{"title":"Roles, Constraints, and Prospects of Scientific Knowledge Transfer at Science Shared Campus of Kotebe University of Education","authors":"","doi":"10.61489/30053447.1.79","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Theoretical and conceptual frameworks for the current research are adapted from: the \"problem solving model\" and the SECI model. We employed different tools for data collection, such as questionnaires, observation, interviews, and document reviews. Based on the procedures of the lottery method, 114 students and their respective parents out of the total 350 students could participate and were involved in. The main output of this study is obtained by using descriptive tools for quantitative data. As a result, about 56.7% of student respondents, 61.9% of parent respondents, and 50%of teachers saw that external knowledge transfer was carried out in the field of natural science through academicians, researchers, and laboratory experts with unreserved effort owing to paid for their effort. On the other hand, qualitative data were analyzed by verbatim translation and interpretation to be validated by the principals, top scorer students, cluster coordinates, and key informants. The constraints on scientific knowledge transfer are internal factors in the instructors’ views like communication problems, language problems, interpretation problems, and technologies and techniques that are used in the transfer of knowledge. Besides, externalized system and management perspectives of scientific knowledge transfer from the instructors, like language and system teachers, to students were observed. The result of this study dealt with validated and reliable dates that were strongly aggregated and triangulated within the keynote person's mission. As a result, concerns about time, scope, language, complexity, and strategy were barriers.","PeriodicalId":497759,"journal":{"name":"Kotebe Journal of Education","volume":"21 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Kotebe Journal of Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.61489/30053447.1.79","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Theoretical and conceptual frameworks for the current research are adapted from: the "problem solving model" and the SECI model. We employed different tools for data collection, such as questionnaires, observation, interviews, and document reviews. Based on the procedures of the lottery method, 114 students and their respective parents out of the total 350 students could participate and were involved in. The main output of this study is obtained by using descriptive tools for quantitative data. As a result, about 56.7% of student respondents, 61.9% of parent respondents, and 50%of teachers saw that external knowledge transfer was carried out in the field of natural science through academicians, researchers, and laboratory experts with unreserved effort owing to paid for their effort. On the other hand, qualitative data were analyzed by verbatim translation and interpretation to be validated by the principals, top scorer students, cluster coordinates, and key informants. The constraints on scientific knowledge transfer are internal factors in the instructors’ views like communication problems, language problems, interpretation problems, and technologies and techniques that are used in the transfer of knowledge. Besides, externalized system and management perspectives of scientific knowledge transfer from the instructors, like language and system teachers, to students were observed. The result of this study dealt with validated and reliable dates that were strongly aggregated and triangulated within the keynote person's mission. As a result, concerns about time, scope, language, complexity, and strategy were barriers.