College students in STEM (science, technology, engineering, mathematics) disciplines are increasingly faced with highly competitive and demanding degree programs and are at risk of academic overconfidence. Following from theory and research highlighting the psychological and developmental risks of unrealistic expectations, the present exploratory study evaluated the longitudinal effects of a motivational intervention encouraging college students in STEM degree programs (N = 52) to consider the importance of downgrading one’s expectations in response to academic setbacks. Contrary to study hypotheses, the results showed intervention participants to report significantly higher expectations and optimism on post-test measures administered 4 months later, no significant gains in emotional well-being or achievement goal orientations, and lower GPAs over five subsequent semesters. These paradoxical effects underscore the need for additional larger-scale research on the nature of students’ responses to potentially ego-threatening motivational programs in STEM disciplines so as to minimize achievement deficits at the expense of preserving motivational resources.
"So what DO we do? George Lakoff told us years ago (Don’t Think of an Elephant; Moral Politics) that we must appeal to voters based on their values, not facts, policies, or programs. He’s still right. The above exchange is part of the reason he is right. Only part, in that smart people can allow their values to trump (so to speak) what they know as well as stupid people can. However, in today’s polarized and ghettoized media landscape, where we have the option of listening only to those who confirm our biases, how do we even make a values-based appeal to the other side?"
"In January 2016, the rapper BoB took to Twitter to tell his fans that the Earth is really flat. “A lot of people are turned off by the phrase ‘flat earth’,” he acknowledged, “but there’s no way u can see all the evidence and not know … grow up.” At length the astrophysicist Neil deGrasse Tyson joined in the conversation, offering friendly corrections to BoB’s zany proofs of non-globism, and finishing with a sarcastic compliment: “Being five centuries regressed in your reasoning doesn’t mean we all can’t still like your music.”
Actually, it’s a lot more than five centuries regressed. Contrary to what we often hear, people didn’t think the Earth was flat right up until Columbus sailed to the Americas. In ancient Greece, the philosophers Pythagoras and Parmenides had already recognised that the Earth was spherical. Aristotle pointed out that you could see some stars in Egypt and Cyprus that were not visible at more northerly latitudes, and also that the Earth casts a curved shadow on the moon during a lunar eclipse. The Earth, he concluded with impeccable logic, must be round."
Science, engineering, and technology permeate nearly every facet of modern life and hold the key to solving many of humanity's most pressing current and future challenges. The United States' position in the global economy is declining, in part because U.S. workers lack fundamental knowledge in these fields. To address the critical issues of U.S. competitiveness and to better prepare the workforce, A Framework for K-12 Science Education proposes a new approach to K-12 science education that will capture students' interest and provide them with the necessary foundational knowledge in the field.
"I’ve written before on how I believe pedagogy should focus on the process and not the product of learning. I could write about this in theory forever, but I realized that I succeeded last semester in doing it in practice, so I thought I would share what I’ve done.
For context, I co-teach a Creative Thinking and Problem-Solving course, which is a liberal arts option at my institution. The module I teach constitutes half the course, and is focused on educational game design. My students are undergraduates, mostly freshman, mostly Egyptian. The largest assessment in my module is a group project where students design their own educational game. In the past, I’ve focused on the learning process in the way we build towards this activity, but I’ve had part of the grade focus on the quality of the actual game the students produce. This semester, I did not put any grade on the actual product."
"The Authors Guild's decade-long legal battle with Google reached the U.S. Supreme Court last Thursday, as the professional organization asked the court to settle whether or not book digitization represents "copyright infringement on an epic scale."
The appeal does not mean the Supreme Court will hear the case and issue a broad ruling on copyright, however. The court receives thousands of appeals a year (known as petitions for a writ of certiorari) and hears less than 5 percent of them. Authors Guild v. Google joins this year's total, but legal experts said it is unlikely the case will make the cut.
"The Supreme Court typically takes cases when there are important unsettled issues of law that need to be decided or in cases of overwhelming importance," said James Grimmelmann, professor of law at the University of Maryland at Baltimore. "This case might have seemed like a case of overwhelming importance a decade ago, but it has dragged on for so long and the ground has moved so much in copyright that it doesn't have that urgency.""
"Before I give more instructions on how to submit let me briefly recap the philosophy of the Open Journal project.
