Dissertations (Ed. D.)--Rowan University, 2009. / Typescript. "UMI Number: 3359922 "--T.p. verso. Includes bibliographical references.

Thesis PlanB (M.S.)--University of Wisconsin--Stout, 2006. / Includes bibliographical references.

Thesis PlanB (M.S.)--University of Wisconsin--Stout, 2006. / Includes bibliographical references.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--Bowling Green State University, 2007. / Document formatted into pages; contains x, 190 p. Includes bibliographical references.

Dissertation (PhD) Florida State University, 2005. / Advisor: John M. Geringer, Florida State University, College of Music. Title and description from dissertation home page (viewed 06-22-07). Document formatted into pages; contains 97 pages. Includes biographical sketch. Includes bibliographical references.

This study explored how student responses systems are being used in middle school classrooms. The study sought to find out (1) for what purposes middle school teachers used student response systems (SRS); (2) in what subject areas middle school teachers use SRS; (3) if teachers profile of use of the systems were associated with particular characteristics of teachers (i.e., years taught, semesters using SRS technology, professional development experiences); (4) if teachers profile of use of the systems were related to their perceptions regarding the effect of SRS on instruction; and (5) if teachers profile of use of the systems were related to their perceptions regarding the effect of SRS on student learning. A total of 658 middle school teachers using student response systems were contacted to participate in the electronic survey. A total of 121 responded, yielding a response rate of 18.38%. A pre-existing survey, the Student Response System Questionnaire, was used to gather quantitative data for this study. Descriptive statistics were used to report data for purposes teachers used the systems and in what subject areas teachers used the systems. The results from the study show that grades 6-8 teachers are using student response systems across the curriculum and the main purpose is for formative assessment. Analysis of variance tests (ANOVAs) were used to analyze the relationship between profiles of use and continuous data (i.e., how many years the teachers have taught and how many semesters they have used student response technology). There was a significant relationship (F = 3.56, p < .05) between the number of years teachers had taught and their profiles of use. After an analysis of variance (ANOVA) test was conducted for the number of semesters teachers had used the SRS as compared to their profile of use, no significance was found. A chi-square test (85.41, p <.01) revealed there was a significant relationship between teachers' profile of use and the amount of technical professional development they have received. A chi-square test (21.83, p <.01) revealed there was a significant relationship between teachers' profile of use and the amount of instructional professional development they had received. An analysis of variance test (ANOVA) was conducted between the teachers' profile of use and their perceptions regarding the effect of student response systems on instruction. This correlation was significant at the .000 level and was therefore significant to this study implying a relationship between the teachers' perceptions regarding the effect of student response systems on instruction and their profiles of use. An analysis of variance test (ANOVA) was also conducted between the teachers' profile of use and their perceptions regarding the effect of student response systems on student learning. This correlation was significant at the .002 level and was therefore significant to this study implying a relationship between the teachers' perceptions regarding the effect of student response systems on student learning and their profiles of use. Ten open response questions were sent out to participating teachers soliciting qualitative data to support the quantitative data from the electronic survey. Eleven teachers responded and themes from their responses are included in the results of this study.

Thesis (Ed.M.)--Boston University

<p> This thesis project consists of the development of an eighth-grade lesson sequence written for students on Catalina Island in Southern California. It is written as part of a project developed by the Catalina Island Conservancy to promote the ecological awareness of students living on the island. It encompasses the three dimensions of the Next Generation Science Standards, highlights an outdoor component, and uses a 5E lesson framework. The lesson was reviewed by the Catalina Island Conservancy and by teachers experienced with the Next Generation Science Standards. Revisions were made based on their feedback. The lesson sequence focuses on a local endemic subspecies of bird in order to explore natural selection. Students learn about the bird, investigate its local habitat, compete in a natural selection simulation, and then make predictions about the fate of the bird due to a climatic change, using evidence collected throughout the lesson.</p><p>

