发布时间：
找了两篇文章.供你参考. in EducationMore than ever, opportunities should be afforded to families that wish to bring their children up with a moral education in accordance with their beliefs. A system of choice allows parents to choose schools that inject moral or religious themes into their children’s education. Further Reading:“Faith Part of the Problem or Part of the Solution?” by Marvin Olasky “Can Public Schools Teach Character?” by Dr. Perry Glanzer “Leading Children Beyond Good & Evil” by Dr. James Davison Hunter An Education for a Good Life by Clark Durant FEATURED ARTICLE:“The Myth of a Value-Free Education”by Dr. Ronald NashAmericans love myths. By "myth," I do not mean the old-fashioned myths that my generation read in grade school. Many Americans would find reading at that fifth-grade level too difficult these days. What I mean by "myth" is what older generations used to call a fiction. One of the more influential myths presently affecting the American family is the myth of a value-free education. A value-free education is described as one in which students are supposed to be free from any coerced exposure to the values of anyone. One way the defenders of value-free education frame their argument is this: they argue that because America ceased to be a homogeneous society a long time ago, the watchword today must be pluralism. In the new setting of today, they insist, we can no longer stress the values and beliefs of some, while ignoring the values of all. And so, they say, we’ll avoid all the problems inherent in this situation by simply agreeing to ignore all values. This specious argument deceives Americans into thinking this is the only way to achieve fairness in our schools. College students today are surrounded by an allegedly academic setting in which the things they find most obvious are confusion, conflicting claims and the absence of any fixed points of reference. America’s colleges have become centers of intellectual disorder. As David Gress explains, "Instead of being havens of independent thought, universities have become channels of indoctrination…confirming the prejudices of those who control the agenda of public discourse." Ralph Bennett is surely right when he warns that "behind its ivy-colored camouflage, American higher education is a fraud—untrue to its students, untrue to itself." The inadequacies of contemporary education are not exclusively matters of the mind. Traditional religious and moral values are under assault at every level of public and higher education. Our educational system is engaged in a systematic undermining of these values. Our educational crisis is to some extent a closing of the American mind, as Allan Bloom examined in his best selling book of that title. But it is also something more profound, a closing of the American heart. No real progress towards improving American education can occur until all of us realize that an education that ignores moral and religious beliefs cannot qualify as a quality education. Recently, no less a person than Mikhail Gorbachev admitted that the major reason his nation is in such trouble is because his people are ignorant of moral and spiritual values. The development of the intellect and of moral character are intimately related. Just as there is an order in nature (the laws of science), in reason (the laws of logic), and in the realm of numbers, so too is there a moral order. One thing we need to do is recover the belief that there is a transcendent, unchanging moral order, and restore it