Education & Pedagogy

Education is a source of national pride in Lebanon. When the general public was asked how the education system was performing, 76 percent of respondents had a positive opinion; and these satisfaction rates have been consistently high over the years. However, perception of education quality does not reflect the reality of the sector; and learning outcomes, which are the determining metrics of success in education, have been lower than the international average, with a declining trend since 2007. This volume seeks to uncover why the education system in Lebanon is not reaching its full potential. It uses a political economy approach to study the drivers and factors that guide education operations to produce and utilize education outcomes. This includes the study of the context, stakeholders, and processes that shape education policies, institutions, and activities. It also aims to identify enablers and constraints for policy change, policy implementation, and results achievement. The analysis encompasses how education policies are developed; how education consumables--such as curricula, textbooks, and learning materials--are produced, distributed, and used by learners; how education services are delivered and monitored; and how results are measured. It includes the identification of the most influential actors in the education arena, as well as their vested interests. It also examines unfavorable frameworks for action that are likely to block the adoption of reforms and delay or derail their implementation. The system-level analysis presented in this volume used a mixed-method approach. Qualitative and quantitative analyses were conducted based on a review and analysis of more than 1,900 research papers, articles, and books; laws and policies; expenditures; trends; and enrollment and outcome indicators. Primary methods of inquiry were also used and included interviews, focus group discussions, and a household-based perception survey. [The studies under Research for Results (R4R) were made possible through generous financial contributions from the United Kingdom's Department for International Development (DFID) and the United States Agency for International Development (USAID).]

The theme of the 38th meeting of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (PME 38) and the 36th meeting of the North American Chapter of the Psychology of Mathematics Education (PME-NA 36) was "Mathematics Education at the Edge." Academically, the theme provides opportunities to highlight and examine mathematics education research that is: (1) breaking new ground or on the cutting edge of innovative research and research methodologies; and (2) exploring issues with groups that are often positioned at the edge or periphery of educational research, such as social justice, peace education, equity, and Indigenous education. Geographically, the theme "Mathematics Education at the Edge" describes the very place of the conference setting, Vancouver, a city situated at the edge of Canada on the Pacific Ocean and Coast Mountain Range. The papers in the six volumes of these proceedings are organized according to the type of presentation. Volume 1 contains the presentations of the plenary speakers, Research Forum activities, Discussion Group activities, Working Session activities and the National Presentation of mathematics education in Canada. Volumes 2-5 contain the Research Reports of the conference, while Volume 6 consists of the Short Oral and Poster Presentations. The organization of PME 2014 is a collaborative effort involving teams of colleagues at the University of British Columbia and Simon Fraser University.

This report is Iowa's response to the four questions that the United States Department of Education, Office of Career, Technical, and Adult Education (OCTAE), requires of all states and territories receiving federal funding through the Workforce Investment Act (WIA), Title II, Adult Education and Family Literacy Act (AEFLA). The overall goal of the Act is "to increase the employability, retention, and earnings of participants and increase occupational skill attainment by participants and, as a result, improve the quality of the workforce, reduce welfare dependency, and enhance the productivity and competitiveness of the Nation." The federally-funded adult education and literacy programs administered by the Iowa Department of Education's Division of Community Colleges provide lifelong educational opportunities and support services to eligible participants. Programs assist adults in obtaining the knowledge and skills necessary for work, further education, family self-sufficiency, and community involvement. By improving the education and skill levels of individual Iowans, the programs enhance the competitiveness of the state's workforce and economy. Iowa adult education programs help learners to accomplish the following: (1) Gain employment or better their current employment. (2) Obtain a high school equivalency diploma by passing the state selected assessment. (3) Attain skills necessary to enter postsecondary education and training. (4) Exit public welfare and become self-sufficient. (5) Learn to speak, read, and write the English language. (6) Master basic academic skills to help their children succeed in school. (7) Become U.S. citizens and participate in a democratic society. (8) Gain self-esteem, personal confidence, and a sense of personal and civic responsibility. Appended to the report is: Workforce Investment Act (WIA), Title II, Section 223 State Leadership Activities.

