动态能力一定会带来创新绩效吗?——不确定环境下的多层次分析

在中国转型经济背景下,基于资源基础观和动态能力观,从多层次视角引入动态能力,分析其在不确定性环境中对我国新企业创新绩效的影响机理。利用长三角232家新企业数据进行实证分析,研究表明:动态管理能力、企业动态能力均对创新绩效具有显著正向影响,而网络动态能力对创新绩效呈现出U型影响;环境不确定性负向调节动态管理能力与创新绩效的关系,正向调节企业动态能力、网络动态能力与创新绩效的关系。     

剖析观众选择电视节目的内因

文章立足受众,对受众选择电视节目的行为进行剖析.主要从三个方面探讨受众为什么会选择不同类型的电视节目:首先是传统文化和亚文化的影响,其次是受众心理认知行为的影响,最后是收视语境的影响.     

网络环境下大学英语教师反思能力培养的实效性研究

开展反思性教学是教师专业发展的有效途径。通过一项基于石家庄铁道大学非英语专业部分教师和学生反思网络环境下大学英语教学的行动研究,可以看出网络环境下的大学英语教学急需解决的主要问题是大学英语教师角色的转换、教学课件制作和使用的科学性、网络环境下互动教学的开展。在网络环境下开展大学英语教师反思能力培养的行动研究,对教师的教学能力和专业发展以及全面提高大学英语教学的质量,有着重要的现实意义。     

网络环境下增强高校图书馆信息职能的对策

探讨了随着网络化、信息化的发展,高校图书馆如何从四个方面利用新技术、采用新设备、更新服务机制、强化信息职能。     

环境类实验教学示范中心建设探讨

我校通过环境教学示范中心的建设,打破原来实验室设置格局,以学科建设为主轴,优化实验教学资源的配置;实施实验教学体系、实验室体制和理论教学改革;建立公共实验教学平台;增强实验教学技术,增加实验教学方法和手段;教学科研相结合,加强高水平的师资队伍建设;培养了学生的实践创新能力,取得了丰硕的教学成果。实验中心是人才培养、学科建设和开展科学研究的基础条件之一。建立一个好的实验中心,不仅可以提高教学水平,增强科研能力,还可以促进我校环境学科的发展。采用探究式教学方法,以学科为依托,注重创新人才的培养,营造了创新意识和能力培养的育人环境。     

自我概念的形成机制

阐述了自我概念的内涵,并对家庭环境、学校环境、社会文化环境及个体行为模式和个人参照系统在儿童自我概念发展中所起的作用进行了论述。这些论述对于揭示自我概念的内涵,以及揭示自我概念的形成具有重要意义。     

公民环境知情权法律制度探析

环境权是公民环境知情权的权利来源,环境知情权是公民参与环境保护的前提条件。应该构建和完善我国公民环境知情权法律制度,以求在实践中把公民环境知情权落到实处,为公民参与环境保护创造条件,同时也为公民保护自己合法的环境权益奠定良好的基础。     

网络环境下高校图书馆的阅读教育

网络环境不仅改变了当今社会的发展模式,也改变了传统图书馆的管理运行模式,加快了图书馆现代化建设步伐。本文从网络环境下大学生的阅读特征及阅读现状进行分析,结合高校图书馆对阅读教育的实施,阐述网络环境下高校图书馆在大学生阅读教育中应发挥的重要作用。     

An examination of the interactions between museum educators and students on a school visit to science museum

Today, science is a major part of western culture. Discussions about the need for members of the public to access and understand scientific information are therefore well established, citing the importance of such information to responsible citizenship, democracy, socially accountable scientific research and public funding (National Research Council [2009] Learning science in informal environments: People, places, and pursuits. National Academies Press). In recent years there has been an increased interest in investigating not just what visitors to informal environments have learnt after a visit, but also how visitors interact and engage with exhibits during the visit (Davidsson & Jakobsson [2012] Understanding interactions at science centers and museums: Approaching sociocultural perspectives. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers). Within the field of school visits to science museums, however, interactions between students and museum educators (MEs) remain relatively unexplored. In our study of such school visits, we are mainly interested in the interactions that take place between three agents—the students, the museum educator and the physical setting of the exhibit. Using moment-to-moment fine grain analysis of multiple interactions allowed us to identify recurring patterns between students and the museum educators around exhibits, and to examine the MEs’ mediational role during the interactions, and the practices they employ to engage students with exhibits. Our study revealed that most interactions between MEs and students consist of technical explanations of how to operate the exhibits. The interactions that do move past this stage often include two main practices, which the MEs use to promote students’ engagement with the exhibits: physical instruction and engaging the students emotionally. Understanding what is actually happening in the learning process that occurs during students’ interactions with exhibits can help museum educators and exhibit designers improve the experiences of students on school visits.     

Examining the ethical environment in higher education

Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) across the world have found themselves faced with new challenges on issues of ethics. Much of this has been centred on issues of assessment: plagiarism, buying essays, sharing/lending of previously passed work and the stealing of marked/returned work of others. Institutions still treat academic misconduct as largely a behavioural difficulty rather than an issue of ethics (or education), suggesting that academia places a far greater emphasis on combating new forms of dishonesty than it does on encouraging ethical habits and a healthy ethical environment. To date, the majority of research in this area has examined these forms of academic misconduct from the point of view of the student and/or the university, with the perspective of academics receiving very limited attention. Our hypothesis is that academics are perhaps best placed to provide the education needed to create and sustain an ethical environment, and we argue that being ‘ethically aware’ is a critical factor in the development of academic competence for all parties. This study adds to existing research in three ways: firstly, by highlighting the importance of an overall framework for an ethical environment within HEIs; secondly, by suggesting an ecological model of key parties (the university, students and academics) with responsibility for this environment in assessment; and thirdly, by including new evidence (generated by a survey of academics) to extend our understanding of their views on these issues.