once more to a central place in the educational process. Throughout history, important thinkers have contended that there is a higher order of permanent things (like moral norms), that human happiness is dependent on living our lives in accordance with this transcendent order, and that peace and order within human society require respect for this order. The most important task of education is to continually remind students of the existence and importance of this transcendent order as well as of its content. If teachers are doing their job properly, they serve as an essential link in the chain of civilization. Without this link, the chain cannot hold. Teachers are the conservers of culture; they are also its transmitters. At least, that’s the role that teachers used to play. Modern education in America has largely separated virtue and knowledge. The Sophists of our age have severed the link between reason and virtue, between the mind and the heart; there is objective truth out there, which it is our duty to pursue and discover. But there is also an objective moral order out there, as well as in here. An adequate education dare not ignore either the mind or the heart. Just as we dare not divorce education from matters of the heart, so too we must not separate education from religion. Like any important human activity, education has an inescapable religious component. Religious faith is not just one isolated compartment of a person’s life—a compartment that we can take or leave as we wish. Religious faith is rather a dimension of life that colors, affects and influences everything we do and believe. Human beings are incurably religious, as John Calvin once said. Paul Tillich was right when he defined religion as a matter of "ultimate concern." Every person has something that concerns him ultimately and whatever that may be, the ultimate concern will have an enormous influence on everything else the person does or believes. Since every human being has something about which he is ultimately concerned, it follows that every human being has a God. No human being can possibly be neutral when it comes to religion. When an individual encounters people who claim that education should be free of any religious content, he should recognize that this is not a religiously neutral claim. Rather it is an assertion that reflects the religious commitments of the person making it. There is a sense in which education is an activity that is religious at its roots. Any effort to remove religion from education is merely the substitution of one set of ultimate religious commitments for another. It is absurd then to think that a choice between the sacred and secular in education is possible. Whatever the state and the courts do regarding education will only establish one person’s set of ultimate (religious) concerns at the expense of someone else’s. Nothing will remedy the problems of American education more quickly and more effectively than the introduction of greater freedom and choice in education. We should seek a permanent end to the situation that allows the state to determine where children must attend school, if that child is to receive a free public education. American families should have complete freedom to send their children to any school they wish, without the added financial burden of paying private school tuition. One way to realize this objective is through educational vouchers. Following the institution of a voucher system, public monies for education would not pass directly to