Literacy Research: Issues of Authority, Ownership, and Representation

With the “social turn” of language in the past decade within English studies, ethnographic and teacher research methods increasingly have acquired legitimacy as a means of studying student literacy. And with this legitimacy, graduate students specializing in literacy and composition studies increasingly are being encouraged to use ethnographic and teacher research methods to study student literacy within classrooms. Yet few of the narratives produced from these studies discuss the problems that frequently arise when participant observers enter the classroom. Recently, some researchers have begun to interrogate the extent to which ethnographic and teacher research methods are able to construct and disseminate knowledge in empowering ways (Anderson & Irvine, 1993; Bishop, 1993; Fine, 1994; Fleischer. 1994; McLaren, 1992). While ethnographic and teacher research methods have oftentimes been touted as being more democratic and nonhierarchical than quantitative methods—-which oftentimes erase individuals lived experiences with numbers and statistical formulas—-researchers are just beginning to probe the ways that ethnographic and teacher research models can also be silencing, unreflective, and oppressive. Those who have begun to question the ethics of conducting, writing about, and disseminating knowledge in education have coined the term “critical” research, a rather vague and loose term that proposes a position of reflexivity and self-critique for all research methods, not just ethnography or teacher research. Drawing upon theories of feminist consciousness-raising, liberatory praxis, and community-action research, theories of critical research aim to involve researchers and participants in a highly participatory framework for constructing knowledge, an inquiry that seeks to question, disrupt, or intervene in the conditions under study for some socially transformative end. While critical research methods are always contingent upon the context being studied, in general they are undergirded by principles of non-hierarchical relations, participatory collaboration, problem-posing, dialogic inquiry, and multiple and multi-voiced interpretations. In distinguishing between critical and traditional ethnographic processes, for instance, Peter McLaren says that critical ethnography asks questions such as “[u]nder what conditions and to what ends do we. as educational researchers, enter into relations of cooperation. mutuality, and reciprocity with those who we research?” (p. 78) and “what social effects do you want your evaluations and understandings to have?” (p. 83). In»the same vein, Michelle Fine suggests that critical researchers must move beyond notions of the etic/emic dichotomy of researcher positionality in order to “probe how we are in relation with the contexts we study and with our informants, understanding that we are all multiple in those relations” (p. 72). Researchers in composition and literacy stud¬ies who endorse critical research methods, then, aim to enact some sort of positive transformative change in keeping with the needs and interests of the participants with whom they work.

Essays on Industrial Organization and Environmental Economics

This dissertation studies environmental regulation issues in the hog production industry as well as forces behind the reorganization of the industry during the past two decades. Federal and State-level environmental regulations imposed on U.S. hog production during the year 2003 are examined in Chapter 1. Based on the number of regulations passed by the Federal government and states, the 2003 regulatory index is constructed. The regulatory stringency index suggests that state-level regulations vary across states and have increased over the years. In addition, state-level regulations are more stringent than federal regulations. Chapter 2 develops an empirically implementable theoretical model which allows us to investigate the long-run effects of environmental regulations on the U.S. hog industry. Hog feeding operations (HFOs) are divided into large feeding operations (LHFOs) and small feeding operations (SHFOs). The impact of the presence of a large number of LHFOs on the entry and exit of CHFOs is also examined. Results of this study suggest that: Increased state-level regulation stringency significantly lowers the output of SHFOs; increased state-level regulation stringency significantly lowers the output of LHFOs; increased state-level regulation stringency significantly lowers the number of SHFOs; SHFO output rises significantly in states that have a greater number of LHFOs; LHFO output rises significantly in states that have a greater number of LHFOs; the number of SHFOs significantly increases in states that have a greater numbers of LHFOs; regulation increases the average SHFO size; and regulation decreases the average LHFO size. Chapter 3 examines the importance of input availability, market attractiveness, agglomeration economies and environmental regulations on the reorganization of U.S. hog production for a panel of 22 U.S. hog producing states which include, Northern states, Southern states and Midwest states for the period 1994-2006. Results from this study suggest that: Hog production in a state is positively affected by hog production in a nearby state, confirming the presence of agglomeration economies; Environmental regulations and high corn price have negative effects on state-level U.S. hog production; High hog prices, and favorable labor cost, and land values attract hog production; and transportation cost has no effect on hog production. Advisors: Azzeddine Azzam and Karina Schoengold

Examining the use of terms "Conservation" "Restoration" and "Preservation" between Natural Resource Professionals and Literature Reviews

ABSTRACT This thesis will determine if there is a discrepancy between how literature defines conservation, preservation, and restoration, and how natural resource professionals define these terms. Interviews were conducted with six professionals from six different agencies that deal with natural resources. These agencies consisted of both government and non-government groups. In addition to interviewing these professionals regarding how they define the terms, they were asked where their work fits into the context of these terms. The interviewees’ responses were then compared with the literature to determine inconsistencies with the use of these terms in the literature and real world settings. The literature and the interviewees have agreed on the term conservation. There are some different points of view about preservation, some see it as ‘no management’ and some others see it as keeping things the same or ‘static.’ Restoration was the term where both the literature and professionals thought of moving an ecosystem from one point of succession or community, to another point on a continuum. The only thing in which they disagree on is the final goal of a restoration project. The literature would suggest restoring the ecosystem to a past historic condition, where the interviewees said to restore it to the best of their abilities and to a functioning ecosystem.