Promoting the Visibility of Educational Research through an Institutional Repository

Established in 1994 through the amalgamation of several teacher training colleges, The Hong Kong Institute of Education (HKIEd) is the major multidisciplinary teacher education provider in the Hong Kong SAR. Despite this, the Institute does not have a particularly high research profile when compared with its peer institutions in Hong Kong and around the world. Its research publishing achieves modest exposure and impact in international educational research literature. The Institute has a goal to attain the title of a “university of education” and has identified an improvement in its research output and profile as critical to achieving this. In this context the HKIEd Library embarked on the redevelopment of its institutional repository, changing its direction from being an archive of institutional publications to one which brought together and offered access to the sum total of published output of the Institute since its foundation, in a deliberate effort to promote Institute research. This paper explores the particular approach taken by the Library to the development of the institutional repository, how the repository contributes directly to and aligns with the research strategies of the Institute, and the impact the Repository has had so far on improving the profile of research at HKIEd.     

作为科学思考的社会学

早在社会学诞生之初,其创始人孔德就将社会学确定为一门关于"社会的科学",称社会学为"实证的哲学".由于科学自身以及科学研究方法存在的局限性,这也意味着作为科学的社会学一系列问题的开始.正因如此,对于社会学的科学性含义,社会学实证方法的重要性,定量研究对于社会学理论发展的基础性意义等,有必要作进一步探讨.     

The praxis of ethnic studies: transforming second sight into critical consciousness

This article focuses on a youth participatory action research (YPAR) program called the Social Justice Education Project (SJEP) that fostered young people of color’s critical consciousness. Their critical consciousness emerged through praxis (reflection/action) while focusing on preserving ethnic studies in Tucson, Arizona. Because the SJEP home was in ethnic studies, the youth also struggled to keep their program alive. The Arizona Department of Education claimed the program bred ‘radicals’ who wanted to overthrow the government and therefore lobbied the state legislature to ban K-12 ethnic studies in public schools. In January 2012, the ban went into effect, shutting down ethnic studies classes as well as the SJEP. Young people’s qualitative research on their struggle led to action to save the education that gave them hope for a more equitable and just world. The article addresses the praxis of YPAR, which sparks a thought process leading to the drive to take action. Observing and documenting educational injustices inspire the need to seek radical change of Self and schools. Through the reflection and action facilitated by YPAR, young people of color construct a message about the importance of ethnic studies for individual as well as social transformation.     

中国行政管理学研究状况的文献计量学分析

采用文献计量学方法从研究主题、研究方式、研究阶段三个角度对2001-2005年刊登在中国行政管理学4个重要刊物上的研究论文的内部结构所进行的分析发现,在行政管理学的研究主题上,行政职能、决策、改革、哲学、法治、人事、基层政权为主流研究领域;行政职能、行政决策、行政改革、国外行政研究和行政哲学等为一级主题的研究热点;公共服务、绩效评估、政府信用、服务型政府和非政府组织等为二级主题的研究热点.在研究方式上,中国行政管理学研究存在着经验研究与非经验研究、定性分析与定量分析的比例失调问题,但经验研究与定量分析方法正在得到越来越多的应用.在研究阶段上,所调查的研究论文多处于问题描述、问题诊断和对策分析阶段.     

关于当前中国农村养老问题及其研究的思考

作为社会的一员 ,老年人有获得社会扶养的权利。如果这种权利不能实现或不能很好实现 ,便形成养老问题。养老问题的研究只能是以认识老年人获得社会保障权利实现过程中的问题并为之谋求对策为根本目的。从这个角度出发 ,养老问题应涵盖四个方面的内容 :(1)“谁来养”的问题 ;(2 )“养不养”的问题 ;(3)“怎么养”的问题 ;(4 )“养得怎么样”的问题。目前 ,这四个方面的问题在农村都存在。而此前的研究因被置于计划生育和老龄化等背景之下而显得不力及过于偏狭 :有限的研究集中于老龄化条件下农村老年人“谁来养”和“怎么养”的问题。这种状况不利于对农村养老问题的全面认识和解决。故笔者认为 ,今后应 (1)全面研究农村养老问题 ;(2 )重视现实 ,分清层次 ,切实研究急需解决的问题 ;(3)在社会变迁的视野下加强农村经济发展、社区建设、文化培育与养老关系的研究     