schools. Rather, that money would be given first to the families of school-age children in the form of vouchers. Parents would then use those vouchers to pay for their children’s education at a school of their own choosing. Perhaps the major reason why public schools are so bad is because they have no competition; they are immune to market-discipline. Consequently, public schools have no incentive to offer a better product at a lower cost. A pro-choice movement in education would give public schools serious competition for the first time in more than a century. (Notice the implication here: many Americans are unaware of the fact that for generations, America’s public schools did not enjoy a monopoly with regard to public financial support.) It is not enough that we simply increase choice among public schools. The governmental monopoly over publicly funded education is a large part of our problem. It is imperative that educational choice be expanded to include the option of attending without financial penalty, without the burden of double taxation, any school that any family wishes, including church-operated private schools. The best and quickest way to improve the quality of education is to allow families to choose their school and let the competition of the market determine which schools prosper and which schools die. In the process, families will be able to select schools, not only on the basis of academic quality, but also with a view to the moral and spiritual values fostered by the school. Dr. Ronald Nash is Professor of Theology and Philosophy at Reformed Theological Seminary Exchange Quarterly Spring 2004 Volume 8, Issue 1Moral Values for Public EducationDaniel C. Elliott, . Azusa Pacific UniversityABSTRACTThe continuing degeneration of personal virtue among the world's societies seems to be emerging as the single-most urgent issue of our time. Until recent years, public schools had long since deferred from their original roles in morality and character education, though many outside of the school systems continued political pressure to move schools either toward or away from a values-oriented curriculum. This author analyses this history and poses questions and ideas about the appropriate teaching of the difference between right and wrong in American continuing degeneration of personal virtue among the world's societies seems to be emerging as the single-most urgent issue of our time. The 1970’s brought a revisitation of ‘values” but under a personalistic approach called “Values Clarification.” Values were to be presented in a neutral way to students who were to clarify and select their choices. There were no incorrect choices, except those for which the individual failed to formulate a supporting rationale. The 1980’s and 90’s saw a rapidly intensifying pluralistic view of American society. When the question of values came up, people asked, “Whose values should we teach?” Many in North American society believe in a core set of virtues found most commonly in a Christian worldview or a Judeo-Christian philosophy, even many who would not characterize themselves as particularly “religious.” Yet the personalistic approach to identification of “virtue“ failed to bring about a more moral society but has, instead, resulted in moral decline. Public schools had long since deferred from their original roles in morality and character education and even many churches or religious organizations were not picking up the slack (Meade, 1990A Major Study on the Morals and Ethics