Search results

This article assesses the ability of Boyer's (1990) four-function definition of scholarship to address critiques of business schools. Boyer's definition of scholarship is presented as the foundation for a paradigmatic shift in higher education in business.

The authors developed this conceptual paper by considering information from three sources: 1) Ernest Boyer's Scholarship Reconsidered: Priorities of the Professoriate, 2) articles by four well-known pundits of business education as well as critiques appearing in the Academy of Management Learning and Education Journal and 3) articles in which Boyer's work was the focal point of the article found by searching Google Scholar, two well-known education journals, a prominent database of education articles and the International Handbook of Higher Education (Forest and Altbach, 2007).

A four-function framework based on Boyer's definition of scholarship is proposed to help improve the operations of business schools. The authors also forward ideological and practical implications related to each of Boyer's four functions.

For several decades now, a number of highly respected business scholars have criticized American business education in its current form. These criticisms, although plentiful, have not fueled the magnitude of change needed to have a significant, sustainable impact on business education. The authors suggest that this lack of change is due, in part, to institutional practices and to the absence of a unified framework for how higher education in business should be executed. The authors argue that Boyer's four-function definition of scholarship could provide such a framework.

More than five years have passed since A Nation at Risk was published in 1983 by then‐Secretary of Education Terrance Bell's National Commission on Excellence in Education. Those years have seen the publication of an enormous body of both primary material, composed of research reports, essays, and federal and state reform proposals and reports; and secondary material, composed of summaries and reviews of the original reform reports and reports about effective programs that are based on reform recommendations. This annotated bibliography seeks to identify, briefly describe, and organize in a useful manner those publications dealing with K‐12 education reform and improvement. The overall purposes of this article are to bring organization to that list, and also to trace relationships and influences from the federal initiatives to the states and professional associations, and from there to the school districts and individual schools.

Argues for an eclectic and pragmatic model of academic development. Such a model encourages inquiry into, and conversations about, academic problems and practices. The intention is to produce more or less useful, though tentative, suggestions for action and intervention. These would reflect Rorty’s pragmatic rationale for “nonideological, compromising, reformist muddling through”, or what Dewey called “experimentalism”. Examines each main term: “towards”, “pragmatic”, “scholarship”, and “academic development”. For example, “pragmatic” is characterised as wanting to promote a liberal, democratic, consensual, just, and even a Utopian society. “Scholarship” is examined as a broad conception following Boyer. “Academic development” is viewed as promoting useful (rather than, say, true or correct or best) approaches to teaching and learning, as encouraging experiments and inquiries, as being more anti‐managerial than managerial, as arguing for a conversational and contestational approach, and as claiming only “tentative responses, possible readings and suggested ideas for action and intervention”.

The purpose of this paper is to delineate a model of library publishing, the library as publishing partner, that reflects the diversity of institutions in higher education.

The model is based on a particular case, but also on the integration of literature on institutional theory, emerging scholarships and library science.

The paper argues that increasing diversity in higher education requires us to think creatively and strategically about different models for library publishing. The library as publishing partner model is presented as an alternative to a one-size-fits-all model based on the experience of research institutions.

The library as publishing partner model is intended to spark further research and conversations about models for other institutional types.

The library as publishing partner model has potential applications at other public comprehensive institutions (or those with similar missions).

The library as publishing partner model is intended to combat the tendency in higher education toward academic drift and to contribute to an increasingly diverse landscape in higher education.

This paper presents an original model, the library as publishing partner, but also argues for an original perspective, in which academic libraries at different types of institutions can be constructively differentiated from each other.

During a period of significant crisis within HE on a global scale, there is a clear need for colleges to clearly articulate the distinct nature of their higher vocational education provision. This need is particularly acute given the current financial and political pressures impacting on a diverse HE landscape. The purpose of this paper is to argue that colleges are well placed to develop and implement an approach to scholarly activity which revitalises links with local communities.

This paper provides a synthesis of recent research on scholarly activity within college-based higher education (CBHE) and the concept of a “civic university”. It also provides a brief case study of how scholarship within the college context can be utilised to promote meaningful community engagement.

Working productively with community organisations, groups and individuals, colleges will be provoked to recast the complex relationship between teaching, research and community engagement in a manner appropriate to their immediate context rather than a national agenda. Moreover, a strengthened relationship between colleges and their local communities will recapture the rich heritage of vocational education in widening participation and raising aspirations towards education in general.

This paper attempts to relocate current discussions of CBHE scholarly activity within the context of civic engagement. It will be of interest to colleagues across the higher vocational education sector, both nationally and internationally, in situating their institutional and departmental scholarly activity strategies within the context of the communities which they serve.

