Search results

The fateful question for our time is what comes after post-modernism, what comes after the after? Building upon the insight of Thomas Mann in Dr. Faustus, the great fictional study of the post-modern composer Adrian Leverkuhn, and upon insights of some of the post-modernists themselves, this after hovers as the lingering but ultimately expunged final (dissonant) chord whose uncanny presence in absence turns cosmic emptiness into the cult of memory, ritualized attentiveness to the faded chord that connects us back to a departed world of meaning by a gossamer thread. A vision of this ritual is acted out in the greatest of all works of deconstruction, The Recovery of Lost Time, in which Marcel Proust guards this attenuating thread with his life like the Wichita lineman, for that is his life. The traveler stranded at the beginning of the epic novel can no longer go forward – there is no more track to lay and no destination to lay it toward – only the obscured recesses of a lost world (long ago when the future still existed), now as fugitive as the years.

The debate between modernity and post-modernity has taken centre stage of philosophical discourse since before the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic. Even after the advent of the pandemic, it has yet to be resolved with each camp claiming to be the victor over the other, and therefore sealed a permanent dichotomy between both schools of thought. With COVID-19 menacing the world, it is timely to revisit the debate and to come to a conclusion that once and for all will dissolve the fissure between these two dominant theoretical paradigms. It is also hoped that the conclusion made can pave the way for a new theoretical paradigm that is more comprehensive and efficient in facing the post-COVID world. By referring to Southeast Asian communities namely the Malaysian, Indonesian, and Singaporean publics, the chapter puts forward the argument that the existing dichotomy between these two theoretical frameworks could no longer sustain its status-quo. This is because the abruption of confusions amongst the public over the issues surrounding the COVID-19 vaccines – and hence on modern science and modernity itself – requires us to stop from rigidly devoting ourselves towards either one of these theoretical paradigms. Based on the case studies, the chapter then suggests for revisions to be made by benefitting from the best of both theoretical paradigms and by omitting those concepts that are no longer effective to be adopted in facing the post-pandemic world.

The purpose of this paper is to explore what happened in Romanian education in the post‐modern context.

The paper discusses the reactions to the changes in Romanian education.

Post‐modernism means innovation. Communication, team work, adaptability, flexibility and problem solving are key skills for the post‐modernist workforce and have major implications in the field of education.

The paper offers insights into the transition from excessively rigid conditions to a more open environment.

Shows that the post‐modern perspective has valuable implications for managing organizational and other change. In arguing for this claim, explains the starting point ‐ that post‐modernism is philosophical scepticism. Analyses the meaning of Derrida’s post‐modern view of justice, and explains why it is consistent with scepticism. Indicates that this view opposes domination and privileges hesitancy in imposing solutions. Discusses the nature and some uses of what is described as the “in‐between”. Post‐modern scepticism, justice as hesitation and acting in the in‐between are shown to constitute a post‐modern perspective which opens up prospects and vistas in an age where non‐hierarchical and multicultural interactions are useful. Opposing domination, for instance, translates into liberating previously marginalized voices, like those of subordinates, women, minorities, the sexually policed and the economically dominated.

The purpose of this paper is to contribute to the theory and applications in social business and accountability.

The paper develops the theoretical arguments, shows the importance of non‐accounting measures, explores available non‐accounting measures and suggests BSC as an externally validated reporting tool.

There is a need to expand the accounting base to non‐financial measures; social business and social enterprises do not have externally validated performance reports and there is no benchmark data to compare performance.

This is a conceptual and theoretical study. It needs empirical validation.

Using the suggested measurement and reporting will make public accountability transparent and expand the accountant's social role. It will motivate teaching of social business in accounting.

The study supports social business as a legitimate entity; corporations engaged in social business will be more publicly responsible; the study will encourage investment in social business; small entrepreneurs from the bottom of the society will have an opportunity to participate in the economy; and the poor will participate in the economy, will expand the economy and contribute to social and economic development.

The paper includes guidelines for implementing the proposed BSC, performance measurements and reporting techniques.