of ChildrenIn March 1990, Robert Coles, a child psychiatrist and Harvard professor, one who called himself “a member of the liberal intellectual left”, was quoted as wistfully recalling “the good old days when religion was taught in the schools” (Meade, 1990). Coles sensed a void--something missing from American homes and schools-- missing for years. Coles directed a major research project. The missing element was, they concluded, a strong, unarguable notion of right and wrong, good and ’ findings revealed a nation of children who have a complicated belief system that usually runs counter to traditional values. “There was an unmistakable erosion of children’s faith in, and support for, traditional sources of authority.” More than parents, teachers or authoritative officials, children turned to peers for guidance on matters of right and wrong. Coles described conversations with many kids whose consciences he said were “not all that muscular.” (Meade, 1990)The New Character EducationA new ground swell is observed forming in the 1990’s seeking to restore ethics, morality, and virtue to a central focus in public schooling. More than 30 educational leaders from state school boards, teachers' unions, universities, ethics centers, youth organizations, and religious groups met in 1992 at the Josephson Institute of Ethics. They formulated eight principles for character education— The Aspen Declaration on Character Education. (Lickona, 1993). In March of 1993, a national coalition for character development formed with representatives from business, government, and education, as well as churches. They began to formulate an agenda for reinstituting morality in public school curriculum and instruction. (Haynes 1994)Four Reasons for Character EducationYoung people increasingly hurt themselves and others because they lack awareness of moral values. Effective character education improves student behavior, makes schools more civil communities, and leads to improved academic performance. Many students come to school with little moral teaching from their parents, communities or religious institutions. We know today that the inclusion of character development emphases within the curriculum of our schools will do the . Add Meaning to Education Moral questions are among the great questions facing the individual person and the human race. There is no such thing as a value-free education. Schools teach values every day by design or default. 2. Sustain and Strengthen our Culture Transmitting moral values to the next generation has always been one of the more important functions of a civilization. Democracies have a special need for moral education, because democracy is government of and by the people . Model Civility There is broad based and growing support for character education in the schools. Common ground exists on core moral values although there may be significant disagreement on the applicationof some of these values to certain controversial issues (Nyland and MacDonald, 1997). The Boyer Institute has been actively promoting research that reveals North American core values (or “common virtu,” also referred to as “common decency.” Honesty, responsibility, self-discipline, giving, compassion, perseverance, and loving are virtue terms most often cited. However, in application, “honesty” can be applied differently according to other elements of the actor’s worldview or philosophy. Compassion and/or responsibility might look different among the sub-groups citing these . Build True