论文信息 - Academic domains as political battlegrounds

Academic domains as political battlegrounds

This article theorizes the functional relationship between the human components (i.e., scholars) and non-human components (i.e., structural configurations) of academic domains. It is organized around the following question: in what ways have scholars formed and been formed by the structural configurations of their academic domain? The article uses as a case study the academic domain of education and technology to examine this question. Its authorship approach is innovative, with a worldwide collection of academics (99 authors) collaborating to address the proposed question based on their reflections on daily social and academic practices. This collaboration followed a three-round process of contributions via email. Analysis of these scholars’ reflective accounts was carried out, and a theoretical proposition was established from this analysis. The proposition is of a mutual (yet not necessarily balanced) power (and therefore political) relationship between the human and non-human constituents of an academic realm, with the two shaping one another. One implication of this proposition is that these non-human elements exist as political ‘actors’, just like their human counterparts, having ‘agency’ – which they exercise over humans. This turns academic domains into political (functional or dysfunctional) ‘battlefields’ wherein both humans and non-humans engage in political activities and actions that form the identity of the academic domain.

[1] Markus Nivala,et al. Simple answers for complex problems: education and ICT in Finnish information society strategies , 2009 .

[2] Yiasemina Karagiorgi,et al. Curricula Considerations in ICT Integration: Models and Practices in Cyprus , 2004, Education and Information Technologies.

[3] Tae-Hee Choi. Transforming education: global perspectives, experiences, and implications , 2016 .

[4] Rosa Maria Bottino. On-line learning networks: Framework and scenarios , 2007, Education and Information Technologies.

[5] Nafisat Afolake Adedokun-Shittu,et al. Evaluating the Impact of Technology Integration in Teaching and Learning. , 2014 .

[6] Martin Ebner,et al. Das O in MOOCs – über die Bedeutung freier Bildungsressourcen in frei zugänglichen Online-Kursen , 2014, HMD Praxis der Wirtschaftsinformatik.

[7] Fehmida Hussain,et al. E-LEARNING 3.0 = E-LEARNING 2.0 + WEB 3.0? , 2012, CELDA 2012.

[8] Gianluca Frozzi,et al. Riflessioni sull’efficacia del Social Networking nel supportare le transizioni degli adulti emergenti in differenti sistemi di attività , 2010 .

[9] Kamal Eddine El Kadiri,et al. Towards a participatory E-learning 2.0 A new E-learning focused on learners and validation of the content , 2010, ArXiv.

[10] Dave L. Edyburn. Research and Practice: Scholarly Endeavors: Conducting a Comprehensive Review of the Literature Using Digital Resources. , 2001 .

[11] D. Kirkpatrick. Techniques for evaluating training programs , 1979 .

[12] K. Charmaz,et al. Constructing Grounded Theory , 2014 .

[13] I. Wallerstein,et al. The Modern World-System: Capitalist Agriculture and the Origins of the European World-Economy in the Sixteenth Century. , 1975 .

[14] Swapna Kumar,et al. The Net Generation as Preservice Teachers , 2011 .

[15] Matt Dunleavy,et al. What added value does a 1: 1 student to laptop ratio bring to technology-supported teaching and learning? , 2007, J. Comput. Assist. Learn..

[16] M. Grant,et al. Communities of practice. , 2020, Health progress.

[17] S. Schön,et al. Forschungszugänge und -methoden im interdisziplinären Feld des technologiegestützten Lernens , 2013 .

[18] Rosa Maria Bottino. Reflections on Educational Technology, Research and School Innovation , 2011, WSKS.

[19] Johan van Braak,et al. Curricula and the use of ICT in education: Two worlds apart? , 2007, Br. J. Educ. Technol..

[20] A. Kellerman,et al. The Constitution of Society : Outline of the Theory of Structuration , 2015 .

[21] Martin Ebner,et al. E-Learning 2.0 = e-Learning 1.0 + Web 2.0? , 2007, The Second International Conference on Availability, Reliability and Security (ARES'07).

[22] Punie Yves,et al. Domestication Of Media And Technology , 2005 .

[23] L. Winner. Autonomous Technology: Technics-out-of-Control as a Theme in Political Thought , 1977 .

[24] Organisational Politics - Only the Darker Side? , 1987 .

[25] R. Silverstone,et al. Information and communication technologies and the moral economy of the household , 2003 .

[26] Jo Tondeur,et al. Teachers’ Beliefs and Uses of Technology to Support 21st-century Teaching and Learning , 2014 .

[27] John Kenneth Galbraith. The New Industrial State , 1967 .

[28] Ryan Shaun Joazeiro de Baker,et al. Educational Data Mining: An Advance for Intelligent Systems in Education , 2014, IEEE Intelligent Systems.

[29] Andrew Hope,et al. Risk Taking, Boundary Performance and Intentional School Internet “Misuse” , 2007 .

[30] Jackie Gerstein,et al. Moving from Education 1.0 Through Education 2.0 Towards Education 3.0 , 2014 .

[31] M. Waters,et al. Modern Sociological Theory , 1994 .

[32] Neil Selwyn,et al. The Politics of Education and Technology , 2013 .

[33] M. Ott,et al. Can Serious Games Contribute to Developing and Sustaining 21st Century Skills? , 2015, Games Cult..