Provides a lighthearted view of post‐modernist links with retail marketing via the UK soap opera Coronation Street.

Modernist theories in leadership were traditionally dominated by masculine incorporation and lacked feminine presence in development and language. The synergistic theory of leadership (SLT) seeks to explicate the need for a post‐modernist leadership theory by providing an alternative to, and not a replacement for, traditional theories. Six aspects particular to the SLT influence the ideas and include issues concerning diversity and the inclusion of the female voice in the theory. Four factors are key to the relational and interactive nature of the theory, which provides a useful framework for building and understanding the interdependent relationships. In a tetrahedron model, the theory uses four factors, including leadership behavior, organizational structure, external forces, and attitudes, beliefs, and values to demonstrate aspects not only of leadership but its effects on various institutions and positions. Developed through a qualitative approach, the theory has been validated qualitatively and quantitatively nationwide and is currently being validated internationally.

This paper aims to consider the impact of outcome-based education (OBE) on students studying human services degrees, particularly those in a policing program. This work examines the validity of the notion that OBE is a progressive teaching approach that improves the quality of education and subsequently professional practice.

A critical analysis of a systemised outcome-based teaching and learning approach is adopted.

OBE has, as an idea, swept across most educational institutions in an apparently revolutionary wave. However, any critical scrutiny of this systemised approach to teaching and learning calls into question whether it is really progressive or empty rhetoric achieving reactionary ends. Any systemised attempt at social change by way of neo-liberal outcomes that are not principle-driven will serve only to reinforce a philosophy of aggressive competition and individualism at the expense of the rule of law and social policy that is situated on a social contract foundation.

The practical implications of this paper relate to the delivery of higher education teaching, with particular reference to human service degrees such as policing: the use of post-modernist theory to develop contemporary teaching and learning systems has created challenges with regards to scientific knowledge; a principled, deontological teaching and learning system rather than a utilitarian “outcome”-based delivery is proposed; the validity of the notion that outcome-based teaching and learning systems are progressive initiatives that improve the quality of education is questioned; and the impact of OBE for students entering human services professions such as policing has implications for public and community safety.

This paper considers the efficacy of OBE as a model for higher education teaching, with particular reference to human services degrees such as policing.

This paper is situated within two debates. First concerns the theories of ‘disorganised capitalism’ and the like which argue for major restructuring of advanced capitalist societies. Reed (1991) usefully identifies and summarises three varieties of such theory: (i) Post‐Fordism/Flexible Specialisation (e.g. Piore and Sabel, 1982); (ii) Disorganised Capitalism (e.g. Lash and Urry, 1987); (iii) Post‐Modernism (e.g. Poster, 1984). Common to these theories of ‘disorganised capitalism’ is the understanding that the progressive development of an ‘organised society’ (Prestus, 1962) — characterised by concentration, centralisation and corporatism — is being interrupted/challenged by trends in a contrary direction. The second relates to arguments about the work of middle management (e.g. Goffee and Scase, 1986 v. Dopson and Stewart, 1990).

Assigning or claiming identities can be a dangerous business. Labels carry conflicting meanings and, even more importantly, what is a laudatory term to some will be grounds for condemnation by others. My immediate response to the invitation to write this piece about becoming a symbolic interactionist, aside from the pleasure of being asked, was that I was not sure that I could claim, or even that I would want to claim, this label. I have a visceral dislike of theoretical-cum-methodological camps, not least because over the years I have been accused of belonging to a variety of these, from positivism to post-modernism. Reflecting a little more on the invitation, however, I realized that I could not reasonably deny that in the past, particularly in the 1970s, I regarded myself and was seen by others as an interactionist. Moreover, while my ideas about sociological work are now somewhat different from what they were then, and the direction of travel might be viewed as ‘un-interactionist’, in fact much of my work is still focused on issues coming out of the interactionist tradition: notably, Blumer's views about methodology, Becker's arguments about ‘Whose side are we on?’, and the notion of analytic induction.