Sovereignty and Intervention in the Middle East: From the Fall of the Ottoman Empire to the Arab Spring

This research provides an institutional explanation of the practices of external intervention in the Arab state system from the fall of the Ottoman Empire in 1922 to the Arab Spring. My explanation consists of two institutional variables: sovereignty and inter-state borders. I examine the changes in regional and international norms of sovereignty and their impact on the practices of external intervention in the Arab state system. I also examine the impact of the level of institutionalization of inter-state borders in the Arab World on the practices of external intervention. I argue that changes in regional and international norms of sovereignty and changes in the level of institutionalization of inter-state borders have constituted the significant variation over time in both the frequency and type of external intervention in the Arab state system from 1922 to the present. My institutional explanation and findings seriously challenge the traditional accounts of sovereignty and intervention in the Arab World, including the cultural perspectives that emphasize the conflict between sovereignty, Arabism, and Islam, the constructivist accounts that emphasize the regional norm of pan-Arabism, the comparative politics explanations that focus on the domestic material power of the Arab state, the post-colonial perspectives that emphasize the artificiality of the Arab state, and the realist accounts that focus on great powers and the regional distribution of power in the Middle East. This research also contributes to International Relations Theory. I construct a new analytical framework to study the relations between sovereignty, borders, and intervention, combining theoretical elements from the fields of Role Theory, Social Constructivism, and Institutionalization. Methodologically, this research includes both quantitative and qualitative analysis. I conduct content analysis of official documents of Arab states and the Arab League, Arabic press documents, and Arab political thought. I also utilize quantitative data sets on international intervention.

Everything in di Dark Muss Come to Light: A Postcolonial Investigation of the Practice of Extra Lessons at the Secondary Level in Jamaica's Education System

Despite the vast research examining the evolution of Caribbean education systems, little is chronologically tied to the postcolonial theoretical perspectives of specific island-state systems, such as the Jamaican education system and its relationship with the underground shadow education system. This dissertation study sought to address the gaps in the literature by critically positioning postcolonial theories in education to examine the macro- and micro-level impacts of extra lessons on secondary education in Jamaica. The following postcolonial theoretical (PCT) tenets in education were contextualized from a review of the literature: (a) PCT in education uses colonial discourse analysis to critically deconstruct and decolonize imperialistic and colonial representations of knowledge throughout history; (b) PCT in education uses an anti-colonial discursive framework to re-position indigenous knowledge in schools, colleges, and universities to challenge hegemonic knowledge; (c) PCT in education involves the "unlearning" of dominant, normative ideologies, the use of self-reflexivity, and deconstruction; and (d) PCT in education calls for critical pedagogical approaches that reject the banking concept of education and introduces inclusive pedagogy to facilitate "the passage from naïve to critical transitivity" (Freire, 1973, p. 32). Specifically, using a transformative mixed-methods design, grounded and informed by a postcolonial theoretical lens, I quantitatively uncovered and then qualitatively highlighted how if at all extra lessons can improve educational outcomes for students at the secondary level in Jamaica. Accordingly, the quantitative data was used to test the hypotheses that the practice of extra lessons in schools is related to student academic achievement and the practice of critical-inclusive pedagogy in extra lessons is related to academic achievement. The two-level hierarchical linear model analysis revealed that hours spent in extra lessons, average household monthly income, and critical-inclusive pedagogical tents were the best predictors for academic achievement. Alternatively, the holistic multi-case study explored how extra-lessons produces increased academic achievement. The data revealed new ways of knowledge construction and critical pedagogical approaches to galvanize systemic change in secondary education. Furthermore, the data showed that extra lessons can improve educational outcomes for students at the secondary level if the conditions for learning are met. This study sets the stage for new forms of knowledge construction and implications for policy change.

