Opportunities for Research in Journalism
In: The journalism bulletin, Band 4, Heft 3, S. 19-24
1237758 Ergebnisse
Sortierung:
In: The journalism bulletin, Band 4, Heft 3, S. 19-24
In: The American journal of sociology, Band 33, Heft 2, S. 194-210
ISSN: 1537-5390
In: National municipal review, Band 16, Heft 2, S. 132-136
In: The American journal of sociology, Band 32, Heft 2, S. 217-226
ISSN: 1537-5390
In: The annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, Band 119, Heft 1, S. 24-31
ISSN: 1552-3349
In: The Economic Journal, Band 33, Heft 130, S. 185
In: Journal of political economy, Band 29, Heft 3, S. 241-249
ISSN: 1537-534X
In: National municipal review, Band 2, Heft 1, S. 48-56
In: Social research: an international quarterly, Band 25, Heft 3, S. 271-284
ISSN: 0037-783X
In: Cross-cultural research and methodology series, 8
World Affairs Online
This is the third and final part of a series of 'research note' articles looking at an AHRC funded project on the various research methodologies used by European Union and International Law researchers. The first part can be viewed at: http://www.jcer.net/ojs/index.php/jcer/article/view/50/53 and the second part can be viewed at: http://www.jcer.net/ojs/index.php/jcer/article/view/96/83
BASE
What is research? Introduction -- Beginning your research -- The basic idea -- Managing the research project -- Choosing the research topic -- Defining your research perspectives -- Producing your project -- Doing your literature review -- Methodology into practice -- Methods -- Analysing your results and writing up -- Analysis and synthesis -- Writing up -- Conclusion -- Some final thoughts
In: RTD info: news roundup on EC research and technological development programmes, Heft 49, S. 14-17
ISSN: 1024-0802
The literature on research-university governance is predominantly concerned with how higher education institutions become successful research universities. However, there is a dearth of studies on the perceptions of university stakeholders towards research-university governance. Therefore, this research aims to reveal the university stakeholders' perception of research universities in Thailand, with special attention to governance. Governance is investigated through two levels of analysis: national and institutional. Two institutions in Thailand are chosen as case studies: Chulalongkorn University (CU) and Chiang Mai University (CMU). A qualitative approach is adopted, which is based on three methods of data collection: document analysis, interviews, and observations. There are 52 research participants, mainly consisting of top university leaders and academics of CU and CMU, and senior officials from governmental agencies and independent organizations. One of the key findings is that it can be argued that the Asian Financial Crisis in 1997 has significantly changed the pattern of university behavior via the introduction of quasi-market mechanisms. These quasi-market mechanisms facilitated the adoption of a university entrepreneurial culture, particularly in terms of diversifying the financial base. In addition, the crisis also promoted the emergence of autonomous universities. This research has both theoretical and practical contributions. In terms of theoretical contribution, it provides an alternative theoretical framework for examining research-university governance. This framework is called the Design of Contractual Relationships, which provides a theoretical lens to examine the perceptions of university stakeholders on the critical conditions and actions of research-university governance. It has three fundamental dimensions: (1) context-underpinning factors (2) incentive arrangements and funding and (3) monitoring and oversight mechanisms. In terms of practical contribution, this research illuminates the fundamental elements of research-university governance in Thailand and provides a comparison between CU and CMU in terms of governance. The Design of Contractual Relationships is adopted to examine the governance comparison between CU and CMU. The comparison shows that the university stakeholders? perceptions of critical conditions and actions can be broadly categorized into the following aspects: the institutional entrepreneurial culture in terms of diversified financial base, the impact of bureaucratic mindset over the university incentive arrangements and monitoring mechanisms, academic inbreeding, and the absence of a "publish or perish" culture. An examination of research-university governance at both the national and institutional levels indicates that there are four fundamental elements embedded in the university cultural structure and the university stakeholders? behavior. These elements are (1) Thai bureaucracy (2) quasi-market mechanisms (3) patronage and (4) pluralistic academic freedom. These fundamental elements have implicitly and explicitly exerted their power over university governance, affected the way in which the governance instruments are selected, and influenced university stakeholders? behavior and the university as a whole. ; published_or_final_version ; Education ; Doctoral ; Doctor of Philosophy
BASE