A measure of community members’ perceptions of the impacts of research partnerships in health and social services

Currently, there are no psychometrically sound outcome measures by which to assess the impacts of research partnerships. This article describes the development of a 33-item, survey questionnaire measuring community members’ perceptions of the impact of research partnerships addressing health or social issues. The Community Impacts of Research Oriented Partnerships (CIROP) was developed using information from the literatures on health promotion, community development, research utilization, and community-based participatory research, and from focus groups involving 29 key informants. Data from 174 community members were used to determine the factor structure, internal consistency, and test–retest reliability of the four CIROP scales, and to provide evidence of construct validity. The CIROP informs research partnerships about the extent of their impact in the areas of Personal Knowledge Development, Personal Research Skill Development, Organizational/Group Access To and Use of Information, and Community and Organizational Development, allowing them to demonstrate accountability to funding bodies. As well, the CIROP can be used as a research tool to assess the effectiveness of knowledge sharing approaches, determine the most influential activities of research partnerships, and determine structural characteristics of partnerships associated with various types of impact. The CIROP provides a better understanding of community members’ perspectives and expectations of research partnerships, with important implications for knowledge transfer and uptake.     

Both Whistleblowers and the Scientists They Accuse Are Vulnerable and Deserve Protection

Whistleblowers play an important role diagnosing research misconduct, but often experience severe negative consequences. That is also true for incorrectly accused scientists. Both categories are vulnerable and deserve protection. Whistleblowers must proceed carefully and cautiously. Anonymous whistleblowing should be discouraged but cannot be ignored when the allegations are specific, serious, and plausible. When accused of a breach of research integrity it is important to be as transparent as possible. Sometimes accusations are false in the sense that the accuser knows or should know that the allegations are untrue. A mala fide whistleblower typically does not act carefully and we postulate a typology that may help in detecting them. Striking the right balance between whistleblower protection and timely unmasking false and identifying incorrect accusations is a tough dilemma leaders of research institutions have to face.     

Developing a methodology to assess the impact of research grant funding: A mixed methods approach

This paper discusses the development of a mixed methods approach to analyse research funding. Research policy has taken on an increasingly prominent role in the broader political scene, where research is seen as a critical factor in maintaining and improving growth, welfare and international competitiveness. This has motivated growing emphasis on the impacts of science funding, and how funding can best be designed to promote socio-economic progress. Meeting these demands for impact assessment involves a number of complex issues that are difficult to fully address in a single study or in the design of a single methodology. However, they point to some general principles that can be explored in methodological design. We draw on a recent evaluation of the impacts of research grant funding, discussing both key issues in developing a methodology for the analysis and subsequent results. The case of research grant funding, involving a complex mix of direct and intermediate effects that contribute to the overall impact of funding on research performance, illustrates the value of a mixed methods approach to provide a more robust and complete analysis of policy impacts. Reflections on the strengths and weaknesses of the methodology are used to examine refinements for future work.     

Implementing Rigorous Survey Methodology within Contexts of Social Work Education,Training and Practice: A Case Study in Substance Use

With the integration of evidence-based practice central to all areas of social work education and training across the globe, it is crucial that we continue to engage with the methodological challenges inherent in gathering this evidence, particularly when it is related to the nature of social work education itself. As a result, this paper addresses some of the methodological challenges involved in examining the education available to social workers on engaging with substance use, both within the social work academy and local authorities in England. Drawing on experiences of implementing large scale online surveys from three substantial research projects completed by the authors, this paper highlights four methodological themes: (1) Constructing a representative sampling frame; (2) Identifying participants within organisations with many departments; (3) Response rates; and (4) Questionnaire design. While these are familiar methodological considerations, this article draws attention to the specific complexities of gathering ‘representative’ knowledge to inform educational strategies on substance use within social work education and employment contexts. Finally this paper offers lessons learned and guidance for social work academics, students and practitioners who are minded to build, or draw from, an evidence-base using representative samples from and within these environments.     

Whose Responsibility is it? A Call for the Integration of the Knowledge of Substance Misuse in Social Work Education,Practice and Research

This commentary is based on the review of two articles written by Hutchinson and Allnock (2014a; 2014b) presented in this journal issue. The commentary reviews the two articles and other research on the integration of substance misuse in social work education, practice and research. Four lessons are presented in terms of how to enhance the knowledge and skills around substance misuse by creating stronger links between social work education, practice and research.