Technical and vocational education helps to empower marginalized sections of society by increasing their employability. However, access to skills training provided by formal technical and vocational institutions is often limited for these sections of society. Women from poor communities are especially disadvantaged in this regard due to community or family beliefs that undermine their potential for career development and economic independence. "Gender Issues in Technical and Vocational Education Programs" is an essential critical resource that probes the issue of gender equity in specialized educational programs, such as vocational or technical education programs. It also presents global initiatives that are being undertaken to enhance the access to technical and vocational education programs to all citizens. Featuring coverage on topics such as digital economy, skill development, and STEM education, this book is ideal for academicians, researchers, social scientists, educators, policymakers, government officials, and professionals. Chapters include: (1) Gender Gap in Skill Development: An Analytical Review (Anjuli Chandra); (2) Youth Participation in the National Development Plan Through Technical and Vocational Education and Training: The Case of Young Black Women in South Africa (Johannes Ntshilagane Mampane); (3) Gender Issues and Priorities in Republic of Belarus (Albina Sibirskaya); (4) Gender Issues in Vocational Education and Training in India: Imperatives and Challenges (Disha Singh); (5) Skill Challenge in Bengaluru's Garment Industry: A Gender Perspective (Karan Peer); (6) Gender Equity and Social Inclusion: Holistic Approach to Education, Training, and Labor Market Demand (Suraiya Tabassum); (7) Vocational Education and Training for Women: A Gender Divide Perspective (Shikha Jyoti Deka); (8) How Bangladesh Is Increasing the Employability of Females with Technical Training Programs (Paula E. Faulkner, Shahana Begum, and Chastity Warren English); (9) Skill Acquisition and Entrepreneurial Intention Among Corp Members in Southwestern Nigeria (Adedeji Oluwaseun Adewusi); (10) Skill Development, Skill Premium, and Technological Change: A Gender-Based Approach (Harshil Sharma); (11) Significant Influences of Digital Literacy to Promote Gender Equity and Equality in Education: Digital Literacy Perspective (Chammika Mallawaarachchi); and (12) Gender-Responsive TVET Framework: An Indian Perspective (Shashi Bala and Puja Singhal).

All over the world, economic inclusion has risen to the top of the development discourse. A Oxford Scholarship Online well-performing education system is central to achieving inclusive development -- but the challenge of improving educational outcomes has proven to be unexpectedly difficult. Access to education has increased, but quality remains low, with weaknesses in governance comprising an important part of the explanation. "The Politics and Governance of Basic Education" explores the balance between hierarchical and horizontal institutional arrangements for the public provision of basic education. Using the vivid example of South Africa, a country that had ambitious goals at the outset of its transition from apartheid to democracy, it explores how the interaction of politics and institutions affects educational outcomes. By examining lessons learned from how South Africa failed to achieve many of its goals, it constructs an innovative alternative strategy for making process, combining practical steps to achieve incremental gains to re-orient the system towards learning. This book contains the following chapters: (1) Improving basic education - the governance challenge (Brian Levy); (2) The transformation of South Africa's system of basic education (Luis Crouch and Ursula Hoadley); (3) Education policymaking at national level - the politics of multiple principals (Robert Cameron and Vinothan Naidoo); (4) Provincial governance of education - the Western Cape experience (Robert Cameron and Brian Levy); (5) Provincial governance of education - the Eastern Cape experience (Zukiswa Kota, Monica Hendricks, Eric Matambo, and Vinothan Naidoo); (6) Explaining the Western Cape performance paradox: an econometric analysis (Gabrielle Wills, Debra Shepherd, and Janeli Kotze); (7) Context and capability: A tale of two bureaucracies (Brian Levy, Robert Cameron, and Vinothan Naidoo); (8) Case studies of school-level governance dynamics in the Western Cape (Ursula Hoadley, Brian Levy, Lawule Shumane, and Shelly Wilburn); (9) Case studies of school-level governance dynamics in the Eastern Cape (Brian Levy and Lawule Shumane); and (10) "All for education" - Meeting the governance challenge (Brian Levy).

