درخت حوزه‌های تخصصی

Given the growing importance of the use of novel technologies, especially in the field of education, and with regard to the necessity of learning the use of e-learning by community members, specifically students, the present study aimed to evaluate the role of critical thinking disposition and academic self-efficacy in the acceptance of e-learning by students. This was a descriptive survey research, and the statistical population (n=1289) included tenth-grade male students in experimental sciences and mathematics disciplines in Mashhad, Iran. In total, 288 students were selected by cluster sampling method and based on the Morgan table. Data were collected using Morgan and Jing Academic Self-Efficacy Scale (MJSES) (1999), Ricketts' Critical Thinking Disposition Questionnaire (2003), and Technology Acceptance Model by Davis and Bagozzi (1989). Notably, the instruments had confirmed validity and reliability. Data analysis was performed in SPSS version 20 using Pearson’s correlation coefficient and stepwise regression. The research question was “do critical thinking disposition and academic self-efficacy play a role in acceptance of e-learning by tenth-grade male students in experimental sciences and mathematics disciplines?” According to the results, critical thinking disposition and academic self-efficacy significantly predicted students’ acceptance of e-learning. In fact, the variable of critical thinking disposition had a share of 0.068 in the amount of acceptance of e-learning in a significant way and based on the standardized beta coefficient. Therefore, this concept can be used as a predictor of e-learning acceptance. Therefore, it is suggested that these skills be reinforced in students by families, principals, teachers and educational authorities to improve the acceptance of new educational innovations and enhance students’ academic achievement.

In a previous article, Stakeholder Theory and the Logic of Value Concepts: Challenges for Contemporary International Law, published in International Studies Journal (ISJ) in2011, the authors outlined the general premises for stakeholder theory applications and international human rights law. However, the challenges that pertain to economic/social rights were not addressed in detail. In this article, therefore, the authors provide a comparative analysis of narrow (or classical) versus broad (or modern)stakeholder theory with a specific view to determining the status of basic economic/social rights in the context of international human rights law. Narrow stakeholder theory is illustrated by Milton Friedman’s framework, whereas the main ideasand thoughts that define the broad alternative are derived from the work of R. Edward Freeman. While the authors primarily endeavor to outlinethe single most crucial premises and implications of application, they are also hoping to inspire discussion about future developments, especially since it could be argued that the stakeholder theory that has the best fit with United Nations norms and strategies may be conducive to a business as usual conclusion.