Search results

A dialogic approach to Ontario, Canada policy development was utilized to collaboratively re-conceptualize provincial Special Education qualification courses for teachers. The stories, perspectives and lived experiences of teachers, principals, supervisory officers, parents, school board special services personnel, students, and the public were included as essential voices and information sources within policy development conversations. These narratives of experience revealed the forms of knowledge, skills, commitments, and ethical stance necessary for teachers to support students with diverse and unique learning needs today and in the future. The transformative nature of narrative dialogue to enlighten, deepen understanding, and alter perspectives was illuminated. The policy development processes used in this publicly shared educational initiative served as a model of democratic dialogue. The inclusive and dialogic methods employed to collectively re-conceptualize special education courses illustrate an innovative framework for developing policies governing the public good. This model of democratic dialogue holds considerable promise for the future of teacher education policy and practice.

Research reveals very little about how the supervision of social studies student teachers ought to be enacted. The paper aims to discuss this issue.

Based on the broader arguments for the democratic purposes of social studies, the author argues for the development of the democratic capacities of teacher citizens by creating deliberative and dialogic spaces in social studies field-based teacher education.

Four conceptual dimensions of dialogic pedagogy in the supervision of social studies student teachers are explored: questioning, listening, negotiation, and self-critique.

Because supervision of student teachers is a pedagogical interaction, a pedagogy of social studies field-based teacher education must be grounded in dialogue and deliberation.

The purpose of this study is to examine how dialogic spaces were co-constituted (opened, broadened and deepened) between students engaged in divergent and convergent collaborative learning tasks, orchestrated by teachers in Finnish primary and secondary schools. The concept of dialogic space refers to a dynamic, shared resource of ideas in dialogue and has come to represent an ideal form of educational interaction, in the contexts of collaborative learning, joint creative work and shared knowledge-building.

A socio-cultural discourse analysis of video-observed classroom dialogue, entailing the development of a new analytic typology, was undertaken to explore the co-constitution of dialogic space. The data are derived from two qualitative studies, one examining dialogue to co-create fictive video stories in primary-school classrooms (divergent task), the other investigating collaborative knowledge building in secondary-school health education (convergent task).

Dialogic spaces were opened through group settings and by the students’ selection of topics. In the divergent task, the broadening of dialogic space derived from the heterogeneous group settings, whereas in the convergent task, from the multiple and various information sources involved. As regards the deepening of dialogic space, explicit reflective talk remained scarce; instead the norms deriving from the school-context tasks and requirements guided the group dialogue.

This study lays the groundwork for subsequent research regarding the orchestration of dialogic space in divergent and convergent tasks by offering a typology to operationalise dialogic space for further, more systematic, comparisons and aiding the understandings of the processes implicated in intercreating and interthinking. This in turn is of significance for the development of dialogic pedagogies.

The purpose of this paper is to contribute to discussions about engagement in social and environmental accounting, drawing on dialogic theory and philosophy. A dialogic approach, building on existing critical inquiries, is introduced to derive principles to inform “on the ground” engagements. Applying dialogic thinking to social and environmental accounting encourages the development of dialogic forms of accountability, more authentic engagements and is more likely to contribute to sustainable social and environmental change.

Contains a synthesis of literature from within and beyond social and environmental accounting to shed light on the issues addressed by the special issue.

Research engagements in social and environmental accounting need not be taken in a haphazard manner uninformed by theory. In particular, the “learning turn” in social sciences has generated a large body of theorizing (informed by concrete engagement activities) that can be used to shape, guide and support engagement.

The principles developed can be used to inform future research design, with the aim of increasing the likelihood that such engagements will yield outcomes of “value” usually defined as emancipatory changes.

This paper develops a new (to accounting) theoretical perspective.

The purpose of this paper is to review the current research program in agonistic dialogic accounting and to reflect on future possibilities for broadening out and opening up accounting and accountability systems, especially as they relate to social and environmental accounting (SEA).

The authors describe an ethic of accountability as a context for dialogue and debate intended to broaden out and open up new imaginings of accounting for democracy. The authors review the accounting literature addressing dialogic accounting and agonistics as the precursor of what has evolved into agonistic dialogic accounting. The authors discuss their work to date on agonistic pluralism and engagement, recognizing the necessity of linking the normative framework to an effective political program. The authors review prior studies applying science and technology studies that have addressed these issues.