Volume I of the 1888-1889 "Report of the Commissioner of Education" is in the two parts and begins with the Commissioner of Education's introduction which includes general statistics; grade of instruction; school property; education in the south; comparison of German, French, and American schools; course of study; the educational systems of Europe, England, and France; the schools of German-speaking countries, Italy, Sweden, and Finland; education in Spain and Brazil; education of teachers, manual training, etc.; two chief interests in the present movement; and the conflict between the college and the common school. This volume contains: Part I -- General and Comparative Exhibit of Education in the United States and Foreign Countries: (1) General Statistical Exhibit of Education in the United States; (2) A Comparison of the Schools of the United States, Germany, and France; (3) Detailed View of the Educational System of England; (4) The Educational System of France; (5) Bird's-Eye View of the Schools of Germany, Austria, Hungary, and Switzerland; (6) The School System of Italy; (7) Education in Sweden and Finland; (8) Education in Spain; (9) Education in Brazil; and (10) Name Register. Part II -- Normal Schools, Manual Training Schools, Courses of Study, etc.: (1) The Inception and Progress of the Normal School Curriculum; (2) The Teaching Force of New England from 1866 to 1883; (3) Professional Work in the Normal Schools of the United States; (4) The "New Plan" of the Trustees of the Peabody Fund in 1878; (5) Courses of Study in City Public Elementary Schools; (6) Manual and Industrial Training; (7) Religious Instruction in Public Schools; (8) Coeducation of the Sexes; (9) Compulsory Attendance Laws; (10) State Text-book Laws and Systems; (11) Powers of City School Boards with regard to School Sites and Buildings; (12) Discussions of Educational Questions, chiefly by School Officials; (13) The University of the Future; (14) Fellowships in Colleges and Universities; and (15) School Savings Banks. [For Volume II, see ED617449.]

The Global Partnership for Education (GPE) addresses the most significant education challenges faced by developing countries through supporting governments to improve equity and learning by strengthening their education systems. GPE is a global fund and a partnership focused entirely on education in developing countries. The partnership has a unique role: agreeing upon standards for education planning and policy-making and mobilizing development financing from public and private donors around the world to support and monitor the implementation of those plans. GPE 2020 is a five-year strategic plan commencing January 1, 2016, and ending December 31, 2020. It aligns GPE's vision and mission to the Global Goals for Sustainable Development. In doing so, GPE specifically recognizes that education is pivotal to the achievement of all of the other Global Goals. GPE therefore adopts as their vision for GPE 2020 the following: "To ensure inclusive and equitable quality education and promote lifelong learning opportunities for all." In order to realize this mission GPE 2020 recognizes it's mission as "Mobilization of global and national efforts to contribute to the achievement of equitable, quality education and learning for all, through inclusive partnership, a focus on effective and efficient education systems and increased financing." Three clear and ambitious goals have been chosen which encapsulate what must be done to stop children and youth being left out or left behind because education systems are nor working as they should: (1) Improved and more equitable student learning outcomes through quality teaching and learning; (2) Increased equity, gender equality and inclusion for all in a full cycle of quality education, targeting the poorest and most marginalized, including by gender, disability, ethnicity and conflict or fragility; and (3) Effective and efficient education systems delivering equitable, quality educational services for all. Core Indicators highlight the key results GPE 2020 hopes to achieve. They are part of a comprehensive set of indicators by which GPE will monitor progress over the next five years. An annex presents GPE Results and Indicators Framework.

The educational movements that have been taking place in Great Britain during the past two or three years have aroused widespread interest among teachers and publicists in this country. This report is an attempt to analyze these movements and to indicate their significance in the broader movement for reconstruction. The educational reforms that have already been introduced and the developments that are promised for the future are not merely the result of an emotional reaction induced by the war. Their meaning will be entirely lost unless their position in the wider program is realized. The present report aims accordingly to give in broad outline the general features of the developments of the past few years. It makes no attempt to deal exhaustively with the course of educational spotlight or progress during this time. In many cases, this would be impossible. The influences of the war on education have not yet spent themselves and to that extent it has not been deemed wise to deal with certain topics that will bear fruitful study at a later date. This paper deals with the course of education and school medical inspection during the past few years, with the proposals for the reform of secondary education, with the various Government reports on different branches of education, and finally with the developments that led up to the passage of the education act in England and the significance of the act itself. A similar but briefer account is given of educational conditions in Scotland. Ireland is included although her educational system is unlike those of England and Wales or Scotland. Contents include: (1) Introduction; (2) England: The schools during the war; (3) Medical inspection of schools; (4) Education of working boys and girls; (5) Secondary education during the war; (6) The position of science in the educational system; (7) Position of modern languages; (8) Tendencies in secondary education; (9) Salaries and pensions; (10) Adult education; (11) Educational reconstruction and public opinion; (12) Education Act, 1918; (13) Scotland: The schools during the war; (14) Teacher's salaries; (15) The reform of education; and (16) The Scottish education bill. [Best copy available has been provided.]

