西北医学教育
西北醫學教育
서북의학교육
NORTHWEST MEDICAL EDUCATION
2015年
4期
574-578
,共5页
刘步平%梁沛华%龙泳伶%曹敏%方春平
劉步平%樑沛華%龍泳伶%曹敏%方春平
류보평%량패화%룡영령%조민%방춘평
资源%共享%机制%教育%教学%特征%CNKI%高被引%文献计量学
資源%共享%機製%教育%教學%特徵%CNKI%高被引%文獻計量學
자원%공향%궤제%교육%교학%특정%CNKI%고피인%문헌계량학
resources%sharing%mechanism%educational%teaching%characteristic%CNKI%highly cited papers%bibliometrics
目的：分析我国教育资源共享机制高被引文献的计量特征。方法检索中国学术期刊全文数据库（CNKI）中1979年－2014年的教育资源共享机制文献，参照普赖斯定律确定高被引文献，用 Excel 2010统计分析被引、年份、期刊、作者、单位、关键词、基金。结果检出教育资源共享机制高被引文献371篇，分别被引10次－157次，累计被引7，605次，篇均被引20．50次；文献数自2000年增加，至2008年达峰值55篇后缓慢下降；载录在115种期刊，《中国电化教育》、《中国电化教育》和《中国远程教育》依次居文献数、总被引频次、篇均被引频次首位；文献作者593人、署名613次，每篇1－8位，总合作率36．39％，最多署名3次；作者机构209个，其中院校占87．56％，22个核心发文机构全部为院校，华东师范大学居署名文献数、折合文献数首位；关键词1，115个、1，605次，“资源共享”、“共享”、“精品课程”、“高校”、“共享机制”使用频次居前5位；110篇文献获基金146项次，其中省部级以上基金占84．25％。结论教育资源共享机制仍是值得关注的热点领域，其高被引文献呈现以《中国电化教育》为权威期刊、以院校为核心发文机构、以优质课程为主要研究对象、以省部级以上项目为主要资助基金的特征，但尚未形成权威作者、核心团队和代表机构及关键词使用不够规范、资助资金偏少、每年新增文献数呈上升趋势。
目的：分析我國教育資源共享機製高被引文獻的計量特徵。方法檢索中國學術期刊全文數據庫（CNKI）中1979年－2014年的教育資源共享機製文獻，參照普賴斯定律確定高被引文獻，用 Excel 2010統計分析被引、年份、期刊、作者、單位、關鍵詞、基金。結果檢齣教育資源共享機製高被引文獻371篇，分彆被引10次－157次，纍計被引7，605次，篇均被引20．50次；文獻數自2000年增加，至2008年達峰值55篇後緩慢下降；載錄在115種期刊，《中國電化教育》、《中國電化教育》和《中國遠程教育》依次居文獻數、總被引頻次、篇均被引頻次首位；文獻作者593人、署名613次，每篇1－8位，總閤作率36．39％，最多署名3次；作者機構209箇，其中院校佔87．56％，22箇覈心髮文機構全部為院校，華東師範大學居署名文獻數、摺閤文獻數首位；關鍵詞1，115箇、1，605次，“資源共享”、“共享”、“精品課程”、“高校”、“共享機製”使用頻次居前5位；110篇文獻穫基金146項次，其中省部級以上基金佔84．25％。結論教育資源共享機製仍是值得關註的熱點領域，其高被引文獻呈現以《中國電化教育》為權威期刊、以院校為覈心髮文機構、以優質課程為主要研究對象、以省部級以上項目為主要資助基金的特徵，但尚未形成權威作者、覈心糰隊和代錶機構及關鍵詞使用不夠規範、資助資金偏少、每年新增文獻數呈上升趨勢。
목적：분석아국교육자원공향궤제고피인문헌적계량특정。방법검색중국학술기간전문수거고（CNKI）중1979년－2014년적교육자원공향궤제문헌，삼조보뢰사정률학정고피인문헌，용 Excel 2010통계분석피인、년빈、기간、작자、단위、관건사、기금。결과검출교육자원공향궤제고피인문헌371편，분별피인10차－157차，루계피인7，605차，편균피인20．50차；문헌수자2000년증가，지2008년체봉치55편후완만하강；재록재115충기간，《중국전화교육》、《중국전화교육》화《중국원정교육》의차거문헌수、총피인빈차、편균피인빈차수위；문헌작자593인、서명613차，매편1－8위，총합작솔36．39％，최다서명3차；작자궤구209개，기중원교점87．56％，22개핵심발문궤구전부위원교，화동사범대학거서명문헌수、절합문헌수수위；관건사1，115개、1，605차，“자원공향”、“공향”、“정품과정”、“고교”、“공향궤제”사용빈차거전5위；110편문헌획기금146항차，기중성부급이상기금점84．25％。결론교육자원공향궤제잉시치득관주적열점영역，기고피인문헌정현이《중국전화교육》위권위기간、이원교위핵심발문궤구、이우질과정위주요연구대상、이성부급이상항목위주요자조기금적특정，단상미형성권위작자、핵심단대화대표궤구급관건사사용불구규범、자조자금편소、매년신증문헌수정상승추세。
Objective Analyzing the bibliometric characteristics of highly‐cited papers on educational re‐sources sharing mechanism in China .Methods We searched the database of China National Knowledge Infrastructure(CNKI)for published studies on educational resources sharing mechanism from 1979 to 2014 and identified highly cited papers according to the Price law .Using Excel 2010 ,we analyzed the frequency and years of being cited , the cited journals , authors and institutions , keywords , and grants .Results Totally ,371 papers on educational resources sharing mechanism were identified as highly‐cited ones ,which were cited for a total of 7 605 times ,ranging from 10 to 157(mean 20 .50) times each .The number of the published studies increased year by year from 2000 ,reaching the peak (55 papers)in 2008 and followed by a gradual drop .The papers retrieved were published in 115 jour‐nals ,among which ,China Educational Technology(CET) ,China Educational Technology(CET)and Distance Education in China (DEC)respectively reached the top in the total number of papers pub‐lished ,the total frequency of being cited ,and the mean frequency of being cited each paper .These pa‐pers were written by 593 authors ,signed 613 person‐times ,with a total coauthoring rate of 36 .39% . The authors were from 209 institutions ,including 183 academies and universities(87 .56% ) ,and a‐cademies and universities accounted for 100 .00% of the 22 key institutions ,with East China Normal University at the top of the list .A total of 1 115 keywords were identified ,used 1 605 times ,with“resource sharing” ,“sharing” ,“excellent course”,“colleges and universities” ,and “Sharing mecha‐nism” as the first 5 in the frequency of use .110 of the papers were supported by 146 grants ,84 .25%from the foundations at and above the ministerial and provincial levels .Conclusion The highly cited papers on educational resources sharing mechanism in CNKI are characterized by CET as authoritative journals ,academies and universities as the key affiliations of the authors ,excellent course as the main subject ,foundations at and above the ministerial and provincial levels as the chief source of grants ,. However ,the authoritative authors ,core team and representatives of agencies ,the use of key words lacks adequate standardization and the number of granted studies needs to be increased .
