{"title":"Title Pending 5477","authors":"","doi":"10.3998/mjcsl.5477","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3998/mjcsl.5477","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":93128,"journal":{"name":"Michigan journal of community service learning","volume":"5 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-01-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139591866","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Daniels, R., Shreve, G., & Spector, P. (2021). What Universities Owe Democracy. John Hopkins University Press.","authors":"James Roland","doi":"10.3998/mjcsl.5130","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3998/mjcsl.5130","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":93128,"journal":{"name":"Michigan journal of community service learning","volume":"2 8","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-12-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"138944852","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"List of Reviewers","authors":"Jeremy Glover","doi":"10.3998/mjcsl.4126","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3998/mjcsl.4126","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":93128,"journal":{"name":"Michigan journal of community service learning","volume":"55 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-06-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135050785","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-11-09DOI: 10.3998/mjcsloa.3239521.0027.207
{"title":"Reviewers - Volume 27.2","authors":"","doi":"10.3998/mjcsloa.3239521.0027.207","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3998/mjcsloa.3239521.0027.207","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":93128,"journal":{"name":"Michigan journal of community service learning","volume":"68 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-11-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"77142962","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-11-09DOI: 10.3998/mjcsloa.3239521.0027.201
Jennifer Tilton
A growing number of service learning classes bring students into jails and prisons, stepping across what Alexander (2010) might call the new Jim Crow color line created by mass incarceration. Many of these courses are part of the innovative Inside- Out Prison Exchange Program, which brings inside and outside students together in a shared college class. Drawing on ethnographic observations, interviews, and 8 years of experience teaching Inside- Out courses, this article explores the ways students construct racial identities and understand racial hierarchies as they work together behind bars. Race is the elephant in the room in America’s prisons, so faculty need to develop new strategies to support our students in the complex emotional and intellectual work of making sense of race. This requires understanding the diversity of our students’ racialized experiences, pushing back against the temptations of colorblindness, and developing new ways to practice relationship building and social solidarity. This article is based on my own work teaching Inside- Out classes and organizing tutoring and writing work-shops for 11 years in a juvenile facility in Southern California. In this time, I have taught nine Inside- Out classes and conducted research on this larger community service learning project from 2012 to 2018. This article draws on more focused participant observation in two Inside- Out classes in 2012 and 2013 and the analysis of the written reflections of 30 outside and 28 inside students from classes taught in 2012, 2013, and 2016. I also draw on 17 interviews conducted with outside students from those same classes, who were recruited for interviews after completing the Inside- Out class. Unfortunately, I did not have institutional review board permission to interview inside students, so their perspectives are less fully represented here (see Tilton, 2020). The racial demographics of outside student participants in this research mirror my Inside- Out classes: White outside students are the majority, about 10% of students are African American, and 30% are Latino, with occasional students who identify as Asian or biracial. 2 Inside students are overwhelmingly Latino and Black, with usually one White inside student in a class. I conducted interviews with seven White, six Latino, and four Black outside students, oversampling Black and Latino students so that I was able to explore the complexity of their experiences inside. In interviews, I asked students to reflect broadly on what they expected and learned from our shared class room as well as more focused questions about how the class made them reflect on race and class in America, how it felt to move between our predominantly White campus and the locked facility, and how they experienced their complex intersectional identities in the Inside- Out classroom. I did open coding, refining key themes and patterns in interview transcripts and response papers, and then chose representative quotes to highli
{"title":"Crossing the New Jim Crow Color Line: Confronting Race in Community Service Learning Behind Bars","authors":"Jennifer Tilton","doi":"10.3998/mjcsloa.3239521.0027.201","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3998/mjcsloa.3239521.0027.201","url":null,"abstract":"A growing number of service learning classes bring students into jails and prisons, stepping across what Alexander (2010) might call the new Jim Crow color line created by mass incarceration. Many of these courses are part of the innovative Inside- Out Prison Exchange Program, which brings inside and outside students together in a shared college class. Drawing on ethnographic observations, interviews, and 8 years of experience teaching Inside- Out courses, this article explores the ways students construct racial identities and understand racial hierarchies as they work together behind bars. Race is the elephant in the room in America’s prisons, so faculty need to develop new strategies to support our students in the complex emotional and intellectual