A Study of Paradigmatic Features in Scholastic Practice
杨永林
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1672-9382.2007.03.004
2007-01-01
Abstract:Scientific misconduct has been regarded as a problem existing both locally and globally. Over the past years, academic scandals have become such a serious problem that it is greatly jeopardizing the research integrity of scientific communities. In a situation like this, the establishment of academic regulations has become something that no serious researcher can ignore. From a philosophical perspective, it is argued that there are three fundamental questions that should be answered before any academic regulation can be introduced. These questions are: Why do we conduct academic research? What is it? How can we do it more scientifically? If we look at the issues related to academic regulations in a Chinese context, it seems that seeking a feasible answer to the question of “What” is more relevant and urgent, compared to the remaining two questions. Following this reasoning, our discussion mainly focuses on the issue of how to define academic practice. The present study covers six parts. The first part is a general introduction to the focus of the study. A case study of scientific misconduct is given in the second part. Calls for academic regulations and factors behind the misconduct are uncovered and discussed in the following two parts. The fifth part is the core part of this research in which the paradigm theory is adopted and a perspective of process-oriented development is introduced to look at the nature of academic training. Eighteen processes identified and analyzed in this part are: globalization, informationalization, netting, digitalization, philosophization, theorization, conceptualization, pioneering, problematization, perspectivization, focusing, structuralization, textualization, modularization, conventionalization, socialization, gaming, and normalization. We suggest in the concluding part that an ecological model of training be adopted so that a good balance can be maintained between technological delicacy and innovative research to reduce new misconduct in the scientific enterprise.