The authors consider how the application of agonistic ideas might facilitate the development of multiple accountings that take pluralism seriously by addressing constituencies and perspectives often marginalized in both SEA and mainstream accounting. An ethic of accountability and science and technology studies are useful for stimulating dialogue and debate regarding democratic and civil society institutions as they relate to economic entities, especially corporations.

Agonistic dialogic accounting in conjunction with other disciplines such as science and technology studies can be used in formulating, implementing and evaluating policy for advancing a progressive social agenda.

A reflective view of the current work in agonistic dialogic accounting highlights considerations for further research regarding the possible interdisciplinary work particularly with science and technology studies in broadening out and opening up accounting and accountability systems as facilitators of progressive social agenda.

This paper aims to contribute to the emerging literature on accounting education in the COVID-19 context. It proposes expanding the literature in its methodological, geographical and conceptual components.

This paper is a qualitative study that used a survey as the method. A total of 122 instructors answered the survey from 22 accounting programmes offered in 11 Colombian cities. The dialogic education model of Paulo Freire is the framework for analysis.

The accounting instructors’ response was to move from face-to-face classrooms to online classrooms, using widely known platforms. The instructors quickly learned to use tools that enabled new dialogue mechanisms with the students. The result was, paradoxically, closer communication at a distance.

The COVID-19 lockdown accelerated the changes in teaching, learning, contextualisation, use of “new” technologies and, above all, practising Freirian dialogue. There is a need to research longer periods and use more data collection and analysis tools.

Evidence of how to teach accounting en masse from online classrooms in a developing country could accelerate the expansion of virtual accounting programmes.

The new context allows increasing the number of students because it does not require travel to large cities.

This paper makes three contributions to the literature on accounting education in the COVID-19 context as follows: it describes the phenomenon in Colombia, a context little studied in the international accounting literature; transcends autoethnographic studies, as it is based on a qualitative survey of national scope and analyses the phenomenon based on Paulo Freire’s complete model, which includes context, educational process design and action process.

This article aims to contribute to the critical accounting literature by reviewing how previous studies have addressed the topic of dialogic accounting (DA), examining the main themes investigated and discussing potential further developments of the DA research agenda.

The present study builds on a systematic literature review of 186 research products indexed on Scopus, Web of Science and Google Scholar that were published between 2004 and 2019 in 55 accounting or non-accounting scientific journals and 14 books.

First, a content analysis of each contribution informs a classification in terms of research design, methodology, geographical setting and sector of analysis. Second, a bibliometric analysis provides several visual representations of the network of research products included in our review using bibliographic coupling, cooccurrence and coauthorship analyses. Third, and most importantly, the main narrative review discusses the development of the research strand on DA from the seminal works that introduced the topic, through the core of critical contributions inspired by the struggle between democracy and agonism, to the most recent contributions, in which new topics emerge and innovative methodologies are applied to the study of DA.

The main contribution of this manuscript is twofold. In addition to providing a systematic, bibliometric and narrative review of the evolution of nearly two decades of literature on DA, the present study is intended to collect ideas for further research and to discuss how the advent of new technologies and the peculiarities of various institutional contexts can shape the future research agenda on this critical form of accounting.

The purpose of the research was to discover the process of social and environmental report assurance (SERA) and thereby evaluate the benefits, extent of stakeholder inclusivity and/or managerial capture of SERA processes and the dynamics of SERA as it matures.

This paper used semi‐structured interviews with 20 accountant and consultant assurors to derive data, which were then coded and analysed, resulting in the identification of four themes.

This paper provides interview evidence on the process of SERA, suggesting that, although there is still managerial capture of SERA, stakeholders are being increasingly included in the process as it matures. SERA is beginning to provide dual‐pronged benefits, adding value to management and stakeholders simultaneously. Through the lens of Freirian dialogic theory, it is found that SERA is starting to display some characteristics of a dialogical process, being stakeholder inclusive, demythologising and transformative, with assurors perceiving themselves as a “voice” for stakeholders. Consequently, SERA is becoming an important mechanism for driving forward more stakeholder‐inclusive SER, with the SERA process beginning to transform attitudes of management towards their stakeholders through more stakeholder‐led SER. However, there remain significant obstacles to dialogic SERA. The paper suggests these could be removed through educative and transformative processes driven by assurors.

