Thesis (Ed.D.) -- Teachers College, Columbia University, 1991. / Typescript; issued also on microfilm. Sponsor: Gary Natriello. Dissertation Committee: Aaron Pallas. Includes bibliographical references: (leaves 190-204).

Thesis (Ed.d.)--Teachers College, Columbia University, 1995. / Includes tables. Typescript; issued also on microfilm. Sponsor: Philip A. Fey. Dissertation Committee: Kathleen A. Loughlin. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 296-304).

Thesis (Ed. D.)--Duquesne University, 2004. / Title from document title page. Abstract included in electronic submission form. Includes bibliographical references (p. 70-73) and abstract.

Thesis (M.S.)--Missouri State University, 2008. / "August 2008." Includes bibliographical references (leaves 87-88). Also available online.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--Ohio University, March, 2006. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 139-159)

No description available.

As bolsas de Produtividade em Pesquisa (PQ) do Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq) são destinadas aos pesquisadores que se destaquem entre seus pares, valorizando sua produção científica. O perfil desses bolsistas tem sido objeto de análise frequente em diversos estudos, majoritariamente com foco específico em determinadas áreas do conhecimento. O presente estudo busca caracterizar toda a população de bolsistas PQ do CNPq, oferecendo uma visão mais ampla e contribuindo com o desenvolvimento de políticas de aperfeiçoamento e valorização da Ciência, Tecnologia e Inovação em todas as áreas. Nesse sentido, o trabalho apresenta e discute dados referentes aos bolsistas e sobre sua produção científica e tecnológica, extraídos dos currículos cadastrados na Plataforma Lattes. As informações referentes aos bolsistas foram divididas em dados gerais sobre os pesquisadores, sobre sua formação em nível de doutorado e sobre a bolsa PQ que possuem atualmente. As informações referentes à produção foram divididas em dados gerais de produção, orientações concluídas, produção bibliográfica, artigos por faixa de JCR e índice H. Os resultados apontaram que há predominância de diversas características dos bolsistas, tais como no sexo, distribuição geográfica, áreas do conhecimento e local de realização do doutorado. Quanto à produção dos pesquisadores, foi possível perceber que há características diferentes entre as áreas do conhecimento, em especial quanto a relevância dos indicadores de produtividade relacionados a artigos publicados para cada área. Observou-se, ainda, que o tempo de formação e o tempo de experiência científica estão diretamente relacionados à classificação dos pesquisadores nos diferentes níveis de bolsa, onde a produtividade e impacto dos bolsistas dos níveis mais altos são efetivamente maiores que os dos bolsistas que ocupam os níveis inferiores. / Research Productivity grants (PQ) of the National Council for Scientific and Technological Development (CNPq) are intended for researchers who stand out among their peers, valuing their scientific production. The profile of these scholarship holders has been the object of frequent analysis in several studies, mostly with specific focus in certain areas of knowledge. The present study aims to characterize the entire population of CNPq PQ fellows, offering a broader view and contributing to the development of policies for the improvement and valorization of Science, Technology and Innovation in all areas. In this way, the study presents and discusses data about the scholarship holders and their scientific and technological production, extracted from the curricula registered in the Lattes Platform. The information about the scholarship holders was divided into general information about the researchers, about their doctoral training and about the PQ scholarship they currently have. Production information was divided into general production data, concluded academic advisory, bibliographic production, articles by JCR and H index. The results showed that there are predominant characteristics of the scholarship holders, such as gender, geographical distribution, areas of knowledge and location of the doctorate. Regarding the production of the researchers, it was possible to perceive that there are different characteristics between the areas of knowledge, especially as the relevance of the productivity indicators related to articles published for each area. It was also observed that the time of formation and the time of scientific experience are directly related to the classification of the researchers in the different levels of scholarship, where the productivity and impact of the scholars of the highest levels are actually greater than the scholarship holders of the lower levels.

