绿色奥运、科技奥运、人文奥运三大理念是奥运非物质遗产

奥运遗产与奥运会的水平、特色有紧密的关系。北京奥运会的特色是通过绿色奥运、科技奥运、人文奥运三大理念和目标的实现来体现的,它的重要影响是打造了2008年北京奥运会的人文特色。2008年北京奥运三大理念所带来的"后奥运"效应,将凸显北京奥运的特色和亮点,将充分证明"绿色奥运、科技奥运、人文奥运"是2008年北京奥运会奉献给奥林匹克运动的独一无二的宝贵遗产。     

论科学发展观对邓小平发展思想的继承与发展

科学发展观与邓小平发展思想是一脉相承的理论体系,邓小平关于发展的系列思想是科学发展观直接的理论来源和思想依据;科学发展观在发展性质、发展目的、发展方向、发展过程及发展目标等方面丰富和发展了邓小平发展思想,赋予了马克思主义发展理论以新的时代内涵和实践要求,它是与时俱进的马克思主义,体现了我党对发展规律认识的新飞跃与新境界。     

科学发展观与马克思主义中国化

科学发展观继承了毛泽东思想、邓小平理论、“三个代表”重要思想中关于发展的基本思想,深刻体现了马克思主义中国化一脉相承的重要特点。科学发展观结合新的时代特点和实践要求,进一步揭示了中国现代化发展的本质、状态、目标和基本要求,生动体现了马克思主义中国化与时俱进的宝贵品格。科学发展观从根本上回答了为谁发展、靠谁发展、怎样发展的基本问题,集中体现了马克思主义中国化的世界观和方法论。     

明清回族进士考略(五)

本文考证了明清时期浙江以及镶黄旗6位进士的生平、事迹及其家世,重点考述了嘉善大姓丁氏。丁氏一族自宋至今千有余年,人才辈出,如明南都工部尚书丁宾、清初诗人丁澎、云贵总督丁思孔,均出自丁氏。丁氏一族来自西域极有可能。本文还提出丁氏可能为宋时入华的中亚国王所非尔之余脉的观点,为进一步深入研究提供了重要的线索。     

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.