Suchergebnisse

Purpose
The purpose of this paper is to discuss questionable research practices (QRPs) in business research, particularly in the logistics and supply chain management discipline, in light of antecedents influenced by the current academic environment and the consequences for academic rigour and relevance to stimulate thinking and debate among the academic community.


Design/methodology/approach
A literature review and autoethnographic approach were used to examine these issues based on over 60 years' collective academic experience of the authors. Data were collected from discussions among the paper's authors as well as recounting open discussions with other academics and journal editors to collate their observations.


Findings
Evidence is provided of issues the authors have seen first-hand where antecedents in the academic environment influences QRPs, which then detrimentally affect research rigour and relevance, integrity and proper contributions to ground-breaking research and knowledge advancement.


Research limitations/implications
This paper is based on personal observations and experiences of the three authors as well as open-ended discussions with others in the academic community. Suggestions are provided for various academic stakeholders to address these issues.


Practical implications
Practical implications are only provided for academics in their roles as authors, journal editors and reviewers.


Social implications
Encouraging the academic community to eliminate QRPs to improve the rigour, relevance and quality of research will provide more credibility and integrity resulting in better impact and outcomes for society at large.


Originality/value
The value of this paper is in stimulating thinking and debate among academics to return to core issues and values in academia opposed to focusing on narrow university goals focussed on other antecedents of QRPs.

Cover -- Half Title -- Title -- Copyright -- Dedication -- Table of Contents -- List of figures -- List of tables -- Acknowledgments -- Introduction: a journey towards a new multilingual policy -- PART I Language policy, multilingualism, and education -- 1 A new approach to language education policies -- 2 Languages and policy in Israel: history and present -- 3 Advocating for a new multilingual education policy in Israel -- PART II From policy challenges to research on multilingual education -- 4 Stakeholders' attitudes and perceptions regarding multilingual education policies -- 5 Testing and assessment of minority students: language and content -- 6 Incorporating LI in the context of teaching English as an additional language -- 7 Connecting Jewish and Arab students via shared education -- 8 The role of heritage languages in multilingual education policies -- 9 Linguistic landscape as multilingual awareness -- PART III From research to practice -- 10 Principles of the new multilingual education policy -- 11 Conclusions, challenges, and future directions -- References -- Appendices -- Appendix 1: Questionnaire for attitudes study -- Appendix 2: Questionnaire for English teachers -- Appendix 3: Observation guide -- Appendix 4: Interview questions for teachers and focus groups -- Appendix 5: Interview questions for teachers who teach heritage languages -- Appendix 6: Plan for lessons on linguistic landscape -- Appendix 7: The invitation to the public exhibition that summarized the linguistic landscape research -- Appendix 8: Language-policy course for principals -- Appendix 9: Examples of suggested pedagogical activities to implement multilingual education policies -- Index.

Researchers should not treat research ethics as pertinent only when conducting particular types of research, with particular types of participants, or at certain points in the research process. This article looks at the issue of securing informed consent where adequate standards and sufficient compliance are revealed to be social constructs. Using the case of a mixed method research project, this article illustrates the demands of securing informed consent when using external agencies as intermediaries; the changing demands on research participants as a result of the scope of research; the different levels of participation required from respondents throughout different phases of the project; and the impossibility of expecting a standard response from all individuals within a research team due to the contingent nature of negotiating and maintaining consent during interviews. The fluidity of consent demands a more reflexive approach to its engagement. Ritualistic adherence to ethical procedures is thus inadequate.

A major disconnect between education research and practice is widely acknowledged by both schoolpractitioners and university-based researchers. Evidence and commentary relative to the disconnectare articulated in four articles in the April 2007 issue of Phi Delta Kappan under the theme TheResearch/Practice Divide. The authors explained, decried, explored, and sought to close the divide;none expressed doubt concerning the existence of the divide in teacher education or educationleadership. Davis asserted (2007, p. 569), "It appears that comparatively little of what is written andthought about by scholars and policy makers actually has any appreciable impact on classrooms ordrives durable system-wide reform efforts."

Research‐practice partnerships (RPPs) have drawn a great deal of attention as promising structures for bringing educational research and practice closer together. However, promising as RPPs may be, challenges still exist and there have been calls for studies investigating how research can be used within RPPs, and how to include practitioners more in the generation of research evidence. We address these calls by conducting a systematic review of the research literature on RPPs. Our review of 57 articles shows that research is used in various ways to inform both the methods and content for facilitating school improvement in RPPs. For instance, research on effective PD can be directly applied to a Professional Development (PD) programme to inform the methods of the intervention, or research findings can be used as the content of an intervention to facilitate teacher learning. Moreover, the results suggest that the type of research used to inform RPPs affects the kinds of opportunities for research use that are presented to practitioners; ranging from applying research directly to practice (instrumental use), to using research to extend understanding (conceptual use), or using research methods and methodologies in order to increase practitioners' capacity for improving education (process use). Based on the results, we argue that the presented opportunities for research use in interventions strongly affect teachers' opportunities to participate in the generation of research evidence and thereby achieve a more democratised evidence system.

Most scholars do not consider the long-term nature of caregiving, but rather focus on a specific developmental period (e.g., old age) or a specific disability (e.g., cancer). Yet the most important lessons about caregiving may occur at any age, regardless of disabilities or other limitations. Caregiving is a lifelong process. It begins in a mother's womb, continues throughout the lifespan, and ends after death. Caregiving Across the Lifespan emphasizes caregiving as a process that occurs throughout one's life. It discusses infant care, the developmental needs of children and adolescents, the.