Matching Items (6)
Filtering by
- Creators: School of International Letters and Cultures
- Member of: Barrett, The Honors College Thesis/Creative Project Collection
- Member of: Theses and Dissertations
- Status: Published
Description
Because children do not have the same decision-making powers as adults in matters affecting their health, their opinions have often been underrepresented in research (Bradding & Horstman, 1999). However, there is growing interest in the way that children view health because this knowledge elicits the development of more child-centered and effective approaches to health education and intervention (Bradding & Horstman, 1999). Professionals have often utilized the write-and-draw technique in school settings to gain a better understanding of how to best implement health education programs. The "bottom-up" approach of the write-and-draw method encourages participation and has been shown to elicit thoughtful responses about how children conceptualize health (Pridmore & Bendelow, 1995). This study uses the write-and-draw method to perform a cross-cultural comparison of child perspectives of health in the United States and Guatemala, countries that represent contrasting paradigms for child health. The results of this study are consistent with previous research, especially the emergent health themes. Children from the United States and Guatemala predominantly depicted health in terms of food. Guatemalan students were more likely to refer to hygienic practices and environmental conditions, while US children mentioned vegetables, water, and exercise as being healthy. For the unhealthy category, themes of poor hygiene, chips, fat/grease, fruit, carbohydrates, and environment were mentioned more often in Guatemala, while U.S. students listed sweets and fast food more frequently. Results support claims made in other literature that children's concepts of health are shaped by life experience and social context. Potential applications of the research include exposing areas (themes) where children are less likely to understand health implications and developing educational curriculum to increase a more comprehensive understanding of health.
ContributorsRenslow, Jillian Marie (Author) / Maupin, Jonathan (Thesis director) / BurnSilver, Shauna (Committee member) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor) / School of International Letters and Cultures (Contributor) / School of Human Evolution and Social Change (Contributor)
Created2014-12
Description
My thesis is about media in both Italy and the United States, and how they evolved into the media we consume today. It revolves around my Journalism and Communication major, as well as my Italian minor. I have incorporated both areas of my studies in my thesis; such as the differences in two different worlds and how they cover and relay media to their viewers, the way in which media influences children, and how advancements such as social media affect journalism in today's society. Through my research, I was able to show that media exists all around the world but the way it is relayed to it's public changes, and influences its audience. I conducted my research via peer-reviewed articles, journals and accredited academic works as well as personal and anonymous surveys. I used my interviews and surveys to build off of the articles I found to make a firm and strong conclusion. The resources used in my thesis were different professionals who currently work, or worked with a credible and well-know media
ews outlet. I also gathered information from elementary, middle, high-school, and college students. Having a different variety of ages, helped me gage the influence media has on its consumers so that I could draw an accurate conclusion.
ews outlet. I also gathered information from elementary, middle, high-school, and college students. Having a different variety of ages, helped me gage the influence media has on its consumers so that I could draw an accurate conclusion.
ContributorsScorzo, Francesca Rose (Author) / Minardi, Enrico (Thesis director) / Stephens, Glen (Committee member) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor) / School of International Letters and Cultures (Contributor) / Walter Cronkite School of Journalism and Mass Communication (Contributor)
Created2014-05
Description
The United States healthcare system does not perform as well as other countries including Germany and England, despite spending the most money on healthcare. It is well-established that there have been attempts at reform in the U.S. healthcare system multiple times in the past. This research paper describes the health care systems in the U.S., Germany, and England to analyze the strengths to create practical healthcare reform ideas for the U.S. This was done by describing each of the country's health care systems in detail, including the history of each country's health care system, the quality of care, the access to care, and the funding of the health care system. Based on this analysis of these health care systems, recommendations for health care reform are provided for the U.S. with revisions to the Affordable Care Act.
ContributorsEppinger, Jamie Marie (Author) / Don, Rachael (Thesis director) / Kizer, Elizabeth (Committee member) / College of Health Solutions (Contributor, Contributor) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2021-05
Description
This thesis project focuses on the rhetoric of dress reform in The Sibyl, the official journal of the National Dress Reform Association from 1856 to 1864. The American Dress Reform Movement grew out of the women’s rights and health reform movements during the Second Great Awakening. Dress reformers viewed women’s fashionable dress as both a symbol of and reason for their political and economic oppression. They believed that by modifying women’s everyday dress, women’s health (and in turn, the health of their descendants) would improve and they would have more opportunities outside of the home. Close reading of The Sibyl reveals that dress reformers gravitated towards the rhetoric of slavery, comparisons to non-Christian nations, and the characterization of women as weak to advocate for their cause. I argue that this rhetoric disempowers women and promotes racist and xenophobic ideas, which ultimately undermines the movement’s goals.
ContributorsWise, Catherine (Author) / Soares, Rebecca (Thesis director) / Looser, Devoney (Committee member) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor) / School of International Letters and Cultures (Contributor) / Historical, Philosophical & Religious Studies, Sch (Contributor)
Created2024-05
Description
This short documentary on the Equal Rights Amendment features attorney Dianne Post and State Representative Jennifer Jermaine, and it examines the fight for passage at the federal and state level. This film attempts to answer the following questions: What is the ERA? What is its history? Why do we need it? How do we get it into the Constitution of the United States of America?
