Search results

In these uncertain and risky times, the work that educators and educational researchers carry out may feel inconsequential. In preparing young people to live well in a world worth living in, educators must consider, firstly, what roles they can play in a global environment riven by volatile economic, social, and environmental contexts, and secondly, the responsibilities they bear as researchers to produce forms of understanding, modes of action, and ways of relating to one another and this world.

In this chapter, we introduce the pedagogy, education, and praxis (PEP) network and how it is that we, as researchers from around the world, came together to discuss our researching practices in coming to know and explore educational research problems concerning equity, diversity and social justice within and across different cultural settings. We share short stories of ourselves to reveal how it is that we have come to know, be, and act as researchers in our projects and how working alongside each other – our mutual relatings – have generated further understanding about our own and each other’s researching practices.

This chapter establishes the purpose of the book, where we share empirical work through the lens of practice architectures. For instance, what is considered to be an educational equity problem across international or cross-cultural sites? What are considered acceptable forms of evidence of coming to understand educational inequity in its diverse forms in different sites? How are taken-for-granted research practices enabling and/or constraining different forms of understandings about educational inequity, including the issues to be researched and/or the direction of the research project? We then provide an overview of the remaining chapters.

This is the concluding chapter of Researching Practices Across and Within Diverse Educational Sites: Onto-epistemological Considerations. In this chapter, we recall the primary purpose of the book as to examine what it is that we believe we do as a diverse group of researchers from Australia, Finland, Norway, and Canada in educational research, reflexively considering our researching practices and how projects ‘turn out’ as a consequence of these practices. Having met and worked together as a part of the pedagogy, education, and praxis (PEP) international network, our collaborations offer us an important intercultural and cross-cultural opportunity to consider our positionality and responsibilities as researchers to our participants and co-inquirers, and their communities. Sharing our projects reveals the affordances and challenges offered by various methodologies unique from and common across our projects but also reinforces the imperatives of relationality, respect, and reciprocity between researchers and the communities they serve. We leave the readers with a concept that builds upon the title of this book, that of axio-onto-epistemology, already in use in postcolonial and decolonial/Indigenous scholarship, but raised here as an open invitation for all educational researchers to consider in their researching praxis.

This chapter focusses on the research methodology of the completed project, drawing on what Martin (2008) described as ‘Indigenist’ research traditions or practices. The project drew upon tenets of critical race theory which developed over the life of a university teaching and learning project to support the praxis of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander, or Indigenous,1 pre-service teachers on their final internships prior to graduating.

The broader project was conceptualised and framed within our prioritisation of Indigenist standpoint and critical race theory. Our project was designed to amplify the perspectives and voices of Indigenous students in situations where White, hegemonic relations appeared to constrain their potential achievement on practicum in socially unjust and often racist ways. Research into the achievement and success of Indigenous education graduates in Australia is dominated by non-Indigenous reporting, framed in deficit language of Indigenous ‘underachievement’, ‘barriers’, ‘lack’, and ‘disengagement’, rather than from their experience of injustice in their professional preparation as teachers.

The research design troubled how researchers like us ‘come to know’ Indigenous achievement in the higher education sector through the pre-service teachers’ words, impelling us to listen to stories of discrimination, rather than to official accounts of how they ‘failed’ to measure up to teacher standards. The attention to detail in the multi-site, micro-level practices in teacher education and the ways these unfold in situ for Indigenous students would not be possible without the Indigenist research methodology developed in partnership with Indigenous research colleagues and student co-researchers.

This chapter then serves to remind educational researchers that research is a practice and has practice architectures with particular hegemonic arrangements which have not transpired to serve the interests of Indigenous peoples. Honouring Indigenist standpoint and employing critical race theory in research design thus means paying particular and careful attention to the work that research practices do, on, to, and with communities, not normative (colonial) crafting of the praxis research problem.

The lack of legal framework on corporate criminal liability (CCL) in Mauritius is a matter of concern with the growing number of corporate crimes. The purpose of the paper is therefore to provide a critical overview of the existing framework on CCL in Mauritius with the aim of underlining its deficiencies and lacunas. As a consequence, an attempt is made to compare the Mauritian model with the French one, so that salient features and characteristics of the French model of CCL can be borrowed into the Mauritian legal framework.

This paper adopts the black-letter approach and the comparative research methodology. The legislative framework of Mauritius on CCL will be compared to the related laws of France with the goal of drawing lessons and inspirations for Mauritius, given that the French model of CCL is well established and highly effective.

