This study employed a mixed method research design to examine a teachers-teaching-teachers method of professional development for training secondary school teachers to use content area reading strategies and their perceptions of the effectiveness of these strategies. Teachers were trained by the researcher (who is also a teacher) to use three content area reading strategies: one before reading strategy (K-W-L), one during reading strategy (Student-Generated Questions), and one after reading strategy (Learning Logs). The findings revealed that teachers perceived content area reading strategies to be very effective for improving student comprehension. The Duke and Pearson (2002) model of comprehension instruction (and particularly the modeling portion of this framework) was found to be an effective way in which to teach both teachers and students how to use content area reading strategies. This study provides teachers with information they can use to learn more about content area reading strategies. It also provides information for administrators, reading clinicians, resource teachers, and professional development committees regarding effective methods of teacher training. / October 2007

This study employed a mixed method research design to examine a teachers-teaching-teachers method of professional development for training secondary school teachers to use content area reading strategies and their perceptions of the effectiveness of these strategies. Teachers were trained by the researcher (who is also a teacher) to use three content area reading strategies: one before reading strategy (K-W-L), one during reading strategy (Student-Generated Questions), and one after reading strategy (Learning Logs). The findings revealed that teachers perceived content area reading strategies to be very effective for improving student comprehension. The Duke and Pearson (2002) model of comprehension instruction (and particularly the modeling portion of this framework) was found to be an effective way in which to teach both teachers and students how to use content area reading strategies. This study provides teachers with information they can use to learn more about content area reading strategies. It also provides information for administrators, reading clinicians, resource teachers, and professional development committees regarding effective methods of teacher training.

This study employed a mixed method research design to examine a teachers-teaching-teachers method of professional development for training secondary school teachers to use content area reading strategies and their perceptions of the effectiveness of these strategies. Teachers were trained by the researcher (who is also a teacher) to use three content area reading strategies: one before reading strategy (K-W-L), one during reading strategy (Student-Generated Questions), and one after reading strategy (Learning Logs). The findings revealed that teachers perceived content area reading strategies to be very effective for improving student comprehension. The Duke and Pearson (2002) model of comprehension instruction (and particularly the modeling portion of this framework) was found to be an effective way in which to teach both teachers and students how to use content area reading strategies. This study provides teachers with information they can use to learn more about content area reading strategies. It also provides information for administrators, reading clinicians, resource teachers, and professional development committees regarding effective methods of teacher training.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of Wollongong, 2008. / Typescript. Includes bibliographical references: leaf 259-305.

Thesis (M.A.)--University of North Carolina at Wilmington, 2005. / Includes appendexis. Includes bibliographical references (leaves: [98]-101)

Thesis (Ph. D.)--Catholic University of America. / Bibliography: p. 125-129.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--Miami University, Dept. of Educational Leadership, 2006. / Title from second page of PDF document. Includes bibliographical references (p. 94-98).

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

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.

State universities in Saudi Arabia have adopted a new educational policy, which made English the medium of instruction for all scientific departments. This has led to establishing a Foundation Year Programme (FYP) in the English Language Institute (ELI) of those universities, which aims to prepare university students to cope with the new academic requirements in their chosen majors and to improve their overall language competence. This study investigates teachers’ roles and beliefs regarding assessment practices in the ELI with the aim to uncover not only the role(s) teachers play in both continuous and summative assessment practices, but also teachers’ understandings of and attitudes towards assessment and their roles in it. Findings will also include how teachers perceive this role in this interpretive study, where the data were collected using open-ended interviews with twenty male and female expatriate and Saudi EFL teachers who work in the ELI of a specific Saudi university. The data were analysed on the basis of participants’ views and explanations about their roles in both continuous and summative assessment in the institution. The findings revealed that teachers had no role in summative assessment unless they were members of the Assessment Committee and that most teachers wanted to have a voice and be more involved. While teachers had a limited role in continuous assessment in the classroom, they felt the need for more involvement in the choice of materials/topics employed as well as more freedom regarding the way it is administered. The study also revealed that the ELI was not well receptive of criticism from teachers, which made teachers sometimes reluctant to being more involved in assessment or voicing their views in fear of being labelled negatively. Finally, some contributions to knowledge, implications for the context and recommendations are provided as well as some suggestions for improving teachers’ roles in assessment for future consideration.