In this paper, the authors seek to disentangle what they see as contradictory uses of the term "professionalisation" with reference to adult educator development and training (AEDT). They set out to distinguish professionalisation from professionalism, and to identify the locus of control of AEDT in Germany, the UK and India. In these three countries, all of which have a long tradition of adult education, "professionalisation" and "professionalism" are used interchangeably to describe conflicting purposes. The authors aim to identify and critically explore the organisations and policies which control and support AEDT in their own countries using American sociologist Eliot Freidson's "third logic" model, and drawing on his juxtaposition of "professions", "the market" and "bureaucracy". Applying Freidson's models to the organisations highlights the role of bureaucracy and that where adult education is concerned, national governments, the European Union and aid organisations not only serve bureaucracy but also support the market rather than operating separately from it. While the term "professionalisation" continues to be used to mean professional development, either by adult educators and representative organisations (as in the UK) or by organisations acting on their behalf (as in Germany and India), it is also used to denote regulation and standardisation issuing from bureaucratic institutions and adult education provider organisations in the interests of the market. The authors suggest that Freidson's model provides a useful tool for adult educators in other countries to reflect on their professional position and to engage in the development of their own professional standards, both in their own interests and in the interests of those they educate. . Mais il est également employé pour désigner la réglementation et la 2 standardisation émanant des institutions bureaucratiques et des prestataires en éducation des adultes dans l'intérêt du marché. Les auteurs suggèrent que le modèle de Freidson fournit un outil utile aux éducateurs d'adultes d'autres pays, leur permettant de considérer leur situation en termes professionnels afin de prendre en main leurs propres normes, dans l'intérêt de la « profession » quelle que soit sa forme, et de ceux auxquels ils dispensent une éducation.
This paper presents an ontological framework that concisely captures the combinatorial complexity of river water sharing and visualizes the problem in its entirety. The framework's dimensions, the dimensions' taxonomies, and the resultant pathways are a complete, closed representation of the river water sharing problem. The framework is transdisciplinary; it is grounded in the research, the legal, and the practice literature on river water sharing. The authors illustrate the method and the application of the framework with the case study of Cauvery River water dispute between the Indian states of Karnataka and Tamil Nadu. The approach can help develop innovative pathways to resolve such problems.
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.