This study focuses on the reaction in the United States to Jay's Treaty, 1794-96. Though crucial in the development of American diplomacy, the treaty's greatest impact was on the domestic politics of the young nation. The most important sources were the correspondence of the participants. Other materials include newspapers, diaries, government documents, and secondary sources. The thesis argues that the treaty was in the best interests of the United States, and the nation was fortunate to be led at this time by the Federalist party.

Thesis (M.C.P.)--Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Dept. of Urban Studies and Planning, 1980. / MICROFICHE COPY AVAILABLE IN ARCHIVES AND ROTCH. / Bibliography: leaves 126-129. / by Stephen Andrew Hill. / M.C.P.

Li, Ho Ming. / Thesis (M.Phil.)--Chinese University of Hong Kong, 2011. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 16-18). / Abstracts in English and Chinese. / Chapter 1 --- Introduction --- p.1 / Chapter 1.1 --- Related literature --- p.1 / Chapter 1.2 --- Background --- p.3 / Chapter 2 --- The model --- p.4 / Chapter 2.1 --- Set up --- p.4 / Chapter 2.2 --- The rationale for performance pay --- p.6 / Chapter 2.3 --- Performance pay with private tutoring --- p.7 / Chapter 2.4 --- Good teacher is not less susceptible --- p.8 / Chapter 2.5 --- Effect of the decreasing tutoring fee --- p.9 / Chapter 3 --- Conclusion --- p.10 / Chapter 4 --- References --- p.12 / Chapter 5 --- Appendix --- p.18 / Chapter 5.1 --- Tables showing bonus schemes across states --- p.18 / Chapter 5.2 --- Derivation for Proposition 1 --- p.18 / Chapter 5.3 --- Numerical example for Proposition 1 --- p.18 / Chapter 5.4 --- Derivation for Proposition 3 --- p.19 / Chapter 5.5 --- Numerical example for Proposition 3 --- p.19

The purpose of this study was to examine the advocacy techniques employed by three state-level child advocacy groups in a mid-western state and to determine the effectiveness of such techniques in influencing policy and legislation.The groups studied were a government-funded bureau, a professional association, and a varied member organization. Each was selected because it met the qualifications set forth for that particular group type. Data collection took place during June and July, 1981.The records examined during data collection included minutes of meetings, publications, fiscal reports, legislative reports and bills, by-laws, and newspaper articles. The data discerned from the records described the groups' founding, objectives, structure, membership, finances, and advocacy strategies, particularly public information campaigns, training, and lobbying efforts. Interviews were conducted with persons knowledgeable of the groups' activities, as necessary.Data were organized into the categories of background information, objectives, membership, structure, funding, and advocacy efforts. Issues considered by any of the three groups were classified either as legislation or as a child-oriented issue. Advocacy techniques utilized to advance a group's position on a piece of legislation were paired with the bill. The effectiveness of the techniques was determined via a scale which examined a bill's progression through the legislative process. Patterns of effective advocacy were listed. Similarly, advocacy techniques employed to advance a group's position on child-oriented issues were paired with the issues. Patterns of advocacy were discerned from that information.As a result of the data analysis, the following conclusions were made; (a) a variety of techniques were used by the groups and contributed to effective advocacy; (b) the techniques of writing to and meeting with legislators or their staffs on behalf of a group were utilized most commonly in successful efforts related to legislation; (c) collaboration and multiple efforts were related to effective advocacy; (d) the professional association was most successful in its legislative advocacy efforts; and (e) the three groups took more positions and utilized more advocacy techniques on child-oriented issues than on legislation.

The problem of the investigation was to determine the legal status of public sector school oriented professional negotiations in the fifty states of the United States. Available data dealing with the status of public sector school oriented professional negotiations between boards of education and teacher organizations proved to be disorganized in terms of providing readily available, complete, and accurate information.The attorney general of each state was contacted by letter for the purpose of completing a questionnaire. The secondary source of information was the executive secretary of each state school board association.Thirty states have statutes mandating negotiations between boards of education and teacher organization representatives. Within each state statute information was gathered concerning (1) statutory inclusion, (2) impasse procedures, (3) grievance procedures, (4) scope of negotiations, (5) employee rights, (6) employer rights, and (7) strikes and penalties.Findings included:1. Thirty state legislatures have mandated negotiations between boards of education and teacher organizations.2. All state legislatures in the Northwest area of the United States mandate professional negotiations between boards of education and teacher organizations.3. One state legislature in the Southeast area of the United States mandates professional negotiations between boards of education and teacher organizations.4. One state statute prohibits boards of education from recognizing teacher organization representatives for the purpose of collective bargaining.5. All thirty state statutes mandating collective bargaining between boards of education and teacher organizations provide teachers with exclusive representation,6. All thirty state statutes mandating collective bargaining between boards of education and teacher organizations provide as negotiable items such matters as salaries, hours, and working conditions.7. All thirty state statutes mandating collective bargaining between boards of education and teacher organizations provide for settlement of impasse by mediation, factfinding, or arbitration.Conclusions were:1. Negotiation rights for teachers have come about more slowly than for most government employees.2. Increased organized efforts to formalize the negotiation procedures have continued to be faced by boards of education in all states.3. Teacher strikes are increasing in spite of anti-strike legislation in most states.4. Statutes have given priority to teacher rights in terms of the rights of teachers and boards of education.5. The passage of legislation is no panacea for problems stemming from board of education and teacher organization relationships and legislation will not eliminate the possibility of court cases, attorneys general opinions, and teacher strikes.Recommendations are:1. Periodic studies should be undertaken in order to update professional negotiation procedures.2. Specific statutory provisions should be studied in depth to determine if such provisions are fulfilling the needs of both parties.3. Attention should be given to professional negotiations within states to determine how legislation is being implemented and how the legal status is developing in states where no guidelines are provided.4. Further study should take place to determine the impact of statutory enactments on both parties.

Not available / text

Not available / text

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.