Thinking styles and academic stress coping among Chinese secondary school students

Abstract

This study investigated the predictive power of thinking styles for academic stress coping. Participants were 563 (280 males, 275 females, 8 gender unspecified) secondary school students in grades 7 through 12 from mainland China. Thinking styles were measured using the Thinking Styles Inventory-Revised II which was based on the theory of mental self-government. Coping strategies were measured by the COPE-Revised, which was derived from Carver’s COPE (1989). Results showed that thinking styles had statistically significant predictive power for academic stress-coping strategies beyond age and gender, largely in the expected directions. Theoretical implications for research on intellectual styles and coping are discussed; and some practical implications for school teachers and students are proposed.     

How teachers and researchers read academic articles

This study looks at language teachers’ and language researchers’ expectations and evaluations of two kinds of journal articles, either researcher-oriented or teacher-oriented. The results show that teachers and academics use different ways of validating information in journal articles and use the information contained in them in distinctly different ways. Teachers also showed a preference for articles written in a clear, succinct, and personal style. Gee's theory of Discourses is used to analyze the results and discuss possible ramifications for teacher education and the practice of publishing research articles.     

Roles,requirements and autonomy of academic researchers

As an indicator of nations' prosperity and economic competitiveness, research impacts the mounting roles and requirements placed upon academic researchers. Internationally, researchers are expected to effectively operate in the fast-changing and demanding research environment. Such effectiveness corresponds mainly to their ability to establish international and interdisciplinary collaborations, secure internal and external grants, and most importantly deliver tangible research outputs. As such, this desired research excellence impacts researchers' academic appointments, recognitions and promotions. Driven by research productivity and pursuit of academic excellence, researchers' individual autonomy may become restricted. This work is based on (a) an international study exploring research productivity within higher education institutions across 15 countries and (b) a relevant international literature review. The voices of 32 participants portray competencies required from and requirements placed upon academic researchers at their respective universities. Findings show that the role of academic researchers is changing and the requirements pose challenges to researchers' autonomy. The research productivity quest along with opportunity-driven decisions may not only restrict researchers' autonomy but also compromise their academic integrity.     

学术自由与学术腐败

本文对学术自由的历史渊源进行了考察,分析了学术自由的制约和学术腐败的根源,对政府和学者个人在维护学术自由和遏制学术腐败方面的具体做法提出了自己的一些观点.     

学术自由与学术责任——大学学术发展的价值协调

学术自由是大学理念中一个最基本的学术价值观,它不仅是学术研究者的一种权利,而且体现为大学内部所特有的独立品格和精神。自17世纪末期近代大学形成以来,学术自由的理念不断强化,内涵不断丰富,逐步成为大学之所以为大学的基础、动力源和基本理念。三百年来,一方面学术自由使大学保持着宽松的研究氛围,传承文明,追求真理;另一方面,在所谓“学术自由”的保护伞下,一些研究人员却暗中接受政府巨额资金,为政府不光彩的行动出谋划策,学术腐败和对学生不负责任的行为也时有发生。对曾经寄予厚望、充满理想色彩的学术圣地——“大学”,人们已颇多…     

Understanding the role of the mentor in developing research competency among undergraduate researchers

Undergraduate research and creative activities are established high-impact practices that provide students with both advanced knowledge of their academic disciplines and the ability to apply that knowledge to creatively answer questions. At the center of these experiences, is the close relationship between a student researcher and a mentor. Using survey data from 69 recent undergraduate researchers at one university, we investigated the characteristics and impact of these mentor–mentee relationships. We found that active mentoring practices were a significant influence on how competent students perceived themselves as scholars. These practices were more influential than practical aspects of mentoring. Our findings reflect the complicated nature of mentoring in higher education and identify key characteristics of successful mentoring relationships. With greater understanding of this essential component of undergraduate research, we are equipped to make more informed decisions regarding faculty and administrative support for future undergraduate research and creative activities.     