Service-learning as a pedagogical avenue to apply students’ knowledge and skills, relate such knowledge and skills to communal needs, and prompt students’ civic participation has been emphasized in higher education for decades. It has been highlighted as one of the major roles, if not the most major, of universities in modern times, transitioning such universities toward becoming more socially vibrant, responsible, and connected institutions rather than being isolated think tanks explicit to a specific audience. Nonetheless, service-learning might seem neither a very spontaneous learning process for some theoretical courses (e.g., language, civilization, communication, and math courses) nor a very practical approach to implement during unprecedented times of lockdown and physical distancing such as that of the COVID-19. This chapter presents and analyzes the case study of a Lebanese higher education institution, in emphasizing service-learning through the “Learning in the Workplace and Community” (LiWC) approach across various theoretical and practice-based courses prior to and during the COVID-19 pandemic. This chapter asserts that prior to the pandemic, service-learning enabled universities to equip their students to become agents of social, economic, and technological change and development. On the other hand, the chapter argues that during and post-COVID-19, service-learning will empower universities to play a more critical and vital role in preparing their students to become agents of support, resilience, agility, and sustainable growth within a global era of social, economic, technological, and healthcare chaos and change. In other words, service-learning will equip students to become avant-garde of certainty in such an uncertain, complex world.

This chapter introduces the notion of the ‘Innovation Story’ as a methodological approach to public policy evaluation, which builds in greater opportunity for learning and reflexivity.

The Innovation Story is an adaptation of the case study approach and draws on participatory action research traditions. It is a structured narrative that describes a particular public policy innovation in the personalised contexts in which it is experienced by innovators. Its construction involves a discursive process through which involved actors tell their story, explain it to others, listen to their questions and co-construct knowledge of change together.

The approach was employed to elaborate five case studies of place-based leadership and public service innovation in the United Kingdom, The Netherlands and Mexico. The key findings are that spaces in which civic leaders come together from different ‘realms’ of leadership in a locality (community, business, professional managers and political leaders) can become innovation zones that foster inventive behaviour. Much depends on the quality of civic leadership, and its capacity to foster genuine dialogue and co-responsibility. This involves the evaluation seeking out influential ideas from below the level of strategic management, and documenting leadership activities of those who are skilled at ‘boundary crossing’ – for example, communicating between sectors.

The evaluator can be a key player in this process, as a convenor of safe spaces for actors to come together to discuss and deliberate before returning to practice. Our approach therefore argues for a particular awareness of the political nature of policy evaluation in terms of negotiating these spaces, and the need for politically engaged evaluators who are skilled in facilitating collective learning processes.

Designing learning environments is increasingly about mediating between the interactions in real and virtual space of largely self-organising learning communities. Traditional ways of briefing designers are less and less proficient, as the demands made on space become less timetabled, more probabilistic. ‘learning landscapes’ ¹ are proposed in which clusters of activity can be seen to be taking place across a field, that activity can be browsed, audited and fully engaged with. Such organic flows of interest and concentration are hindered by traditional demarcated space models, and attempts to enable the flows through ‘flexible’ interlinking of rooms fail.

There is evidence ² that the organic interactions between learners grow exponentially when these learners are connected together as virtual communities in open, robust virtual platforms. But this works best when these interactions are grounded from time to time in real places. How can designers best provide spaces that support learning in real and virtual space? Should design teams be composed of people with skills in devising real and virtual space?

Increasingly the answer is ‘yes’, and this places strains on procurement processes. Built form can take a long time to deliver. So can virtual platforms take time to devise and make operable. Can these processes be aligned? The concepts for RMIT’s Design Hub, a physical design research platform, were developed through research conducted twelve years before the building was completed. Many of the gap years were taken up with establishing the financial basis for constructing the Hub. During this time the concepts were validated by testing with various potential user groups, and a further tranche of international investigations validated the level of innovation being sought. The process for RMIT’s Swanston Academic Building (SAB) was smoother and shorter, but it involved a year in which a ‘learning landscape’ concept was moulded through intensive work with user client focus groups.

Neither of these projects has a virtual doppelganger, though both have sophisticated and evolvable IT systems. The Hub embeds a process of curating research interaction and dissemination that is hampered by this fact. The mediated learning landscape of the SAB falls short of the originating concepts, – because space constraints did not allow for an undivided, flowing landscape. A well designed virtual counterpart could have provided what the insertion of walls has obscured. Should all future innovative learning and researching environments have a virtual counterpart from the outset?

There is an emerging trend for such paired environments in creative city thinking and in museums. Surely briefing and procuring real and virtual environments in tandem will enliven future space use in universities?