Thesis (M.S.)--University of Florida, 2002. / Title from title page of source document. Includes vita. Includes bibliographical references.

Individuals of Mexican descent have resided in the United States for more than a century and a half and during that time have experienced varying degrees of acceptance. As American society has generally adopted the view that "foreigners" should assimilate to mainstream American culture, many individuals of Mexican descent have faced demands to distance themselves from their culture in order to adopt the behaviors and values consistent with White American culture. While many ethnic groups may have faced similar circumstances, the experiences of individuals of Mexican descent may differ from those of others due to the close proximity of Mexico to the United States and the constant flow of Mexican immigrants, which together may contribute to their retention of their native culture. As individuals of Mexican descent experience greater contact with their native and White American culture, particularly while in pursuit in success, it becomes necessary to understand what pressures individuals experience when among their White American and same-ethnicity peers. Furthermore, it is necessary to examine how they negotiate their bicultural contexts in response to the pressures they face. Using a sample of university student who were of Mexican descent, this study employed qualitative methods and select measures to explore their perceptions of pressures faced and adaptive strategies utilized when among their White American and same-ethnicity peers. The results from the present study indicated that the participants believed their culture continues to be seen as inferior and is unaccepted by White Americans. As a result of their beliefs, which were reinforced by their minority status, stereotypes, and intergroup experiences, many reported experiencing distress when among their White peers. Among their same-ethnicity peers, many reported experiencing pressure to remain connected to their culture. Despite different definitions of what remaining connected meant, the most commonly referenced criterion included being fluent in Spanish and having to overcome struggles. In order to negotiate their bicultural settings, the majority of the participants utilized an adaptive approach to their bicultural contexts that allowed them the flexibility to draw from both cultures in a manner that was consistent with their values, beliefs, and cultural identity. / text

No description available.

This work is an interdisciplinary exploration of negotiations between the nations that make up Canada. It explores the disparity that remains between Aboriginals and non Aboriginals in Canadian North America at a systemic level. It will show that the postcolonial era is rampant with colonial doctrine and that these principles and policies maintain a dogmatic system that can not allow for the continued existence of Aboriginals as separate and distinct peoples. I will show my understanding and interpretation of an old Indigenous system and suggest ways in which aspects of this ancient system may be valuable in creating a coordination of world views that can allow for both factions to exist and prosper. I will specifically address how the differing world views that exist between Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal Canadians—and the inequality between these two groups of peoples—has been and remains infused in the negotiation process that these governments attempt to complete. The final aspect of this work will be a theatrical production piece that allows (in some small way) the traditional Indigenous approach to ‘law’ to be given equal weight as the Supreme Court in Delgamuukw suggests.

Stair negotiation has been identified by older adults as one of the most challenging locomotor tasks, one that is associated with a high risk for falls and serious injury. Currently lacking is a comprehensive understanding of the lower limb during stair negotiation in an older adult population. It has been identified that more research is needed to determine key determinants of difficulty and safety on stairs. The objective of this thesis was to investigate lower limb kinematics and kinetics during stair negotiation and evaluate the impact of handrail use on stair ambulation in young adults, older adults, and older adults with a fear of falling (FOF). The four studies that make up this dissertation provide a detailed picture of the lower limb joint kinematics and kinetics during stair ambulation, as well as provide insight into the role of handrail use and FOF in performance of stair negotiation. Specifically, in the first study principal component analysis (PCA) was used, of the scores generated from the PCA models four principal component (PC) scores were identified that could be used to correctly classify 95% of young and older adults. The second study provided a comprehensive data set of lower limb joint kinematics and kinetics during stair negotiation. The third study identified comparable centre of pressure velocities (VCOP) between young adults and older adults during stair negotiation with and without a handrail. Whereas older adults with FOF demonstrated reduced VCOP during stair negotiation without a handrail and further reduced VCOP when using the handrail. Furthermore, no significant difference in lower limb moments during stair negotiation with and without a handrail were found in older adults, as was similar for older adults with FOF. However, a gait assessment revealed that older adults with FOF demonstrated differences from ‘normal’ gait patterns during stair negotiation with and without a handrail. These studies provide a comprehensive normative dataset of the lower limb joint kinematics and kinetics during stair negotiation, as well as provide insight into the role of handrail use and fear of falling in performance of stair ambulation. It is important to appreciate the nature and extent of normal age-related adaption and compensatory strategies to identify unique patterns of movement due to the superimposition of pathology. / Thesis (Ph.D, Kinesiology & Health Studies) -- Queen's University, 2010-09-24 14:50:22.242

The aim of this study is to explore what cultural differences Swedish business negotiators perceive and how they adapt and/or manage the differences.

Negotiating a synergized solution is challenging under optimal circumstances. Add in the challenge of cross-cultural differences, cultural collision occurs leading to worse negotiation outcomes in intercultural negotiation than intracultural ones (e.g., Adair et al., 2001; Adair et al., 2007). Given that intercultural negotiations are both challenging and prevalent, this study investigates how to improve intercultural negotiation effectiveness, and demonstrates when intercultural negotiators can in fact achieve significantly better outcomes than intracultural negotiators (i.e. cultural synergy). Drawing insights from research on cultural essentialism and its influence on intergroup relations and conflicts, I examine the interaction between essentialist beliefs and the cultural context in negotiation. Using an actor-partner interdependence model, I reveal that whether cultures collide or synergize in intercultural negotiation depends on negotiators’ endorsement of cultural essentialist beliefs. Intercultural negotiators who believed that cultural characteristics are malleable (i.e. non-essentialist beliefs) achieved higher individual gains and joint gains, compared to not only intercultural negotiators who endorsed stronger essentialist beliefs, but also intracultural negotiators. Beyond identifying why cultures collide in negotiation, these findings pave the way for future research to examine factors that help negotiators harvest cultural synergy for favorable negotiation outcomes.

