This work introduces a series of papers developed to explore the case for change in dental education. Three issues facing dental education are (a) the challenging financial environment of higher education, making dental schools very expensive and tuition-intensive for universities to operate and producing high debt levels for students, which limits access to education and restricts career choices; (b) the profession's apparent loss of vision for taking care of the oral health needs of all components of society and the resultant potential for marginalization of dentistry as a specialized health care service available only to the affluent; and (c) the nature of dental school education itself, which has been described as convoluted, expensive, and often deeply dissatisfying to its students. The theoretical rational for this work is that developing dental faculty from solely clinicians to academicians will allow for the curricular change so needed in dental education. Furthermore, it is curricular change that can lead to changes in the oral health profession.My work first explores the scientific nature of research into dental education to determine its ability to advance the profession. This study found that while there has been a small increase in the amount of rigorous dental education research in the past 10 years, it remains a small percentage of the overall research completed in the field. We then researched the effect of pedagogical training for dental clinicians and discovered predictors for those faculty members more likely to alter their methods to be more student centered. Our narrative research into faculty resistors (those unwilling to change) allowed us to identify themes that can alter our approach to future faculty development. And finally, we researched the effect of modern pedagogy on a course in the dental school curriculum. This research allowed us to justify curricular changes that improve efficiency and student performance.

In order to arrive at informed judgments about the quality of research institutions and individual scholars, funding agencies, academic employers and researchers have turned to publication rankings. While such rankings, often based on journal citations, promise a more efficient and transparent funding allocation, individual researchers are at risk of showing adaptive behavior. This paper investigates whether the use of journal rankings in assessing the quality of scholarly research results in the unintended consequence of researchers adapting their research topics to the publishing interests of high-ranked journals. The introduction of the Handelsblatt Ranking (HBR) for economists in German language institutions serves as a quasi-natural experiment, allowing for an examination of research topic dynamics in economics via topic modeling and text classification. It is found that the Handelsblatt Ranking did not cause a significant shift of topics researched by German-affiliated authors in comparison to their international counterparts, even though topic convergence is apparent.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

<p>  </p> <p>Over the years it has become more common for practitioners to use the NGSS scientific practices to inform curricula at the undergraduate level. One of these practices is argumentation, the process of engaging in argument from evidence. Argumentation is an important part of the scientific process because scientists must make claims about their research and then provide justification using evidence to support those claims. While being able to argue your claim based on evidence is a common occurrence for scientists, it is rarely something students engage with in general level courses. In order to incorporate argumentation in the classroom the Claim, Evidence, Reasoning (CER) framework was adopted to develop the argumentation materials. </p> <p>In this study, aspects of the CER framework have been adapted and incorporated into the existing curriculum of a second-semester general chemistry non-majors course. The changes include lecture discussions, worksheets, and exam questions to help scaffold and facilitate students’ argumentation development. In the spring 2020 and 2021 semesters, 80 students in each course were tracked through their CER assessments to gain insight into how students construct arguments. The arguments were analyzed based on completeness, correctness, and complexity. The results show support for the effectiveness of the curriculum intervention and were used to make recommendations for instructors using the CER framework and identify future areas of research.</p>

[pt] Na pesquisa tratamos das dinâmicas do campo científico através da acumulação de capitais e da construção das posições de prestígio institucional a partir dos Bolsistas de Produtividade em Pesquisa do CNPq. Produzindo um recorte da pesquisa do SOCED (Grupo de Pesquisas em Sociologia da Educação), coordenado pela pesquisadora Zaia Brandão, sobre a os bolsistas de produtividade do CNPq, nosso objetivo foi compreender a centralidade de algumas instituições na pesquisa em Educação analisando se existem instituições com o poder de “comandar o jogo” no campo cientifico da área. Quais são as instituições que estão hierarquicamente representadas com poder no campo científico na área da Educação a partir da concessão das bolsas de produtividade? Partindo dos agentes (pesquisadores) traçamos uma configuração das instituições prevalentes nessas trajetórias para conhecer o peso relativo das instituições universitárias na luta por hegemonia no campo da Educação. O objeto da investigação são as instituições na composição das hierarquias científico-acadêmicas a partir das trajetórias institucionais e práticas acadêmicas registradas no Currículo Lattes dos pesquisadores bolsista de produtividade das categorias 1 (A, B, C, D) e Sênior. Trabalhamos em nossa pesquisa com dados de todos os PQ-1 (A, B, C e D) com 170 bolsistas que somado aos PQ-Sr (11) compuseram a amostra de 181 pesquisadores. A análise das variáveis do nosso banco de dados dos PQ-1 e PQ-Sr nos permitiu caracterizar, pela instituição de pertença de cada agente, a hierarquia a partir da: instituição e região da instituição de trabalho dos pesquisadores; instituição de doutoramento; relação entre a instituição de formação (doutoramento) e a instituição de pertença; relação entre os tipos de publicações e as posições ocupadas; a relação entre o poder institucional e os periódicos mais atrativos para os pesquisadores bolsistas e; conhecer as instituições responsáveis pelas revistas mais bem avaliadas, com Qualis A1 e A2. As análises evidenciaram a existência de uma política que reproduz a hierarquia de bolsistas e acabam privilegiando instituições que já possuem razoáveis condições de condução de trabalhos científicos. As instituições do topo da hierarquia revelam o poder de “comando do jogo” no campo científico por meio da definição e manutenção das regras e posse de seus próprios periódicos bem qualificados que contribuem para definir o padrão de cientificidade da área. Tais instituições possuem poder que gera uma dinâmica de maior concessão de bolsas para seus pesquisadores e maior financiamento para as pesquisas realizadas pelas suas instituições. / [en] In this research we deal with the dynamics of the scientific field through the accumulation of capital and the construction of positions of institutional prestige from the Research Productivity Grantees of the CNPq. Within the SOCED (Research Group on Educational Sociology) research, coordinated by the researcher Zaia Brandão, on the CNPq productivity fellows, I chose to understand the centrality of some institutions in the research in Education, analyzing if there are institutions with the power of Command the game in the scientific field of Education. What are the institutions that are hierarchically represented with power in the scientific field in Education from the granting of productivity grants? From the agents (researchers) we draw a configuration of the institutions prevalent in these trajectories to know the relative weight of the university institutions in the fight for hegemony in the field of Education. The object of the research is the institutions in the composition of the academic-academic hierarchies from the institutional trajectories and academic practices the of researchers registered in the Lattes Curriculum of the productivity grants program of categories 1 (A, B, C, D) and Senior. We worked on the research with data of all the PQ-1 (A, B, C and D) with 170 that added to the PQ-Sr (11) composed the sample of 181 researchers. The analysis of the variables of our database of PQ-1 and PQ-Sr allowed us to characterize, by the institution of each agent, the hierarchy from the: institution and region of the researchers work institution; PhD degree institution; relationship between the training institution (PhD degree) and the work institution; relationship between types of publications and positions in the field; the relationship between institutional power and the most attractive journals for researchers and; know the institutions responsible for the best evaluated journals, with Qualis A1 and A2. The analyzes showed the existence of a policy that reproduces the hierarchy of productivity grants and end up favoring institutions that already have conditions to do scientific work. Institutions at the top of the hierarchy reveal the power of command of the game in the scientific field through the definition and maintenance of the rules and they have own well-established journals that contribute to defining the scientific standard of the area. Such institutions have power for a greater grant dynamics for their researchers and greater funding for the research maked by their institutions.