共同体与道德——试析麦金太尔对共同体伦理传统的追求

本尼迪克特创立的本笃会使得希腊罗马文化以及亚里士多德的共同体伦理传统在罗马帝国末期的社会混乱中得以保留和延续,这让麦金太尔看到了重建道德共同体以回复亚里士多德传统的可能与希望.麦金太尔认为,若想摆脱现代西方道德领域存在的混乱与无序状态,只能放弃自由个人主义,回归亚里士多德的共同体传统.从本尼迪克特那里,麦金太尔看到了危机状况下保留和延续亚里士多德传统的希望,但对于在当今时代回复亚里士多德传统之可能性这一问题,麦金太尔并非持乐观态度;麦金太尔深知自由主义传统在西方社会之根深蒂固,也深知其理论实现之艰难.但麦金太尔从社群主义角度出发对自由主义的修正和批判有着重要的理论和现实意义.     

基于大工程观的地方高校工科人才素质培养研究

大工程观包括工程经济观、工程价值观、工程系统观、工程生态观和工程社会观;高等工程教育必须应对工程全球化、工程社会性和工程复杂性的挑战,开展“大工程”观引领下的工科人才素质培养研究,实施“大工程”观指导下的人才培养模式改革。     

Problems in being responsive: Reflections on an evaluation of a program for training motorcycle riders

This paper discusses some methodological issues arising from an evaluation of the Queensland Road Safety Council Motorcycle Training Program. The basic orientation of the evaluation was responsive/illuminative; responsive in the sense that the evaluation proceeded interactively, with appropriate issues and procedures identified and modified progressively through direct observation of the program and discussion with the participants; illuminative in the sense that the final report attempted to provide a detailed account of the program operation and of its strengths and weaknesses as perceived by various stakeholders. An account is given of the main considerations in designing, implementing, and reporting the evaluation. Implications for future evaluations are discussed.     

Applicability of standards for evaluations of educational programs, projects and materials in an international setting: Qualitative research

Qualitative studies are much more the practice in Europe and increasingly elsewhere than in the United States. For an international audience, therefore, there needs to be much greater emphasis on qualitative techniques than there is in the standards report. The most difficult ethical problem arises from the conflict between the right to privacy of research subjects and the right to know of audiences. By its nature, qualitative research focuses on the particular, the detailed analysis of the specific incident. It is therefore often difficult to conceal the identity of the individual organisations and people concerned. Even a confidential report might work to the detriment of the subjects studied. Published reports pose the same problem. Have subjects the right to have material they believe to their disadvantage excised from a report even if that renders the report valueless? There are two technical points in the standards document that should be amplified. The first concerns the verification of data. We need to specify procedures to ensure credibility for qualitative studies. The second concern is the specification of quantitative techniques for the analysis of qualitative data. The statement in the standards document is too weak. We need to define much more clearly the steps that should be taken to ensure that qualitative data can be tested rigorously. Finally, there is the problem of collusion, the danger that the qualitative evaluators will select from their material the data which are in conformity with their own predilictions or presuppositions, the expectations of their audience, or the requirements of their sponsors. This problem may be acute in some parts of the world. To be of maximum international value, the standards report needs to be extended and to pay much greater attention to problems arising with qualitative evaluation.     

Evaluating a human service program: Employing the judicial evaluation model

The emergence of adversarial models as an approach to formative and summative evaluations is gaining recognition among educational research professionals. The implementation of the Judicial Evaluation Model (JEM), as described in this article, is the first application to a human service employment and training program. Evaluation questions raised within the study were designed to assess the efficacy of linkage arrangements between the Comprehensive Employment and Training Act (CETA) prime sponsors and education service providers in the Commonwealth of Virginia. The four stages of the JEM and its application to CETA are discussed, the panel findings are reported along with noted pitfalls and strengths, suggested guidelines for implementation, and a few recommendations.     

Making methods choices

This article is a further discussion of methodological paradigms in evaluation research. More specifically, this article is a response to the attacks on paradigmatic perspectives made by Reichardt and Cook in the opening chapter of their edited book Qalitative and Quantitative Methods in Evaluation Research. They “suggest that part of this current debate over qualitative and quantitative methods is not centered on productive issues and so is not being argued in as logical a fashion as it should be.” For better or worse paradigm debates are, by their nature, only partly subject to logical analysis. Paradigms — methodological or otherwise — involve values, world view, empirical tendencies, and patterned responses. Because their central arguments rest entirely on a logical foundation, Reichardt and Cook may have done precisely what they accuse others of doing: “obscuring issues and unnecessarily creating schisms between the two methodtypes.”     

Handling problems of ecological fallacy in program planning and evaluation

The issue of ecological fallacy is highlighted in the use of social area analysis as a method of program planning and evaluation. Data on psychiatric admissions from one catchment area in New York City show misleading cross level generalization to be a real and ever present danger that planners and evaluators should not ignore. A simple method of assessing the degree and major sources of difference between higher (geographic) and lower (sociological) level relationships is illustrated. Suggestions are made regarding ways of clarifying cross level generalizations.     

Enhancing program review for evaluation and management

Program review has not received the attention it warrants as a program evaluation tool despite its wide use for evaluation and management purposes. The use of the program review will probably endure on the strength of its face validity and irrespective of other developments in the field of program evaluation. Evaluators should realize this and, accordingly, attempt to improve its effectiveness. This paper presents one organization's approach to achieving this objective through the explication of development principles, implementation guidelines and review items. This paper also discusses benefits that can be expected from a systematic development of this tool and presents various research directions and potentials in this area.     

Assessing the efficacy of ombudsman services for the aged in long term care institutions

Long term care ombudsman programs are a recently established component within the gerontological services continuum. Public policy in this area is not yet well defined and there is a conspicuous absence of systematic studies assessing the effectiveness of such program efforts. This research reports on the accomplishments of an urban based, volunteer nursing home ombudsman program. Survey findings show moderate levels of goal attainment in the policy and social relations domains and more promising results in the organizational/managerial sphere. The relationship between perceptions of program success and varying ombudsman role behaviors is underscored.     

目睹圣彼得堡《石头记》抄本散记

上个世纪,学术界在俄罗斯圣彼得堡发现了一套清代的《石头记》抄本,派专家做了学术鉴定和考察,这个抄本是迄今发现12个早期《红搂梦》抄本中价值最高的本子之一,文本内容很多地方独出异文,这些异文更接近曹雪芹的原笔、真笔,解决了一些《红楼梦》版本校勘的问题。1986年中华书局影印出版了这部《石头记》。文章作者在圣彼得堡目睹了《石头记》抄本,与中华书局的影印本尺寸不同,这部《石头记》宽如同常见书(18．5cm),而长度却像《辞海》等大型工具书(25．5cm)。这套《石头记》共5函,每函7册,现存35册,一般每两回订一册,但也有少数三回装订一册,还有一回订一册的。第五回和第六回装订的那一册遗失了,这很可能因为第五册里有“册子”判词和“红楼梦”曲子,预示十二钗的结局,更能引起阅读兴趣,被人借阅未还而失去。这部抄本没有第八十回,最后一册只有七十八回和七十九回,事实上,八十回的内容包含在七十九回中,第七十九回和第八十回尚未分断,也说明这个抄本所依据的底本应该是时间比较早,当在曹雪芹去世前后不久。此外,第十七回和第十八回虽然分开了,第十八回却只有标回而无回目的具体文字,属于早期抄本的特征。抄本的纸张是已经写有文字的纸反过来在背面抄写,册页上还有红色点断的痕迹和名宁旁边的红线标记。