Soviet/Vietnam relations, 1969 to 1978

The SRV occupy an ambiguous position in relation to the Soviet Union, conforming neither wholly to the status of an eastern bloc state nor to that of a developing country. Furthermore, the dynamics of the relationship ensure that the client patron relationship has often been reversed. This study is structured around a loose methodological framework, in order to accommodate both Marxist-Leninist and international relations aspects of the problem.A study of Soviet academic writing on Vietnam opens up several areas of inquiry. The course of the Paris Peace Talks, which coincided with detente and improved Soviet/United States relations, illustrates a conflict of interests for the Soviet Union. The war in Vietnam emerged as a lesser priority, in spite of the Vietnamese desire to move to a military conclusion. For the same reasons, Soviet support for Vietnam appeared muted in the period immediately following the cease fire of 1973 and amounted to an acceptance of the status quo for the foreseeable future, priority going towards economic reconstruction in the North rather than military action in the South. A Vietnamese initiative, therefore, led to the unexpected final victory of 1975. The Soviet Union were thus unprepared, immediately, to deal with the problems attendant upon reunification and continued Vietnamese hostilities with Cambodia. The Soviet/Vietnam Treaty of 1978 represents a harmonizing of Soviet and Vietnamese policy goals in which Soviet support for Vietnam in respect of full economic reunification and Cambodia as a sphere of Vietnamese influence was the political consequence.The substantial power of leverage the Vietnamese have been able to exert at any given time, leads to a re-evaluation of the nature of the relationship and suggests an interpretation in terms of mutual advantage

Wealth and social responsibility: A study of philanthropy in southern New Hampshire and southern Maine

This is a study of individual philanthropists and their beliefs and practices of philanthropy in southern New Hampshire and southern Maine. It examines the patterns and social structures of philanthropy in these areas, looking particularly at issues of class, culture, social capital, and civic participation. Based on in-depth interviews conducted with 40 wealthy philanthropists in 2002 and 2003, the study findings suggest that I uncovered a population of philanthropists that had not been studied before. These sample philanthropists are not simply using their wealth to maintain the status quo and perpetuate their position in society, as past studies have found philanthropists to be. While some of these philanthropists choose to be members of the upper-class-elite-culture of philanthropy, others eschew or are not at all interested in membership in this culture. I identified four subsets of philanthropists in the study. Some of these philanthropists do support the traditional institutions and organizations of elite culture while others support those institutions and organizations that seek to offer social provision, address the inequities in society and, to some extent, alter the structures of society. Generations of wealth, education, migration, party, marriage, gender and age/generation are factors that affect these philanthropists\u27 choice of which organizations receive their time and money, and their traditional or change orientation. The subset of philanthropists that respondents belong to, based on their engagement in the elite culture of philanthropy, determines areas of giving, how they contribute (% time and % income), how they view decision-making in the organizations to which they donate, and how they relate to their wealth. The subset of philanthropists that they belong to also affects their diversity of associations and comfort with their wealth, which impact their positioning in either leadership or collaborative roles with the organizations to which they donate their time and their money. These findings suggest a new, or previously unstudied social structure in the philanthropy world in which some wealthy philanthropists choose not to be members of elite culture. These philanthropists are aware of the inequities in society and focus their philanthropy on attempts to administer social justice , even the playing field and give back to society

Integrating Sociotechnical Issues In The Introduction To Circuits Course

Engineers frequently encounter sociotechnical issues in their work, so it is critical that they are prepared to address complex, real-world issues that require both technical and social expertise. Engineering accreditation criteria further underscore the importance of understanding sociotechnical issues by expecting engineering undergraduate programs to address ethical, global, cultural, social, environmental, and economic considerations in student outcomes. However, most engineering instructors were educated with a deep technical focus, have little experience outside of engineering, and feel ill-equipped to integrate non-technical topics. As a result, engineering is often taught in the undergraduate curricula from a purely technical perspective, with an emphasis on calculations and mathematical modelling, and without mention of social issues. In this paper, we outline a new project to help engineering instructors integrate sociotechnical issues into their classrooms. Applying proven principles of backward course design and working with a team of electrical engineering graduate students, we aim to develop and test several sociotechnical modules for the Introduction to Circuits course. Each module will be linked to technical topics addressed in the course, and each will emphasize a different social issue. We will prepare detailed teaching guides so instructors can easily use the modules in their own contexts, and we will assess the effectiveness of the modules

Understanding Diverse Pathways: Disciplinary Trajectories of Engineering Students: Year 3- NSF REE Grant 1129383

Engineering as a whole continues to suffer from a low participation of women of all races andBlack, Hispanic, and Native American men. To diversify pathways for students to and throughengineering and to improve student success, we must first know how to measure success andprovide baseline data describing the current situation for all students. Our previous work hasshown that persistence or success varies by race and gender, and how we measure persistencematters in understanding this variation. Once women matriculate in engineering, they graduate insix-years at the same or better rates than their male counterparts of all races. This finding,however, shows considerable variation by engineering subdiscipline. Aggregating allengineering disciplines tends to produce a skewed view of the field given the large numbers ofstudents in Electrical and Mechanical engineering. Disaggregation by race and gender isimperative because not all populations respond the same way to similar conditions. Building onearlier findings that trajectories of engineering persistence are non-linear, gendered, andracialized as a whole and for electrical and computer engineering, we are extending theseanalyses to other engineering disciplines. Using an existing dataset that includes wholepopulation data from eleven institutions throughout the U.S. spanning more than 20 years, wehave an unprecedented opportunity to conduct analyses of student persistence disaggregated byrace, gender, and engineering discipline. This gives us a unique opportunity to paint a morecomplete picture of the current situation for students in engineering and to identify successes andareas of concern. Our research question is How do the trajectories of engineering students indifferent engineering disciplines vary by race and gender? Trajectories are measured atmatriculation, four years later, and six-year graduation for matriculants to the disciplines as wellas all students in the major, including first-time-in-college (FTIC) and transfer students. Theimpact of first-year engineering (FYE) programs is also considered. We focus on the mostpopular disciplines of engineering: Chemical, Civil, Electrical, Mechanical, and Industrial. Inaddition, we have considered Aerospace Engineering given its similarity in curriculum toMechanical and Computer Engineering given its similar curriculum to Electrical. We have begunto work on comparisons of the five most popular engineering disciplines