An Empirical Comparison of Reuse in Embedded and Nonembedded Systems

High-quality software, delivered on time and budget, constitutes a critical part of most products and services in modern society. Our government has invested billions of dollars to develop software assets, often to redevelop the same capability many times. Recognizing the waste involved in redeveloping these assets, in 1992 the Department of Defense issued the Software Reuse Initiative. The vision of the Software Reuse Initiative was "To drive the DoD software community from its current "re-invent the software" cycle to a process-driven, domain-specific, architecture-centric, library-based way of constructing software.'' Twenty years after issuing this initiative, there is evidence of this vision beginning to be realized in nonembedded systems. However, virtually every large embedded system undertaken has incurred large cost and schedule overruns. Investigations into the root cause of these overruns implicates reuse. Why are we seeing improvements in the outcomes of these large scale nonembedded systems and worse outcomes in embedded systems? This question is the foundation for this research. The experiences of the Aerospace industry have led to a number of questions about reuse and how the industry is employing reuse in embedded systems. For example, does reuse in embedded systems yield the same outcomes as in nonembedded systems? Are the outcomes positive? If the outcomes are different, it may indicate that embedded systems should not use data from nonembedded systems for estimation. Are embedded systems using the same development approaches as nonembedded systems? Does the development approach make a difference? If embedded systems develop software differently from nonembedded systems, it may mean that the same processes do not apply to both types of systems. What about the reuse of different artifacts? Perhaps there are certain artifacts that, when reused, contribute more or are more difficult to use in embedded systems. Finally, what are the success factors and obstacles to reuse? Are they the same in embedded systems as in nonembedded systems? The research in this dissertation is comprised of a series of empirical studies using professionals in the aerospace and defense industry as its subjects. The main focus has been to investigate the reuse practices of embedded systems professionals and nonembedded systems professionals and compare the methods and artifacts used against the outcomes. The research has followed a combined qualitative and quantitative design approach. The qualitative data were collected by surveying software and systems engineers, interviewing senior developers, and reading numerous documents and other studies. Quantitative data were derived from converting survey and interview respondents' answers into coding that could be counted and measured. From the search of existing empirical literature, we learned that reuse in embedded systems are in fact significantly different from nonembedded systems, particularly in effort in model based development approach and quality where the development approach was not specified. The questionnaire showed differences in the development approach used in embedded projects from nonembedded projects, in particular, embedded systems were significantly more likely to use a heritage/legacy development approach. There was also a difference in the artifacts used, with embedded systems more likely to reuse hardware, test products, and test clusters. Nearly all the projects reported using code, but the questionnaire showed that the reuse of code brought mixed results. One of the differences expressed by the respondents to the questionnaire was the difficulty in reuse of code for embedded systems when the platform changed. The semistructured interviews were performed to tell us why the phenomena in the review of literature and the questionnaire were observed. We asked respected industry professionals, such as senior fellows, fellows and distinguished members of technical staff, about their experiences with reuse. We learned that many embedded systems used heritage/legacy development approaches because their systems had been around for many years, before models and modeling tools became available. We learned that reuse of code is beneficial primarily when the code does not require modification, but, especially in embedded systems, once it has to be changed, reuse of code yields few benefits. Finally, while platform independence is a goal for many in nonembedded systems, it is certainly not a goal for the embedded systems professionals and in many cases it is a detriment. However, both embedded and nonembedded systems professionals endorsed the idea of platform standardization. Finally, we conclude that while reuse in embedded systems and nonembedded systems is different today, they are converging. As heritage embedded systems are phased out, models become more robust and platforms are standardized, reuse in embedded systems will become more like nonembedded systems.

Cross-Disciplinary Collaboration Behavior of Practitioners in the Treatment of Anxiety Disorders

Current research on the collaborative behaviors of conventional and alternative health care providers for the treatment of anxiety is lacking. While there are multiple studies looking at alternative health care integration into primary care, none of them look at anxiety specifically. The purpose of this paper is to provide a preliminary exploration of possible barriers to collaboration between conventional and alternative health care providers for the treatment of anxiety. Quantitative data on collaboration behavior patterns were obtained with an anonymous survey. Data from the surveys were analyzed using a chi-square analysis. Along with these numerical data narrative data from the survey and interviews were collected in order to assess beliefs about the barriers to collaboration from different health care providers. The results indicate that conventional providers collaborate the least with alternative providers and alternative providers collaborate the least with conventional providers. The descriptive results regarding the barriers to collaboration from the study illustrated a common theme, specifically, the lack of education of conventional providers on alternative health care practices on anxiety. This is an exploratory study: therefore it would be beneficial for future researchers to look deeper into the beliefs of health care providers on the barriers to collaboration, possibly identifying the specific barriers to collaboration for each type of healthcare provider.

Do Methods Matter In Global Leadership Development? A Mixed-Methods Study Of A U.s.-Based International Mba Program

As world communication, technology, and trade become increasingly integrated through globalization, multinational corporations seek employees with global leadership experience and skills. However, the demand for these skills currently outweighs the supply. Given the rarity of globally ready leaders, global competency development should be emphasized in higher education programs. The reality, however, is that university graduate programs are often outdated and focus mostly on cognitive learning. Global leadership competence requires moving beyond the cognitive domain of learning to create socially responsible and culturally connected global leaders. This requires attention to development methods; however, limited research in global leadership development methods has been conducted. A new conceptual model, the global leadership development ecosystem, was introduced in this study to guide the design and evaluation of global leadership development programs. It was based on three theories of learning and was divided into four development methodologies. This study quantitatively tested the model and used it as a framework for an in-depth examination of the design of one International MBA program. The program was first benchmarked, by means of a qualitative best practices analysis, against the top-ranking IMBA programs in the world. Qualitative data from students, faculty, administrators, and staff was then examined, using descriptive and focused data coding. Quantitative data analysis, using PASW Statistics software, and a hierarchical regression, showed the individual effect of each of the four development methods, as well as their combined effect, on student scores on a global leadership assessment. The analysis revealed that each methodology played a distinct and important role in developing different competencies of global leadership. It also confirmed the critical link between self-efficacy and global leadership development.