Emotions and teaching styles among academics: the mediating role of research and teaching efficacy

The key purpose of this research was to investigate the mediating role of academics’ self-efficacy in teaching and research (termed ‘academic self-efficacy’) in the relationship between emotions in teaching and teaching styles. Two hundred and thirty-two academics from 13 higher educational institutions in Shanghai, mainland China, responded to three self-report inventories, each assessing academics’ emotions in teaching, efficacy in teaching and research, and teaching styles, respectively. Results showed that academics’ emotions in teaching statistically predicted teaching styles, both directly and indirectly – through academic self-efficacy. Findings have enriched the literature on emotions in teaching, that on teaching styles, and that on teacher/academic self-efficacy. Practical implications are proposed in relation to academics and university senior managers.     

Academic profession in academic organization

It has been argued that academic organizations are organized anarchies with ambiguous goal functions and uncertain technologies. Academia cannot evaluate itself because its dynamics is the garbage-can process. The counter-argument is that rational academic man(woman) is a substitute for organizational foolishness. The organizational behavior of academic institutions must be interpreted in terms of the logic of the academic profession.     

The association of thinking styles with research agendas among academics in the social sciences

Research agendas are understudied, despite being key to academic knowledge creation. The literature suggests that the ways that academics determine their research agendas are conditioned by individual, organisational and environmental characteristics. This study explores the cognitive aspects of academics' research agendas in the social sciences by using a theory on thinking styles as an analytical framework. The results suggest that the research agendas of academics in the social sciences are significantly associated with their thinking styles. These findings aid understanding of how academics set their research agendas. This study also represents an important landmark in research on thinking styles, focusing on academic research work as a potential venue for further studies. The findings are relevant for policymakers, research funding agencies, university administrators and academics because they have implications for academic research development processes, outcomes, and for research and academic identity socialisation during doctoral studies.     

Academic socialization,parental educational expectations,and academic self‐efficacy among Latino adolescents

This study examined the direct association between parental educational expectations and adolescents’ academic self‐efficacy, as well as the moderating influence of parental academic socialization messages. Participants were 148 Latino parent–adolescent dyads with the majority of Mexican origin (80.4%). Most of the parent participants were mothers (85.8%). Adolescents were 13 (46%) or 14 (54%) years of age, and 53% identified as female. Adolescents reported their academic self‐efficacy and perceptions of their parents’ educational expectations; parents reported on their academic socialization messages of shame/pressure and effort regarding academics. The results suggest that, after accounting for parents’ level of education and immigrant status, parental educational expectations were positively associated with adolescent academic self‐efficacy. This association was stronger among adolescents whose parents reported transmitting fewer messages of shame/pressure and academic effort. These results point to the importance of nuances in the content and type of academic socialization messages within Latino families.     

Academic hardiness and academic self-efficacy in graduate studies

ABSTRACT

The purpose of the study was to measure graduate students’ academic hardiness (GSAH) and academic self-efficacy (GSASE) and to examine the relationships between the two. A total of 202 graduate students across disciplines were recruited to complete two questionnaires (GSAH and GSASE). Results of exploratory factor analyses showed that the GSAH and GSASE were reliable for assessing graduate students’ academic hardiness and academic self-efficacy. Comparing master’s and doctoral students’ scores in the GSAH and GSASE scales, we found that doctoral students outperformed master’s students. The findings also revealed that three dimensions of GSAH (commitment, control of affect, and challenge) were strong predictors of graduate students’ academic self-efficacy. These results confirm and strengthen the relation between graduate students’ academic hardiness and academic self-efficacy. This study calls attention to graduate students’ ability to recognize and appraise causes of their failure and to learn how to overcome academic difficulties.     

Attitudes of researchers toward deception in communication research

Eighty communication researchers representing twenty‐six universities responded to a questionnaire designed to assess attitudes toward deception‐related practices in conducting communication research. Nearly seven out of ten of the respondents perceived misleading and/or misinforming human subjects as an acceptable research strategy when accompanied by debriefing. The majority of the respondents favored research review boards and informed consent procedures and indicated familiarity with the APA standards for ethical research involving human subjects.     