work of making sense of race. This requires understanding the diversity of our students’ racialized experiences, pushing back against the temptations of colorblindness, and developing new ways to practice relationship building and social solidarity. This article is based on my own work teaching Inside- Out classes and organizing tutoring and writing work-shops for 11 years in a juvenile facility in Southern California. In this time, I have taught nine Inside- Out classes and conducted research on this larger community service learning project from 2012 to 2018. This article draws on more focused participant observation in two Inside- Out classes in 2012 and 2013 and the analysis of the written reflections of 30 outside and 28 inside students from classes taught in 2012, 2013, and 2016. I also draw on 17 interviews conducted with outside students from those same classes, who were recruited for interviews after completing the Inside- Out class. Unfortunately, I did not have institutional review board permission to interview inside students, so their perspectives are less fully represented here (see Tilton, 2020). The racial demographics of outside student participants in this research mirror my Inside- Out classes: White outside students are the majority, about 10% of students are African American, and 30% are Latino, with occasional students who identify as Asian or biracial. 2 Inside students are overwhelmingly Latino and Black, with usually one White inside student in a class. I conducted interviews with seven White, six Latino, and four Black outside students, oversampling Black and Latino students so that I was able to explore the complexity of their experiences inside. In interviews, I asked students to reflect broadly on what they expected and learned from our shared class room as well as more focused questions about how the class made them reflect on race and class in America, how it felt to move between our predominantly White campus and the locked facility, and how they experienced their complex intersectional identities in the Inside- Out classroom. I did open coding, refining key themes and patterns in interview transcripts and response papers, and then chose representative quotes to highli","PeriodicalId":93128,"journal":{"name":"Michigan journal of community service learning","volume":"2 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-11-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"90090523","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-11-09DOI: 10.3998/mjcsloa.3239521.0027.204
K. Lau
{"title":"Validation of S-LOMS and Comparison Between Hong Kong and Singapore of Student Developmental Outcomes After Service-Learning Experience","authors":"K. Lau","doi":"10.3998/mjcsloa.3239521.0027.204","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3998/mjcsloa.3239521.0027.204","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":93128,"journal":{"name":"Michigan journal of community service learning","volume":"59 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-11-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"78729942","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-11-09DOI: 10.3998/mjcsloa.3239521.0027.202
A. Ricke
From a university perspective, service- learning and community engagement (SLCE) has been identified as a high- impact practice that offers advantages over traditional lecture and assignments, yet students do not always embrace SLCE courses. While most studies of undergraduate students’ perceptions of SLCE focus on particular experiences or on SLCE in general, contextualizing these findings within students’ percep tions of various teaching strategies and knowledge can better assist faculty in engaging students. Drawing on cognitive anthropology, this article is one of the first to conduct a cultural domain analysis to provide insights into how undergraduates conceptualize SLCE in relation to other teaching strategies. This broader analysis of the associations undergraduates make with SLCE reveals how these can carry ramifications for quality engagement with the project and community partners. The results include how faculty can design and scaffold SLCE into their courses in the absence of a centralized agency or formal campus- wide process for regulating SLCE experiences. From a university perspective, service- learning and community engagement (SLCE) has been identified as a high- impact practice that offers certain advantages over traditional lecture and assignments, yet some students do not always recognize the benefits of SLCE. 1 Past research reveals that part of the context that influences students’ understandings of and responses to SLCE includes students’ life experiences and identities, their expe-1.
{"title":"Applying Students' Perspectives on Different Teaching Strategies: A Holistic View of Service-Learning Community Engagement","authors":"A. Ricke","doi":"10.3998/mjcsloa.3239521.0027.202","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3998/mjcsloa.3239521.0027.202","url":null,"abstract":"From a university perspective, service- learning and community engagement (SLCE) has been identified as a high- impact practice that offers advantages over traditional lecture and assignments, yet students do not always embrace SLCE courses. While most studies of undergraduate students’ perceptions of SLCE focus on particular experiences or on SLCE in general, contextualizing these findings within students’ percep tions of various teaching strategies and knowledge can better assist faculty in engaging students. Drawing on cognitive anthropology, this article is one of the first to conduct a cultural domain analysis to provide insights into how undergraduates conceptualize SLCE in relation to other teaching strategies. This broader analysis of the associations undergraduates make with SLCE reveals how these can carry ramifications for quality engagement with the project and community partners. The results include how faculty can design and scaffold SLCE into their courses in the absence of a centralized agency or formal campus- wide process for regulating SLCE experiences. From a university perspective, service- learning and community engagement (SLCE) has been identified as a high- impact practice that offers certain advantages over traditional lecture and assignments, yet some students do not always recognize the benefits of SLCE. 1 Past research reveals that part of the context that influences students’ understandings of and responses to SLCE includes students’ life experiences and identities, their expe-1.","PeriodicalId":93128,"journal":{"name":"Michigan journal of community service learning","volume":"35 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-11-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"90207884","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-11-09DOI: 10.3998/mjcsloa.3239521.0027.205