This survey of land-grant college education is divided into five sections, published separately as follows: Part I: History and Educational Objectives of Land-Grant College Education; Part II: The Liberal Arts and Sciences and Miscellaneous Subjects in Land-Grant Colleges; Part III: Agricultural Education in Land-Grant Colleges; Part IV: Engineering and Mechanic Arts in Land-Grant Colleges; and Part V: Home Economics in Land-Grant Colleges. In this section (Part II) such subjects have been brought together as could not be as readily classified under agriculture, engineering, or home economics. In addition to the study of the liberal arts and sciences, in relation to the technical fields, there is also included a treatment of the subjects of agricultural economics, rural sociology, industrial journalism, military training, physical education, general educational extension, and education in the negro land-grant colleges. The following 13 chapters are included: (1) The liberal arts in relation to the land-grant colleges (George F. Zook); (2) The sciences in relation to undergraduate land-grant college curricula (Charles E. Marshall); (3) The sciences in relation to graduate work in agriculture (A. R. Mann); (4) The sciences in relation to engineering education (Richard G. Dukes); (5) The arts and sciences in relation to home economics education (Emeline S. Whitcomb); (6) Agricultural economies and allied subjects (H. C. Taylor); (7) Rural sociology (C. J. Galpin); (8) Industrial journalism (N. A. Crawford); (9) The War Department and military training in the land-grant colleges (C. R. Mann and F. J. Morrow); (10) Military training in land-grant colleges (William Bennett Bizzell); (11) Physical education and hygiene (Thomas E. Jones); (12) Education in the negro land-grant colleges (R. S. Wilkinson); and (13) University extension in land-grant colleges (Louis E. Reber). An index is included. (Individual chapters contain footnotes and figures.) [Best copy available has been provided.]

The Committee for Education Funding (CEF), a coalition of over 90 national education associations and institutions from preschool to postgraduate education, applauds President Obama's Fiscal Year 2013 budget for prioritizing investment in education as a proven strategy to increase jobs and improve our nation's economic growth and competitiveness. Within a constrained fiscal environment and tight spending caps imposed by the Budget Control Act, the budget proposes an increase of $1.7 billion (2.5 percent) in discretionary spending for programs in the Department of Education. In addition, the budget proposes over $60 billion in mandatory spending for major new investments in modernizing schools and community college facilities, preventing further layoffs of teachers and other educators, improving the preparation and quality of teachers and school leaders, expanding career academies, and training workers through community colleges. While CEF is pleased with overall education investments in the budget, looming sequestration cuts present a major threat to students, schools, and colleges. The Administration's budget proposes to consolidate 38 ESEA programs into nine new flexible funding streams. While such consolidations ultimately will be decided in the ESEA reauthorization, from a budgetary perspective CEF believes any program consolidations should not result in the elimination of essential functions such as improving teacher preparation at institutions of higher education, family engagement, or providing K-12 students with sufficient specialized instructional support personnel. This report contains the following sections: (1) Charts and Graphs (Joel Packer, Ed.; and Tom Zembar, Ed.); (2) The Foundation for Success--Elementary and Secondary Education (Jocelyn Bissonnette, Ed.; Noelle Ellerson, Ed.; and Lindsay Jones, Ed.); (3) Education, Careers and Lifelong Learning (Jamie Baxter, Ed.; and Nancy Conneely, Ed.); (4) The Gateway to Opportunity--Higher Education (Stephanie Giesecke, Ed.; and Carolyn Henrich, Ed.); (5) Forging Success--Educational Research, Statistics and Improvement (Gerald Sroufe, Ed.; and Augustus Mays); and (6) Education-Related Programs--Meeting the Human Needs of America's Children (Roberto Viramontes, Ed.; and Jared Solomon, Ed.). [For CEF's "Budget Response: Fiscal Year 2012," see ED562026.]