The purpose of the study was to determine working relationships between full-time chief negotiators in selected school districts throughout the United States and the superintendents of schools, members of the negotiating team, and school boards during the period of collective negotiations. Secondary purposes of the study were to: (1) identify the composition of board negotiation teams and to discover the special responsibilities borne by various members of the negotiation team; (2) investigate the process of internal communications carried on between the full-time chief negotiator, the superintendent, and the board during negotiations; and (3) secure opinions of the full-time chief negotiator, superintendent, and board president relative to the positive or negative effect of the negotiation process on the school district.The population of the study was comprised of eighteen responding urban school corporations throughout the United States which have an established position of full-time chief negotiator as a function of the superintendency. Data secured from the negotiators, superintendents, and school board presidents of participating school corporations were used as the basis for the study.The major findings from the study were:1. Full-time chief negotiators have, with few exceptions, reported directly to the superintendent of schools.2. School board negotiation teams have usually included, in addition to the full-time chief negotiator, at least one member with major responsibility for instructional and/or personnel matters within the school system. The negotiating team members representative of business management and/or finance areas were reported for fewer than half of the school systems included in the study.3. The full-time chief negotiator, with few exceptions, has been chairman of the board negotiating team and has been charged with responsibilities for setting strategy and directing the progress of negotiations.4. The full-time chief negotiator has ordinarily served as the only spokesman for the administration and school board during negotiation sessions. On some occasions other team members may serve as a spokesman depending upon matters being discussed and expertise of the team member. The fulltime chief negotiator has served as spokesman during all crucial periods.5. The superintendent of schools has not been an active participant in actual negotiations proceedings.6. Although the superintendent of schools has not been an active participant in negotiating sessions he has been closely involved behind the scenes. All reports indicate that the superintendent has not been "by passed" in any way.7. The superintendent and full-time chief negotiator as a general rule were reported as attending all school board executive sessions dealing with negotiations matters.8. The person or persons making negotiation recommendations to the board was, as a general rule, the superintendent and the chief negotiator, but there was some conflict here in the responses of the chief negotiator, superintendent, and president of the board. There was noticeable conflict in the situations where the chief negotiator reported to someone other than the superintendent.9. Board presidents felt that board involvement on noneconomic matters was the same as economic. Most chief negotiators felt board involvement on non-economic matters was substantially less than on economic matters. The superintendents were more inclined to agree with the board opinion.10. The overall effect of negotiations as reported by all three groups surveyed were predominately positive. The responses of the full-time chief negotiator were almost all positive, with a lesser number of superintendents responding in the positive and even a lesser number of presidents of the school board.11. Most superintendents felt the establishment of the position of full-time chief negotiator to have been beneficial and essential to the functioning of their school system after the advent of negotiations with employee groups.Major conclusions included:1. More and more school systems will move to employ a full-time chief negotiator in the future.2. The establishment of the position of chief negotiator, reporting to the superintendent of schools has not resulted in any relinquishment of authority, status or influence of the superintendent.3. The person performing the task of chairman of the school board negotiation team should be an employee of the school system with knowledge in all areas of the school system he represents.4. The full-time chief negotiator should be close to the superintendent and identified with him in order to have maximum effectiveness in the negotiation process.5. The full-time chief negotiator must have intimate contact with the school board in regular and executive sessions in order to know the attitudes and desires of the board that he represents.6. The establishment of the position of chief negotiator as a function of the superintendency is generally considered to be desirable and essential.7. The establishment of the position of chief negotiator does not change or depreciate the relationship of the superintendent with the school board in the negotiation process so long as the chief negotiator reports directly to the superintendent of schools. If the chief negotiator reports to someone other than the superintendent, there is likely to be confusion, conflict and impairment of effective relationships.

The purpose of the study was to develop guidelines relative to the collection, organization, and presentation of data by Indiana school governing body negotiation personnel for use by a fact finder during impasse situations in the collective bargaining process.Study participants included fifty-six individuals identified by officials of the Indiana Education Employment Relations Board as qualified to serve as fact finder in impasse situations between a school governing body and a teacher organization. Participants provided value judgment responses to statement items identifying data which should be included in reports developed for use by fact finders. Statement items were organized to present data relative to General Background Information, Revenue, Salary and Fringe Benefits, Budgeting, Cash Flow and Cash Balance, Non-Financial Issues, and Miscellaneous General Comparisons. The combined responses were developed into a preliminary set of guidelines.Selected administrative heads of eight Indiana school systems involved in fact finding procedures during 1975, and fact finder specialists employed full time by the Indiana Education Employment Relations Board, reviewed and analyzed the preliminary guidelines and made suggestions, corrections, additions, deletions, and/or editing changes based on past experience. The findings of the study were developed into a set of guidelines for the development of reports prepared by school management negotiation team personnel for use by a fact finder in Indiana impasse situations. The Guidelines for the Development of Reports for Fact Finders was divided to include coverage of general background information, revenue information, salary and fringe benefit information, budgeting information, non-financial issues, data, and miscellaneous general comparisons. Miscellaneous suggestions not involved in the study format were also included.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Hong Kong, 2008. / Also available in print.