Advancing Knowledge Creation in Education Through Tripartite Partnerships

The purpose of this paper is to highlight the work of one tripartite partnership with stakeholders to improve and strengthen novice teachers’ pedagogical designs using design based professional learning guided by the principles of knowledge building/knowledge creation. The tripartite partnership involved 450 novice teachers from an urban school division, a practitioner-research university team, and the provincial government. Drawing upon one case, this paper analyzes the ways in which the design-based professional learning mirrored the knowledge building/knowledge creation processes highlighting the ways in which teachers worked in collaborative, collective, and connected ways to progressively improve pedagogical designs for collective knowledge building. Computer supported, networked digital technologies provided a community to develop an audit trail to keep track of progressive improvements and refinements to their pedagogical designs and to support, enable, and enhance knowledge building discourse. Design-based professional learning informed by the 12 principles of knowledge building/knowledge creation provided novice teachers with a process to work collectively as a community, progressively improving and refining their pedagogical designs, identifying the role of their pedagogical designs in their students’ work, and engaging with other teachers in their respective schools.

Download Full-text

ABDUCTIVE REASONING: A CONTRIBUTION TO KNOWLEDGE CREATION IN EDUCATION

Cadernos de Pesquisa ◽

10.1590/198053145255 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 49 (171) ◽

pp. 308-329 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Javier Nunez Moscoso

Keyword(s):

Knowledge Creation ◽

Knowledge Building ◽

Scientific Research ◽

Abductive Reasoning ◽

Logical Inference ◽

Philosophical System ◽

Scientific Project ◽

Educational Field

Abstract Based on an epistemological discussion, this paper aims to show the contribution of abduction as a scientific procedure in the educational field. To that end, I explain how scientific research approaches and processes are founded on the three types of logical inference: deduction, induction and abduction, all of which underpin knowledge building and the role of both science and researchers. Firstly, I describe the specific features of abduction according to Peirce’s philosophical system. Then, I illustrate its implementation in a study on teaching. Finally, I underscore how abduction could contribute to build a broader scientific project in the intercept between basic and praxeological research.

Download Full-text

Knowledge creation in small building and construction firms

Journal of Innovation Management ◽

10.24840/2183-0606_001.001_0009 ◽

2013 ◽

Vol 1 (1) ◽

pp. 125-142 ◽

Cited By ~ 7

Author(s):

Susanne Durst ◽

Ingi Runar Edvardsson ◽

Guido Bruns

Keyword(s):

Construction Industry ◽

Knowledge Creation ◽

Vital Role ◽

Knowledge Sources ◽

Structured Interviews ◽

Construction Firms ◽

External Knowledge ◽

Body Of Knowledge ◽

Small Building

Studies on knowledge creation are limited in general, and there is a particular shortage of research on the topic in small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). Given the importance of SMEs for the economy and the vital role of knowledge creation in innovation, this situation is unsatisfactory. Accordingly, the purpose of our study is to increase our understanding of how SMEs create new knowledge. Data are obtained through semi-structured interviews with ten managing directors of German SMEs operating in the building and construction industry. The findings demonstrate the influence of external knowledge sources on knowledge creation activities. Even though the managing directors take advantage of different external knowledge sources, they seem to put an emphasis on informed knowledge sources. The study´s findings advance the limited body of knowledge regarding knowledge creation in SMEs.

Download Full-text

The Geography of Insight

10.1093/oso/9780190865122.001.0001 ◽

2018 ◽

Cited By ~ 2

Author(s):

Richard Foley

Keyword(s):

Collective Knowledge ◽

Key Features

This book, based on a philosopher’s experiences as dean over almost two decades, argues it is appropriate for the sciences and humanities to have different aims and for the values informing their inquiries also to be different. It maintains there are four core differences: (1) it is proper for the sciences but not the humanities to seek insights not limited to particular locations, times, or things; (2) the sciences but not the humanities value findings as independent as possible of the perspectives of the inquirers; (3) the sciences should be wholly descriptive while the humanities can also be concerned with prescriptive claims, which give expression to values; and (4) the sciences are organized to increase collective knowledge, whereas in the humanities individual insight is highly valued independently of its ability to generate consensus. Associated with these differences are secondary distinctions: different attitudes about an endpoint of inquiry; different notions of intellectual progress; different roles for expertise; different assumptions about simplicity and complexity; and different approaches to issues associated with consciousness. Taken together these distinctions constitute an intellectual geography of the humanities and sciences: a mapping of key features of their epistemology. In addition, the book discusses the role of universities in an era attached to sound bites and immediately useful results, and the importance of there being a healthy culture of research for both the sciences and humanities, one that treasures long-term intellectual achievements and whose presiding value is that with respect to many issues it ought not to be easy to have opinions.

Download Full-text

A Brief Statement on the Future of Public Scholarship and the Research Methods Landscape

The Oxford Handbook of Methods for Public Scholarship ◽

10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190274481.013.19 ◽

2019 ◽

pp. 700-707

Author(s):

Patricia Leavy

Keyword(s):

Research Methods ◽

Teaching Practices ◽

Knowledge Building ◽

Research Community ◽

The State ◽

Public Scholarship ◽

Institutional Structures ◽

The Future ◽

Book Editor

The book editor offers some final comments about the state of the field and promise for the future. Leavy suggests researchers consider using the language of “shapes” to talk about the forms their research takes and to highlight the ongoing role of the research community in shaping knowledge-building practices. She reviews the challenges and rewards of taking your work public. Leavy concludes by noting that institutional structures need to evolve their rewards criteria in order to meet the demands of practicing contemporary research and suggests that professors update their teaching practices to bring the audiences of research into the forefront of discussions of methodology.

Download Full-text

Securitisation gaps: Towards ideational understandings of state weakness

European Journal of International Security ◽

10.1017/eis.2021.13 ◽

2021 ◽

pp. 1-20

Author(s):

Kevork Oskanian

Keyword(s):

The State ◽

Collective Knowledge ◽

State Action ◽

Role Of The State ◽

Wide Range ◽

State And Society ◽

Interpretive Approach ◽

Recent Developments ◽

The Republic

Abstract This article contributes a securitisation-based, interpretive approach to state weakness. The long-dominant positivist approaches to the phenomenon have been extensively criticised for a wide range of deficiencies. Responding to Lemay-Hébert's suggestion of a ‘Durkheimian’, ideational-interpretive approach as a possible alternative, I base my conceptualisation on Migdal's view of state weakness as emerging from a ‘state-in-society's’ contested ‘strategies of survival’. I argue that several recent developments in Securitisation Theory enable it to capture this contested ‘collective knowledge’ on the state: a move away from state-centrism, the development of a contextualised ‘sociological’ version, linkages made between securitisation and legitimacy, and the acknowledgment of ‘securitisations’ as a contested Bourdieusian field. I introduce the concept of ‘securitisation gaps’ – divergences in the security discourses and practices of state and society – as a concept aimed at capturing this contested role of the state, operationalised along two logics (reactive/substitutive) – depending on whether they emerge from securitisations of the state action or inaction – and three intensities (latent, manifest, and violent), depending on the extent to which they involve challenges to state authority. The approach is briefly illustrated through the changing securitisation gaps in the Republic of Lebanon during the 2019–20 ‘October Uprising’.

Download Full-text