La psicología social en España : estructuras de comunidades

Este trabajo se enmarca en el espacio de la 'Psicología social de la ciencia' (Domènech, Íñiguez, Pallí y Tirado 2000; Iñiguez y Pallí, 2002; Moscovici, 1993; Shadish & Fuller, 1994; Shadish & Neimeyer, 1989). La Psicología social contribuye a los estudios sociales de la ciencia y la tecnología con el estudio de las interacciones y factores sociales que se dan en el marco de la producción científica y específicamente, promoviendo la idea de que el conocimiento es el resultado de un trabajo conjunto. El presente trabajo considera a la propia Psicología social como objeto de análisis. Específicamente pretende fijar una historiografía de la Psicología social en España, analizar sus características, identificar su dinámica y describir sus prácticas. Para ello, manteniendo las características propias presentes en la corta tradición de la Psicología social de la ciencia, utiliza tanto el Análisis de Redes Sociales (ARS) por su reconocida eficacia en el estudio de comunidades científicas, como la Bibliometría, por su capacidad para analizar la estructura de la producción y la comunicación. En la investigación se analizan las comunicaciones presentadas en los 8 Congresos españoles de Psicología social, celebrados entre 1982 y 2000.This study forms part of a 'social psychology of science" (Domènech, Íñiguez, Pallí y Tirado 2000; Iñiguez y Pallí, 2002; Moscovici, 1993; Shadish & Fuller, 1994; Shadish & Neimeyer, 1989). Social psychology's contribution to the social understanding of science and technology is in its study of the interactional and social factors involved in the production of scientific knowledge, exploring the idea that knowledge is the product of joint endeavour. In the work reported here we take Social Psychology itself as the object of study. Specifically, we subject Social Psychology in Spain to a historical analysis, analysing its characteristics, identifying its development and describing its practices. To do so, we follow practices established in the short legacy social psychology of science. We use both social network analysis (SNA), for its acknowledged utility in the study of scientific communities, and bibliometrics, for what it tells us about the structure of scientific publication. We present an analysis of the papers presented at the eight Social Psychology conferences held in Spain between 1982 and 2000

Breaking silos : interdisciplinary research in kinesiology

With the growing popularity of kinesiology at the undergraduate level, one would expect the field to be influential. Kinesiology, however, appears to be in a paradox. The undergraduate popularity is not reflected in the rest of academia, or even the general public, many of whom feel kinesiology is not a legitimate field. Part of kinesiology’s problems may be due to the continued fragmentation among the sub-disciplines. Many prominent kinesiologists have proposed interdisciplinary research (IDR) as a viable path to the field’s re-unification. Despite all of the discourse about this, however, the field appears to be stuck. The overall objective of this dissertation was to nudge the conversation forward by exploring IDR in kinesiology. This dissertation attempted to close this knowledge gap by summarizing the body of literature on IDR, outline trends, purpose a model for IDR, describe incentives and limitations, and identify areas for further investigation within the field of kinesiology (and possibly broader academic community). This was accomplished by using a mixed-methods approach, consisting of two separate but related studies. The first empirical study provided a quantitative descriptive review of IDR in kinesiology and purposed a prediction model. A stratified-random sample of journal articles (n = 552) were selected from kinesiology-focused journals (n = 10) from the years 2008 to 2012. Articles were coded on a variety variables characterizing the authors and the nature of the research. Authors were primarily publishing disciplinary research (78.8%) versus IDR (21.2%). The majority of research was biophysical (67.2%), quantitative (94.5%), and funded (52.7%). Authors from kinesiology departments published just over half the journal articles (57.4%). There was little significant change in the authors or research variables across time. The prediction model for IDR selected by the step-wise regression (R² = 0.52, p < 0.001) had three predictor variables: behavior epidemiology framework, theoretical framework, and disciplinary focus. However, despite increased demand for IDR and kinesiology’s inherent multidisciplinary nature, disciplinary research prevails in the field. The second empirical study explored kinesiologists' perception of IDR, including perceived benefits and limitations. Themes were uncovered using a qualitative, open- coding protocol. The overarching themes were Benefits (i.e., the positive aspects to conducting IDR) and Limitations (i.e., the challenges to conducting IDR), each with eight sub-themes. The most prominent sub-themes for Benefits were New Perspectives, Better Results, and Collaboration Potential. The most prominent sub-themes for Limitations were Collaboration Problems, Challenging Methodology, and Limiting Results and Analysis. Overall, all participants felt IDR was valuable to the field, but each had legitimate reservations, creating a somewhat contradictory environment that causes tension between the perceived benefits and limitations. Until the tension can be resolved, IDR may continue to remain on the fringes of kinesiology research

