穗港两所高校《英语教学法》课程结构比较

本文通过对比穗港两所高校《英语教学法》课程模式的异同,阐述当前的师培工作中一些引人注意的特点,如反思教学、行为研究、教师职业发展、教师认知过程等等。显然,当前师培者正承担越来越重要的自我更新的责任     

法律行为框架中的股东表决权制度探析

表决权在资本多数决的股东大会决议机制下分化为意思表达权和形成权两种性质各异的权利,其原因在于股东大会决议行为的特殊法律行为属性和特殊法律效力,在于股东表决的不同性质——意思通知和单方法律行为,并由此导致对一系列关乎股东表决权的制度的重新评价和审视,如表决权排除、类别股东表决、异议股东股份购买请求权以及资本多数决的决议机制等。     

我国网络问政中政府公信力不足问题研究

随着改革开放的深入,我国社会各阶层公民意识崛起,公民政治参与积极性空前高涨,而互联网为大众的政治参与提供了宽广的平台,高涨的参与热情与宽阔的互动平台相结合使中国社会迅速进入"网络问政"时代。但受个别公务员存在认识误区、政府信息不透明、相关责任追究和监督机制缺失等因素制约,政府在网络问政过程中的公信力缺失问题越来越严重,因此,应提高政府的网络问政的能力,加速完善网络问政系列制度建设,实现问政的制度化、机制化、规范化。     

经济诉权初探

经济诉权是广大社会成员所享有的。针对经济违法行为请求国家司法裁判的权利。独立的经济公益诉讼是经济诉权产生和存在的基础;原告资格界定了经济诉权主体的范围;经济公益诉讼受案范围界定了经济诉权客体的范围;经济诉权的内容包括起诉权、请求裁判权、期待胜诉权、上诉权。与民事诉权相比,经济诉权是公益诉权。     

不真正连带责任的诉讼形态——权利实现与程序救济

由于立法不明确,法院对不真正连带责任诉讼形态的选择表现出不确定性.理论上也存在不同认识,在现实法律环境下,应当结合不真正连带责任的性质、效力、诉讼形态的划分标准等因素进行综合考虑,首先应当遵守现有的法律规定;在法律未作明确规定时,债权人具有选择权,可以向任一债务人起诉,也可以选择向全部不真正连带责任人一并起诉,如果债权人同时向不真正连带责任人分别起诉,则应当适用合并审理的有关规定.     

西方集体行动理论研究的演化及发展

集体行动是社会科学界长期关注和思考的核心问题之一,本文主要针对西方学者关于集体行动理论的分析和研究发展进行较为系统的介绍和简要评议,以图对国内的集体行动研究提供有益的思考问题的视角。     

存在哲学视野中的交往行为理论--哈贝马斯交往行为理论的另一种解读

哈贝马斯的交往行为理论作为一种批判的社会理论,在批判现代西方社会日益严重的弊病和危机的同时,旨在为这一社会提供一种建设性的解决方案。海德格尔的存在哲学则关注于人的生存问题,力图通过对"存在"整体的深度分析来揭示现实生活世界中人们的生存困境,并最终通过诗性的语言来得到克服。与海德格尔的这一思想进路相比较,哈贝马斯的交往行为理论也可以视为是面向生活世界的交往问题而提出来的。哈贝马斯以生活世界作为他的交往行为理论的现实起点,以交往行为为核心实现"交往范式"对"劳动范式"的理论置换,并通过对交往行为进行规范语用学分析将交往理性重建为一种规范的力量,揭示出植根于生活世界的交往活动之中的有效性规范,以此谋求对交往问题的规范性解决。     

When Futures Meet the Present

In this essay, I respond to Mische's work on projection and the research of future action. Further, I suggest a tri-partite framework of mechanisms—one I have termed "political semiosis"—that allows historical actors to materially and figuratively reorient and realign the past, present, and future in projects of transformation.     

Social Policy from Olson to Ostrom: A Case Study of Dutch Disability Insurance

Social policy development and reform in corporatist welfare states often follows a pattern of subsequent collectivization and de‐collectivization. This has to do, the article argues, with the social problems these phases address. Early social policy development forms a response to Olson‐type collective action problems that organized actors (labour and employers' organizations) in the field experience: state‐obliged benefits solve free rider problems, while bipartite administration allows labour and employers' organizations to organize their constituencies. This solution to Olson‐type collective action problems, however, also constitutes an Ostrom‐type collective action problem. Such a system functions as a common pool resource. Individual benefit take‐up is experienced as free and the costs of benefit take‐up are collectivized in the common pool. The article illustrates this pattern with reference to Dutch disability insurance.     

Assessing participants’ perceptions on group-based principles for action in community-based health enhancing physical activity programmes: The APEF tool

In community-based health enhancing physical activity (CBHEPA) programmes, group-based principles for action such as active participation, enjoyment, and fostering group processes are widely advocated. However, not much is known about participants’ perceptions of these principles as there are no assessment tools available. Therefore, this article describes the development of the APEF (Active Participation, Enjoyment, and Fostering group processes) tool and reports on its implementation in a Dutch CBHEPA programme. Indicators for the principles have been identified from literature research, interviews with professionals, and secondary analysis of three group interviews with 11 practitioners. To address the identified indicators, the APEF tool was developed, pretested, and used in 10 focus groups with 76 participants.The APEF tool consists of eight statements about group-based principles for action, on which CBHEPA participants vote, followed by in-depth discussion. The voting procedure engages participants. Spider diagrams visualise participants’ perceptions of group-based principles.The APEF tool addresses the challenge of relating group level outcomes to individual outcomes such as physical activity behaviour. The tool facilitates as well as evaluates group-based principles for action, it stimulates dialogue and is culturally sensitive, but it needs strong facilitating skills to manage group dynamics.