Search results

Scholarly literature on the Internationalization of Education has generated important theories, debates, and insights supporting in-depth understandings of the field, yet we lack comprehensive reviews exploring the design, implementation, and impact of practical approaches. The present review addresses this gap, mapping the literature on international curriculum design, identifying trends and themes across approaches and pedagogies while revealing limitations and lack of attention to issues that inhibit practice in the field. It highlights the privileging of “instrumental,” or quantifiable skills-based curricula, over “transformative” internationalization dedicated to social justice and equity, and observes important disconnects between theory and practice: publications in the field offer critical conceptualizations of what internationalized curricula should achieve and why but with little attention to specific content and teaching practice that would lead to achieving these objectives. The review further analyzes such disconnect in the literature dedicated to decolonial internationalizing pedagogies, while simultaneously illuminating how prevailing decolonial theories of international education erase and ignore parts of the world. It concludes by contending that approaches to the internationalization of curriculum would benefit from increased practical frameworks that could guide educators, practitioners, and students in crucial conversations at the intersections of social justice and International Education.

The purpose of this chapter is to highlight how universities got into the predicament in which they currently find themselves in, or somewhat planned to be in, in the 2020s. The historical account outlines the purpose of higher education and who it was for throughout the last few centuries, before a more in-depth analysis of the last few decades will highlight how, and why, neoliberal and subsequently managerial aspects of leadership and performance metrics crept into universities before an analysis of the last 5–10 years, including the onset and consequences of COVID, will demonstrate that many ‘COVID recovery plans’ around staff cuts and course reforms were already in place before COVID, but it was COVID that allowed these plans in most cases to be escalated.

The research seeks to evaluate stakeholder perceptions of firms, the extent these assessments impact trust in firms and possible implications for sustainability communications.

Three studies were undertaken involving two experiments (n = 436, n = 393) and one survey (n = 217). Analyses of variance was used in all three studies and in studies 2 and 3—to test for possible mediators—each variable was tested using Hayes' PROCESS macro (Hayes, 2013) with bootstrapping of 5,000 samples.

Results demonstrate significant favouring of sustainability-minded firms. Some differences between consumers and investors were found but also notable commonalities such as a general propensity to favour purpose-oriented firms and similar determinations of trust in firms.

Findings could support more effective sustainability communications and firm decisions regarding investments in purpose- and sustainability-oriented initiatives. The results may also support designs to pursue and promote designations (e.g. B Corp) that legitimize sustainability claims.

This research was unique in its evaluation of two stakeholder types in the same context. Further, it provides new insights into how a firm’s profit-purpose orientation affects stakeholder perceptions and assessments of trustworthiness.

The purpose of this study is to describe participation in decision-making among service users with severe mental illness.

Service users want to participate in decision-making and in the planning of their care. There are widely known methods, such as shared decision-making, that could be used to facilitate service user participation. Three focus group interviews were conducted with the participation of 14 persons with mental illness and/or substance abuse who were service users at two Swedish Homes for Care and Residence (HVB). Data were analyzed by qualitative content analysis.

Two themes emerged: service users’ involvement in decisions is hampered by the professionals’ approach and adequate information and experience of participation means greater empowerment.

Although it is known that service users would like to have more influence, and that methods like shared decision-making are recommended to empower service users and improve the decision process, research on these matters is limited.

This study reveals that there is a need of more systematic decisional support, such as shared decision-making, so that service users can be seen as important persons not only in guidelines and policy documents but also in clinical practice.

The findings indicate that service users do not participate in decisions systematically, although policies, guidelines and laws providing that service users should be offered an active part in decision-making with regard to their care and treatment.

Although it is known that service users would like to have more influence, and that methods like shared decision-making are recommended to empower service users and improve their decision process, research on these matters is limited. The findings indicate that service users do not participate in decisions systematically, even though policies, guidelines and laws are in place stipulating that service users should be offered an active part in decision-making with regard to their own care and treatment. The results of this project bring improvement opportunities to light.

This chapter is focused on what we can learn from oppressive governance, in this case specifically relating to university governance in terms of vice chancellors and presidents, to the deputy vice chancellor and deputy president and down the ever-growing university hierarchy to deans and heads of schools and their deputies, from a Freirean perspective. Freire wrote at length about how leaders ‘controlled’ education and why they did so, but he also wrote at length about how governments control populations – himself being both a political prisoner and a person in exile to escape persecution. This chapter subsequently examines Freire's ideas around what techniques people employ to control populations and applies them to a higher education setting because the similarities are numerous and the tactics familiar.

This chapter provides an overview of Freire's primary approach to how governments control people, why governments dictate what is being taught and why they seek out control over educators. This chapter investigates the similarities Freire found between the most oppressive governments and dictatorships that rules by violence, to how our educational institutions are controlled. The stakes might be entirely different in these scenarios, but he knew the ultimate objective in all these situations was to remove power from the people, give it to a powerful few and ensure the people would never be able to regain control once more. These ideas and suggestions are key moving forward because it provides a baseline to understand how Freire thought about manipulative behaviours, and why tactics used in extremely violent situations can essentially be watered down and used to control people in universities in much the same way.

This chapter analyses the other aspect of an oppressor/oppressed relationship by looking at what happens to the oppressed, in this case, the academics and staff not in leadership roles. This chapter looks at why the tactics leaders employ work, and why people do not retaliate, and what systems have been put in place to prevent the people from having any consequential power. This chapter thus looks at how the power of the majority in the academy has been slowly eroded by managerial promises of empowerment, self-governance or having an opinion on the institution's direction when in reality, they have no opinion, and the only decisions they can make are inconsequential. This is why time and time again, we see universities restructure, remove non-profitable courses and increase targets to unrealistic levels to maintain power over the majority.

The study aims to explore the conditional relationships between product modularization and new product development (NPD) efficiency. It is postulated that R&D outsourcing plays an important mediating role. Furthermore, the level of competency trust is considered an essential factor in moderating the indirect effect of product modularization on NPD efficiency via R&D outsourcing practices.

Drawing on transaction cost economics theory, this study suggests a moderated mediation model that addresses how product modularization effectively promotes NPD efficiency via outsourcing practices. The hierarchical regression and PROCESS macro model were conducted to test the hypotheses based on survey data from 273 manufacturing firms in China.

Product modularization enhances NPD efficiency directly and indirectly through the external collaboration of R&D outsourcing. Furthermore, the role of product modularization in R&D outsourcing practices is more effective when the competency trust in R&D outsourcing partners is high.

By showing the critical role of external collaboration, this study provides valuable insights into how manufacturing firms utilize product modularization to achieve desired NPD performance more effectively.