Mathematical properties of Q-measures

Q-measures are network indicators that gauge a node's brokerage role between different groups in the network. Previous studies have focused on their definition for different network types and their practical application. Little attention has, however, been paid to their theoretical and mathematical characterization. In this article we contribute to a better understanding of Q-measures by studying some of their mathematical properties in the context of unweighted, undirected networks. An external Q-measure complementing the previously defined local and global Q-measure is introduced. We prove a number of relations between the values of the global, the local and the external Q-measure and betweenness centrality, and show how the global Q-measure can be rewritten as a convex decomposition of the local and external Q-measures. Furthermore, we formally characterize when Q-measures obtain their maximal value. It turns out that this is only possible in a limited number of very specific circumstances.     

A layered framework to study collaboration as a form of knowledge sharing and diffusion

Collaboration can be described using layered systems such as the article–author–institute–country structure. These structures can be considered ‘cascades’ or ‘chains’ of bipartite networks. We introduce a framework for characterizing and studying the intensity of collaboration between entities at a given level (e.g., between institutions). Specifically, we define the notions of significant, essential and vital nodes, and significant, essential and vital sub paths to describe the spread of knowledge through collaboration in such systems. Based on these notions, we introduce relative and absolute proper essential node (PEN) centrality as indicators of a node's importance for diffusion of knowledge through collaboration.We illustrate these concepts in an illustrative example and show how they can be applied using a small real-world example. Since collaboration implies knowledge sharing, it can be considered a special form of knowledge diffusion.     

A Study of Academic and Nonacademic Predictors and Criteria of Success among Scholarship Recipients

This is an investigation of the relationships and differences among selected personality, demographic, and intellective variables in a sample of 267 Morehead Scholars, at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, from the classes of 1965 through 1970 to determine the feasibility and practicality of their use as predictors and criteria of academic and nonacademic achievements. Analysis of variance was used to determine the differences among the various groups. Stepwise regression analysis was used to determine the association among the variables and to select the most efficient predictors of academic and nonacademic criteria.

There was a significant relationship between high school nonacademic achievements and (a) Opinion, Attitude, and Interest Survey (OAIS) scores, (b) high school rank in class and (c) Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT) scores. High school nonacademic achievements and selected OAIS scales, when combined with SAT scores and high school rank in class, increase the efficiency of predicting subsequent college grade point average (GPA). The addition of high school nonacademic achievements to SAT scores increased the efficiency of predicting freshman and senior cumulative GPA for all groups. The OAIS scales, freshman GPA, and high school nonacademic achievements can be used to predict college nonacademic achievements.     

Vision in an Age of Accountability

A case is presented against a data collection system that is intended to provide increased accountability of teachers, professors and the profession. The utilization of some current data collection systems may in fact jeopardize the integrity of the profession's mission and goals. The cause of concern is the use of the easiest form of data collection (e.g., fitness, skills, math, and science scores) rather than evidence viewing the student as a complex organism that would require a more appropriate and complex assessment system (i.e., “life skills” activity participation and social skills rather than a fitness test). I also note that a focus on increased accountability and simplified data collection provides the impetus that research in higher education needs to consider a paradigm shift to be more collaborative and holistic. In presenting these issues, I note that the vision of Delphine Hanna was similar, specifically more collaborative, more holistic, and more humanistic in making scholarly and professional decisions.     

Introduction—The Case for Integration and Collaboration,Reprise

We shall some day be heeded, and when we shall have our amendment to the Constitution of the United States, everybody will think it was always so, just exactly as many young people believe that all the privileges, all the freedom, all the enjoyments which a woman now possesses always were hers (Susan B. Anthony on February 15, 1894). (Sherr, 1995, p. xi)     

The song remains the same: the selective tradition of technical rationality in adult education program planning theory

The purpose of this study is to depict the historical development of American adult education planning theory. We argue that adult education planning theory represents a ‘selective tradition’ promoting a dominant ‘discourse’ that privileges ‘technical rationality’. Using discourse analysis, we demonstrate how technical rationality emerged in the professionalization movement in the 1930s to dominate planning theory discourse, how technical rational planning theory became codified by 1950, and how little it has varied since. Using relational analysis, we juxtapose this dominant tradition of technical rational planning theory with historical examples of adult education to begin expanding our notions of what could count as legitimate planning practice and theory.     

Editorial

This study explores the relationship between adult education practitioners using different styles of power and influence tactics in designing and planning programmes and organizational political contexts. Power and influence styles were identified through cluster analysis: shotgun, tactician, ingratiator, and bystander. The relationship between power and influence style and organizational political contexts was examined.