CharacterThus, a person of true character, according to experts, is trustworthy, treats all people with respect, acts responsibly, maintains self-control, is fair and just, is caring, pursues excellence, and is an all around desirable State Education Code Basis for Teaching Fundamental Moral ValuesThough often humorously critiqued as a state that is less than ‘virtuous’ in its social ethic, nevertheless, California, as a state, has raised the bar for public schools and virtue-based curriculum for several decades. Ever since the 1970s the California legislature has aggressively addressed the question of values and virtue in the curriculum, though this often went unnoticed or unheralded by the media or even the schools themselves. Currently, California Ed. Code 44806 tells us that it is the duty of teachers to “impress upon the minds of pupils the principles of morality, truth, justice, patriotism, and a true comprehension of rights, duties, and dignity of American citizenship...” The code further directs us to teach students to . . .avoid idleness, profanity, and falsehood, and to instruct them in the manners and morals and the principles of a free government. Each teacher shall endeavor to impress upon the minds of the pupils the principles of morality, truth, justice, patriotism, a true comprehension of the rights, duties and dignity of American citizenship, including: kindness toward domestic pets and the humane treatment of living Moral and Civic Education and Teaching About Religion, the Board directs school personnel to teach students about: morality, including respect for differences and the significance of religion; truth; open discussion; justice; patriotism; self-esteem; integrity; empathy, including the “golden rule” (The Christian Bible, Matthew 7:12); exemplary conduct; moral interaction and ethical reflection; and the capacity to recognize values, including respect for the family, property, reliability, and for law. MoralityThe California Board of Education says, “School personnel must foster in students an understanding of the moral values that form the foundation of American society.” California teachers must teach students that citizens in a free society respect the worth and dignity of others, as well as their freedom of conscience. Religion is to be presented and viewed as primary source for the presence of basic moral principals. While no individual religious system may be prescribed, school faculty must help students recognize the sources of morality in history, law, and experience and must help students appreciate the significant contributions of religion, including the sacredness of human life and belief in freedom of worship. Morality is defined as “responsibility for personal decisions and conduct and the obligation to demonstrate concern about the well-being of others, along with showing respect for living creatures and the physical environment.” TruthCalifornia teachers are required to help students understand truth and the necessity for truth in a free and democratic society. Telling and expecting to be told the truth is an essential element among free and democratic peoples. Imagine a word study on the concept of truth, drawn from the Bible and other texts, obtaining definitions of truth JusticeJustice is defined as “fairness in dealing with others, and is considered a hallmark of American society.” The California Board of Education said that “one owes to oneself and to others the obligation to engage in a constant effort to see that justice is