语言评价揭示闽南语歌谣的女性价值观

用当代西方语言学的评价理论对闽南语歌谣中显性或隐性的态度评价取位进行语言分析，诠释这种方言口头文学独特的区域文化内涵，揭示其蕴含的闽南女性传统价值观，包括其婚嫁观、人生现和幸福观。通过对闽南人至今仍身在其中的闽南区域文化习俗追根溯源，深入了解闽南语歌谣的女性文化传承本质。     

硕士学位论文评审制度刍议

分析了目前国内高等院校研究生培养现状,认为以清华大学等国内许多高等院校在借鉴全国优秀博士学位论文评审经验的基础上,将提高研究生培养质量的重点转向研究生学位论文的评审,并逐步确立了制度化、规范化和社会化的学位论文评审制度的做法效果显著。结合西北师范大学的实际情况,就当前的硕士学位论文评审制度从评审目的和对象、现行评审方式和隐名评审的意义等方面提出了建设性的意见。     

儿童绘画教育“误区”和“评价”的探讨

随着对儿童美术教育投入的日渐增加,儿童绘画教育存在的一些不良倾向也逐渐显现出来,部分教师和家长陷入了一些绘画教育的误区。儿童绘画教育并不是要把儿童培养成一个小画家,我们应抓住儿童绘画的特点,充分尊重儿童的天性,尊重他们的创作,在此基础上,走出儿童绘画教育的误区,合理认识和评价儿童作品。     

湖南高校党建工作评估活动的实践与思考

1998年中共中央组织部、中共中央宣传部和教育部联合印发<普通高校学校党建工作基本标准,湖南采取"党建评估"的形式予以贯彻落实.经过五年的评估,党建工作地位在高校广泛提升,全面规范了基层基础工作,党建工作思路更明确了,党建工作特色更丰富了.继续推进党建评估活动还要在认识上进一步深化,在实践和理论探索上进一步落实.     

试论档案鉴定工作的正确定位

档案鉴定工作是一项十分严肃而重要的工作。长期以来,档案鉴定成为我国档案界研究的热点和难点,从理论到实践都展开了广泛研讨。无论是归档鉴定,还是进馆鉴定、存毁鉴定、开放利用鉴定,档案鉴定工作贯穿于档案业务工作的各个环节。随着电子文件档案的兴起,"大档案"的形成,"大鉴定"呼之欲出。这要求我们破除鉴定工作无足轻重、重藏轻鉴和等待观望等思想观念,把鉴定工作切实重视起来。     

民间借贷纠纷要件事实证明责任论

《民间借贷规定》第16、17条规定的证明责任分配与《民诉法解释》第90条的规定相左，混淆了主观证明责任与客观证明责任、抗辩与否认、本证与反证，证明责任分配不当。应在要件事实证明责任论框架下，厘清仅依据借据、收据、欠条等债权凭证和仅依据金融机构的转账凭证提起的民间借贷诉讼中存在的事实认定问题，明确原告对借贷关系的证明责任，以发挥民法作为行为规范的指导作用，提高原告保留证据的自我责任意识。另外，借贷关系的事实认定往往需要借助鉴定，而仅依据证明责任分配并不能明晰债权凭证申请鉴定的责任，应结合证明标准和法官心证程度，根据主观证明责任的转移来确定由谁申请鉴定。     

Navigating the COVID-19 pandemic in the contingency framework: Antecedents and consequences of public’s stance toward the CDC

This study applied the contingency theory of conflict management to examine how contingency factors influence the public’s perceptual and behavioral responses to COVID-19 and stance toward the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). In particular, we tested political ideology as an important individual characteristic variable to examine its roles in the contingency theory framework. The findings revealed that two situational variables (i.e., threat appraisal and attitudes toward CDC) positively influenced the public’s contingency accommodation stance toward the CDC. Furthermore, greater conservatism was significantly associated with lower levels of threat appraisal and more negative attitudes toward the CDC, however it did not influence the stance toward the CDC. Theoretical and practical implications of the findings and directions for future research are discussed.     

Grading Gems: Appraising the Quality of Research for Social Work and Social Care

The impetus towards basing practice and policy decisions moreexplicitly on sound research requires tools to facilitate thesystematic appraisal of the quality of research encompassinga diverse range of methods and designs. Five exemplar toolswere developed and assessed in terms of their usefulness inselecting studies for inclusion in a systematic review. Thewidely used ‘hierarchy of evidence’ was adaptedand used to appraise internal validity. Four tools were thendeveloped to appraise the external validity dimensions of generalizability(two scales) and methods of data collection (two scales). Methodsof combining the scores generated by each tool were explored.Qualitative and quantitative studies were appraised, not separatedinto two spheres but by using complementary tools developedto appraise different aspects of rigour. There was a high levelof agreement between researchers in applying the tools to twenty-twostudies on decision making by professionals about the long-termcare of older people. The scales for internal validity and generalizabilitydiscriminated between the qualities of studies appropriately.The two tools to appraise data collection gave diverse results.Excluding studies that scored in the lowest category on anyscale appeared to be the scoring system that was most justifiable.This approach is presented to stimulate debate about the practicalapplication of the evidence-based initiative to social workand social care. This study may assist in developing clearerdefinitions and common language about appraising rigour thatshould further the process of selecting robust research forsynthesis to inform practice and policy decisions.     

Health Policy and the Politics of Evidence

National decisions on the drugs, treatments and medical devices that should be funded through public expenditure are a fundamental element of health policy. But despite a political emphasis upon evidence‐based policy, the results of rigorous clinical trials and statistical modelling techniques rarely speak for themselves. So, does the pre‐eminence traditionally accorded to quantitative data in the medical field underpin policy decisions on a consistent basis? Or are more subtle, less transparent characteristics of context and interaction evident in the shaping of attendant decisions? This article considers these questions by drawing on a study of decision‐making in the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE)—an organization established by the British government in 1999 to decide whether selected health technologies should be made available throughout the National Health Service in England and Wales. In broad terms, the findings point to the primacy of arguments based on quantitatively oriented, experimentally derived data but also to a discursive hegemony of clinicians and health economists in mediating, including or debarring more qualitative, experientially based evidence. A more complex, dynamic understanding of policy governance in the field of health technology appraisal—founded on a discursive appropriation of the idea of the “common good”—goes some way to explaining the persistence of this hegemony despite an avowedly inclusive, plural approach to decision‐making.     

高等教育大众化条件下教学质量评价体系研究现状

如何科学地评价教学质量一直是学校管理部门和教师关注的热点。近几年来,这方面的研究主要集中在对教学质量评价体系中内容的设计以及最终评定教学质量等级的方法上,主要包括:教学质量传统评价方法、神经网络评价法、模糊综合评价法以及马尔可夫链评价法。