Entrepreneurship has a tremendous impact on the economic development of a country, so much that entrepreneurship is seen as a solution for the fast changing economic demands worldwide and has been recognized as a path to sustainable economic development. Despite recognition of entrepreneurship on the road to global economic development, a large body of research on the elements of entrepreneurship education remains unresolved. Are these behaviors inherent to human beings, their genetic code, their psychological traits, or can students, young children, and even adults, be taught how to become an entrepreneur? This book presents several chapters following different approaches to answer these questions. Researchers explore education programs in different countries, they show experiences in entrepreneurship education, explain how to teach entrepreneurial skills, cultural issues, and propose some orientations and reflections on entrepreneurship education. The book contains the following chapters: (1) The Spirit of Entrepreneurial Education in Namibia--An Exploratory Study (Wilfred Isak April); (2) Entrepreneurship Education for Women in Brazil--Challenges and Limits (Elaine da Silveira Leite); (3) Entrepreneurship Education in China (Weiming Li and Chunyan Li); (4) Entrepreneurship Education in Spain (José C. Sánchez-García and Brizeida Hernández-Sánchez); (5) The Importance of Partnerships in Promoting Entrepreneurship Education--Case Study of a Group of Schools (Maria Isabel Carvalho and Mário Franco); (6) Educating Succeeding Generation Entrepreneurs in Family Businesses--The Case of Slovenia (Mojca Duh, Marina Letonja and Jaka Vadnjal); (7) Promoting Entrepreneurship Education through University Networks--A Case Study in Mozambique (Dambusse Libombo, Anabela Dinis and Mário Franco); (8) Customer Orientation of Current and Future Entrepreneurs in Research Using Projection Methods--Implications for Education (Anna Pawlowska); (9) Teaching and Detecting The Creative Potential--Experience and Perspectives (Sílvio Manuel Brito); (10) Entrepreneurship Education as Learning to Form Identities--Cross-Cultural Perspective (Iiris Aaltio and Qian Wang); (11) Training New Housing Entrepreneurs--A Malaysian Scenario (Mastura Jaafar, Syed Putra Syed Abu Bakar and Wan Mohd Dzulkifli Wan Daud); (12) New Perspectives in Entrepreneurship Education--A Brazilian Viewpoint (Eric Charles Henri Dorion, Cristine Hermann Nodari, Pelayo Munhoz Olea, Paula Patricia Ganzer and Claudio Baltazar Côrrea de Mello); and (13) Mismatch in Teachers' Ontological Conception of Entrepreneurship Education (Kaarlo Paloniemi and Pekka Belt).

This documentation is for the provisional version 1a file of the National Public Education Financial Survey (NPEFS) for school year (SY) 2013-14, fiscal year 2014 (FY 14) conducted by the National Center for Education Statistics' (NCES) . It contains a brief description of the data collection, along with information required to understand and access the data file. The Common Core of Data (CCD) is a national statistical program that collects and compiles administrative data from state education agencies (SEAs) covering the universe of all public elementary and secondary schools and school districts in the United States. The NPEFS survey is one of six annual surveys that comprise the CCD. The other five surveys are the Public Elementary/Secondary School Universe Survey, the Local Education Agency Universe Survey, the State Nonfiscal Survey of Public Elementary/Secondary Education, the School District Finance Survey (F-33), and the School-Level Finance Survey (SLFS). The principal users of CCD data are the federal government, the education research community, state and local government officials (including school boards and LEA administrators), and the general public. Congress authorizes NCES to collect these data through the Education Sciences Reform Act of 2002 (20 U.S.C. § 9543). NCES and the Economic Reimbursable Surveys Division (ERD) of the U.S. Census Bureau collaborate to collect public education finance data, with the Census Bureau acting as the primary collection agent for the NPEFS survey. The NPEFS survey provides state-level aggregate finance data for revenues and expenditures for public elementary and secondary education. The NPEFS data are useful to (1) chief officers of state education agencies (SEAs), (2) policymakers in the executive and legislative branches of federal and state governments, (3) education policy and public policy researchers, (4) the press, and (5) citizens interested in information about education finance.