attained.” PatriotismJesus, quoted in Matthew 22:21, (The Christian Bible) instructs people to give to the government that which it was due (give to Caesar that which is Caesar's...) and to reflect similar obedience in relationship to God. Loyalty to one’s government is taught throughout Judeo Christian thought and scriptures, being only excepted by loyalty to God. In the case of our nation, we pledge to it as “one nation under God”. Such a concept bears full discussion in our classrooms, though such discussions must be sensitive and appropriate for the age and maturation levels of the students involved. Self-esteemThe California Board of Education says that “Self-esteem and esteem for others are based on the intrinsic worth and dignity of individuals, not on academic ability or physical prowess. Jesus said that we must love others as we love ourselves (Matthew 19:19 ff), that normal human beings do esteem themselves, love themselves, provide for their own basic needs by nature. It is with God’s permission that we do so. This discussion is authorized in California classrooms. IntegrityThe California Board of Education tells us “School personnel should encourage students to live and speak with integrity; that is, to be trustworthy. To foster integrity is to help build character, to assist students to be honest with themselves, to promote a wholeness unimpaired by self-deceit, and to encourage the development of reliability in relations with others.” In view of recent questions about the integrity among business and government leaders, may would suggest that there is a curriculum related rationale for teachers
通过整理,在写英语论文过程中,主要注意的有以下几点: 第一.对于初写英语论文的人来讲.最好不要对原中文论文进行直译. 在谈到这个观点时,唐教授一再强调初写英语论文一定要"抄",也就是说搜集一些类似的国外高级刊物的英语论文,在这些论文中找到要表达相似意思的英文句子,使用它的句型.这样写出来的论文更适合外国人的思维方式.也能让外国人更容易理解.同时也更容易被SCI,EI检索. 他还说,按这种方式写过5篇论文左右,一些地道的英语表达方式就可以熟练的记住了. 第二.在写英语论文之前,首先要确定你要投什么样的期刊.其实投中文期刊论文也是这样的.举个很简单的例子,前几天,我有一个同学,写了一篇用数学问题解决纺织工程问题的论文.导师指导他说:"如果你想投到<>,在写论文时,在内容上就应该对一些数学知识作详细的说明,而纺织知识可以作粗略的介绍,但如果你想投到<>期刊,那就应该对纺织的一些基础知识作详细的说明!".因此,投不同类型的期刊有不同的写作手法.这样可以提高论文的录用率. 第三.要想写出被SCI/EI检索的文章一定要多花功夫在标题和摘要上.这也许是大家都知道的.外国人更注重创新,只要你觉得自己的观点有创新点,就不要怕不会被外文收录.还有一句话我还记忆忧新:"做很少人做的研究领域,做难的研究领域".这样的文章很容易被录用. 第四.中国有句古话:"熟读唐诗三百首 不会作诗也会吟."在写英语论文之前,做大量的阅读是必要的.但最好应该去读那些英语是母语国家学者写的论文.但是,必须注意的是.无论是硕士还是博士,永远应该把专业放在第一位,英语是放在第二位.英语只是一种工具.只是一种帮助你科研的工具. 第五.写英语论文时,不要使用外国人没有使用过的句型.即使这样的句子在语法上没有问题.但是外国人就是看不懂.也就相当于是一个病句.也许这种"病句"对你考CET有用,其实学英语口语也是这样的.在练英语口语时,希望朋友们记住:"讲外国人从来没说过的英语,即使语法没有问题,也是错的."我国著名语言学家说过:"想学好一门外语,首先要学好其文化!"
一篇较长的英语论文(如英语毕业论文)一般都需要标题页,其书写格式如下:第一行标题与打印纸顶端的距离约为打印纸全长的三分之一,与下行(通常为by,居中)的距离则为5cm,第三、第四行分别为作者姓名及日期(均居中)。
如果该篇英语论文是学生针对某门课程而写,则在作者姓名与日期之间还需分别打上教师学衔及其姓名(如:Dr./)及本门课程的编号或名称(如:English 734或British Novel)。打印时,如无特殊要求,每一行均需double space,即隔行打印,行距约为(论文其他部分行距同此)。
二、提纲
英语论文提纲页包括论题句及提纲本身,其规范格式如下:先在第一行(与打印纸顶端的距离仍为左右)的始端打上 Thesis 一词及冒号,空一格后再打论题句,回行时左边须与论题句的第一个字母上下对齐。
主要纲目以大写罗马数字标出,次要纲目则依次用大写英文字母、阿拉伯数字和小写英文字母标出。各数字或字母后均为一句点,空出一格后再打该项内容的第一个字母；处于同一等级的纲目,其上下行左边必须对齐。
需要注意的是,同等重要的纲目必须是两个以上,即:有Ⅰ应有Ⅱ,有A应有B,以此类推。如果英文论文提纲较长,需两页纸,则第二页须在右上角用小写罗马数字标出页码,即ii(第一页无需标页码)。
三、摘要
1、英文摘要是应用符合英文语法的文字语言，提供论文内容梗概为目的的短文。（内容基本与中文摘要相同，但不用完全逐句对应）。
2、英文题目、摘要、关键词自成一页（1页即可），放在中文摘要页之后。
3、英文字体与行间距： 统一使用“西文字体”中的“Times New Roman”，倍行间距。
4、英文题目： 使用三号字加粗。
5、英文摘要： “Absract”顶格，使用四号字，并加粗。
英文摘要具体内容使用四号字。
6、英文关键词： “Key Words”顶格，使用四号字并加粗。
四、正文
有标题页和提纲页的英语论文,其正文第一页的规范格式为:论文标题居中,其位置距打印纸顶端约5cm,距正文第一行约。段首字母须缩进五格,即从第六格打起。
正文第一页不必标页码(但应计算其页数),自第二页起,必须在每页的右上角(即空出第一行,在其后部)打上论文作者的姓,空一格后再用阿拉伯数字标出页码；阿拉伯数字(或其最后一位)应为该行的最后一个空格。
在打印正文时尚需注意标点符号的打印格式,即:句末号(句号、问号及感叹号)后应空两格,其他标点符号后则空一格。
五、文中引述
