Politics at the water's edge: The presidency, Congress, and the North Korea policy of the United States

For all their efforts to avoid a nuclear North Korea, the Clinton and Bush administrations failed to achieve this goal, the most important policy objective of the United States in its relations with North Korea for decades, mainly because of inconsistencies in U.S. policy. This dissertation seeks to explain why both administrations ultimately failed to prevent North Korea from going nuclear. It finds the origins of this failure in the implementation of different U.S. policy options toward North Korea during the Clinton and Bush administrations. To explain the lack of policy consistency, the dissertation investigates how the relations between the executive and the legislative branches and, more specifically, different government types—unified government and divided government—have affected U.S. policy toward North Korea. It particularly emphasizes the role of Congress and partisan politics in the making of U.S. policy toward North Korea. This study finds that divided government played a pivotal role. Partisan politics are also central to the explanation: politics did not stop at the water’s edge. A divided U.S. government produced more status quo policies toward North Korea than a unified U.S. government, while a unified government produced more active policies than a divided government. Moreover, a unified government with a Republican President produced more aggressive policies toward North Korea, whereas a unified government with a Democratic President produced more conciliatory policies. This study concludes that the different government types and intensified partisan politics were the main causes of the inconsistencies in the United States’ North Korea policy that led to a nuclear North Korea.

A Basic Interpretive Study of the Experiences of University Students Who Have Dropped or Failed an Online Course

Online courses have increased in enrollments over the past few decades. As the number of students taking online courses have increased, so has the number of students who have dropped or failed an online course. According to the literature, online courses may have higher drop rates than traditional, face-to-face courses. The number of students who fail an online course is, also, of concern. As online courses may continue to grow over the next few decades, studies on persistence in online courses may benefit students, administrators, instructional designers, educators, and researchers. Although previous research studies have addressed persistence in online courses, very few examine it from the perspectives of students who were unsuccessful in their courses. These students may have unique insights about the online experience that may have related to their lack of success. The purpose of this study was to understand the experiences of university students who have failed or dropped an online course through the lenses of transactional distance theory and Kember’s model of dropout in distance education. Transactional distance theory discusses the dialog, structure, and learner autonomy involved in an online course, while, Kember’s model presents categories that may relate to dropping an online course. Together, the theory and model may help in understanding the experiences of students who have dropped or failed an online course. In this study, semi-structured interviews were conducted with 20 participants from a large Southeastern university in the United States. Based on the participants’ responses, the data was sorted and ranked according to the amount of transactional distance in their courses, as well as the categories of Kember’s model. Many of the participants who experienced low or high transactional distance have, also, expressed an issue with the goal commitment category of Kember’s model. Additionally, there were important differences in the student characteristics of those who dropped or failed an online course. Furthermore, suggestions for improving online courses were given by the participants. Some of these suggestions included more student-instructor interactions, the use of more technology tools in their online course, and for orientations to the online environment to be offered.

A basic interpretive study of the experiences of university students who have dropped or failed an online course

Online courses have increased in enrollments over the past few decades. As the number of students taking online courses have increased, so has the number of students who have dropped or failed an online course. According to the literature, online courses may have higher drop rates than traditional, face-to-face courses. The number of students who fail an online course is, also, of concern. As online courses may continue to grow over the next few decades, studies on persistence in online courses may benefit students, administrators, instructional designers, educators, and researchers. Although previous research studies have addressed persistence in online courses, very few examine it from the perspectives of students who were unsuccessful in their courses. These students may have unique insights about the online experience that may have related to their lack of success. The purpose of this study was to understand the experiences of university students who have failed or dropped an online course through the lenses of transactional distance theory and Kember’s model of dropout in distance education. Transactional distance theory discusses the dialog, structure, and learner autonomy involved in an online course, while, Kember’s model presents categories that may relate to dropping an online course. Together, the theory and model may help in understanding the experiences of students who have dropped or failed an online course. In this study, semi-structured interviews were conducted with 20 participants from a large Southeastern university in the United States. Based on the participants’ responses, the data was sorted and ranked according to the amount of transactional distance in their courses, as well as the categories of Kember’s model. Many of the participants who experienced low or high transactional distance have, also, expressed an issue with the goal commitment category of Kember’s model. Additionally, there were important differences in the student characteristics of those who dropped or failed an online course. Furthermore, suggestions for improving online courses were given by the participants. Some of these suggestions included more student-instructor interactions, the use of more technology tools in their online course, and for orientations to the online environment to be offered.^