Search results

The purpose of this paper is to present an overview of the current state of debates surrounding Open Access (OA) in non-STEM disciplines.

This paper uses a selective literature review and discussion methodology to give a representative summary of the state of the art.

Non-STEM disciplines persistently lag behind scientific disciplines in their approach to OA, if the teleology towards open dissemination is accepted. This can be attributed to a variety of economic and cultural factors that centre on the problem of resource allocation with respect to quality.

This paper will be of value to policymakers, funders, academics and publishers. The original aspect of the paper pertains to the identification of an anxiety of irrelevance in the humanities disciplines and a focus on “quality” in Open-Access publishing debates.

This article argues that truth recovery practices that take place against the backdrop of ongoing settler colonial erasure, as is the case when considering Zionist colonial violence in Palestine, must focus on combating state-sponsored attempts at erasure, rather than solely providing a platform for the expression of settler guilt.

The article analyses existing literature on truth recovery practices that take place in Palestine, including the work of a variety of local NGOs engaged in such praxis, with a view to considering how this form of transitional justice has germinated incrementally in the space. Critical reflection on the work of a variety of grassroots NGOs is situated alongside other forms of transitional justice intervention.

The article argues that in the context of enduring settler colonialism, the truth regarding past Zionist atrocities in historic Palestine must avoid being curated in the present day in such a way as to allow for damage limitation rather than the platforming of conversations around meaningful repair. Truth recovery for recovery's sake serves only to reinforce the settler colonial status quo rather than properly agitate for a full decolonisation, one that demands and facilitates indigenous Palestinian return.

The article challenges prevailing notions of the role of truth recovery practices in spaces of enduring settler colonial value. It makes clear that the role of truth recovery interventions in sites where colonial violence endures must be to actively and meaningfully support activities that reinforce native identity, history and presence on the land. Moreover, by reference to existing grassroots attempts at truth recovery in Palestine, the article provides an original and clear argument that states it is simply not enough to platform the revelation of uncomfortable truths or to provide opportunities for settler violence of the past to be “confessed” in public if it is disassociated from challenging the present-day structures of ongoing oppression.

The purpose of this paper is to develop the sustained argument that explication can contribute to the emergence and development of the philosopher‐manager who is appropriately sceptical of generalisations, and confident in their own abilities to develop local, valid and meaningful theories based on their wisdom and personal experience.

The idea and practice of explication as a source of (new) meaning and knowledge in a contested postmodern world is the main focus of this paper. Within the postmodern discourse which informs and shapes the paper, particular attention is given to the problematics of autobiography, fiction and “truth”, and the undecidability of meaning.

Explication offers managers the prospect of “new” explicit knowledge and skills based on their prior experience and, more importantly perhaps, explication helps people to develop a honed philosophical mindset which can recognise and deal with the empty arguments, flawed recipes and fictions that often characterise traditional management theory.

Future empirical research on the ways that explication is described and practised, is urgent and vital. This will yield interesting and valuable insights for those who practice explication, and for those who design and implement OD solutions including the corporate university.

The paper outlines the handful of related activities which make up the explication process.

This paper locates the idea of explication within a postmodern discourse. The paper benefits from previous work by the author which encourages managers to exploit their experiential learning so as to create and to share their own theories rather than rely on the dictums of others.

In this chapter, we “occupy the earth” with an overview of the anti-fracking discourse(s) of diverse local initiatives converging as a global movement opposed to fracking. By mapping the discourse(s) of the anti-fracking movement, the articulation of the problems and solutions associated with fracking raise questions not only about the environment but draw attention to a crisis of democracy and the critical need for social and environmental justice. With the help of a multiple theoretical framework we draw on insights about environmental movements and their democratizing potential; conceptualizations about power and (counter) discourse; and depictions of the environmental justice movements in the United States. Toward this end, we analyze the framing of the anti-fracking movement: the many local voices engaging in political struggles to sustain their communities, places and ways of life, and the global movements’ forum for collective solidarity, recognition, and civic action. Shedding light on the multiple frames employed by movement members, we discuss the implications and potential embodied in this widening debate.

This study was designed to be an agonistic encounter between two pre-service teachers from different academic disciplines and with opposing climate change beliefs. The purpose of this study was to create an opportunity for this pair of future educators to voice, acknowledge and engage their differences, rather than avoid or skirt them.

Using a paired interview approach, two pre-service teachers discussed online sources about climate change. The analysis focuses on critical literacy practices of textual critique and reader reflexivity, considering how students from different beliefs and perspectives engage in agonism and negotiated practices.

While there was evidence of the two students engaged in critical literacy practices of textual critique, most of this engagement with the sources remained more at a surface level with somewhat superficial criteria to evaluate the sources. The two students engaged reflexively during the interview discussion in terms of their academic disciplines and climate change beliefs. This reflexive work produced the most compelling exchanges during the interview discussion and pointed to two rich sites for agonistic engagement: their differing conceptions of reliability and their competing perspectives about the intersection of science and politics.

Agonism offers a lens that helps ensure we understand that all pursuits toward facts and truth are necessarily contested as we engage with respected adversaries, not enemies we need to vanquish. There is an urgent need for dialogue across difference, especially for people in the increasingly polarized USA with complex topics and challenges such as climate change.