正确引用作品原文或专家、学者的论述是写好英语论文的重要环节；既要注意引述与论文的有机统一,即其逻辑性,又要注意引述格式 （即英语论文参考文献）的规范性。
引述别人的观点,可以直接引用,也可以间接引用。无论采用何种方式,论文作者必须注明所引文字的作者和出处。美国学术界通行的做法是在引文后以圆括弧形式注明引文作者及出处。
六、文献目录
论文作者在正文之后必须提供论文中全部引文的详细出版情况,即文献目录页。美国高校一般称此页为 Works Cited, 其格式须注意下列几点:
目录页应与正文分开,另页打印,置于正文之后。
目录页应视为英语论文的一页,按论文页码的顺序在其右上角标明论文作者的姓和页码；如果条目较多,不止一页,则第一页不必标出作者姓和页码(但必须计算页数),其余各页仍按顺序标明作者姓和页码。
标题Works Cited与打印纸顶端的距离约为,与第一条目中第一行的距离仍为；各条目之间及各行之间的距离亦为,不必留出更多空白。
各条目内容顺序分别为作者姓、名、作品名、出版社名称、出版地、出版年份及起止页码等；各条目应严格按各作者姓的首字母顺序排列,但不要给各条目编码,也不必将书条与杂志、期刊等条目分列。各条目第一行需顶格打印,回行时均需缩进五格,以将该条目与其他条目区分开来。
英语论文摘要又称文摘，是论文的重要组成部分，它是以提供文献内容梗概为目的，不加评论和补充解释，简明、确切地记述文献重要内容的短文。摘要应具有独立性和自明性，并拥有与文献同等量的主要信息，即不需阅读全文，就可获得重要的信息。
摘要通常置于文题之后，文章之首。在论文发表后，论文摘要常被文献检索系统所收集。英语论文摘要一般为200-300单词，并有与英文摘要表达观点一致的中文摘要与之对应。
扩展资料：
发表论文作用：
论文是指进行各个学术领域的研究和描述学术研究成果的文章。它既是探讨问题进行学术研究的一种手段，又是描述学术研究成果进行学术交流的一种工具。不同的人发表论文的作用也不同：
1、评职称（晋升职称）：研究生 毕业需要；教师 、医护人员 、科研院所的人员、企业员工 等 晋升高一级的职称时，发表期刊论文是作为一项必须的参考指标。
2、申报基金、课题 ：教育、科技、卫生系统 每年申报的国家自然科学基金项目、其它各种基金项目、各种研究课题时，发表论文 是作为 基金或课题 完成的一种研究成果的结论性展示。
3、世界性基础领域的研究，比如在医学、数学、物理、化学、生命科学 等领域开展的基础性研究，公开发表论文 是对最新科技 科学研究成果、研究方法的一种展示和报道。以推动整个社会的科技进步等。
思想政治教育导刊、思想政治教育研究、马克思主义研究、人大复印资料
来稿请用5号字，倍行距，A4纸打印，并请同时提交电子稿。为审稿方便，请另页给出文题、摘要、关键词以及作者姓名、工作单位、通讯地址、邮政编码、电话、E-mail地址等。 撰稿要求文稿应论点明确，论据充分，数据可靠，条理清晰，题文相符，文字简明。 地址：上海市徐汇区茶陵北路21号216室 《思想理论教育》编辑部 邮编：200032
1、《思想政治教育研究》创办于1985年，是由哈尔滨理工大学主管并主办的中国高校思想政治教育学术性期刊，也是黑龙江省高校思想政治教育研究会会刊 。
2、《思想教育研究》创刊于1985年1月，是由中华人民共和国教育部主管，中国高等教育学会思想政治教育分会（原全国高等学校思想政治教育研究会）、北京科技大学主办的期刊 。
3、《思想理论教育导刊》是由教育部主管，高等教育出版社主办的国家级教育类核心期刊。本刊系教育部马克思主义理论与思想政治教育指导性刊物。全国高校思想理论教育核心期刊、新闻出版署“中国期刊方阵”的“双效”期刊。
4、《思想政治工作研究》是中共中央宣传部主管、中国思想政治工作研究会和中宣部思想政治工作研究所主办的，综合因子为：，邮发代号为：2-378。思想政治工作研究促进国际科学文化交流，探索防灾科技教育、教学及管理。
5、《当代中国价值观研究》（双月刊）创刊于2016，是由教育部主管、北京师范大学主办的国内首家以当代社会价值问题为主要研究内容的专业期刊。
6、《政工研究动态》是中国思想政治工作研究会主办，被中国期刊全文数据库（CJFD）收录，是国家级期刊。政工研究动态中央级研究动态型、信息参考型期刊。
956年1月出生，湖北汉川人，上将军衔。现任第十三届全国人大民族委员会副主任委员；曾任中国人民解放军第42集团军政治部主任。2011年9月，任湖北省军区政治委员；2012年3月，任中国人民解放军广州军区政治部副主任；2013年，任中国人民解放军广州军区联勤部政委；2014年12月，任中国人民解放军济南军区政治部主任（副大军区级）
当然了，期刊的级别不同，对同样讠仑文的发表也是有着不同收费标准的，从实际的收费数据来看，壹品优作为代发平台，会处于用户的需求而最大限度的加以控制，这也是建立在了解了讠仑文发表期刊价格？对这些客观因素的影响，如果没有明智的选择和实质性的应对，同样会制约用户的讠仑文发表，因此选择专业的代发平台是尤为重要的。
您是说的《教育导刊》还是《思想理论教育导刊》，《教育导刊》不是最新2012年版的核心期刊，核心期刊对文章质量都是有很高要求的，都是很难发表的！版面费都是很高的，你可以百度搜中国论文资料库找江老师帮你投稿！希望可以帮到您！
《教育导刊》按收到投稿的时间先后顺序，对每一篇文章按照规定的标准进行审阅。因为要经多次审稿和校对，所以审稿期是三个月；凡投稿三个月内未收到编辑部采用通知，可自行处理；如果录用，文章出版后会给作者寄送样刊和稿费。 作者通过本网站投稿系统投稿后，若显示状态为“已读”，表明编辑已经阅读了这篇文章，但并不代表录用；稿件若显示为“通过初审”，表示文章正处于评审过程中。具体录用与否，请在三个月内留意您稿件的显示状态。 一般情况下，编辑部会对来稿作修改或删节，如果不同意修改或删节，来稿时请注明。 稿件一旦录用，会给作者寄送样刊和稿费。 为适应我国信息化建设需要，扩大作者学术交流渠道，该刊已加入《中国学术期刊(光盘版)》和中国期刊网。作者著作权使用费与本刊稿酬一次性给付。如作者不同意将文章编入该数据库，请在来稿时声明，该刊将作适当处理。 文章质量是本刊报道取舍的最主要的条件。文章质量主要体现在三个维度。其一为新颖度，即有新观点、新材料、新论证方法；其二为深度，即有一定的研究深度，有较高理论价值或应用价值；其三为真实度，即有求真求实的科学态度，文章的观点、材料和论证正确、真实、科学、严谨。
比较权威的有思想政治教育研究,青少年研究,当代青年,思想理论研究,学校党建与思想教育等
思想理论教育导刊 也是权威啊，cssci！
《思想理论教育导刊》cssci 双核心，这个应该符合你的要求 我能帮你发表一些期刊，空间有联系方式
具体到什么，你的文章写的什么，你要阅读还是投稿的。
河南南岸文化我近期整理了几本教育类中文核心期刊的投稿心得，希望对准备投稿的作者有所帮助。 1. 《思想教育研究》 《思想教育研究》（月刊）创刊于1985年，由全国高校思想政治教育研究会主办。本刊经过20多年的建设，已经成为全国高等学校思想政治教育指导性刊物，思想政治教育学科核心期刊，为推动高校思想政治工作和思想政治教育学科建设做出了重要贡献。主要栏目：专家视点、学科建设、德育论坛、观察与思考、实践与探索、理论探讨、高校党建、专题研究。 本刊为：人文扩展（2018年版）, 中文核心（2017年版）, RCCSE(A)(2017-2018), CSSCI来源期刊（2019-2020）, 科技核心（2019社会科学）, 维普收录, 万方收录, 知网收录, 写了一篇稿子，其实风格就不是要投这个杂志的，但还是抱着试一试的态度投了。邮箱投稿一个月。看到群里说1个月没有回复的，就可以打电话询问。编辑接电话后，说最近收录的文章中没有，建议改投。所以，杂志还是挺不错的。 投稿1个多月后告知需要修改，按两位外审专家意见修改后将文章缩减至11000字，第2月就出刊了，这个期刊发表速度特别快，从来不压稿，用了就是下月发，如果两个月没接到通知基本是被pass，编辑态度特别好，很好的期刊，期刊很良心，不存在黑这种事，我投稿5、6次才中，的确是以质量审稿的。只要自己用心了会有好结果的！ 投过好几篇文章，一直有无音讯。在该网站的投稿平台去年6月份的一篇文章，至今一年多了，还是待审中。。。看该期刊的作者多是约思政专家的稿件，或者第二作者至少是博导、教授。