大数据视域下高校精准资助模式构建研究

高校精准资助是"精准扶贫"思想在高校领域的具体实践,对于提升高校扶贫的精准性提供了新的理念与路径。大数据具有信息采集和分析优势,能够为资助方提供充足的信息,为资助形式的多样化提供事实依据,以及为资助效能的提高提供技术条件。为了实现优化高校精准资助模式的目标,应当在系统论思想的指导下,着眼于制度的整体性,注重内部的协调性,从框架设计、制度保障、技术路径和联动机制等四个方面进行理论模型的构建与制度的创新。     

Research,policy and funding – academic treadmills and the squeeze on intellectual spaces1

In recent years, there has been a great deal of collective rumination about social scientists' role in society. In the post‐1997 UK context, public policy commitments to ‘evidence‐based policy’ and ‘knowledge transfer’ have further stimulated such reflections. More recently, Michael Burawoy's 2004 address to the American Sociological Association, which called for greater engagement with ‘public sociology’ has reverberated throughout the discipline, motivating a series of debates about the purpose of sociological research. To date, most such contributions have been based on personal experience and anecdotal evidence. In contrast, this paper responds directly to Burawoy's suggestion that we should ‘apply sociology to ourselves,’ in order that we ‘become more conscious of the global forces’ driving our research ( Burawoy 2005 : 285). Drawing on an empirical research project designed to explore of the relationship between health inequalities research and policy in Scotland and England, in the period from 1997 until 2007, this paper discusses data from interviews with academic researchers. The findings suggest that the growing pressure to produce ‘policy relevant’ research is diminishing the capacity of academia to provide a space in which innovative and transformative ideas can be developed, and is instead promoting the construction of institutionalized and vehicular (chameleon‐like) ideas. Such a claim supports Edward Said's (1994 ) insistence that creative, intellectual spaces within the social sciences are increasingly being squeezed. More specifically, the paper argues we ought to pay far greater attention to how the process of seeking research funding shapes academic research and mediates the interplay between research and policy.     

试论我国农村基础教育的经费问题

本文通过对我国农村基础教育经费需求、来源与使用的个案材料分析和整体数据考察,建议国家及早大幅度地增加教育经费投入,适当回收基础教育管理和经费筹措体制的部分责任与权力,加大中央和省级对于教育的宏观调控能力。     

The Ghost Collaborator

Collaboration is increasingly important for researchers in all disciplines. Universities and funding bodies tend to prefer projects that involve interdisciplinarity, collaboration between different institutions, and international consortiums. Such projects can yield great benefits, but they also pose particular challenges for certain aspects of research integrity, and particularly for awarding credit and authorship. In this article, we describe and analyze the phenomenon of the ghost collaborator, who is initially fully involved and makes a full contribution to a project’s design, but then finds him- or herself excluded from meetings and publications.     

Five Ministries and Commissions including NHFPC Jointly Issued Implementation Program on Firmly Advancing Rural Poverty Alleviation in Health and Family Planning

正In August 2014,5 ministries including National Health and Family Planning Commission(NHFPC),State Development and Reform Commission,Ministry of Finance,State Council Leading Group Office of Poverty Alleviation and Development,and State Administration of Traditional Chinese Medicine jointly issued Implementation Program on Firmly Advancing Rural Poverty Alleviation in Health and Family     

高校科研经费管理的现状、原因及对策

伴随着政府对高校科研经费投入的日益增加,如何科学而又合理地用好科研经费,是我国高校财务管理工作面临的新挑战。近年来,我国高校科研经费管理在立项、预算、使用和考核等方面都存在着诸多问题,在科研经费的使用过程中违规违纪现象尤其严重,这些现状背后的深层次动因有信息不对称、管理体制中存在矛盾等。对高校科研经费的管理应采取健全管理制度、合理预算、加强监管等改进措施,以提高高校科研经费的使用效益。     

基于SWOT—PEST模型分析的众筹融资模式研究

对影响众筹融资发展的因素进行了梳理,结合运用SWOT-PEST矩阵分析模型,综合考虑了政治、经济、社会和技术等因素,比较分析了众筹融资这一模式的优势、劣势、机遇和挑战,并提出了相应的发展策略建议。     

National identity and regional development: Cornwall and the campaign for Objective 1 funding

The politics of identity is important within regional and governance policy debates, becoming a mechanism for ‘filling in’ the democratic gaps left by the hollowing out of the state, with much discourse about constructing identities for governance purposes. This raises questions about the feasibility of processes of identity construction, and whether it starts from new, or builds on existing identities. We use the case study of the Cornish campaign for Objective 1 EU structural funding, engaging directly with modernist versus ethnosymbolist accounts of nationalism, to explore the binary between instrumental, constructed identities and more phenomenological accounts.     

Lottery Funding and Changing Organizational Identity in the UK Voluntary Sector

This paper focuses upon ways in which National Lottery funding impacts upon aspects of identity for small- to medium-sized organizations in the United Kingdom, and highlights some of the less-anticipated difficulties that groups may experience after receipt of a grant. A large Lottery grant can facilitate rapid expansion and may necessitate a degree of organizational learning for which groups are often unprepared. The paper suggests that a Lottery grant may lead to changes in the ways in which an organization identifies itself, or is identified by stakeholders. However, these changes may not be accompanied by a corresponding change in the organization's capacity or underlying cultural ethos. On the basis of the primary research carried out in 2003, the paper examines the implications of these changes for individual organizations and for the sector more widely.     

A multilevel cross-classified modelling approach to peer review of grant proposals: the effects of assessor and researcher attributes on assessor ratings

Summary. The peer review of grant proposals is very important to academics from all disciplines. Although there is limited research on the reliability of assessments for grant proposals, previously reported single-rater reliabilities have been disappointingly low (between 0.17 and 0.37). We found that the single-rater reliability of the overall assessor rating for Australian Research Council grants was 0.21 for social science and humanities (2870 ratings, 1928 assessors and 687 proposals) and 0.19 for science (7153 ratings, 4295 assessors and 1644 proposals). We used a multilevel, cross-classification approach (level 1, assessor and proposal cross-classification; level 2, field of study), taking into account that 34% of the assessors evaluated more than one proposal. Researcher-nominated assessors (those chosen by the authors of the research proposal) gave higher ratings than panel-nominated assessors chosen by the Australian Research Council, and proposals from more prestigious universities received higher ratings. In the social sciences and humanities, the status of Australian universities had significantly more effect on Australian assessors than on overseas assessors. In science, ratings were higher when assessors rated fewer proposals and apparently had a more limited frame of reference for making such ratings and when researchers were professors rather than non-professors. Particularly, the methodology of this large scale study is applicable to other forms of peer review (publications, job interviews, awarding of prizes and election to prestigious societies) where peer review is employed as a selection process.