关于创新教育课堂教学交互网络结构的实践研究

实施创新教育 ,课程内容改革是核心。同时又不可忽视的是 :课堂教学作为实现教学目标的手段 ,成为由理论目标达及实际目标的中介 ,也是关键环节。创新教育的课堂实施可分为两大系统、六大因子 :创新教育的目标系统主要包括创新意识、创新思维和创新能力因子 ;创新教育培养的手段系统主要包括教学内容、教学方法、教学评价因子。在创新教育的课堂实施的两大系统中 ,六大因子是相互关联的。建构一个各因子的交互网络结构模型 ,为教师的教学实践提供更清晰和明确的原则性方案 。

Spatial Interaction and Network Structure Evolvement of Cities in Terms of China's Rail Passenger Flows

Cities separated in space are connected together by spatial interaction (SI) between them. But the studies focusing on the SI are relatively few in China mainly because of the scarcity of data. This paper deals with the SI in terms of rail passenger flows, which is an important aspect of the network structure of urban agglomeration. By using a data set consisting of rail O-D (origin-destination) passenger flows among nearly 200 cities, intercity rail distance O-D matrixes, and some other indices, it is found that the attenuating tendency of rail passenger is obvious. And by the analysis on dominant flows and spatial structure of flows, we find that passenger flows have a trend of polarizing to hubs while the linkages between hubs upgrade. However, the gravity model reveals an overall picture of convergence process over time which is not in our expectation of integration process in the framework of globalization and economic integration. Some driven factors for the re-organization process of the structure of urban agglomeration, such as technique advance, globalization, etc. are discussed further based on the results we obtained.

Do networks of social interactions reflect patterns of kinship？

The underlying kin structure of groups of animals may be glimpsed from patterns of spatial position or temporal as- sociation between individuals, and is presumed to facilitate inclusive fitness benefits. Such structure may be evident at a finer, behavioural, scale with individuals preferentially interacting with kin. We tested whether kin structure within groups of meerkats Suricata suricatta matched three forms of social interaction networks： grooming, dominance or foraging competitions. Networks of dominance interactions were positively related to networks of kinship, with close relatives engaging in dominance interactions with each other. This relationship persisted even after excluding the breeding dominant pair and when we restricted the kinship network to only include links between first order kin, which are most likely to be able to discern kin through simple rules of thumb. Conversely, we found no relationship between kinship networks and either grooming networks or networks of foraging competitions. This is surprising because a positive association between kin in a grooming network, or a negative association be- tween kin in a network of foraging competitions offers opportunities for inclusive fitness benefits. Indeed, the positive association between kin in a network of dominance interactions that we did detect does not offer clear inclusive fitness benefits to group members. We conclude that kin structure in behavioural interactions in meerkats may be driven by factors other than indirect fit- ness benefits, and that networks of cooperative behaviours such as grooming may be driven by direct benefits accruing to indi- viduals perhaps through mutualism or manipulation