<p> The purpose of this study was to compare the traditional grading and feedback systems used in most classrooms to a competency-based grading and feedback system. The traditional system used the familiar grading system of A, B, C, D and F applied to assignments. The competency model was based on providing students formative and summative feedback regarding their achievement toward proficiency of specific skills and concepts. </p><p> This quasi-experimental action research study had a control group and an intervention group comprised of general education and special education sixth grade students in language arts classes. Quantitative data in the form of student achievement scores and student survey responses was analyzed. Qualitative data in the form of teacher interview responses was analyzed. </p><p> Overall there was no statistically significant change in the MAP reading scores between the control and intervention group. However, when the variables of time, group and gender from an ANOVA were analyzed, the males in the intervention group showed a statically significant increase in achievement. This achievement was regardless if the male was an IEP or non-IEP student. Overall, the results do not show that either the control or intervention group sees the feedback as effective. However, the results of the girls&rsquo; responses in the control group were statistically significant. The girls in the control group did see the provided feedback as effective. The teachers&rsquo; interview responses provided three main themes, which included students applied feedback more in the competency-based classroom than in the traditional classroom. Both teachers used the feedback to adjust curriculum and instruction. Additionally, the intervention teacher pointed out that more time is needed to help students apply the competency-based system. </p><p> Based on this study, the first recommendation is to implement competency-based grading and feedback processes. The second recommendation is that formative and summative feedback processes based on proficiencies be implemented to assists students in identifying their understanding of and performance on skills and concepts. Recommendations for future studies include having a larger sample size and continuing the study for a longer period of time.</p><p>

<p> The purpose of this research was to examine the potential relationship between students&rsquo; degree of familiarity with repertoire common to beginning band method books and aural-based music achievement after one year of study. Three research questions guided this study: (1) Which songs from the Familiar Repertoire Survey (FRS) are reported as being the most and least familiar to the sample? (2) For a familiar song, &ldquo;Lightly Row,&rdquo; can FRS scores predict (a) Familiar Music Achievement Singing Test (FMAST) scores, (b) Familiar Music Achievement Playing Test (FMAPT) scores, (c) Familiar Music Achievement Improvisation Singing Test (FMAIST) scores, and (d) Familiar Music Achievement Improvisation Playing Test (FMAIPT) scores? (3) For an unfamiliar song, &ldquo;Finish Line,&rdquo; can FRS scores predict (a) Unfamiliar Music Achievement Singing Test (UMAST) scores, (b) Unfamiliar Music Achievement Playing Test (UMAPT) scores, (c) Unfamiliar Music Achievement Improvisation Singing Test (UMAIST) scores, and (d) Unfamiliar Music Achievement Improvisation Playing Test (UMAIPT) scores? </p><p> Participants (<i>N</i> = 17) were fifth and sixth grade students enrolled in their second year of beginning band in a New Jersey elementary school. I created two measurement instruments: FRS, designed to gauge the breadth and depth of students&rsquo; familiarity with songs common to beginning band method books, and the Music Achievement Test (MAT) designed to measure aural-based music achievement in singing, playing by ear, and improvising on a familiar and unfamiliar song. </p><p> In the first session, participants completed FRS by listening to songs common to beginning band books and completing a Likert-type survey on their familiarity with each song. Later, participants watched MAT through an interactive video which prompted them to complete eight musical subtests. I recorded all performances. Judges rated each performance with two rating scales. </p><p> I analyzed the frequency of responses for each song and found &ldquo;Hot Cross Buns,&rdquo; &ldquo;Jingle Bells,&rdquo; &ldquo;Pierrot,&rdquo; &ldquo;Lightly Row,&rdquo; and &ldquo;London Bridge&rdquo; to be the most familiar songs. Through linear regressions, I analyzed the ability of FRS to predict MAT scores. I found a significant regression equation between FRS and its ability to predict FMAST scores and UMAIST scores. </p><p> The current exploratory study contained many limitations which restricts its generalizability to other beginning band populations; however, six conclusions can be made. Familiarity with common beginning band repertoire as represented by a selection of 24 songs common to beginning band method books does not predict students&rsquo; achievement (a) singing an unfamiliar song, (b) demonstrating through singing improvisation based on a familiar song, (c) playing by ear a familiar or unfamiliar song, and (d) improvising on an instrument, whether improvising within the context of a familiar or unfamiliar song. Familiarity with common beginning band repertoire does predict students&rsquo; achievement (a) singing a familiar song and (b) demonstrating through singing improvisation based on an unfamiliar song.</p><p>