This study offers a narrative of literary responses to lost texts, ancient and modern, from the age of Petrarch to the age of Milton. Whether continental scholars or English poets, the authors whom I consider share an abiding belief that the imagination is the right vehicle to access the otherwise irretrievable past, and that absent texts can be put to practical uses. Bringing together the work of textual critics, bibliographers, and literary scholars, the introduction evaluates available methods of studying lost texts and proposes an integrated framework for further research. The four chapters that follow provide four distinct answers to the question, what did early modern scholars and poets make out of lost texts? The first chapter finds Petrarch in his De remediis utriusque fortunae inaugurating a long-lasting tradition, the lament for lost books and libraries. I argue that, with help from Petrarch, the Florentine circle of Leonardo Bruni developed what would become a conventional language for explaining these losses. A chapter on scholarly misbehavior examines fifteenth- and sixteenth-century narratives—i.e., legends, lies, and slanders—about lost texts alongside the emergence of the humanist supplements, the efforts of early modern editors (e.g., Erasmus, Ermolao Barbaro) to fill lacunae in partial classical texts with their original compositions, sometimes surreptitiously. This practice of imitation-as-emendation led English authors—Shakespeare, Chapman, Jonson, and Burton—to complete the partial texts of their recent and medieval predecessors and to apprehend with their imaginations the literary heritage that they could not hold in their hands. In the two latter chapters, I argue that this interest sometimes took the form of an imaginative supplement, as when Spenser completes Chaucer's fragmentary Squire's Tale in The Faerie Queene, and sometimes the form of a meditation, as when Milton in "Il Penseroso" envisions English literary history as a series of incomplete works. Likewise, earlier claims about lost texts could simply be revived (e.g., in the invective of Thomas Nashe), or they could be repurposed in self-conscious tropes, as when Ben Jonson and Edmund Spenser entice their readers with representations of lost, unpublished, and unwritten works. / 2019-08-01T00:00:00Z

As bolsas de Produtividade em Pesquisa (PQ) do Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq) são destinadas aos pesquisadores que se destaquem entre seus pares, valorizando sua produção científica. O perfil desses bolsistas tem sido objeto de análise frequente em diversos estudos, majoritariamente com foco específico em determinadas áreas do conhecimento. O presente estudo busca caracterizar toda a população de bolsistas PQ do CNPq, oferecendo uma visão mais ampla e contribuindo com o desenvolvimento de políticas de aperfeiçoamento e valorização da Ciência, Tecnologia e Inovação em todas as áreas. Nesse sentido, o trabalho apresenta e discute dados referentes aos bolsistas e sobre sua produção científica e tecnológica, extraídos dos currículos cadastrados na Plataforma Lattes. As informações referentes aos bolsistas foram divididas em dados gerais sobre os pesquisadores, sobre sua formação em nível de doutorado e sobre a bolsa PQ que possuem atualmente. As informações referentes à produção foram divididas em dados gerais de produção, orientações concluídas, produção bibliográfica, artigos por faixa de JCR e índice H. Os resultados apontaram que há predominância de diversas características dos bolsistas, tais como no sexo, distribuição geográfica, áreas do conhecimento e local de realização do doutorado. Quanto à produção dos pesquisadores, foi possível perceber que há características diferentes entre as áreas do conhecimento, em especial quanto a relevância dos indicadores de produtividade relacionados a artigos publicados para cada área. Observou-se, ainda, que o tempo de formação e o tempo de experiência científica estão diretamente relacionados à classificação dos pesquisadores nos diferentes níveis de bolsa, onde a produtividade e impacto dos bolsistas dos níveis mais altos são efetivamente maiores que os dos bolsistas que ocupam os níveis inferiores. / Research Productivity grants (PQ) of the National Council for Scientific and Technological Development (CNPq) are intended for researchers who stand out among their peers, valuing their scientific production. The profile of these scholarship holders has been the object of frequent analysis in several studies, mostly with specific focus in certain areas of knowledge. The present study aims to characterize the entire population of CNPq PQ fellows, offering a broader view and contributing to the development of policies for the improvement and valorization of Science, Technology and Innovation in all areas. In this way, the study presents and discusses data about the scholarship holders and their scientific and technological production, extracted from the curricula registered in the Lattes Platform. The information about the scholarship holders was divided into general information about the researchers, about their doctoral training and about the PQ scholarship they currently have. Production information was divided into general production data, concluded academic advisory, bibliographic production, articles by JCR and H index. The results showed that there are predominant characteristics of the scholarship holders, such as gender, geographical distribution, areas of knowledge and location of the doctorate. Regarding the production of the researchers, it was possible to perceive that there are different characteristics between the areas of knowledge, especially as the relevance of the productivity indicators related to articles published for each area. It was also observed that the time of formation and the time of scientific experience are directly related to the classification of the researchers in the different levels of scholarship, where the productivity and impact of the scholars of the highest levels are actually greater than the scholarship holders of the lower levels.

No description available.