International Benchmarking Review of UK Physical Geography

Physical geography in the UK is extraordinarily rich and diverse. It provides insights into processes and forms in the natural environment, including climate and atmosphere, geomorphology and landscape, biogeography and ecosystems, hydrology and water science, oceans and soils. The use, application and development of technologies, including Earth observation, GIS, and geochronological tools, are integral parts of contemporary physical geography. This report is the first to compile evidence on the health and influence of UK physical geography. It uses documented evidence, most of which is in the public domain, to describe the nature and demand for physical geography in schools, the shape and size of physical geography in universities, the achievements and global influence of UK physical geography and its academic community, and the aspirations and skillsets offered by the next generation of physical geographers. Physical geography brings a unique spatial perspective, and the capability to integrate across scales and subdisciplinary systems. It links to aspects of environmental science, mathematics, physics and life sciences. It sets intellectual agendas both within and beyond geography, and leads eminent international collaborative research programmes. The ‘de-siloing’ of science in the 21st century in response to big ‘whole world’ societal-environment challenges demonstrates the value of approaches which have always been integral to UK physical geography. UK physical geography is international in outlook, is world-leading in many subareas, and influences the discipline worldwide. This is achieved through many routes including: international research partnerships; the training given to overseas students in UK geography departments, particularly at graduate level; and the roles played by UK-based academics in international professional bodies, international journal editorships and major conferences. UK physical geography research is funded from diverse sources and punches well above its weight in terms of success rates at the UK Research Councils. In the last decade, European funding has also been vital in supporting UK physical geography research. New substantial funding opportunities are emerging including through the UK’s Global Challenges ResearchFund and Industrial Strategy, which physical geography is well placed to engage with.Additionally, the opportunities for postgraduate doctoral research in physical geography have been enhanced with the advent of the UK Research Council doctoral training programmes. The future of physical geography is bright. It is witnessing a resurgence in popularity in schools in England. Curriculum changes, increasing physical geography’s presence within A-Levels in England and Wales, are positive developments, as are a greater emphasis on fieldwork, individual project work and data skills. These provide opportunities for physical geography to bolster its position within the discipline in schools and beyond. The situation is not consistent across the UK; it is hoped that changes can be made in the content of Scottish Highers that leads to greater balance in the content of physical and human geography. At university, physical geography is a popular and growing subject choice and attracts some of the highest-calibre students to its undergraduate degrees. As well as being taught in UK university geography undergraduate programmes, physical geography is widespread in other degree structures and departments. Successful course delivery is contingent upon institutions providing appropriate access to laboratory facilities, fieldwork opportunities and quantitative training. Physical geography undergraduates perform well in their degrees, express high level of courses satisfaction, and have excellent employment outcomes compared to many disciplines. The independent review of this report by a panel of eminent overseas experts confirms that “it is beyond doubt that UK physical geography is a leading force worldwide as evidenced by all the metrics discussed in this report”. Nonetheless, there are challenges, detailed within the report, that need to be addressed to enhance the scientific academic and public presence, inclusivity, resourcing, autonomy, and global reputation of UK physical geography. It is recommended that a working group representative of constituent bodies within UK physical geography, led by the Royal Geographical Society (with the Institute of British Geographers) (RGS-IBG), is set up to take forward the ssues associated with thesechallenges

Journal of the National Collegiate Honors Council, Volume 13, Number 2, Fall/Winter 2012 (complete isue)

Honors Around the Globe: Countries and Contributors Australia—Deirdre Barron and Margaret Zeegers Brazil—Eunice M. L. Soriano de Alencar, Aderson Luiz Costa Jr., and Denise de Souza Fleith Chile—Frederick J. Conway, Carlos Alberto Cioce Sampaio, and Juan Carlos Skewes China—Ikuo Kitagaki and Donglin Li Mexico—Mohammad Ayub Khan and Ruben Morales-Menendez Netherlands—Vladimir Bartelds, Johannes Boonstra, Trijntje van Dijk, Lyndsay Drayer, Pierre Van Eijl, Stan van Ginkel, Bouke van Gorp, Nelleke de Jong, G. Johan Offringa, Anton Peeters, Albert Pilot, Karin Scager, Ron Weerheijm, Jeske Weerheijm, Fred Wiegant, Marca V. C. Wolfensberger, and John Zubizarreta Qatar—Byrad Yyelland Switzerland—Michaela Ruppert Smith United Kingdom—Margaret Lam

The evolution of architecture faculty organizational culture at the University of Michigan

Understanding and navigating the multiple academic disciplines and administrative subcultures, which operate within higher education institutions, is challenging for both internal and external stakeholders who may be unfamiliar with the disparate normative, regulative, and cultural cognitive systems that guide social behavior of each area. Higher education leaders need to understand the cultures operating within the organizational groups and subgroups in order to coordinate, integrate, and foster collaboration toward organizational and institutional goal attainment activities. This case study, which focused on the emergence and evolution of the organizational culture of the architecture faculty at the University of Michigan, provides insights into this particular organizational unit as well as a conceptual framework and research process from which to examine other faculty subcultures. Findings included explication of historical, societal and technological influences; the sociocultural, norms, roles and structural elements developed by the organizational members to structure their social behavior; a list of norms, roles and statuses used by members; as well as an explication of leadership actions that were accepted or rejected by faculty members as the organizational culture developed

Seriousness, Irony, and Cultural Politics: A Defense of Jorge Portilla

This essay discusses Jorge Portilla’s phenomenological analysis of values and freedom in his essay, “The Phenomenology of Relajo.” Portilla argues that genuine freedom requires seriousness and sincerity; it requires wholehearted participation in cultural practices that one finds truly valuable. To support his argument, Portilla examines the ways that values and freedom are undermined when cultural practices are disrupted and break down as a result of the antics of the so-called "relajiento," a kind of “class clown” figure in Mexican culture who refuses to take anything seriously. Carlos Sánchez has criticized Portilla's rejection of the relajiento, suggesting that the relajiento’s disruptive behavior may be a liberatory act of defiance against the legacy of colonialism. I argue, however, that Portilla was right to see the relajiento’s behavior as counterproductive in the fight for liberation from oppression