Search results

As publishers and academia swiftly head towards e-textbooks, it is important to understand how students feel about using e-textbooks as a primary learning tool. This paper discusses results of a small-scale study looking into how a group of language learners view and use e-textbooks as learning tools in ESL classrooms. The paper concludes by offering teaching implications that could ease integrating e-textbooks in language classrooms in a more effective and efficient manner.

Data economy is pervasively present in our everyday lives. Still, ordinary laypersons' chances to genuine communication with other stakeholders are scarce. This paper aims to raise awareness about communication patterns in the context of data economy and initiate a dialogue about laypersons' position in data economy ecosystems.

This conceptual paper covers theory-based critical reflection with ethical- and empirical-based remarks. It provides novel perspectives both for research and stakeholder collaboration.

The authors suggest invitational rhetoric and Habermasian discourse as instruments towards understanding partnership between all stakeholders of the data economy to enable laypersons to transfer from subjectivity to the agency.

The authors provide (1) theory-based critical reflection concerning communication patterns in the data economy; (2) both ethical and empirical-based remarks about laypersons' position in data economy and (3) ideas for interdisciplinary research and stakeholder collaboration practices by using invitational rhetoric and rational discourse. By that, this paper suggests taking a closer look at communication practices and ethics alike in the data economy. Moreover, it encourages clear, rational and justified arguments between stakeholders in a respectful and equal environment in the data economy ecosystems.

Peer feedback is applauded in many writing courses for fostering students’ independence and collaboration and for creating a wider learning environment in which students can benefit from the feedback and diversity of input they get from other peers (Stubbe, 2013). It improves students’ writing skills by developing their use of effective composing processes since they can share ideas while planning, drafting, and revising writing forms (Richards and Schmidt, 2010). It also reduces the anxiety of students who can get constructive feedback on their writing from other peers instead of their teachers (Phillipson, 2007). However, application of peer feedback in writing courses is a complex process since it requires provision of rubrics and guidelines for students to follow; this is in addition to explaining the areas they need to focus on. It also requires having cultural awareness of the level of corrections Arab students can accept. This paper reflects on a practical experiment conducted with a group of undergraduate students for showing how peer feedback is approached and practised by students in English language courses. Students’ views and perceptions about peer feedback are also surveyed showing their appreciation of the level of collaboration peer feedback encourages among them. Nevertheless, the results also show a number of concerns students have about peer feedback.

This study aims to address three research questions pertaining to climate neutrality within the supply chain of metal and mining industry: (1) How can an organization implement practices related to climate neutrality in the supply chain? (2) How do members of the supply chain adopt different measures and essential processes to assist an organization in responding to climate change-related concerns? (3) How can the SAP-LAP framework assist in analyzing and proposing solutions to attain climate neutrality?

To address the proposed research questions concerning climate neutrality, this study employs a case study approach utilizing the SAP-LAP (situation, actor, process–learning, action, performance) framework. Within the SAP-LAP framework, adopting a natural resource-based perspective, the study thoroughly examines the intricacies and interactions among existing situations, pertinent actors and processes that impact climate initiatives within a metal and mining company.

The study's findings suggest that organizations can achieve the objective of climate neutrality by prioritizing resources and capabilities that lead to reduced GHG emissions, lower energy consumption and optimal resource utilization. The study further proposes key elements that significantly influence the pursuit of climate neutrality within enterprises.

This study is one of the earliest contributions to the development of a holistic understanding of climate neutrality in the supply chain of the metal and mining industry.

The study will assist practitioners and policymakers in comprehending the present circumstances, actors and processes involved in enterprises' supply networks in order to attain climate neutrality in supply chains, as well as in taking the right steps to enhance performance.

This study presents a climate neutrality model and provides valuable insights into emission management, contributing to the achievement of the climate neutrality objective.

It's hard to envision a system more global and more integrated than research. Many stakeholders affect and are affected by changes in the research ecosystem; the ecosystem differs in significant ways across the globe and between researchers, institutions and fields of study; and there are many questions that exclusive action can't address. There are also broad ecosystem-level questions that need answering. For these reasons alone, global approaches to reform are needed.

