Business oriented approach to reinstrumentation and control improvement projects

Author(s):  
Alan Munns
2010 ◽  
pp. 343-364 ◽  
Author(s):  
Henk Eijkman

This chapter addresses a significant theoretical gap in the Web 2.0 (or “Web 2.0+,” as it is referred to by the author) literature by analyzing the educational implications of the “seismic shift in epistemology” (Dede, 2008, p. 80) that is occurring. As already identified in Chapter 2, there needs to be a consistency between our own epistemic assumptions and those embedded in Web 2.0. Hence the underlying premise of this chapter is that the adoption of social media in education implies the assumption of a very different epistemology—a distinctly different way of understanding the nature of knowledge and the process of how we come to know. The argument is that this shift toward a radically altered, “postmodernist,” epistemic architecture of participation will transform the way in which educators and their students create and manage the production, dissemination, and validation of knowledge. In future, the new “postmodern” Web will increasingly privilege what we may usefully think of as a socially focused and performance-oriented approach to knowledge production. The expected subversion and disruption of our traditional or modernist power-knowledge system, as already evident in the Wikipedia phenomenon, will reframe educational practices and promote a new power-knowledge system, made up of new, social ways in which to construct and control knowledge across the Internet. The chapter concludes by advocating strategies for critical engagement with this new epistemic learning space, and posing a number of critical questions to guide ongoing practice.


2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tat'yana Korneeva ◽  
Tat'yana Tatarovskaya

2013 ◽  
Vol 40 (14) ◽  
pp. 5648-5660 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. Fernandez de Canete ◽  
A. Garcia-Cerezo ◽  
I. Garcia-Moral ◽  
P. Del Saz ◽  
E. Ochoa

2010 ◽  
Vol 22 (2) ◽  
pp. 261-271 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eun Young Mun ◽  
Marsha E. Bates ◽  
Evgeny Vaschillo

AbstractSterba and Bauer's Keynote Article discusses the blurred distinction between theoretical principles and analytical methods in the person-oriented approach as problematic and review which of the person-oriented principles are testable under the four types of latent variable models for longitudinal data. Although the issue is important, some arbitrariness exists in determining whether a given principle can be tested within each analytic approach. To close the gap between person-oriented theory and methods and to extend the person-oriented approach more generally, it is necessary to embrace both variable-oriented and person-oriented methods because it is not the individual analytic methods but how studies are implemented as a whole that defines the person-oriented approach. Three areas in developmental psychopathology are discussed in which variable-oriented and person-oriented methods can be complementary. The need to better understand the target system using an appropriate person-specific tool is graphically illustrated. Several concepts of dynamic systems such as attractors, phase transitions, and control parameters are illustrated using experimentally perturbed cardiac rhythms (heart rate variability) as an example in the context of translational alcohol research.


1984 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 413-448 ◽  
Author(s):  
Clemens Knobloch

Summary The paper recaptures, on the basis of one of the central issues of the discussion, namely, the relationship between thought and speech, the psychlin-guistic controversy between Wilhelm Wundt (1832–1920), Hermann Paul (1846–1921), and Anton Marty (1847–1914) at the turn of this century. The basic tenets of all three theories are presented, their assumptions analysed, and their respective fruitfulness (or lack of it) put forward. After redressing the distorted picture of Wundt’s position in the recent historiography of psycholingu-istics, it is shown that Wundt’s model of an expression-oriented approach, which in effect identifies categories of linguistic surface structure with those of an inner psychological nature, remains circular and not amenable to further development. Hermann Paul, though making use of a similar procedure, is opposed to Wundt’s (as well as Heymann Steinthal’s (1823–1899) social psychology or Völkerpsychologie), favouring instead the individual as the locus of linguistic events (and hence linguistic analysis), thereby playing down the importance of linguistic intercourse and communication in language acquisition and historical development. Finally, in Marty’s theories the contradiction between his reliance on 19th-century event-directed psychology and a rather modern functional conception of language is most evident. Marty wants, unlike Wundt and Paul, to distinguish clearly between genetic and systematic questions. But while recognizing the complementarity of event expression and control of comprehension on the part of the hearer, he does not do so in the case of the linguistic representation of ‘objects and events’. In an attempt to escape from the naive homology of thinking and grammar, Marty argues in favour of a complete separation of the two mental activities. The paper argues that the common psychological premisses of these authors must be considered if the differences between them are to be understood, since it is just these particular premises that lie in the way of an adequate comprehension of problems of semantics and of communication.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document