The Ronald E. McNair Scholars Program is a U.S. Department of Education TRIO Program, funded at 152 institutions across the United States and Puerto Rico. In 2013, total funding reached over $35 million--of which, Portland State University received approximately $211,000 (US Department of Education, 2013). The program's goal is to introduce first-generation, low-income, under-represented group college students to effective strategies for succeeding in doctoral programs so they may become professors and create a more supportive environment for future non-traditional students. One way to explore program effectiveness beyond completion of the McNair Program is to ask the McNair Scholars themselves about program impact. This comparative interview study explores McNair graduates' understandings of issues they face in adjusting to graduate school and how participation in the McNair Program prepared them to address these issues. Typically, McNair program evaluations emphasize the collection and analysis of quantitative data - e.g. graduate school enrollment and degree attainment. However, little qualitative research has been conducted on graduate's perceptions of the impact of program participation on their graduate school experiences. This study, which uses Bourdieu's Theory of Social Reproduction, along with the sociology-based ideas of role-as-resource, role mastery, and expertise development, explores students' perceptions of the McNair Program's effectiveness in regards to helping them understand the "graduate student" role and use that role to succeed in graduate school and beyond.

Costa Rica embodies many of the characteristics which the United States would like to foster in Central America and elsewhere. In recent years, however, misunderstandings have often been present in the development of relations between both nations, and leaders. These differences have been particularly visible between Presidents Reagan and Arias when carrying out their foreign policies towards Central America. Recent developments in warfare, social and political unrest and economic crises in the region added to the emergence of a Central American political leadership--independent of U.S. decision making-have increased international misunderstandings between both political speakers. These misunderstandings are shown by Reagan and Arias' through their public discourses which have revealed deterioration in communication and cooperation between them. Since Reagan and Arias come from different cultures, their values are different, making it difficult for the two men to communicate effectively. Towards discovering the differences m cultural values underlying arguments between them, this study uses the Toulmin model to provide a critical and interpretative analysis of the exchange of political arguments from both leaders concerning Central America. Data were collected from public discourses by Reagan and Arias. An intercultural communication perspective is then used to assess the effects of the arguments on international understanding. This research was successful in isolating a number of political arguments concerning Reagan and Arias' respective policies toward Central America, it revealed consistently different underlying cultural values. These differences in cultural values may affect the mutual understanding between the two political leaders, since their discourses did not acknowledge each other's cultural values or patterns of thinking. At the core of Reagan and Arias' disagreements is the ethnocentric assumption that each is similar to the other. This assumption is not a recommended strategy for intercultural interaction. Because of the novelty of this type of interdisciplinary interpretative research, the results can not be compared adequately with previous research on values in public discourse. Further investigation in this area should support the worth of studying political argumentation from the combines approaches of rhetorical analysis and intercultural communication.

No description available.

No description available.

In 1979, a handful of Nevada state officials sparked a movement to transfer the large unappropriated domain to the western states. For two years what became known as the Sagebrush Rebellion swept across the American West like brushfire, engaging westerners of all stripes in a heated dispute over the question of the public lands. In Utah, as elsewhere in the West, public officials, rural ranchers, miners, developers, academics, environmentalists, and concerned citizens joined the debate and staked sides. This episode underscored western relationships between people and nature and featured contests over competing ideologies in the West. But it probably did more harm than good in solving the problems of the West and even further polarized westerners against themselves. After just two years in the limelight, the Sagebrush Rebellion unspectacularly faded into public memory, partly as a result of environmental opposition but mostly because Ronald Reagan's administration steered public land policy in a new direction. Interior Secretary James Watt took steps to appease disgruntled westerners by loosening federal regulations on the public lands, but he opposed any efforts for a large-scale transfer. Thus the Sagebrush Rebellion ultimately failed; but still today the sentiment and conflicts that propelled it persist, continuing to color the panorama that is the American West.

The purpose of this research is to develop and architect a preliminary multidisciplinary design optimization (MDO) tool that creates multiple types of generalized rocket fairing models. These models are sized relative to input geometric models and are analyzed and optimized, taking into account the primary objectives, namely the structural, thermal, and aerodynamic aspects of standard rocket flights. A variety of standard nose cone shapes is used as optimization proof of concept examples, being sized and compared to determine optimal choices based on the input specifications, such as the rocket body geometry and the specified trajectory paths. Any input models can be optimized to their respective best nose cone style or optimized to each of the cone styles individually, depending on the desired constraints. Two proof of concept example rocket model studies are included with varying sizes and speeds. Both have been optimized using the processes described to provide delineative instances into how results are improved and time saved. This is done by optimizing shape and thickness of the fairings while ascertaining if the remaining length downstream on the designated rocket model remains within specified stress and temperature ranges. The first optimized example exhibits a region of high stress downstream on the rocket body model that champions how these tools can be used to catch weaknesses and improve the overall integrity of a rocket design. The second example demonstrates how more established rocket designs can decrease their weight and drag through optimization of the fairing design.

The thesis analyzes how the administrations of Ronald Reagan, George H.W. Bush, Bill Clinton, and George W. Bush used force in response to incidents of international terrorism. Key players in each administration and whether they advocated a law enforcement approach or a war paradigm approach to counterterrorism are examined. In addition, Koh¿s pattern of executive initiative, congressional acquiescence, and judicial tolerance forms a theoretical lens through which to compare and contrast administrations. An assessment of the role of Congress in making the administrations¿ counterterrorism policies confirms the vitality of this pattern, and suggests future administrations will adhere to it. During the George W. Bush administration, Koh¿s pattern of executive initiative (led by personalities like Vice President Cheney), congressional acquiescence, and judicial tolerance combined with the 9/11 tragedy and pervasive fears of another attack to create a ¿perfect storm¿ known as the ¿war on terror¿. The research also analyzes to what extent the four administrations were constrained by international legal norms on the use of force, i.e. articles 2(4) and 51 of the UN Charter. On the domestic side, the thesis analyzes the extent to which American legal norms on the use of force constrained the administrations. Although the lack of compelling constraints on the use of force is present in all four administrations, the thesis indicates that the George W. Bush administration embodied an extreme example of this trend.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.