哎！中奖率比买彩票还低。 2.《教师教育研究》 《教师教育研究》（双月刊）创刊于1989年，是由国家教育部主管，北京师范大学、华东师范大学、教育部高校师资培训交流北京中心主办的教育教学期刊。办刊宗旨：倡导学术创新、促进学术交流、提高学术水平，全方位研究解决教师教育中的理论和实际问题。开设栏目：主要有教师教育新体系建构、体制创新 、培养模式、教师专业化、教育现代化、继续教育、学科建设、课程与教材、教学新探、队伍建设、管理与评价、教育实验、教师与学生、教育心理、教育原理。 本刊为：人文核心（2018年版）, 中文核心（2017年版）, RCCSE(A)(2017-2018), CSSCI来源期刊（2019-2020）, 科技核心（2019社会科学）, 维普收录, 万方收录, 知网收录, 超星收录, 1）5月15日投稿 2）6月19日开始外审，送2位专家 3）8月15日前后发现外审多了一位专家，不知何故。打电话无人接听。 4）9月8日打通电话，编辑非常和蔼。告知多了一位专家是因为原来外审的1位专家迟迟没有返回外审意见，故终止此专家外审，又送另外一位专家。但编辑自己说，送审时间也已近1个月，并答应要催促专家，尽快完成审稿意见。 5）一周后，仍然没有进一步意见。打电话即出现传真声音，无人接听。 5月初投稿，初筛一周左右，初审半个月，5月底开始外审，三周左右退修第一次，7月底退修第2次，现在快一个月了，在第三次外审中，能不能过外审应该快有结果了 投过两次，去年投过一次，审稿期八个月，最终终审被拒，无退稿原因。年底又投搞一次，至今五个月，还在外审中，联系过编辑部一次，编辑回复外审最短三个月，上不封顶（他们似乎也不太会催外审）。投这家期刊一定要有足够的耐心，只能一直等待 从投稿到最终通知录用，将近10个月，期间有对文章进行修改，编辑认真、态度很好。本刊学界评价很高，但录用周期相对较长。 3.《教育发展研究》 本刊为：人文核心（2018年版）, 中文核心（2017年版）, RCCSE(A+)(2017-2018), CSSCI来源期刊（2019-2020）, 科技核心（2019社会科学）, 知网收录, 目次收录（维普）, 目次收录（万方）, 超星收录,第一批认定学术期刊, 《教育发展研究》在很多高校算作权威B类期刊，期刊上的论文质量很高，发表还是有一定难度的。投稿后45天左右就会有审稿结果，审稿通过会直接和你联系。包括数据、图表、文字的修改，编辑和主编老师都很负责用心，整个过程下来会让人收获很大。由于是双月刊，之后就会很快见刊。林老师一直致力于办专业、有温度的期刊，给了年轻人很多机会，不歧视研究生独作，大家在保证文章质量的情况下都可以试试！ 这个没有官网投稿，需要自己联系编辑部。985在读硕士，挂导师一作。因为学校就在上海而且去过教科院，所以跟编辑联系很方便。一次性发了两篇给编辑，大概过了一周编辑发信息说其中一篇比较有新意，另一篇直接拒绝。但需要大改，除了核心观点没有改，其他基本都改了。中间改动花了2个多月，期间跟编辑联系过一次，编辑说还需要修改，所以一共修改了两次。个人感觉偏爱理论思辨类的文章，而且观点一定要有新意。最后一次发给编辑直接说录用了，好像没有外审。 4.《当代教育科学》 本刊为：人文核心（2018年版）, 中文核心（2017年版）, RCCSE(A-)(2017-2018), 维普收录, 万方收录, 知网收录, 超星收录 该刊审稿较慢，首先为两周内未收到通知即初审通过，其次为两周+一个月左右的外审时间。当然，编辑部服务态度还是很好的，不论是邮件还是电话，均可以及时反馈消息或接通。不过感觉刊物影响因子略低，而今又面临新一轮期刊定级。。。 两周过初审不通知，之后一个多月没消息，期间询问两次均在二审中，看到同批次的作者已经有了通知，熬到两个月满询问，告知二审未过。还需继续努力呀！ 投过几次终于中了一篇。2020年4月5日投稿，审稿期一般为2月，因为之前投都是默默等两个月就改投了，这次完全也没抱什么希望。日邮件查稿，心想着反正以前从没中过这个期刊，要是没通过审核就赶紧改投，节省一些时间。当天中午就收到录用通知，刊期定在6月份，见刊很快，不歧视硕士独作。不过该刊比较喜欢教育理论类的文章，定量的相对较少。 5.《高校教育管理》 审稿速度比较快，7天左右就给了回复。我的文章是以硕士论文为蓝本撰写的，但是硕士论文上了知网。投出去给的审稿意见是：您的来稿经编辑部初审，认为内容翔实、结构清晰、语言明了，但遗憾的是，您的文章文字查重比较高，故不适合在我刊发表，您可以转投他刊。我感觉编辑态度不错，起码是看了一遍稿子的，这一点比较难得。 从2019年底投稿，初审，到外审，再到外审回来返修，期间修改了5次（包括送外审前修改了1次）。结果终审将近一个月之后，直接退稿！前后折腾了6个月时间 超级烦琐的期刊。我投稿后，按审稿要求认真修改了3次，最后一次修改是调整语句表述（到这个份上了，我以为应该没问题了）。从投稿算起3个月后进入终审。终审1个多月后，退稿。总共浪费了4个多月。 6.《高教发展于评估》 本刊为：人文核心（2018年版）, 中文核心（2017年版）, RCCSE(A-)(2017-2018), CSSCI扩展版（2019-2020）, 维普收录, 万方收录, 知网收录, 超星收录,第一批认定学术期刊,匿名审稿, 在读博士独作可发 邮寄纸质版，投递，签收，收到邮件已送二审，编辑电话通知修改录用，审稿周期2个月。属于时间比较长的，中间打过电话和编辑沟通，因为一位专家给的意见不是很好，但是编辑觉得文章还不错，所以又挑选了一位专家再审，感觉自己比较幸运，编辑人也很好，沟通很顺畅。 由于疫情期间，审稿有所延迟，一个月过初审，一个多零几天收到录用通知。根据外审意见说我题目过于谦卑不必要，建议直接点，另外要求我改两个词，说一词为生造词，一词为使用不当。于是稿件就被录用了。这次经验让我感觉商榷性文章很不好发，所以《高教发展与评估》能录用我的稿子我特别感激，很开心。觉得不费一番用心。 更多教育类期刊投稿方面的疑问欢迎咨询我
思想政治教育研究是c刊。
思想教育研究》是C刊，也就是cssci，创刊于1985年1月，是由中华人民共和国教育部主管，中国高等教育学会思想政治教育分会（原全国高等学校思想政治教育研究会）、北京科技大学主办的期刊。
据2018年10月《思想政治教育研究》期刊官网显示，《思想政治教育研究》编委会共有顾问8人，编委39人 。根据2018年10月25日中国知网显示，《思想政治教育研究》出版文献共4533篇，总被下载1210866次、总被引29223次；（2018版）复合影响因子为，综合影响因子为 。
《思想政治教育研究》设有“本刊专稿”、“书记论坛”、“博导论坛”、“博士园地”、“理论探讨”、“党建工作”、“思想政治理论课教学”、“思想政治工作”、“德育研究”、“辅导员队伍建设”、“工作研究”、“军队院校”、“心理健康教育”等栏目。同时该刊针对相关理论热点、会议精神，结合时势不定期开设相关栏目。
据2018年10月《思想政治教育研究》期刊官网显示，《思想政治教育研究》编委会共有顾问8人，编委39人 。根据2018年10月25日中国知网显示，《思想政治教育研究》出版文献共4533篇，总被下载1210866次、总被引29223次；（2018版）复合影响因子为，（2018版）综合影响因子为 。
根据2018年10月25日万方数据知识服务平台显示，《思想政治教育研究》载文量为2702篇，被引量为14162、下载量为77500；根据2015年中国期刊引证报告（扩刊版）数据显示，《思想政治教育研究》2015年影响因子为，在全部统计源期刊（6735种）中排第965名，在教育（346种）中排第46名
答：《青春岁月》、《青年时代》以及《山西青年》。
1、《青春岁月》杂志是经国家新闻出版总署批准、由共青团河北省委主管、主办的省级优秀社科期刊。创刊于1982年4月。征稿方向：文学、 艺术、 政治、法律、经济、文化、教育、科教
2. 《青年时代》杂志创刊于1950年，是由共青团贵州省委主管主办，青年时代杂志社编辑出版，经国家新闻出版总署批准,具有60年创刊历史的国内外公开发行的全国优秀期刊。
3. 《山西青年》创刊于1976年，是经国家新闻出版署批准出版的省级正式期刊。它是由共青团山西省委主管的，山西青少年报刊社主办的山西省一级核心期刊，为教学与科研服务。