Cindy S. Vincent
This article contributes to a long- standing conversation about the implementation of service- learning by proposing an updated revision for the 21st century: critically engaged civic learning (CECL). The term service- learning is problematic as it invokes inequitable power dynamics that inherently privilege one group over another, with more privileged groups providing “service” to marginalized groups (Bortolin, 2011). CECL shifts service- learning from a student- centered pedagogy to an equity- based framework that views all constituent stakeholders as invested partners in the co- design, implementation, and evaluation of CECL initiatives and is founded on redistributed power and authority to promote civic learning and social change. CECL is structured by six guiding principles: social justice, power dynamics, community, civic learning objectives, reflexivity, and sustainability. Consequently, we argue that CECL can be seen across four overar ching outcomes— increased self- awareness, self- efficacy, and self- empowerment; increased awareness of civic agency; better understanding of community; and workforce preparation— which can be assessed through the CECL Inventory for Social Change (CECL- ISC) (Awkward et al., 2021). This article contributes to a long- standing conversation about the implementation of service- learning by proposing an updated revision for the 21st century: critically engaged civic learning (CECL). Service- learning has been embedded in universities and communities for close to a century, where it has been framed as a movement, educational phenomenon, pedagogy, theory, and field (Giles & Eyler, 1994). However, the term service- learning is problematic as it invokes inequitable power dynamics that inherently privilege one group over another, with more privileged groups providing “service” to marginalized groups (Bortolin, 2011; Mitchell, 2007). This crit-icism attacks the epicenter of service- learning, which often places emphasis on “servicing” others rather than collaborating to resolve issues that affect everyone in the community, including the educational institution. This framing reinforces structural and institutional inequalities in the community and reifies the inequitable power dynamics that persist throughout
本文通过提出21世纪的最新修订:批判性参与的公民学习(CECL)，为关于服务学习实施的长期对话做出了贡献。“服务学习”这个术语是有问题的，因为它涉及不公平的权力动态，固有地使一个群体比另一个群体享有特权，更多的特权群体为边缘化群体提供“服务”(Bortolin, 2011)。CECL将服务学习从以学生为中心的教学法转变为以公平为基础的框架，将所有利益相关者视为共同设计、实施和评估CECL倡议的投资伙伴，并建立在重新分配权力和权威的基础上，以促进公民学习和社会变革。CECL有六个指导原则:社会公正、权力动态、社区、公民学习目标、反身性和可持续性。因此，我们认为CECL可以在四个总体结果中看到-提高自我意识，自我效能和自我授权;提高对公民机构的认识;更好地理解社区;劳动力准备——可以通过CECL社会变革清单(CECL- ISC)进行评估(Awkward et al.， 2021)。本文通过提出21世纪的最新修订:批判性参与的公民学习(CECL)，为关于服务学习实施的长期对话做出了贡献。服务学习已经在大学和社区中扎根了近一个世纪，在那里它被定义为一种运动、教育现象、教育学、理论和领域(Giles & Eyler, 1994)。然而，“服务学习”这个术语是有问题的，因为它引发了不公平的权力动态，固有地使一个群体比另一个群体享有特权，更多的特权群体为边缘群体提供“服务”(Bortolin, 2011;米切尔,2007)。这种批评攻击了服务的中心——学习，它往往强调“服务”他人，而不是合作解决影响社区中每个人的问题，包括教育机构。这种框架强化了社区中的结构性和制度性不平等，并使始终存在的不公平权力动态具体化
{"title":"Critically Engaged Civic Learning: A Comprehensive Restructuring of Service-Learning Approaches","authors":"Cindy S. Vincent","doi":"10.3998/mjcsloa.3239521.0027.205","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3998/mjcsloa.3239521.0027.205","url":null,"abstract":"This article contributes to a long- standing conversation about the implementation of service- learning by proposing an updated revision for the 21st century: critically engaged civic learning (CECL). The term service- learning is problematic as it invokes inequitable power dynamics that inherently privilege one group over another, with more privileged groups providing “service” to marginalized groups (Bortolin, 2011). CECL shifts service- learning from a student- centered pedagogy to an equity- based framework that views all constituent stakeholders as invested partners in the co- design, implementation, and evaluation of CECL initiatives and is founded on redistributed power and authority to promote civic learning and social change. CECL is structured by six guiding principles: social justice, power dynamics, community, civic learning objectives, reflexivity, and sustainability. Consequently, we argue that CECL can be seen across four overar ching outcomes— increased self- awareness, self- efficacy, and self- empowerment; increased awareness of civic agency; better understanding of community; and workforce preparation— which can be assessed through the CECL Inventory for Social Change (CECL- ISC) (Awkward et al., 2021). This article contributes to a long- standing conversation about the implementation of service- learning by proposing an updated revision for the 21st century: critically engaged civic learning (CECL). Service- learning has been embedded in universities and communities for close to a century, where it has been framed as a movement, educational phenomenon, pedagogy, theory, and field (Giles & Eyler, 1994). However, the term service- learning is problematic as it invokes inequitable power dynamics that inherently privilege one group over another, with more privileged groups providing “service” to marginalized groups (Bortolin, 2011; Mitchell, 2007). This crit-icism attacks the epicenter of service- learning, which often places emphasis on “servicing” others rather than collaborating to resolve issues that affect everyone in the community, including the educational institution. This framing reinforces structural and institutional inequalities in the community and reifies the inequitable power dynamics that persist throughout","PeriodicalId":93128,"journal":{"name":"Michigan journal of community service learning","volume":"16 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-11-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"82318203","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-11-09DOI: 10.3998/mjcsloa.3239521.0027.206