The first step in this exploration isn't to start looking for “solutions”, but to develop a better understanding of how our needs and interests overlap. By identifying the broad contours of common ground in this conversation, we can build the guardrails and mileposts for our collaborative efforts and then allow the finer-grained details of community-developed plans more flexibility and guidance to evolve over time.

What are these overlapping interests? First, the people in this community share a common motive – idealism – to make research better able to serve the public good. We also share a common desire to unleash the power of open to improve research and accelerate discovery; we are all willing to fix issues now instead of waiting for market forces or government intervention to do this for us; and we want to ensure that everyone everywhere has equitable access to knowledge.

There is also very broad agreement in this community about which specific problems in scholarly communication need to be fixed and why, and well as many overlapping beliefs in this community. OSI participants have concluded that four such beliefs best define our common ground: (1) research and society will benefit from open done right; (2) successful solutions will require broad collaboration; (3) connected issues need to be addressed, and (4) open isn't a single outcome, but a spectrum.

OSI has been observing and debating the activity in scholarly communication since late 2014 with regard to understanding possible global approaches and solutions for improving the future of open research. While the COVID-19 pandemic has made the importance of open science abundantly clear, the struggle to achieve this goal (not just for science but for all research) has been mired in a lack of clarity and urgency for over 20 years now, mostly stalling on the tension between wanting more openness but lacking realistic solutions for making this happen on a large scale with so many different stakeholders, needs and perspectives involved.

Underlying this tension is a fundamental difference in philosophy: whether the entire scholarly communication marketplace, driven by the needs and desires of researchers, should determine what kind of open it wants and needs; or whether this marketplace should be compelled to adopt open reform measures developed primarily by the scholarly communication system's main billpayers-funders and libraries. There is no widespread difference of opinion in the community whether open is worth pursuing. The debate is mostly over what specific open solutions are best, and at what pace open reforms should occur.

OSI has proposed a plan of action for working together to rebuild the future of scholarly communication on strong, common ground foundation. This plan – which we're referring to as Plan A – calls for joint action on studies, scholarly communication infrastructure improvement, and open outreach/education. Plan A also calls for working together with UNESCO to develop a unified global roadmap for the future of open, and for striving to ensure the community's work in this space is researcher-focused, collaborative, connected (addressing connected issues like peer review), diverse and flexible (no one-size-fits-all solutions), and beneficial to research. UNESCO's goal is to finish its roadmap proposal by early 2022.

For a full discussion of OSI's common ground recommendations, please see the Plan A website at http://plan-a.world.

This study aims to explore a range of institutional, environmental and policy conditions that influence the creation of “bossless” or “flat” companies, i.e. firms with little or no formal hierarchy.

The author builds on the theory and evidence presented by Foss and Klein (2022) in their study of the costs and benefits of organizing without hierarchy. The author also draws on a variety of related theoretical insights and empirical evidence. The paper is exploratory and anecdotal though and is intended to motivate further research rather than provide a definitive account of bossless organizing.

The paper develops nine propositions. It suggests that high levels of economic freedom create maximum scope for entrepreneurs to experiment with different organizational forms (1). Likewise, a lack of economic freedom increases the scope for the government to experiment (2). Markets characterized by technological innovation and uncertainty are likely to discourage bossless organizing (3 and 4), while stagnating industries with major capital requirements are likely to encourage it (5). Labor market interventions that increase the cost of employment contracts sometimes encourage firms to flatten (6), but more generally, these interventions encourage expanding management layers (7). In environments with strong intellectual property (IP) laws, companies with more modular and knowledge-based work are more likely to flatten (8). The creation of low-hierarchy firms such as cooperatives is encouraged by public subsidies, access to cheap credit and preferential tax treatment (9).

Studies of bossless or flat firms focus almost exclusively on describing their internal organization and evaluating their performance; little attention is paid to the conditions that encourage or discourage the emergence of these firms. This paper focuses on the latter, with a view to encouraging more scholarly interest in this field.