Search

This paper focuses on how contributions are argued in research proposals in the humanities. Due to standardizing tendencies in research funding towards formats characteristic of science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) subjects, there has been concern that the humanities are marginalized. In this study, 'contribution statements' were identified in proposals funded by the Bank of Sweden Tercentenary Foundation across the humanistic disciplines. These statements were systematically analyzed in terms of type and structure of contributions advanced. The results suggest that the humanities differ from the sciences in terms of specificity of focus, a high level of 'acceptable serendipity' in proposed outcomes, but that these disciplines structurally tend to adhere to the same types of research contribution arguments as STEM. A better understanding of the way in which humanities scholars frame contributions offers insight into how these fields change and how they relate to developments in the science policy and funding landscape.

The traditional "lone scholar" view of an Arts and Humanities doctoral student sits uneasily with the skills-based discourse underpinning policies aimed at enhancing researcher development and employability. This paper reports on a case study of a research training programme for doctoral students in the Arts and Humanities at a UK university. It calls for the embedding of the generic skills agenda within a more clearly articulated pedagogic discourse and formulates four pedagogic principles for research training programme design. Additionally, the paper problematises the research trainer role and highlights the importance of paying attention to the students' own learning agendas and the learning value they are prepared to derive from training. (Contains 2 notes and 1 table.)

Background: Norwegian public health nurses prevent diseases and promote health in children and young people aged 0–20 and their families. Public health nursing programs prepare students for their practical role and provide relevant theoretical knowledge. Objectives: To gain knowledge of the literature in the Norwegian public health nursing curricula, and to examine further the nursing base in these curricula. Design: An explorative and descriptive design was chosen. Sample: Reading lists based on syllabus documents from the 10 higher educational institutions in Norway offering programs in public health nursing. Measurements: A summative content analysis and a categorization of content from reading lists were performed. Results: Numerical information on the content and categorization of reading lists shows that social science and humanities literature dominates, followed by psychology and medicine. Nursing texts, theories and philosophy comprise only a minor part of the curricula. Conclusion: The paper provides valuable data on the theoretical focus in Norwegian public health nursing and raises important questions about the paucity of nursing texts in the curriculum. The imbalance in reading lists in Norway should be studied further and similar studies conducted in other countries to encourage reflection on the theoretical content of public health nursing education globally. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The study analyses contributions to Library and Information Science (LIS) by researchers representing various disciplines. How are such contributions associated with the choice of research topics and methodology? The study employs a quantitative content analysis of articles published in 31 scholarly LIS journals in 2015. Each article is seen as a contribution to LIS by the authors' disciplines, which are inferred from their affiliations. The unit of analysis is the article‐discipline pair. Of the contribution instances, the share of LIS is one third. Computer Science contributes one fifth and Business and Economics one sixth. The latter disciplines dominate the contributions in information retrieval, information seeking, and scientific communication indicating strong influences in LIS. Correspondence analysis reveals three clusters of research, one focusing on traditional LIS with contributions from LIS and Humanities and survey‐type research; another on information retrieval with contributions from Computer Science and experimental research; and the third on scientific communication with contributions from Natural Sciences and Medicine and citation analytic research. The strong differentiation of scholarly contributions in LIS hints to the fragmentation of LIS as a discipline. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper explores social scientists' and humanities (SSH) scholars' integration within the academic medical research environment. Three questions guided our investigation: Do SSH scholars adapt to the medical research environment? How do they navigate their career within a culture that may be inconsistent with their own? What strategies do they use to gain legitimacy? The study builds on three concepts: decoupling, doxa, and epistemic habitus. Twenty-nine semi-structured interviews were conducted with SSH scholars working in 11 faculties of medicine across Canada. Participants were selected through purposeful and snowball sampling. The data were analyzed by thematic content analysis. For most of our participants, moving into medicine has been a challenging experience, as their research practices and views of academic excellence collided with those of medicine. In order to achieve some level of legitimacy more than half of our participants altered their research practices. This resulted in a dissonance between their internalized appreciation of academic excellence and their new, altered, research practices. Only six participants experienced no form of challenge or dissonance after moving into medicine, while three decided to break with their social science and humanities past and make the medical research community their new home. We conclude that the work environment for SSH scholars in faculties of medicine does not deliver on the promise of inclusiveness made by calls for interdisciplinarity in Canadian health research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The purpose of this study was to examine evidence of a hypothesized shift in the operative research paradigms in music education during the first quarter century of the publication of the Journal of Research in Music Education, during the period 1953 to 1978. This shift was from humanities-oriented historical and philosophical studies to scientifically oriented psychological studies, from studies couched at higher levels of generality to more specific levels of analysis of the data, and from studies geared toward broader contextual and institutional issues to those concerning the specific behaviors of students in music education. Data for our analysis are drawn from the first 26 years of the Journal of Research in Music Education during its formative period from 1953 to 1978. In order to test quantitatively these broad philosophical claims for shifting paradigms in music education research during this period, our specific research questions focused on indicators that, taken together, might document these changes. Based on heuristic models, 499 articles were classified according to types of research method, facets of music education, and integrative levels of analysis. Descriptive statistics and statistically significant correlations provided strong evidence of this shift. Implications for further research were sketched. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]