The text of the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA) states that “equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on account of sex.” The amendment was authored by Alice Paul and was first introduced into Congress in 1923. The ERA did not make much progress until 1970, when Representative Martha Griffiths from Michigan filed a discharge petition demanding that the ERA move out of the judiciary committee to be heard by the full United States House of Representatives. The House passed it and it went on to the Senate, where it was approved and sent to the states for ratification. By 1977, 35 states had voted to ratify the ERA, but it did not reach the 38 states-threshold required for ratification before the 1982 deadline set by Congress. More recently, Nevada ratified the ERA in March 2017, and Illinois followed suit in May 2018. On January 27th, 2020, Virginia finalized its ratification, making it the 38th state to ratify the Equal Rights Amendment.
Supporters of the ERA argue that we have reached the required goal of approval by 38 states. However, opponents may have at least two legal arguments to challenge this claim by ERA advocates. First, the deadline to ratify was 1982. Second, five states have voted to rescind their ratification since their initial approval. These political and legal challenges must be addressed and resolved before the ERA can be considered part of the United States Constitution. Nevertheless, ERA advocates continue to pursue certification. There are complicated questions to untangle here, to be sure, but by listening to a variety of perspectives and critically examining the historical and legal context, it may be possible to find some answers. Indeed, Arizona, which has yet to ratify the ERA, could play a vital role in the on-going fight for the ERA.
The text of the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA) states that “equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on account of sex.” The amendment was authored by Alice Paul and was first introduced into Congress in 1923. The ERA did not make much progress until 1970, when Representative Martha Griffiths from Michigan filed a discharge petition demanding that the ERA move out of the judiciary committee to be heard by the full United States House of Representatives. The House passed it and it went on to the Senate, where it was approved and sent to the states for ratification. By 1977, 35 states had voted to ratify the ERA, but it did not reach the 38 states-threshold required for ratification before the 1982 deadline set by Congress. More recently, Nevada ratified the ERA in March 2017, and Illinois followed suit in May 2018. On January 27th, 2020, Virginia finalized its ratification, making it the 38th state to ratify the Equal Rights Amendment.
Supporters of the ERA argue that we have reached the required goal of approval by 38 states. However, opponents may have at least two legal arguments to challenge this claim by ERA advocates. First, the deadline to ratify was 1982. Second, five states have voted to rescind their ratification since their initial approval. These political and legal challenges must be addressed and resolved before the ERA can be considered part of the United States Constitution. Nevertheless, ERA advocates continue to pursue certification. There are complicated questions to untangle here, to be sure, but by listening to a variety of perspectives and critically examining the historical and legal context, it may be possible to find some answers. Indeed, Arizona, which has yet to ratify the ERA, could play a vital role in the on-going fight for the ERA.
ContributorsSchroder, Jude Alexander (Author) / Adelman, Madelaine (Thesis director) / Mitchell, Kathryn (Committee member) / School of Politics and Global Studies (Contributor, Contributor, Contributor) / School of International Letters and Cultures (Contributor) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2020-05
Description
Following the Russian Federation’s illegal invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, the world has once again found itself in a time of crisis. President Vladimir Putin has chosen to rewind the clock and restore the Cold War-era divide between Russia and the United States. The European Union, while still divided internally on numerous issues, has seemingly chosen to rise to the occasion in the wake of Russia’s invasion and assert itself as an equal party to both Cold War-era rivals. All the while China, the pacing, ever vigilant threat, continues to keep its cards close to its chest, and it remains to be seen whether a new Sino-Soviet split will emerge just as before or if the adage “the enemy of my enemy is my friend” still rings true. However, 2022 is not 1962, at least not yet. The global nuclear non-proliferation regime, the culmination of sixty years of constant effort between adversary and ally alike, exists to save the United States and Russia from themselves. Despite the breadth and authority of the regime there are threats abound to its existence, particularly in this time of deep uncertainty. It is incumbent upon the nuclear powers of the world, and Russia especially, to ensure that it does not become a casualty of this age. The world must therefore look back to the early days of the Cold War when crises were abundant, and the United States and the Soviet Union repeatedly brought humanity to the edge of the nuclear abyss. What we learn from doing so is that, while difficult, the global nuclear non-proliferation regime can be supported through unilateral, bilateral, and multilateral actions such as novel weaponry moratoriums, a return to adversarial arms control, and achieving the universality of export control regimes, respectively.
ContributorsErjavic, Spencer (Author) / Hoogenboom, Hilde (Thesis director) / O'Donnell, Edward (Committee member) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor) / School of Politics and Global Studies (Contributor) / Historical, Philosophical & Religious Studies, Sch (Contributor) / School of International Letters and Cultures (Contributor)
Created2022-05