Search results

The purpose of this paper is to evaluate the implementation of mobile learning in a nursing course at The Open University of Hong Kong, and identify the potentials of, and constraints on, introducing mobile technologies in the instructional design of nursing education. The paper also considers the pedagogical implications of the expansion of mobile learning in the field of nursing.

The research adopts a qualitative approach to obtain the students’ and teacher’s experiences, opinions, and expectations on mobile learning. Two focus groups with 20 student participants were conducted and an in-depth interview with the course teacher was arranged. The Framework for the Rational Analysis of Mobile Education (FRAME) model was used as the research framework to support data collection and analysis.

The aspects of device usability, interaction learning, and social technology as suggested in the FRAME model were partly fulfilled in the study. Mobile technology enhanced the portability and accessibility of learning information, and networking tools facilitated interaction among students and between students and the teacher. However, the readability of text was limited due to constraints on the user interface and screen size, and concerns over the reliability of learning content were also raised, given the abundance of unfiltered online information. The difficulty in updating the content of multimedia materials and sourcing videos of an appropriate level, together with the problem of device networking, also limited the usefulness of mobile learning. Attention should also be paid to the perceptual differences between students and the teacher on the nature and functions of mobile learning.

This empirical study provides a detailed evaluation of the delivery of mobile learning in a nursing course. The findings reveal the strengths and limitations of using mobile technologies to support the nursing education.

The paper debunks Peter P. Li’s assertion that Yin-Yang is superior to any other cognitive frames or logical systems for paradox research. The purpose of this paper is to alert the Chinese indigenous management researchers to the danger of Chinese exceptionalism and over-confidence.

To show that Peter P. Li’s assertion is doubtful, the authors identify the flaws in his analysis.

The authors find that there are three serious flaws in Peter P. Li’s analysis. First, there are four defects in the typology of cognitive frames he built in order to compare Yin-Yang with the others. Second, his understanding of dialectics in general and Hegelian dialectics in particular is flawed. And finally, without resorting to Yin-Yang, many scholars can develop theories that are equivalent to those derived from Yin-Yang.

Due to the page limit, this paper only focuses on arguing that Yin-Yang is not superior to other cognitive frames or logical systems without going one step further to explain in which situations Yin-Yang are valuable and might be more suitable than others for helping us understand some research issues.

This paper implies that we should not blindly believe that the Chinese way of thinking and acting is superior to other people’s. Chinese people should be open-minded in the globalized era, not only promoting their own culture but also appreciating and learning from other cultures.

The reduction of cultural exceptionalism and ethnocentrism can make cross-cultural communication and interaction smoother.

This paper is a rigorous critique on the “Yin-Yang being superior” assertion of Peter P. Li.

This paper investigates whether a J-curve can be detected in the time series data on China’s bilateral trade with the G-7 countries. It utilizes cointegration and causality tests to ascertain both the long-run relatedness, and the short-run dynamics, between the real exchange rate, national income, and the trade balance. There is some evidence that a real depreciation eventually improves the trade balance with some countries. But there is no indication of a negative short-run response which characterizes the J-curve.

There is a growing body of literature discussing the green logistics practices (GLPs) that companies could introduce to reduce the logistics environmental impact. Current approaches also identify several influencing factors within firms that could serve as barriers to, or enablers of, GLPs. However, less is known about the role of extra-firm stakeholders, even though these are crucial to operationalizing green logistics effectively. This study merges current theoretical understanding with empirical evidence to provide a detailed stakeholder analysis of GLPs.

Using stakeholder theory as a theoretical lens, the authors aimed at offering a mid-range contribution by conducting multiple embedded case studies examining Italian logistics service providers and shippers. GLPs and the related influencing factors were examined as sub-units of analysis within broader companies' environmental sustainability strategies.

The authors identified cascading effects among factors influencing the adoption of GLPs (e.g. key economic factors are affected by external factors which also influence organizational and collaboration factors). These effects are moderated by interdependencies between primary and secondary stakeholders, and the study highlights the prominent involvement of secondary stakeholders, such as final consumers.

This paper contributes to better understanding how and why companies adopt GLPs, emphasizing the wide set of stakeholders involved and illustrating how different stakeholders impact on GLPs adoption by affecting a set of influencing factors. By combining insights from the available literature with contemporary empirical data, the authors emphasize how Logistics Service Providers (LSPs) and shippers can no longer address the adoption of GLPs as “focal companies”, but only as part of a “focal network of interconnected stakeholders”, all of them influencing GLPs adoption.