Suchergebnisse

This study is a partial advance of ongoing research whose main objective is the creation, contribution, and analysis of cultural indicators in the Ecuadorian university context. This work focuses specifically on providing a series of indicators on the equipment, use, and consumption of the TIC of students of the National University of Education of Ecuador (UNAE). The methodology used is the quantitative of descriptive-analytical order, based on the data collected in a survey applied on a population sample, made up of 438 students of the total universe between the different careers and cycles offered by the UNAE. The sample has a margin of 95% reliability and an error of 5%. The obtained results showed a high level of equipment, use, and consumption of the different technological devices. Also, this university population spends daily hours in academic and free time activities in cellphones, television, videos, and internet.

While much has been written about the construction of the Guayaquil and Quito railroad, little has been written about the important connection between the subsidiary companies organized by the railroad and the development of the Ecuadorian Corporation, the first modern holding company to be organized in Ecuador. The objective of this article is to present the history of the Ecuadorian Corporation from its beginnings in 1897 with the organization of the Guayaquil and Quito Railway Company to its dissolution in 1986 as a result of a hostile take over by the Rooney Pace corporation. In exploring the connection between the railway company and the Ecuadorian Corporation, emphasis has been placed on the roles of Archer Harman, the promoter of the railway company and its subsidiaries, Evermont Hope Norton, the founder of the Ecuadorian Corporation, and Hope Norton Stevens, his grandson and successor. The methodology for this article was based on an analysis of the unpublished primary sources of the Guayaquil and Quito Railway Company and its subsidiaries and of the Ecuadorian Corporation. The article concludes with an analysis of the important contribution made by the Ecuadorian Corporation to the economic development of Ecuador.

Design science research was used for the generation, use and evaluation of a model for knowledge sharing in the user community through open educational resources (OER). The focus of interest was on the development process of a model for knowledge sharing that emphasizes the characteristics and the needs of the user community; the empowerment and democratic issues of openness; the collaboration between institutions and dialog with society; and the consideration of quality and sustainability issues. Initially, the community needs were analyzed through surveys and workshops, and the findings used, through negotiations, to formulate the development process. An open-training platform served as an infrastructure and included a repository with OER, a wiki and a discussion forum. The purpose of this article is an attempt to provide universities with a plan and template for integrated knowledge sharing that responds to societal needs. Usability and usefulness has not been evaluated. (C) 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Strindberg's strategies of commitment, disengagement and new commitment across the border between literature and politics represent an intriguing intellectual adventure we can follow throughout his life as a writer. My article focuses on Strindberg's dilemma as it took form in the first half of the 1880s, and observes it through his fundamental and controversial relationship with the Swedish journalist, literary critic and Social-democratic political leader Hjalmar Branting, with the Danish playwright, literary critic, journalist and radical liberal politician Edvard Brandes, and with the Norwegian writer, politically engaged intellectual and nasjonalskald Bjørnstjerne Bjørnson. For a period they all experienced, along with Strindberg, the ambivalence of working in a social field where art and politics were intertwined, and were to a certain extent involved in the same project, each with his own interpretation. For Strindberg the writer, defending his autonomy from the political field in the end became crucial. What did his colleagues expect from his work? How did Strindberg react to their expectations? What is his legacy today with respect to stances such as intellectual autonomy from power, democratic rule, pacifism and critique of civilization, but also anti-feminism and anti-Semitism? Strindberg's unruly genius illustrates that it is at times difficult to draw the dividing line between radicalism and reaction, and that the great modernists were often also great anti-modernists.