Glenn A. Bowen
{"title":"Book Review Essay: College Univesity Leaders Promoting Recommitment to the Civic Purpose of Higher Education","authors":"Glenn A. Bowen","doi":"10.3998/mjcsloa.3239521.0027.206","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3998/mjcsloa.3239521.0027.206","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":93128,"journal":{"name":"Michigan journal of community service learning","volume":"10 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-11-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"87915812","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-08-18DOI: 10.3998/mjcsloa.3239521.0027.101
Tania D. Mitchell
Our partnership with MJCSL to produce this special issue was based on the premise that exploring the roles and promise of higher education in working toward social justice was a critical imperative. The past year has made the urgency of this issue even more clear. When we began the work to plan this issue— sending out the call for proposals, thinking through the timeline to publication— we had not yet heard of the novel coronavirus. As we were all trying to navigate the COVID- 19 global pandemic, the disproportionate impacts of the pandemic cre-ated a stark picture of economic stratification, the disparities in health care access, and the racial realities of both. As institutions, engagement centers, and instructors were thinking about how community engagement work might need to change to be responsive to the COVID- 19 pandemic, the inequities laid bare made clear the need to center social justice in this work. Then, the multiple killings of unarmed Black Americans— Breonna Taylor, Ahmaud Arbery, Elijah McClain, Rayshard Brooks, Tony McDade, George Floyd, to name only a few— due to the actions of law enforcement, inspired a series of social protests but also commitments from higher education leaders to move their institutions toward racial equity, another signal that community engagement should center social justice. The deaths, in the United States, of over 600,000 from COVID- 19 (Allen et al., 2021); the loss of more than a dozen Black transwomen in 2021 (Yurcaba, 2021); the increase in the food insecurity of more than 40 million people (Feeding America, 2021); an insurrection attempt on the U.S. Capitol led by individuals with ties to anti- Semitic and white nationalist movements; efforts in 43 states to reduce access to voting in ways that would disproportionately affect Black, Indigenous, and People of Color (BIPOC) communities; increased inci dents of violence targeting Asian and Asian American communities, including the murders, in March of 2021, of six women of Asian descent in a mass shooting at three spas in Atlanta that took eight lives in total— we are living in a moment that requires attention to and action
{"title":"Centering Social Justice in the Scholarship of Community Engagement","authors":"Tania D. Mitchell","doi":"10.3998/mjcsloa.3239521.0027.101","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3998/mjcsloa.3239521.0027.101","url":null,"abstract":"Our partnership with MJCSL to produce this special issue was based on the premise that exploring the roles and promise of higher education in working toward social justice was a critical imperative. The past year has made the urgency of this issue even more clear. When we began the work to plan this issue— sending out the call for proposals, thinking through the timeline to publication— we had not yet heard of the novel coronavirus. As we were all trying to navigate the COVID- 19 global pandemic, the disproportionate impacts of the pandemic cre-ated a stark picture of economic stratification, the disparities in health care access, and the racial realities of both. As institutions, engagement centers, and instructors were thinking about how community engagement work might need to change to be responsive to the COVID- 19 pandemic, the inequities laid bare made clear the need to center social justice in this work. Then, the multiple killings of unarmed Black Americans— Breonna Taylor, Ahmaud Arbery, Elijah McClain, Rayshard Brooks, Tony McDade, George Floyd, to name only a few— due to the actions of law enforcement, inspired a series of social protests but also commitments from higher education leaders to move their institutions toward racial equity, another signal that community engagement should center social justice. The deaths, in the United States, of over 600,000 from COVID- 19 (Allen et al., 2021); the loss of more than a dozen Black transwomen in 2021 (Yurcaba, 2021); the increase in the food insecurity of more than 40 million people (Feeding America, 2021); an insurrection attempt on the U.S. Capitol led by individuals with ties to anti- Semitic and white nationalist movements; efforts in 43 states to reduce access to voting in ways that would disproportionately affect Black, Indigenous, and People of Color (BIPOC) communities; increased inci dents of violence targeting Asian and Asian American communities, including the murders, in March of 2021, of six women of Asian descent in a mass shooting at three spas in Atlanta that took eight lives in total— we are living in a moment that requires attention to and action","PeriodicalId":93128,"journal":{"name":"Michigan journal of community service learning","volume":"13 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-08-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"75708350","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：