Foreword     

Jonathan D. Fife 《ASHE Higher Education Report》1984,13(7):xiii-xiv

  相似文献   

Foreword     

Jonathan D. Fife 《ASHE Higher Education Report》1984,13(3):xiii-xiv

  相似文献   

Foreword     

Jonathan D. Fife 《ASHE Higher Education Report》1988,17(4):xv-xvi

  相似文献   

Foreword     

Jonathan D. Fife 《ASHE Higher Education Report》1988,17(3):xix-xx

  相似文献   

Foreword     

Jonathan D. Fife 《ASHE Higher Education Report》1981,10(3):iii-iii

  相似文献   

Foreword     

Jonathan D. Fife 《ASHE Higher Education Report》1979,8(4):v-v

  相似文献   

Women in American science   总被引：3，自引：0，他引：3  

Harriet Zuckerman  Jonathan R. Cole 《Minerva》1975,13(1):82-102

  相似文献   

Foreword     

Jonathan D. Fife 《ASHE Higher Education Report》1977,6(7):v-v

  相似文献   

‘A Heaven of Hell, a Hell of Heaven’: His Dark Materials, Inverted Theology, and the End of Philip Pullman’s Authority     

Jonathan Padley  Kenneth Padley 《Children‘s Literature in Education》2006,37(4):325-334

This article argues that Philip Pullman’s His Dark Materials may be read as a series which attempts to assault the Christian doctrine of God. We believe that this demonstrably accords with Pullman’s personal views, and that, through his story, he seeks to foster such views in his readership. However, the accuracy of his attack falls short of its intended mark when it is examined alongside classical Christian theology. The Authority which Pullman’s narrative destroys is actually more akin to the Christian view of the devil than he is the divine, and the victories of Will and Lyra—as a new Adam and Eve—have strong resemblances to the victories which Christianity claims for Christ and Mary. Pullman’s narrative, therefore, becomes an inversion of his deicidal intention rather than an inverting and revolutionary destruction of theology.

Jonathan PadleyEmail:

  相似文献   

Factors affecting the speed of free writing     

Jonathan Ferrier  Joanna Horne  Chris Singleton 《Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs》2013,13(1):66-78

Factors affecting the free writing speed of 11‐year‐old students were investigated using the Group and Individual Assessment of Handwriting Speed. Intelligence, gender, legibility and whether the student has special educational needs or speaks English as an additional language were all found to impact on writing speed to a significant extent. In one of the two schools studied, the students wrote significantly faster than the students in the other school. This ‘teacher effect’ was found to be independent of the other significant factors examined in the study and was attributed largely to instructional differences between schools and teachers. The average writing speed was 36% lower than published norms for this test, implying that 70.2% of the students would be eligible for extra time in examinations and raising doubts regarding the validity of these norms. It was concluded that vulnerability to teacher effects and other factors makes free writing an unreliable method of measuring writing speed, especially when group administered, and calls into question its use to justify the provision of examination access arrangements or accommodations.  相似文献