As the need for educated workers in the workforce grows at the national and state level, educating low-skilled adults is one way of addressing the skills gap. Adult education programs offer low-skilled adults an opportunity to increase basic academic skills and prepare for college and career. Today, transitioning students from adult education programs into postsecondary education is becoming one of the priorities for adult basic education programs. In this study, the author investigated elements of the career pathways model in an adult education program at a community college and its impact on transitioning students to postsecondary education. The primary purpose of the research was to examine the relationships between participation in a Pathways to Careers program offered by a community college under the Title II of the Workforce Innovations and Opportunity Act and students' transition to postsecondary education in a community college. The study was conducted at a multi-campus community college in North Carolina. The researcher especially sought to determine the relationship between the proportion of students transitioning to postsecondary education and their enrollment in the Pathways to Careers program. This study also evaluated the impact of the Pathways to Careers program on students' retention and academic performance. The results indicate that student transition to postsecondary education is statistically significant in their association with student enrollment in the Pathways to Careers program. The Pathways to Careers program has a positive impact on transitioning students to postsecondary education, academic performance, and retention. Additionally, using the qualitative data from individual interviews conducted with faculty and staff members, the researcher found that certain elements such as support services, co-enrollment, and contextualized instruction have a strong impact on students transitioning to postsecondary education. [The dissertation citations contained here are published with the permission of ProQuest LLC. Further reproduction is prohibited without permission. Copies of dissertations may be obtained by Telephone (800) 1-800-521-0600. Web page: http://www.proquest.com/en-US/products/dissertations/individuals.shtml.]

This dissertation is to deal the issues of open education, creative economies, higher education. It also compares the performances in these aspects among different countries. The conception of the "creative economy" develops within the context of "global neoliberalism" and "knowledge economy." These three notions are all concerned with economic development. In addition, the creative economy emphasizes the importance of creativity and cultural commodities in cultural and economical development. Open education adapts the openness concept in education and utilizes information communication technology (ICT) to enhance openness. Open education encourages sharing educational opportunities and providing resources to a greater number of participants. The idea of open knowledge in the creative economy and open education implies the crossing of knowledge boundaries and collective knowledge creation. With its advantageous conditions, higher education can play an important role in the development of open knowledge. From a global perspective, this dissertation adopts a statistical "comparison structure" (also known as a co-plot) to discover the categories and features of the creative economy and open education among countries and regions. Knowledge Assessment Methodology (KAM) data from the World Bank is analyzed and compared internationally. The co-plot shows that there are differences in certain variables among countries and regions. High GDP does not necessarily lead to a highly developed creative economy, but well collective development of some particular variables can contribute to the development of the creative economy in some countries. The conclusion focuses on: (a) open education and its relationship to open knowledge and creative economy, (b) the role and significance of open education, (c) the role of higher education in creative economy and open society, and (d) the results of comparison structure (co-plot) and alternative models. This dissertation makes recommendation concerning the aspects of policy-making and higher education development, as well as future researches. [The dissertation citations contained here are published with the permission of ProQuest LLC. Further reproduction is prohibited without permission. Copies of dissertations may be obtained by Telephone (800) 1-800-521-0600. Web page: http://www.proquest.com/en-US/products/dissertations/individuals.shtml.]

This quantitative study examined the perceptions of selected university administrators and legislators concerning levels of support for Tennessee public higher education. The purpose of the study was to gain a greater understanding among the various constituents as to the needs and restraints facing higher education funding. The population targeted for this study was comprised of 132 members of the Tennessee General Assembly, the Executive Director of the Tennessee Higher Education Commission (THEC), the Chancellor of the Tennessee Board of Regents (TBR), the President of the University of Tennessee System, and 36 Chief Administrators at 9 state-supported universities. The principal investigator used a web-based survey development company to design, collect, and store survey responses. Results obtained from the study were examined using independent samples t tests, one-way ANOVAs, and a Pearson correlation coefficient. From these tests, 8 out of 13 research questions had statistically significant findings. Analysis of the data revealed that legislators and higher education administrators in the State of Tennessee perceived funding for higher education differently. There were significant differences between the 2 groups concerning use of higher education reserves during weak economic times, the explanation for tuition rises, how much costs students should incur for higher education, level of importance placed on state appropriations for funding higher education, and how they perceived priority of higher education in the state budget. There was a significant difference between one's political party affiliation and perception of access to higher education being an issue. Democratic participants tended to perceive access to higher education as more of an issue than Republican participants. A significant difference was also found between one's education level and ranking of higher education in the state budget. Participants having earned a graduate degree tended to prioritize higher education with significantly greater regard in the state budget than the participants with no graduate degree. [The dissertation citations contained here are published with the permission of ProQuest LLC. Further reproduction is prohibited without permission. Copies of dissertations may be obtained by Telephone (800) 1-800-521-0600. Web page: http://www.proquest.com/en-US/products/dissertations/individuals.shtml.]