The mandatory application of the identification principle in CCL, inspired from the British common law, is a serious impediment towards successful criminal prosecution of companies responsible for criminal offences. In addition, the lack of clear legal provisions on substantive and procedural aspects of CCL is a matter of concern and demonstrates the dire need for legal amendments and action from the legislator as the paper discusses.

To the best of the author’s knowledge, this paper will be among the very first one tackling this area of law from a comparative perspective. The issue of CCL has indeed receive very little academic attention and this paper will help in filling the literature gap on this matter. It will also help future research on the matter for students, academics and corporate law practitioners.

Generation Z has already begun to impact our world, particularly through their social change behaviors, personal characteristics, volunteering, and entrepreneurial endeavors. In particular, Gen Zers around the world like to stay informed of societal issues, share information with others about those issues, and engage in personal behaviors and/or lifestyle changes to address those issues.

The emergence of dark kitchens in the restaurant industry is a contemporary phenomenon, arising most recently in the context of the so-called gig economy. This new business model flourished during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic on a global scale. Despite dark kitchens' popularity, considerable negative publicity exists in the news related to poor working conditions. To highlight this new phenomenon, this paper explores the existing literature on worker exploitation in dark kitchens in the context of the gig economy.

A systematic literature review of hospitality and tourism databases generated 1,430 articles, of which 18 met the authors' inclusion criteria for the final analysis, and 1,030 anecdotal sources, of which 47 were included. Thematic analysis was used to identify the key themes and summarise the findings to be used for further studies.

The popularity of dark kitchens as a business model is premised on the fact that dark kitchens' dramatically reduces the operational cost and increases productivity. On the other hand, the working conditions and contractual agreements of the gig workers in dark kitchens raise several questions from operational, legal and ethical perspective. These poor working conditions create the conditions for worker exploitation and further damage the sector's image.

This study advocates that companies and managers are responsible for implementing and monitoring fair working conditions in dark kitchens. The existence of poor working conditions increases employee turnover and, overall, affects the industry's reputation.

This explorative study provides insights into the working conditions and contractual agreements in dark kitchens. Currently, there is no other study (empirical or conceptual) to shed light on the working practices. The authors hope this study will trigger further discussion and empirical research in this field.

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 paper aims to consider the practices and experiences of the new school-based mentors for Early Career Teachers (ECT's), emerging from the UK Government's new early career framework (ECF) policy (DfE, 2019a). The paper uses Lipsky's (2010) framing of professionals as “street level bureaucrats” to consider the extent to which the ECT mentors, as new policy actors, exercise professional discretion (Lipsky, 2010) in negotiating and aligning the new ECF policy with existing practice.

To research the mentor's interpretation and enactment of the new ECF policy, semi structured interviews were undertaken with an initial sample of nine mentors and four induction tutors who were also mentors. Online semi structured interviews were held, lasting around 50 min. This method was largely pragmatic as the study started during a period when schools were still cautious of face-to-face visitors in terms of COVID-19. Although the benefits for the interviewer experiencing the culture and context in which the ECT mentor was situated were lost, offering online interviews was critical in securing mentors' time.

Findings suggest a disconnect between the intentions of the policy and the reality of its enactment at a local level. The ECT mentors have limited professional discretion, but some are exercising this in relation to their own professional development and the training they are providing for their ECTs. Most of the mentors are adapting the ECT's professional development journey whilst mindful of the programme requirements. The degree to which the ECT mentors used professional discretion was linked and limited largely by their own levels of confidence and experience of mentoring, and to a lesser extent the culture of their schools.

The ECF policy represents an important step in acknowledging the need to professionally develop mentors for the work they undertake supporting beginning teachers. However, the time and the content of the mentor training have not been given sufficient attention and remains a hugely missed opportunity. It does not appear to be recognised by the government policy makers but more significantly and concerning in this research sample it is not being recognised sufficiently by those mentoring the ECTs themselves.

There is an urgent need by the UK government and school leaders to understand the link between the quality of mentor preparation and the quality of the ECTs who will be entering the profession and influencing the quality of education in future years. More time and resourcing need to be focussed on the professional development of mentors enabling them to exercise professional discretion in increasingly sophisticated ways in relation to the implementation of the ECF policy.

The ECF policy is the latest English government response to international concerns around the recruitment and retention of teachers. The policy mandates for a new policy actor: the ECT mentor, responsible for the support and professional development of beginning teachers. The nature of the mentor's role in relation to the policy is emerging and provides an interesting case study in the disconnect between the intentions of a policy and its initial enactment on the ground. The mentors may be viewed as street level bureaucrats exercising degrees of professional discretion as they interpret the policy in their own school context.