This paper reports a segment of broader theory-building case study research exploring organizational learning and knowledge processes in a bio-medical consortium. Its focus is the individual-level factors that influence knowledge processes associated with organizational learning. As we explored how organizational learning occurred, the underlying knowledge processes came forward as complex and idiosyncratic. In an unanticipated finding, micro-processes emerged as highly influential, with individual perceptions of approachability, credibility and trustworthiness mediating knowledge importing and knowledge sharing activities. We introduce a model -the psychosocial filter -to describe the cluster of micro-processes that were brought forward in the study. Firstly, scientists filtered knowledge importing by deciding whom they would approach for information and from whom they would accept input. The individual's confidence to initiate information requests (which we termed social confidence) and the perceived credibility of knowledge suppliers both mediated knowledge importing. Secondly, scientists mediated knowledge sharing by actively deciding with whom they would share their own knowledge. Perceived trustworthiness -based on perceptions of what colleagues were likely to do with sensitive information -was the factor that influenced knowledge-sharing decisions. Significantly, the psychosocial filter seemed to constitute a heedful process with high functionality. Its effect was not to block knowledge circulation, but instead to ensure that knowledge-sharing decisions were made in a thoughtful and deliberate way. The psychosocial filter suggests an initial framework for conceptualizing the role that individual-level processes play in organizational knowledge sharing. Building on this, the model provides a platform for more focused exploration of knowledge processes and social relationships in organizational learning. Organizational learning is now accepted as a central, rather than peripheral organizational variable, with its competitive value widely recognized (Dodgson, 1993;
Under contemporary highly competitive markets, organisations are demanding that any investment in learning be converted into productive outcomes that rapidly progress the organisation towards pre-defined strategic goals. A customised work-integrated learning curriculum has the potential to achieve such productive outcomes because it allows learners to quickly contextualise the study content within the socio-cultural and functional environment of the workplace. However, the development of a work-integrated learning curriculum relies on genuine partnerships between the universities and organisations. These types of partnerships require lengthy processes of negotiating the curriculum and pedagogies to support learning based in the workplace. Predictably, such partnerships challenge the traditional roles of the universities as transmitters of discipline specific knowledge and workplaces as less active partners in the learning processes and products. This paper is based on a case study and relates the challenges of developing a partnership, the transformed role of the academics and a more complex design and facilitation of the curriculum. What became evident was that such a partnership was problematic and demanded redistribution of knowledge-power relations between the university and the host organisation. The findings substantiate that successful work-integrated learning that meets the needs of individuals and their workplaces is premised on a learning partnership where the roles for the curriculum and pedagogy are genuinely shared. That such partnerships are integral to successful work-integrated learning and deeply problematic begs for more research to understand the dynamics and ways to approach learning partnerships between universities and organisations.
Argues that it is both pertinent and timely that investigations be made into the dynamics of individual change. Much of the literature refers to change as a societal/cultural issue or an organization issue. Moreover, the approaches to managing complex change have been developed at a group or a systems level, seldom recognizing that it is the individual who confronts and solves the problems of change and ultimately accepts or rejects the change. Provides a literature review of the current models of individual change transition and identifies several assumptions on which they are built. Explores evidence that refutes these assumptions, which encourages the construction of a new model of individual change transition. This new model identifies four phases through which individuals pass to regain their own level of security. Suggests that the proposed new model offers managers, change agents, researchers and individuals alike a valuable way of describing and understanding individual change transition, as well as identifying avenues for intervention in the process.
Cohort-based supervision, postgraduate research supervision, cohort development * Sarojni Choy was an employee of the Queensland University of Technology at the time the data for this research study were collected. postgraduate research supervision identified three common models of supervision: traditional, group, and blended. Burnett (1999) described the traditional approach as the Apprentice Master Model (AMM) where the supervisor assumes the role of a 'master' with the student as the 'apprentice' and the group approach as the Collaborative Cohort Model (CCM) where the supervisor becomes the mentor. Further, McCallin and Nayar (2012) noted there was little research evidence about the efficacy of these models and called for more discussion and research to improve supervision as pedagogy.This paper concentrates on the cohort (sometimes referred to as the community) model of supervision. The foundations of learning cohorts are informed mainly by the theory of social constructivist (Fosnot 1996) and Lave and Wenger's (1991) concept of 'community of practice'. Within the educational theory of social constructivism, learning is construed as an "interpretive, recursive, building process by active learners interacting with the physical and social world" (Fosnot 1996, p. 30). It is argued that a social world is less threatening and facilitates interactive dialogue and critical reflection (Brookfield & Preskill 1999) to construct, re-construct and apply knowledge in socially meaningful contexts. Regardless, the social, physical, psychological and pedagogical contexts in which learning occurs needs to be purposefully designed and maintained to enhance student achievement. Furthermore, learners need to be enculturated into those social worlds to engage in and contribute in meaningful ways. However, a learning environment and enculturation alone will not lead to successful learning. As Dysthe, Samara andWestrheim (2006) and Wisker, Robins andShacham (2007) argue that members of a cohort need to be purposefully developed if this model is to succeed. However, approaches to developing learning cohorts specifically for research degrees are not evident in the academic literature. This paper on developing cohorts for postgraduate research degrees describes and justifies the approach we used to develop a cohort of seven students enrolled in a Master of Education (Research) at an Australian University. Their development included provisions through four main schedules: i) a week long residential workshop; ii) formation and fostering of a community of learners; iii) nourishing scholarship; and iv) ongoing cohort learning opportunities. In addition, we also progressively evaluated the design at the reaction level (see Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2007) using student evaluation surveys, group discussions, feedback from cohort sponsor representatives and our reflective notes during 2010. This evaluation provided some early indication of success or otherwise.
Current literature suggests that the relationship between andragogy and pedagogy is based on a continuum. This study foundthatthe relationship ofandragogical and pedagogical orientations, measured by the Student's Orientation Questionnaire, is more correctly represented as being olthogonalor at right angles to each other. Such an orthogonal relationship reflects thecomplexities involved in adult learning. The paper discusses implications for both the learning process and for hture research.The arguments for and against the concept of andragogyhave been ragmgfor some time ( Cross, 1981 ;Davenport & Davenport, 1985a; Ehas, 1979;Houle, 1972;London, 1973;McKenzie, l977,1979;Rachal, 1983). Muchofthedebate stems fiom Mering plxlosoplycal viewpoints, classfication of andragogy (whether it is atheory, method, t e c h q u e or aset of assumptions) andthe general uthty or value of the term for adult education. Indeed, thereis even debate over Mering interpretations of the term andragogy as used in North America and Europe (Podesch, 1987). Cross( 1 9 8 1 ,~. 225)sumsupthesituationby claiming that "the current position seems to be that andragogy consists of a Merent set of assumptions from pedagogy but that it is neither uniquely suited to adults nor superior to more tradtional education." (also discussion by Harris, 1989;Knowles, 1984a;Pratt, 1988). Further, Pratt (1988 contends that, whle andragogical practice has been seen as particularly appropriate for the teachmg of adults, recent debate has abandoned the andragogy-pedagogy dchotomy whch claims that teachmg adults is sigmficantly Merent from the teachmg of youths.An extension of these arguments focuses on the relabonshp between andragom andpedagogy. As Rachal(1983) comments: ". ..we oversimpw and
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.