Search results

As a high school senior, there was no doubt I wanted to attend college, it was just a matter of where. I applied to only two universities – Oakland University (OU) and MSU. I was not too familiar with MSU, but it had a good reputation; I was much more familiar with Oakland. Although I had obtained an application for the University of Michigan (UM), I decided that the UM application was just too long to complete. And what the heck is a wolverine anyway? I lived in Michigan for most of my life, and I had never spotted this mythical rodent. As a tendency, I always found Michigan students and alumni to be either too arrogant or eccentric for my taste. Also, at that time of my life, I found the atmosphere in Ann Arbor not right in some way, so I applied to only two universities.¹

There is an urgency to build a critical view of information and communication technologies in society and education in order to harness their pedagogical potential. Generally, the Covid-19 pandemic demanded transformation, which is one of the possibilities in times of crisis. Despite the pandemic exposing digital exclusion in many parts of the planet, digital technologies concurrently have overcome, at least in part, social isolation through the provision of remote activities. The functionality of technologies motivated the question that guides the present investigation: how does the use of technologies before, during, and after the pandemic period appear in the products of the ISATT academic community? The objective is to come to know the contribution of ISATT and the degree to which its input is current and relevant. To meet our goal, we conducted an exploratory study gathering data by means of Google Form questionnaire. ISATT members invited to answer the questionnaire were also participants in the survey. Our intent is to map and describe the relationship between technology and creative teaching and categorize the different approaches used. Our analysis will allow ISATT community members to evaluate their interests, foci, trends, and contributions.

How do organizations respond to negative feedback regarding their innovation activities? In this chapter, the authors reconcile contradictory predictions stemming from behavioral learning and from the escalation of commitment (EoC) perspectives regarding persistence under negative performance feedback. The authors core argument suggests that the seemingly contradictory psychological processes indicated by these two perspectives occur simultaneously in decision makers but that the design of organizational roles and reward systems affects their prevalence in decision-making tasks. Specifically, the authors argue that for decision makers responsible for an individual project, responses given to negative performance feedback regarding a project are dominated by self-justification and loss-avoidance mechanisms predicted by the EoC literature, while for decision makers responsible for a portfolio of projects, responses to negative performance regarding a project are dominated by an under-sampling of poorly performing alternatives that behavioral learning theory predicts. In addition to assigning decision-making authority to different organizational roles, organizational designers shape the strength of these mechanisms through the design of reward systems and specifically by setting more or less ambiguous goals, aspiration levels, time horizons of incentives provided, and levels of failure tolerance.