Many California community colleges face difficult decisions when implementing the State's shared governance mandate on institutional planning and budgeting processes. Using Allison and Zelikow's rational, organizational, and political decision models as the foundation, the purpose of this narrative study was to explore decision processes used by a successful community college district in California to understand its success with the State's mandated institutional planning and budgeting processes. Data were collected through semistructured interviews with 10 individuals representing a board of trustees, 3 administrations, 3 academic senates, and a faculty association. Data were inductively coded and then subjected to Ollerenshaw and Creswell's narrative analysis procedure. All 10 narratives were assigned decision process scores based on Allison and Zelikow's framework and 6 specific planning and budgeting decision events. Findings indicate that elements from all 3 decision models were routinely used to create synergism of actions leading to a collaborative and strong unity of effort. In addition, favored decision-making processes may have overcome rational choice impediments in the budgeting area. The positive social change implication includes a recommendation to the academic leaders of all 72 California community college districts that they capitalize on the synergistic interactions of decision processes required for successful institutional planning and budgeting. In addition, leaders should use favored decision models sparingly to fulfill California's legislative mandate for a quality and college-educated workforce. The ultimate unity of effort for academic leaders is to correct the shortfall of a million college graduates needed by 2025 for California's workforce.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

The purpose of this study is to examine American perceptions of Russia as a problem between 2001 and 2021, specifically the perceptions present in the United States Senate Foreign Relations Committee (SFRC). It tries to answer two questions: 1) how the perceptions have developed, and the perceived reasons driving this development, and 2) the differences between Republican and Democratic senators. This is done with a qualitative content analysis of the seven hearings for United States Secretary of State held between 2001, in the beginning of George W. Bush’s presidency, to 2021, the beginning of Joe Biden’s presidency. The study makes use of actor-specific theory and Kaplowitz’ theory on the perception of enemies as its theoretical framework. The result of the study is that the perception has developed from a cautious view of a Russia that is unstable, but not hostile, to one of Russia as actively hostile and problematic. The question of party differences indicates that there are few differences between the two parties other than their view on Donald Trump and his connections to Russia, although this finding is not as conclusive.

The 2006 Congressional elections included some of the closest elections in recent history. Party control was on the line in both houses of Congress. As a result, candidate message strategies were subject to intense scruntiny by media and voters alike since each election played a significant role in determining which party would control the Senate. This thesis employs a content analysis of ten candidate-controlled blogs from five 2006 U.S. Senate elections to evaluate candidate issues, incumbent and challenger strategies, and message tactics used by the candidate to reach a wide classification of voters. The entire population of posts from the ten candidate blogs (N = 474) was included in this analysis. The thesis assesses candidate blog strategies and candidate gender difference through the theoretical perspectives of the issue ownership framework, agenda setting, and incumbent and challenger strategies. Findings show little evidence of intercandidate agenda setting through blogs, general adherence to assumptions of the issue ownership framework, and offer foundations for future communication research focused on candidate blogs. Recommendations for future research include a more expansive study of all campaign blogs as well as an intermedia agenda setting study to measure systematically the influence of blogs on other media. / Master of Arts

The Faculty Senate of East Tennessee State University shall be governed by the following by-laws in the conduct of its business. When the by-laws are updated, any substantive changes will be listed here as well as the previous version(s) of the document.

The Constitution of the Faculty Senate was last approved by Faculty vote on March 21, 2020 . When the Constitution is updated, any substantive changes will be listed here as well as the previous version(s) of the document.

The Senate Munitions Committee of 1934-1936, chaired by Gerald Nye of North Dakota, provided the first critical examination of America's modern military establishment. The committee approached its task guided by the optimism of the progressive Social Gospel and the idealism of earlier times, but in the middle of the munitions inquiry the nation turned to new values represented in Reinhold Niebuhr's realism and Franklin D. Roosevelt's Second New Deal. By 1936, the committee found its views out of place in a nation pursuing a new course and in a world threatening to break out in war. Realist historians writing in the cold war period (1945-1990) closely linked the munitions inquiry to isolationism and created a one-dimensional history in which the committee chased evil "merchants of death." The only book-length study of the munitions investigation, John Wiltz's In Search of Peace, published in 1963, provided a realist interpretation. The munitions inquiry went beyond the merchants of death in its analysis of the post-World War I American military establishment. A better understanding emerges when the investigation is considered not only within an isolationist framework, but also as part of the intellectual, cultural, and political history of the interwar years. In particular, Franklin Roosevelt's political use of the investigation becomes apparent. Sources used include the committee's hearings, exhibits, and reports, the Gerald Nye Papers, the Franklin Roosevelt Papers, the Cordell Hull Papers, the R. Walton Moore Papers, the Henry Stimson Papers, the Homer Cummings Diaries, and the State Department's decimal files.

La thèse analyse un document intitulé Record Labeling Hearing (RLH) (1985), qui reprend dans son intégralité une séance qui s’est tenue au Congrès des États-Unis à propos du contenu jugé problématique de certains albums de musique. Au cœur de cette séance, se retrouve le Parents Music Resource Centre (PMRC), un groupe de pression qui voit le jour en 1984. D’après le PMRC, les albums avec des paroles traitant de sexe, de violence, d’occulte, de drogues et d’alcool méritent l’autocollant du « Parental Advisory : Explicit Lyrics » afin d’avertir les parents des thématiques abordées. La séance réunit des sénateurs du Congrès américain, les membres du PMRC et des alliés de ces derniers, dont la National Parent/Teacher Association (NPTA), ainsi que des représentants de l’industrie de la musique et trois artistes. Nous verrons dans la thèse qu’en fait, c’est le heavy metal que le PMRC et ses alliés visaient lors du RLH et non par exemple certains contenus transversaux à divers types d’albums de musique. A cette époque, la sous-culture du heavy metal était encore en émergence et pour tout dire bien fragile. En 1985, elle était même menacée de fragmentation en raison de la popularité de certains de ses sous-genres. Or, en présentant le heavy metal comme une contre-culture, le RLH a aidé ce genre musical à se constituer en véritable sous-culture.