We no longer need traditional academics journals to disseminate research in astrophysics and cosmology. We all post our research to the arXiv and read other papers there too. It's been years since I last accessed a paper in a journal. The only useful function that journals provide is peer review, and we in the research community do that (usually for free) anyway. We only need journals for peer review, although we also like the prestige that is associated with them. But traditional journals have an unnecessarily slow and expensive editorial process, along with a nasty habit of placing the articles they publish behind a paywall."
"After one especially doubt-riddled crop of papers, I responded, "Whoa!" (or words to that effect). Science, I lectured sternly, has established many facts about reality beyond a reasonable doubt, embodied by quantum mechanics, general relativity, the theory of evolution, the genetic code. This knowledge has yielded applications—from vaccines to computer chips—that have transformed our world in countless ways. It is precisely because science is such a powerful mode of knowledge, I said, that you must treat new pronouncements skeptically, carefully distinguishing the genuine from the spurious. But you shouldn't be so skeptical that you deny the possibility of achieving any knowledge at all.
My students listened politely, but I could see the doubt in their eyes. We professors have a duty to teach our students to be skeptical. But we also have to accept that, if we do our jobs well, their skepticism may turn on us."
"The consolidation of the scientific publishing industry has been the topic of much debate within and outside the scientific community, especially in relation to major publishers’ high profit margins. However, the share of scientific output published in the journals of these major publishers, as well as its evolution over time and across various disciplines, has not yet been analyzed. This paper provides such analysis, based on 45 million documents indexed in the Web of Science over the period 1973-2013. It shows that in both natural and medical sciences (NMS) and social sciences and humanities (SSH), Reed-Elsevier, Wiley-Blackwell, Springer, and Taylor & Francis increased their share of the published output, especially since the advent of the digital era (mid-1990s). Combined, the top five most prolific publishers account for more than 50% of all papers published in 2013. Disciplines of the social sciences have the highest level of concentration (70% of papers from the top five publishers), while the humanities have remained relatively independent (20% from top five publishers). NMS disciplines are in between, mainly because of the strength of their scientific societies, such as the ACS in chemistry or APS in physics. The paper also examines the migration of journals between small and big publishing houses and explores the effect of publisher change on citation impact. It concludes with a discussion on the economics of scholarly publishing."
"With the advent of Google Scholar and other metrics for faculty productivity, advancing one’s career as a professor is much more of a numbers game than it used to be. Still, the traditional system of peer review in hiring, tenure and promotion decisions has retained a good deal of nuance. Scholars in the same field as those they’re evaluating know that while one project may not be as prestigious as another, for example, a good degree of academic innovation might be worth a little professional risk.
But is that system under threat? Full-time faculty members at Rutgers University at New Brunswick say that it may be, in light of the university’s contract with a faculty productivity monitoring company called Academic Analytics.
Rutgers professors say they don't need the system, which is based on a patented algorithm for measuring faculty productivity, and that what little data they’ve been able to obtain to so far include some serious errors. On Monday, the faculty of the School of Arts and Sciences will vote on a faculty union-backed resolution asking the university not to use Academic Analytics data in personnel and curricular decisions, and to give faculty members access to data collected by the company.
“I think in everybody in academia has an interest in collective and individual measures of productivity, but these are very blunt forms of measurement,” said David Hughes, a professor of anthropology and president of Rutgers’ American Association of University Professors and American Federation of Teachers-affiliated faculty union. “Most universities already have a very robust system of assessing faculty output, with [numerous] categories for your scholarship, so why would we want to dilute that for these indexes?”"
"A study published in 2011 found that 24 percent of students on 17 CUNY campuses (including Kingsborough) had experienced both food and housing insecurity in the previous year. Other surveys, including a large study released last week, have suggested that such problems may be more prevalent than previously thought. This is especially true at community colleges, where students tend to be older and saddled with additional debts and responsibilities.
Ms. Elmore talked to The Chronicle about students’ struggle for upward mobility through higher education. Following is an edited and condensed version of that conversation."
– The results of the factor analysis indicate the possibility of 46 variables under six factors being important for the success of institutional repository implementation. These six factors are “Management”, “Services”, “Technology”, “Self-archive Practices”, “People” and “Resources”.
– This study has empirically tested and consolidated the factors which are important in institutional repository implementation worldwide and documented them as critical success factors.
– It also frames questions about the possible value of developing some guidelines or standards related to success factors to be able to monitor the deployment of institutional repositories."
