Th&ma Hoger Onderwijs 2021-1

More documents

Recommendations

Info

TH MA 1-21LiteratuurAshwin, P. (2020). Transforming University Eduation. A Manifesto. Londen: Bloomsbury.Ashwin, P.W., McLean, M. & Abbas, A. (2012). ‘The pedagogic device: sociology, knowledgepractices and teaching-learning processes’. In: P. Trowler, M. Saunders & V. Bamber(red.), Tribes and Territories in the 21st-Century: Rethinking the significance of disciplines inhigher education (pp. 118-129). Abingdon: Routledge.Bernstein, B.B. (2000). Pedagogy, Symbolic Control, and Identity. Theory, Research, Critique.New York: Rowman & Littlefield Pub.Bourdieu, P. (1986). ‘The Forms of Capital’. In: J. Richardson (red.), Handbook of Theory andResearch for the Sociology of Education (pp. 241-258). Westport: Greenwood.Boyer, E.L. (1990). Scholarship Reconsidered. Priorities of the Professoriate. Carnegie Foundationfor the Advancement of Teaching.Brew, A. (2001). Conceptions of Research: A Phenomenographic Study. Studies in highereducation, 26(3), 271-285.Cartwright, N. & Hardie, J. (2012). Evidence-Based Policy. A Practical Guide to Doing it Better.Oxford University Press.Cook-Sather, A. (2014). Student-faculty partnership in explorations of pedagogical practice:a threshold concept. International Journal for Academic Development, 19(3), 186-198.Griffioen, D.M.E. (2019a). Higher Education’s Responsibility for Balanced Professionalism.Methodology beyond Research. (Inaugurele rede). Hogeschool van Amsterdam. Geraadpleegdop: www.hva.nl/content/evenementen/oraties/2019/10/didi-griffioen.htmlGriffioen, D.M.E. (2019b). Promoveren in het Nederlandse binair stelsel. Practicus ofacademicus. Th&ma Hoger Onderwijs(5), 58-63.Griffioen, D.M.E. & Jong, U. de (2015). Mapping Dutch Higher Education Lecturers’ Discourseon Research at Times of Academic Drift. Scottish Journal for Arts, Social Sciences,and Scientific Studies, 26(1), 81-94.Lectoraat Higher Education, Research and Innovation (2020). Strategisch programmaOnderzoek in Onderwijs. Geraadpleegd op: www.hva.nl/content/lectoraten/higher-edu-cation-research-and-innovation/strategisch-programma-onderzoek-in-onderwijs/strate-gisch-programma-onderzoek-in-onderwijs.htmlLeighton, R., & Griffioen, D.M.E. (in review). Lecturers’ Curational Behavior in HigherEducation.Nationaal Regieorgaan Onderwijsonderzoek (2019). Toegekende Comenius Projecten.Geraadpleegd op: www.nro.nl/onderzoeksprojecten/comeniusprogramma/toegekende-projecten/#griffioenSimons, M. & Elen, J. (2007). The ‘research-teaching nexus’ and ‘education through research’:and exploration of ambivalences. Studies in higher education, 32(5), 617-631.Van den Akker, J.J.H. (2003). Curriculum Perspectives: An Introduction. In: J.J.H. van denAkker, W. Kuiper & U. Hameyer (red.), Curriculum landscapes and trends (pp. 1-10).Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Vissers, G. & Dankbaar, B. (2013). Knowledge and Proximity. European Planning Studies,21(5), 700-721.Noten1 Ze redeneren hier vanuit de vraag of tacit knowledge wel bestaat. Hun antwoord: het isniet zo relevant of het bestaat, want ook de bezitter van deze kennisvorm heeft daar pasiets aan hij ermee handelt.2 De professional knowledge device is een organisatiekundige extensie van de pedagogicdevice van Bernstein (2000; zie ook Ashwin, 2014).3 De relativiteit van de mogelijkheid van generieke vaardigheden is hierbij voor het argumenteven niet relevant.62