Previous work on SERA has involved predominantly content‐based analysis on assurance statements. However, this paper investigates the details of the SERA process, for the first time using qualitative interview data.

Utilising dialogic meta-narrative analysis, a form of inquiry based on examining the difference between voices in meaningful and relevant dialogue (Wegerif, 2006, p. 347), the purpose of this paper is to present an examination of three relevant works on theories of the global South for identifying educational patterns, themes, and biases from the worldview perspectives of the respective authors.

In comparative and international education “qualitative” research, the acceptance of differing points of view and reference have often resulted in a fragmented and fractitious affirmation of cultural relativity, whereby the pursuit of truth (Veritas) has been replaced by the pursuit and contestation of a plurality of knowledges and truths. Davies defines this as “discursive practice”, which refers to the way discourse and the production of selves produce and reconstitutes one’s social and psychological realities (Davies, 1999, p. 88). The positional and discursive worldviews relative to “other” are not only dependent on locational, contextual, and time (Zeitgeist) dimensions, but also on disciplinary methodological foundations and subjective interpretations of both experience and choice.

The analysis of the three scholarly works identifies issues of comparative education research from a dialogic and dialectic perspective, suggesting that relativistic notions of research are required and necessary in order to expand horizons and “break out of the box” to broaden one’s imagination.

The questions raised by all three worldviews require further research: Who pays? Who benefits? Should the field contest the positional points-of-reference of comparativists? Should theory and mode of inquiry be made more clear in order to understand and discern the positional authority of the researcher and the researched? Should relevant literature addressing subject material involve greater scrutiny – if not collaboration – between scholars from different worldview perspectives?

Subjectivity, validation and significance of findings contribute to dissemination and advancement of knowledge, and if not robust or rigorous, are simply another point of view.

This is a new paradigmatic approach to problematising comparative and international research from three positional worldviews. The value in problematising the three worldviews helps to delve deeper into the issues at hand regarding the global South.

The book has generated a passionate dialogue-disagreement (mostly but not entirely) with the book. Dialogue-disagreement is based on challenges, disagreements and rebuttals between opponents, often belonging to different, even irreconcilable, paradigms. The goal of dialogue-disagreement is not so much to convince the opponent to change their mind but rather to critically examine and problematize the two involved paradigms: the authors’ and the reviewer’s. By taking the generated challenges and disagreements seriously, both irreconcilable paradigms can grow through their replies. Dialogue-disagreement gives the participants–opponents the gift of revealing their own paradigmatic blind spots, which are often invisible from within their paradigms. Dialogue-disagreement is exploratory and based on an agnostic relationship between frenemies, i.e. “friendly enemies.”

This is a critical book review essay of Self Managed Learning and the New Educational Paradigm (Cunningham, 2021).

The reviewer views Ian Cunningham’s Self Managed Learning educational paradigm as a hybrid of Progressive and Democratic Education, while the reviewer sees his/her Self-Education paradigm as entirely Democratic (and Dialogic). Elsewhere, the reviewer discussed and critically analyzed the Progressive Education paradigm, which generally involves channeling the student’s learning activism and subjectivity toward learning outcomes desired by an educator. It uses the educator’s manipulation of the student’s subjectivity to make them study what the educator wants them to study. In contrast, the paradigm of Democratic Education assumes that the educatee is the final authority of their own education. The educatee decides whether to study, when to study, what to study, how to study, with whom to study, where to study, for what purpose to study and so on. The educatee makes these decisions by themselves or with the help of other people at the educatee’s discretion and conditions. The reviewer charges that Ian’s Self Managed Learning paradigm is a hybrid of both paradigms, with the Progressive Education paradigm taking the lead and exploiting the Democratic Education paradigm.

The book presented a unique, innovative practice worth a critical analysis. The reviewer’s dialogue-disagreement with the book reveals a particular hybrid of Progressive and Democratic Education which is common to some innovative self-directed learning.