"2. Problem statement
Prior studies have revealed that library managers and academic librarians are largely taking the lead in terms of planning, implementing, and maintaining IRs (Rieh & Jea, 2008). Administrating an IR requires a long-term commitment to safeguarding, preserving, and making accessible the intellectual content of an institution. When the significance of an IR is not understood, the value of its services may be underestimated and, consequently, organizational support to ensure IR survival and growth may dwindle. This is further complicated by the fact that IRs are not yet universally accepted by faculty as necessary (Burns, Lana, & Budd, 2013). Lynch (2003) argues that hosting an IR is a “stewardship [that] is easy and inexpensive to claim; [but] it is expensive and difficult to honor, and perhaps it will prove to be all too easy to later abdicate” (Section 4, para. 12). If academic librarians seek to build and support IRs for the long term, and if they wish to know what kind of value the repository adds to the community they serve, then they need to understand the factors that can influence the success of IRs. In other words, what are the conditions needed to implement and operate an IR successfully?
This study explores the critical success factors in the deployment of IRs. It analyzes the perspectives of IR managers concerning how they perceive the importance of the factors identified as critical and considers the actual performance of IRs relative to those factors. This research represents an effort to identify IR critical success factors based on the perceived importance and the actual performance of the factors in the IR implementation and operation. The critical success factor (CSF) approach (Caralli, 2004), was popularized by Rockart (1979) as “the limited number of areas in which results, if they are satisfactory, will ensure successful competitive performance for the organization.” (p.90).
This research contributes to the base of understanding about the conditions that are critical to the success of IRs worldwide. The results have implications for the actual performance (achievement) on each of those factors in established IRs, and would enable IR administrators to effectively support requirements for the success of IRs. There has been no comprehensive study on the success factors of IRs in the library context and no investigation of success factors in real-life contexts of IR activities."
"This study seeks to give libraries a plan for interinstitutional cooperation for institutional repositories that will benefit all involved: researchers, institutions, and, ultimately, global scholarship. This research uses repository studies, interviews with existing repository managers, and the input of libraries considering a repository to inform the exploration of the opportunities for collaboration in IR development and maintenance. This article proposes opportunities for collaboration between institutions in order to convince libraries that it is possible and effective to work together toward a common goal: highlighting existing working groups or alliances, sharing technology and hardware, building separate interinstitutional bodies to house repositories, and sharing the work of specialists."
"Pinfield, S., Salter, J., Bath, P.A., Hubbard, B., Millington, P., Anders, J.H.S. and Hussain, A. (2014) Open-access repositories worldwide, 2005-2012: Past growth, current characteristics and future possibilities. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. Article first published online: 28 APR 2014.
This is the latest version of this eprint.
Published Version: http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/asi.23131
This paper reviews the worldwide growth of open-access (OA) repositories, December 2005 to December 2012, using data collected by the OpenDOAR project. It shows that initial repository development was focused on North America, Western Europe and Australasia, particularly the USA, UK, Germany and Australia. Soon after, Japan increased its repository numbers. Since 2010, other geographical areas and countries have seen repository growth, including East Asia (especially Taiwan), South America (especially Brazil) and Eastern Europe (especially Poland). During the whole period, countries such as France, Italy and Spain have maintained steady growth, whereas countries such as China and Russia have experienced relatively low levels of growth. Globally, repositories are predominantly institutional, multidisciplinary and English-language-based. They typically use open-source OAI-compliant repository software but remain immature in terms of explicit licensing arrangements. Whilst the size of repositories is difficult to assess accurately, the available data indicate that a small number of large repositories and a large number of small repositories make up the repository landscape. These trends and characteristics are analyzed using Innovation Diffusion Theory (IDT) building on previous studies. IDT is shown to provide a useful explanatory framework for understanding repository adoption at various levels: global, national, organizational and individual. Major factors affecting both the initial development of repositories and their take up by users are identified, including IT infrastructure, language, cultural factors, policy initiatives, awareness-raising activity and usage mandates. It is argued that mandates in particular are likely to play a crucial role in determining future repository development."
"Professors contribute to Institutional Repositories (IRs) to make their materials widely accessible in keeping with the benefits of Open Access. However, universities' commitment to IRs depends on building trust with faculty and solving copyright concerns. Digital preservation and copyright management in IRs should be strengthened to increase faculty participation."