boeken bladenAn all toopromisingtitleBruno Broucker, VictorM.H. Borden, TonKallenberg & Clare Milsom(red.): Responsibility ofHigher Education Systems– What? How? Why?Brill|Sense, Leiden.ISBN 9789004436541;275 blz. € 29,00here are two keyTquestions academicsand universitiesshould alwaysask themselves. The first is:‘What are we good at?’ This is afamiliar question, and generallywe are very practised at respondingto it. We are, however,much less fluent in respondingto the second question, whichis: ‘What are we good for?’ Thissecond question is about ourcontribution to society, and itstill seems to catch us by surprise.In response, we tend toextol the long-term benefits tosociety of investing in the qualityof research and teaching. Inother words, we tend to rely onan ‘invisible hand’ phenomenonas justification for our knowledgeproduction and knowledgedissemination. But this is reallyjust to state our belief that astrong response to the ‘good at’question will suffice also as aresponse to the ‘good for’ question.In a post-truth era wherecivil society, locally, nationallyand globally, is beset by challenges,split by civil discord, andchallenged by populist rhetoricand resurgent nationalisms,such a limp response increasinglyseems like an abdication ofmoral responsibility.For those of us who regard the‘good for’ question as important,the appearance of a booktitled Responsibility of HigherEducation Systems is therefore anoteworthy event. It raises hopeof an in-depth consideration ofthe societal legitimacy of theacademic enterprise. The ‘goodfor’ question, in effect, is this:what do we as academics see asour responsibility to society? Weare quick to talk about academicfreedom, but no freedom comeswithout responsibility. Is therea corresponding concept ofacademic responsibility? If so,what is it and how should weexercise it?The editors of this volume raisesimilar questions. In the introduction,they point out explicitlythat the general responsibilityof higher education institutionsgoes beyond developing knowledgeand educating future generations,and raise the questionof what their social responsibilityconsists of. Likewise, in thelast section of their concludingchapter they speak of ‘respondingto the threats and opportunitiesof an ever-changing world’.A book dealing with such matterswould be welcome indeed.But this is not such a book.Despite the expectations raisedby the title and the introduction,the contents do not, in themain, deal with our academicresponsibility to society. Rather,the various chapters dealwith responsibilities in thesense of division of labour, orallocation of duties. It is aboutwho does what, and how it isdone, rather than about whatshould be done. For example,63
Page 1 and 2:
WWW.THEMAHOGERONDERWIJS.ORGTHDe bij
Page 3 and 4:
TH MA De bijwerkingen van meritocra
Page 5 and 6:
inhoudTHMAthemahogeronderwijs.org4S
Page 7 and 8:
De bijwerkingen van meritocratieTH
Page 9 and 10:
Page 11 and 12:
Page 13 and 14: De bijwerkingen van meritocratieTH
Page 47 and 48: TH MA themahogeronderwijs.orgceptue
Page 49 and 50: TH MA themahogeronderwijs.orgAls sy
Page 51 and 52: TH MA themahogeronderwijs.orgHogero
Page 53 and 54: TH MA themahogeronderwijs.orgFiguur
Page 55 and 56: TH MA themahogeronderwijs.orgDit le
Page 57 and 58: TH MA themahogeronderwijs.orgvraags
Page 59 and 60: TH MA themahogeronderwijs.orgcreër
Page 61 and 62: TH MA themahogeronderwijs.orgvormt
Page 63: TH MA themahogeronderwijs.orggeving
Page 67 and 68: Beter lerenkiezenEvelyne Meens: Een
Page 69 and 70: Hoe toont zich dat dan in detwaalf
Page 71 and 72: voor de praktijkcases in dezebundel
Page 73 and 74: Overtuigendevisie oponderzoekMandy
Page 75: Maar vóór hetzover is moet de opl
show all

Th&ma Hoger Onderwijs 2021-1

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?