The purpose of this paper is to demonstrate how critical discourse analysis can help to uncover the dominant discursive formations that underlie policy guidelines within education. Focusing on the policy guidelines for career education and guidance in New Zealand, it illustrates how these have been used by the state in an attempt to normalise ideological standpoints, shape “common‐sense” thinking and delimit the scope of practice.

Critical discourse analysis was employed as this approach helps to uncover the hidden meanings, political imperatives and uneven workings of power/dominance and oppression that are employed in/through textual representations.

Neoliberal discourse is infused throughout the policy guidelines for career education and guidance in New Zealand, and demands that career advisers/teachers should produce entrepreneurial and self‐responsibilised global economic subjects.

Although this paper is situated within a New Zealand context, given the creeping influence of neoliberalism in many English‐speaking states, the issues identified have international relevance in relation to the kind of citizen career education is expected to produce.

Much of the literature within the career arena adopts an uncritical, and apolitical, stance, with the truth‐claims made by neoliberal states tending to be positioned as authoritative and inviolable. Drawing from critical theory, this paper contributes a social justice perspective that looks beneath the surface of the seemingly benign and well‐intentioned discourses that permeate the guidelines for career education and guidance in New Zealand.

A discourse analysis of the cognitive viewpoint in library and information science identifies seven discursive strategies which constitute information as a commodity, and persons as surveyable information consumers, within market economy conditions. These strategies are: (a) universality of theory, (b) referentiality and reification of ‘images’, (c) internalisation of representations, (d) radical individualism and erasure of the social dimension of theory, (e) insistence upon knowledge, (f) constitution of the information scientist as an expert in image negotiation, and (g) instrumental reason, ruled by efficiency, standardisation, predictability, and determination of effects. The discourse is guided throughout by a yearning for natural‐scientific theory. The effect of the cognitive viewpoint's discursive strategy is to enable knowledge acquisition of information processes only when users' and generators' ‘images’ are constituted as objectively given natural‐scientific entities, and to disable knowledge of the same processes when considered as products of social practices. By its constitution of users as free creators of images, of the information scientist as an expert in image interpretation and delivery, and of databases as repositories of unmediated models of the world, the cognitive viewpoint performs ideological labour for modern capitalist image markets.

Purpose: In this chapter, the authors posit that, shadowing the etiological crises in criminology, much crime media scholarship remains “lost in the mediascape.” The authors outline why dominant positivist methodologies in crime media scholarship leave us lost and offer tools that researchers may use for better wayfinding in this complex and dynamic environment.

Methodology/approach: Drawing on the concept of liquid criminology, the authors join a growing chorus in the crime media field calling for methodological and theoretical concepts more reflective of the social dimensions of liquid modernity, that is, uncertainty, ambiguity, impermanence, precarity, etc.

Findings: The conditions of liquid modernity inform a mediascape characterized by an abundance of data, misinformation, disinformation, propaganda, and conspiracy theories resulting in collective disorientation and the inability to form coherent narratives about the past, present, or future. As such, these conditions defy positivistic conventions like representative sampling and demand new, imaginative approaches to the study of crime media. To that end, informed by the cultural criminological perspective, the authors offer two methodologies and one theoretical concept.

Research limitations: The authors believe our methodological and theoretical suggestions are best suited for analyzing themes and concepts among discourse around crime incidents that have significant legal and social implications. The authors offer no definitive answers, but hope to begin building a better toolbox for wayfinding in this digital wilderness.

Originality/value: The currently dominant methodology within crime media scholarship is a poor fit with contemporary media culture. Here, the authors begin to remedy that by proposing an orientation that fits better with the fluid, uncertain, and dynamic media environment that permeates our social world.

In the drama of the evidentiary process, it would hardly be thought exceptional that the judge’s intuition of the formal order of things – which is to say, their sufficient standing-to-reason – should falter when confronted with the sprawling and confused immediacy of stubborn matter-of-fact. The circumstantial given is a bewildering Gordian Knot of data; the analytic legerdemain of localising our attention and following one of its threads cannot reduce the tangle into which it soon recedes. And in comparison to the knot’s multiplicity, our scope for unifying abstraction, or “large-scale” comprehension, is limited and flickering. We possess fragments of intuition, and fragments of formal connection between these fragments. But the panorama is merely agglutinative – the fragments do not congeal into one perfect, self-evident totality. And an offhand remark amongst the lectures of Alfred North Whitehead suggests that this defect is of more than methodological significance – even when one takes one’s example from arithmetic: “the snippet of knowledge that the addition of 1 and 4 produces the same multiplicity as the addition of 2 and 3, seems to me self-evident” (Whitehead, 1968, p. 47). And yet we would disclaim any such self-evidence were larger numbers involved – only skeptically could we hazard a guess. So, he continues, we have recourse to “the indignity of proof,” securing our opinion through the rationality of calculation. Nor is it so much that proof and method are chastening of themselves – the nemesis, the sting of the creatural condition is rather having to prove, the imperfection of finite judgment and the infinite possibility of perfecting it. This predicament was already known to Sophocles; if humanity “holds out” against the overwhelming by its inventiveness, by finding a means in to mêchanoen technas, the machinations of technique, it is because our ultimate condition with regard to the overwhelming is amêchanôs, aporos, resourceless and without means.