higher than Non-NBCTs on the E-TIP in three of the four target areas and on the Total of the Scale. Pearson product-moment corelations were used to determine a relationship between years of experience or level of education and NBCTs' perceived use of DAP. Years of experience were significantly related, but level of education was not. The findings indicate that National Board certified teachers perceive they incorporate more developmentally appropriate practices into their teaching than Non-National Board certified teachers.

This dissertation examined the changes of Geometry Education in New York State in connection with the differences in the New York State Mathematics Standards (1999, 2005, 2011). As a result of this analysis, a theoretical framework was created to support teachers in making the shift from teaching towards the 2005 learning standards to teaching towards the goals of the Common Core Standards (2011). Once created, the theoretical framework served as the basis of the development of a collection of problems on various topics in geometry used by teachers in their geometry classrooms. This document can be found in the Appendix of this dissertation. As seen in the past, curriculum, standards, and assessment are all intertwined and reflect one another. In order to bridge the gaps and explore relationships between these components, this research compares the various New York State Mathematics Standards to determine differences in topical coverage as well as an analysis of the New York State Geometry Regents examinations under the 2005 standards and Common Core Standards. Additionally, the research builds on these results and also analyzes select New York State Regents Examination questions in specific topics. This study used the information gathered to create a collection of problems based on certain principles to support teachers in adequate preparation of students for the Common Core Geometry Course. Teachers found the principles provided to be very useful in creating their own problems for additional topics, and found the collection of problems to be very helpful in the teaching and learning of geometry to their students.

Not available / text

Thesis (Ed.D.)--University of Central Florida, 2008. / Adviser: Larry Holt. Includes bibliographical references (p. 68-74).

Dissertation (Ph.D.)--Auburn University, 2006. / Abstract. Vita. Includes bibliographic references.

Thesis (Ed.D.)--University of Central Florida, 2008. / Advisers: Larry Holt, Randall Hewitt. Includes bibliographical references (p. 95-106).

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Washington, 2007. / Vita. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 172-187).

Thesis (Ed. D.)--Illinois State University, 2006. / Title from title page screen, viewed on May 11, 2007. Dissertation Committee: Thomas Crumpler (chair), Amee Adkins, Robert Dean, Lynn Gaddis, Kay Moss, Gary Weilbacher. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 441-446) and abstract. Also available in print.

Thesis (Ed.D.)--University of West Florida, 2006. / Title from title page of source document. Document formatted into pages; contains 130 pages. Includes bibliographical references.