With the eyes of others: an ethnography of an academic office

The author raises questions about ethnographic methodology through exploring the implications of using observations produced by his colleagues about his office as data for his research. This process blurred the boundaries between researcher, method and the object and subject of research. It meets some criteria for ethnography and not others, and does not evidence clear definitional boundaries for any sub-genre such as autoethnography or collaborative authoethnography. Besides raising definitional challenges and the blurring of roles in research, the study also illustrates how the methodology revealed tensions over collegial trust, boundaries and privacy. The author's colleagues exposed aspects of the author's identity that were opaque and even invisible to the author. The author accordingly raises questions about the locus of ethical concern. Thus, issues of roles, definition, trust, boundaries, privacy and method were entwined.     

再论高等职业教育是一种类型

本文从世界高等教育发展史、我国高等职业教育发展史和我国学位制度的演变说明高等职业教育是一种类型,并对今后我国职业教育的发展从认识上、制度上、具体办学上相应提出了建议。     

Latent Profiles of Reading and Language and Their Association With Standardized Reading Outcomes in Kindergarten Through Tenth Grade

The objective of this study was to determine the latent profiles of reading and language skills that characterized 7,752 students in kindergarten through tenth grade and to relate the profiles to norm-referenced reading outcomes. Reading and language skills were assessed with a computer-adaptive assessment administered in the middle of the year and reading outcome measures were administered at the end of the year. Three measures of reading comprehension were administered in third through tenth grades to create a latent variable. Latent profile analysis (LPA) was conducted on the reading and language measures and related to reading outcomes in multiple regression analyses. Within-grade multiple regressions were subjected to a linear step-up correction to guard against false-discovery rate. LPA results revealed five to six profiles in the elementary grades and three in the secondary grades that were strongly related to standardized reading outcomes, with average absolute between-profile effect sizes ranging from 1.10 to 2.53. The profiles in the secondary grades followed a high, medium, and low pattern. Profiles in the elementary grades revealed more heterogeneity, suggestive of strategies for differentiating instruction.     

卞孝萱先生与郑板桥研究

卞孝萱先生学识渊博 ,是享誉海内外的文史专家。虽年届耄耋 ,著作等身 ,而犹精神矍铄 ,笔耕不辍。为恭贺先生八十华诞 ,我们编选一组文章 ,以展示先生的学术风范     

关于电子专业基础课的教学探讨

本文从引导学生树立自信心,激发学生学习兴趣,培养学生创新能力等方面入手,改变传统的教学观念,在教学手段及方法上做了一些改革,收到一定成效.     

文化使命感与问题意识--王水照的学术成就和治学方法

王水照的人生道路历经坎坷和磨难,学术生涯几经波折和反复,但仍然取得了很高的学术成就,其贡献主要体现在以下五大领域:一是苏轼研究,二是散文研究,三是宋词研究,四是专题性的综合研究,五是钱锺书研究。他肩负高度的文化使命感,带着强烈的问题意识进入传统学术和现当代文化的现场,以深邃的阐释学意识,用清透精当的语言,为唐宋文学描绘出深广的文化背景、思想图景和学术地图,做到了历史与逻辑的统一,从而凸显出学术的主体性、特殊性和个体性。     

学术史研究的新境界

进化史观的传播，新史学思潮的初步确立，冲击着传统学术史的编纂方式。进入二十世纪后，摆脱由纪传体史书演化而来的学案体学术史束缚，编撰崭新的章节体学术史，成为历史编撰学的重要课题。在建构中国学术史的新体系的历程中，出现了象梁启超著的《论中国学术史变迁之大势》，刘师培的《周末学术史序》，章太炎的《清儒》、《学隐》、《学变》等用新观点、新方法写成的学术史著作，开创了学术史研究的新境界。本文主要对梁启超著的《论中国学术史变迁之大势》做较为系统的分析，兼顾对其他用新观点写出的学术史著作进行阐释。     

Breaking the tyranny of office hours: Overcoming professor avoidance

ABSTRACT

Studies have found that Faculty–Student Interaction (FSI) has many positive benefits for students including academic support, professional development, mentoring, and career planning. Research-intensive universities exhibit the lowest levels of faculty–student interaction within higher education. This article utilises qualitative methods to explore faculty, student, and staff perceptions of faculty–student interactions, particularly those that take place out of the classroom, at a research-intensive public U.S. university. We identify social distance between faculty and students based on unequal status within a rigid, hierarchically-organised culture as a key barrier to FSI. We then discuss methods that some of the faculty in our study used to mitigate their social distance with students in an effort to increase FSI.     

The scholarship of teaching: A comparison of conceptions held by experts and regular academic staff

Over the past decade the scholarship ofteaching has received considerable attention inthe higher education literature as a reactionto the widely cited Carnegie Foundation'sreport ``Scholarship Reconsidered'; however, theconcept has remained devoid of a unifieddefinition. A recent Delphi study conductedwith a selective group of scholars whoseexpertise lies in the area of universityteaching and learning indicated the extent towhich these ``experts' agreed with each other onimportant features and unresolved issues theyassociate with the scholarship of teaching. Building on the results of the Delphi study,the present article discusses the results of asecond survey comparing these ``experts' 'conceptions with those of a larger group ofscholars whose expertise lies in a differentacademic field (``regular academic staff'), inorder to identify the similarities anddifferences in the conceptions of thescholarship of teaching held by each of the twogroups. While regular academic staff werefound to associate the scholarship of teachingmore with good or effectiveteaching ``experts' pointed to notions such aspeer review and scholarly standards. Thediscussion of the results focuses on the notionof consensus reached within and betweenthe two groups. It is argued that in order topromote changes in policy with respect to whatis to count as scholarship, identifying andreporting ``experts' ' conceptions, thoughclearly necessary for promoting moreenlightened discussions on the issue, willremain insufficient. Policy change in academeis more likely to ensue as a result of thewider academic community reaching consensus onthe meaning, and nature, of the scholarship ofteaching. The wider academic community includes``experts', as well as colleagues in departmentsand disciplinary associations. The articleconcludes by exploring the notion of consensusthrough the lens of critical social theory.     

高校学术创新团队建设应注意的问题

高校科技要出更多的原创性科研成果，就必须抓住机遇，建设强有力的学术创新团队。因此，目前学术创新团队的建设已成为高校十分重要的任务和目标。处理好学术创新团队的定位、人员组成、团队文化等问题是学术创新团队建设成功的关键。