谢拉的文献工作教育思想与实践

在1952—1970年担任西储大学图书馆学院院长期间,谢拉积极探索文献工作教育:在学科理论方面,进行文献工作学科理论建设;在学术研究方面,设立美国图书馆学院第一个专门的文献工作研究中心“文献工作与交流研究中心”;在教学活动方面,在图书馆学教育项目中引入文献工作相关课程,强化以文献工作为重点的专业图书馆人才培养。谢拉的文献工作教育是对传统图书馆学教育的改造,适应了图书馆学教育专门化的发展趋势,其立足点是以文献工作提升图书馆职业的社会价值,服务于图书馆人才培养,体现出明显的图书馆本位立场。谢拉领导下的西储大学图书馆学院的文献工作教育是一种过渡形态的早期情报学教育,促进了20世纪美国图书馆学教育向图书情报学教育格局的转型。参考文献62。     

Google Scholar and Web of Science: Examining gender differences in citation coverage across five scientific disciplines

Many studies demonstrate differences in the coverage of citing publications in Google Scholar (GS) and Web of Science (WoS). Here, we examine to what extent citation data from the two databases reflect the scholarly impact of women and men differently. Our conjecture is that WoS carries an indirect gender bias in its selection criteria for citation sources that GS avoids due to criteria that are more inclusive. Using a sample of 1250 U.S. researchers in Sociology, Political Science, Economics, Cardiology and Chemistry, we examine gender differences in the average citation coverage of the two databases. We also calculate database-specific h-indices for all authors in the sample. In repeated simulations of hiring scenarios, we use these indices to examine whether women's appointment rates increase if hiring decisions rely on data from GS in lieu of WoS. We find no systematic gender differences in the citation coverage of the two databases. Further, our results indicate marginal to non-existing effects of database selection on women's success-rates in the simulations. In line with the existing literature, we find the citation coverage in WoS to be largest in Cardiology and Chemistry and smallest in Political Science and Sociology. The concordance between author-based h-indices measured by GS and WoS is largest for Chemistry followed by Cardiology, Political Science, Sociology and Economics.     

Investigating the quality of interactions and public engagement around scientific papers on Twitter

This study explores science communication on Twitter by investigating a sample of tweets referring to academic papers in five different scientific fields. The specifications of science communicators on Twitter, the characteristics of those who initiate actions (by tweeting), the extent and quality of reactions (retweeting), individual and group interactions, and the distribution of tweets across types of engagement in the process of science communication (i.e., dissemination, consultation, and evaluation) were explored. A broad array of actors is involved in the communication of science on Twitter, with individual citizens and individual researchers playing an important role. In principle, this is promising for creating direct interaction, which can be difficult through more traditional mass media. The vast majority of communication activities regarding academic papers is undigested dissemination with almost no sign of debate, contestation, or collective reflection. Another general finding of this study is that bot accounts play a major role in the science communication landscape on Twitter.     

Impact Factors and the Central Limit Theorem: Why citation averages are scale dependent

Citation averages, and Impact Factors (IFs) in particular, are sensitive to sample size. Here, we apply the Central Limit Theorem to IFs to understand their scale-dependent behavior. For a journal of n randomly selected papers from a population of all papers, we expect from the Theorem that its IF fluctuates around the population average μ, and spans a range of values proportional to $\sigma /\sqrt{n}$, where σ² is the variance of the population's citation distribution. The $1/\sqrt{n}$ dependence has profound implications for IF rankings: The larger a journal, the narrower the range around μ where its IF lies. IF rankings therefore allocate an unfair advantage to smaller journals in the high IF ranks, and to larger journals in the low IF ranks. As a result, we expect a scale-dependent stratification of journals in IF rankings, whereby small journals occupy the top, middle, and bottom ranks; mid-sized journals occupy the middle ranks; and very large journals have IFs that asymptotically approach μ. We obtain qualitative and quantitative confirmation of these predictions by analyzing (i) the complete set of 166,498 IF & journal-size data pairs in the 1997–2016 Journal Citation Reports of Clarivate Analytics, (ii) the top-cited portion of 276,000 physics papers published in 2014–2015, and (iii) the citation distributions of an arbitrarily sampled list of physics journals. We conclude that the Central Limit Theorem is a good predictor of the IF range of actual journals, while sustained deviations from its predictions are a mark of true, non-random, citation impact. IF rankings are thus misleading unless one compares like-sized journals or adjusts for these effects. We propose the Φ index, a rescaled IF that accounts for size effects, and which can be readily generalized to account also for different citation practices across research fields. Our methodology applies to other citation averages that are used to compare research fields, university departments or countries in various types of rankings.     