The research agenda setting of higher education researchers

Research agenda setting is a critical dimension in the creation of knowledge since it represents the starting point of a process that embeds individual researchers’ (and the communities that they identify themselves with) interest for shedding light on topical unknowns, intrinsic and extrinsic factors underpinning that motivation, and the ambition and scope of what a research endeavor can bring. This article aims to better understand the setting of individual research agendas in the field of higher education. It does so by means of a recently developed framework on research agenda setting that uses cluster analysis and linear modeling. The findings identify two main clusters defining individual research agenda setting—cohesive and trailblazing—each with a different set of determining characteristics. Further analysis by cross-validation through means of sub-sampling shows that these clusters are consistent for both new and established researchers, and for frequent and “part-time” contributors to the field of higher education. Implications for the field of higher education research are discussed, including the relevance that each research agendas cluster has for the advancement of knowledge in the field.     

学术认可与学术系统内部的运行规则

赢得学术界的认可对于学者而言具有特殊的意义。它不仅意味着个人的研究成果为他人所接纳,而且也意味着学者本人在学界获得了相应的职业声望、地位和等级等各种资源。因此,学术认可构成了学术共同体内部运行的核心议题。然而学术认可的过程究竟是为个体意义上的自致性因素所主导,还是为社会性因素所建构?揭示和理解学术认可背后的相关规则对于我们考察中国当下的学术制度具有非同寻常的意义。     

Academic work: Perceptions of senior academic administrators

This article reports on selected findings of the first stage of a qualitative study of academic work in Australian universities. This stage examined the perceptions senior academic administrators from the humanities, sciences, social sciences and professional areas hold of the work roles of academics. The article presents their perceptions of ‘research’ and ‘scholarship’ and the link between the two, as well as the interrelationships between research, scholarship and teaching. The findings show a high level of consensus and coherence in the views presented. The article examines possible reasons for such a unanimity of perception and raises further questions for investigation.     

Academic self-concept,autonomous academic motivation,and academic achievement: Mediating and additive effects

Three conceptual models were tested to examine the relationships among academic self-concept, autonomous academic motivation, and academic achievement. This allowed us to determine whether 1) autonomous academic motivation mediates the relation between academic self-concept and achievement, 2) academic self-concept mediates the relation between autonomous academic motivation and achievement, or 3) both motivational constructs have an additive effect on academic achievement. A total of 925 high school students (404 boys and 521 girls) were asked to complete a questionnaire on two occasions separated by a year interval. Results from SEM analyses provided good support for the hypothesized model positing that autonomous academic motivation mediates the academic self-concept–academic achievement relation. Results are discussed in light of self-determination theory and self-concept theory.     

Academic self-efficacy and academic self-concept: Reconsidering structural relationships

The current study investigates (1) whether academic (e.g. math) self-efficacy and academic self-concept represent two conceptually and empirically distinct psychological constructs when studied within the same domain, (2) the nature of the relationship existing between both self-constructs, (3) their antecedents, and (4) their mediating and predictive qualities for background variables such as gender and prior knowledge and outcome variables such as math performance, math interest, and math anxiety. Results indicate that (1) math self-efficacy and math self-concept do indeed represent conceptually and empirically different constructs, even when studied within the same domain, (2) students' academic self-concept strongly influences their academic self-efficacy beliefs, (3) academic self-concept is a better predictor (and mediator) for affective–motivational variables, while academic self-efficacy is the better predictor (and mediator) for academic achievement. These findings underpin the conceptual and empirical differences between both self-constructs as suggested by Bong and Skaalvik [Bong, M., &; Skaalvik, E.M. (2003). Academic self-concept and self-efficacy: How different are they really?. Educational Psychology Review, 15, 1–40.].