Dimensions: A competitor to Scopus and the Web of Science?

Dimensions is a partly free scholarly database launched by Digital Science in January 2018. Dimensions includes journal articles and citation counts, making it a potential new source of impact data. This article explores the value of Dimensions from an impact assessment perspective with an examination of Food Science research 2008–2018 and a random sample of 10,000 Scopus articles from 2012. The results include high correlations between citation counts from Scopus and Dimensions (0.96 by narrow field in 2012) as well as similar average counts. Almost all Scopus articles with DOIs were found in Dimensions (97% in 2012). Thus, the scholarly database component of Dimensions seems to be a plausible alternative to Scopus and the Web of Science for general citation analyses and for citation data in support of some types of research evaluations.     

高校文科专业文献学教学的反思

针对文献学课程作为选修课常常受到文献检索等课程的挤压,作为必修课又受到教学对象主、客观两方面因素的制约的情况,提出文献学对于文史哲等专业的治学研究有指导作用,对于学生知识体系的建构和完善有着非同一般的意义,应该成为文科专业的基础课。改进文献学的教学现状,教师必须注意文献学观念的转变,注意与国学教育相融合,提升自己的学术含量,提高自己的文化品格,实现教学策略的调整。     

Elementary school children’s understanding of science: The implementation of an extracurricular science intervention

The promotion of students’ achievement and competence in the so-called STEM disciplines is one cornerstone of current educational research and practice. In particular, as early as elementary school, the fostering of an adequate understanding of science is a normative goal of science education. It facilitates students’ science learning and enables them to understand the nature and development of scientific knowledge. Based on the relevance of the promotion of young children’s understanding of science, a corresponding science intervention was recently developed and successfully evaluated in a first study under highly controlled conditions. The goal of the present study was to investigate the effectiveness of this intervention when implemented in practice. One hundred seventeen third- and fourth-grade students and 10 trained course instructors participated in this study. We applied a randomized block design with waitlist control groups and repeated measures. The results revealed that children assigned to the intervention compared with children assigned to the waitlist control group showed better inquiry-related methodological competencies (a better understanding of the scientific inquiry cycle and experimentation strategies) and a higher need for cognition. The findings point to the successful implementation of the intervention and are compared with the results of the first study.     

浅谈语文教学中的创新教育

语文教学中要培养学生的创新精神，就要充分挖掘学生的想象力，培养学生大胆设想、大胆尝试的能力。这些能力的培养就对老师的课堂教学提出了更高的要求，要大胆抛弃传统的教学模式，大胆创新。     

引导学生正确认识宗教问题

文章主要阐述在历文教学中要有针对性地解决学生提出的宗教问题，引导学生正确地看待宗教在社会主义社会的存在，认识宗教与迷信、邪教的区别，认识宗教与科学的关系。     

试从"自我"角度探求科技人性化之路径

文章初步尝试从人的自我的角度来探求科技人性化之路径:人要着眼于“善”假外物而促动科技的生命化和艺术化,用独立灵明的自我意识监控科技对自我之身心整体及其与外部自然和社会环境的关系过程,以大公大我推动科技在人类内部和谐的基础上发展。