Pub Date : 2018-01-01DOI: 10.1080/23265507.2018.1479139
L. Jackson, M. Peters, L. Benade, Nesta Devine, S. Arndt, Daniella J. Forster, A. Gibbons, E. Grierson, P. Jandrić, George Lăzăroiu, K. Locke, R. Mihaila, G. Stewart, M. Tesar, P. Roberts, J. Ozoliņš
ABSTRACT Peer review is central to academic publishing. Yet for many it is a mysterious and contentious practice, which can cause distress for both reviewers, and those whose work is reviewed. This paper, produced by the Editors’ Collective, examines the past and future of peer review in academic publishing. The first sections consider how peer review has been defined and practised in changing academic contexts, and its educational significance in the development of scholarship. The paper then explores major historical and contemporary issues around identity, diversity, anonymity, and the review process, and the related power of editors versus reviewers in academic publishing. Finally, the paper discusses the case of new scholars as reviewers engaging in neoliberal labour, before concluding with some brief recommendations based on our analysis.
{"title":"Is peer review in academic publishing still working?*","authors":"L. Jackson, M. Peters, L. Benade, Nesta Devine, S. Arndt, Daniella J. Forster, A. Gibbons, E. Grierson, P. Jandrić, George Lăzăroiu, K. Locke, R. Mihaila, G. Stewart, M. Tesar, P. Roberts, J. Ozoliņš","doi":"10.1080/23265507.2018.1479139","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/23265507.2018.1479139","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Peer review is central to academic publishing. Yet for many it is a mysterious and contentious practice, which can cause distress for both reviewers, and those whose work is reviewed. This paper, produced by the Editors’ Collective, examines the past and future of peer review in academic publishing. The first sections consider how peer review has been defined and practised in changing academic contexts, and its educational significance in the development of scholarship. The paper then explores major historical and contemporary issues around identity, diversity, anonymity, and the review process, and the related power of editors versus reviewers in academic publishing. Finally, the paper discusses the case of new scholars as reviewers engaging in neoliberal labour, before concluding with some brief recommendations based on our analysis.","PeriodicalId":43562,"journal":{"name":"Open Review of Educational Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/23265507.2018.1479139","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41442418","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2018-01-01DOI: 10.1080/23265507.2018.1555488
M. Peters, P. Jandrić
ABSTRACT Building on Peters’ and Jandrić's previous work on curriculum as ‘text’ and ‘discourse’ (Peters, M. A., & Jandrić, P. (2018b). The curious relationships between discourse, genre and curriculum. Open Review of Educational Research, 5(1).), this article seeks to refresh and extend the central metaphor of ‘curriculum as text’ that is adopted as the organizing metaphor of William Pinar’s 2006 book Understanding Curriculum: An Introduction to the Study of Historical and Contemporary Curriculum Discourses. We undertake this analysis by referring to five theoretical notions: Jorge Luis Borges’ ‘The garden of forking paths’ (1941), Roland Barthes’ structuralism (1977), Julia Kristeva's intertextuality (1966/1986), Ted Nelson's hypertextuality (1965), and Gilles Deleuze's and Felix Guattari's extratextuality (2004/1980). In conclusion, we show that the text is neither simply an artefact nor is it simply a sequence of uttered sounds. The text does not solely reside within the domain of the reader and cannot be considered as the exclusive domain of the author. Looking at relationships between text, textuality, curriculum, and technology, we show that the metaphor of ‘curriculum as text’ is inherently postdigital and that it requires development of a new postdigital language of inquiry and new postdigital forms of textual and non-textual expressions of that language in the years to come.
{"title":"Curriculum, text and forms of textuality","authors":"M. Peters, P. Jandrić","doi":"10.1080/23265507.2018.1555488","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/23265507.2018.1555488","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Building on Peters’ and Jandrić's previous work on curriculum as ‘text’ and ‘discourse’ (Peters, M. A., & Jandrić, P. (2018b). The curious relationships between discourse, genre and curriculum. Open Review of Educational Research, 5(1).), this article seeks to refresh and extend the central metaphor of ‘curriculum as text’ that is adopted as the organizing metaphor of William Pinar’s 2006 book Understanding Curriculum: An Introduction to the Study of Historical and Contemporary Curriculum Discourses. We undertake this analysis by referring to five theoretical notions: Jorge Luis Borges’ ‘The garden of forking paths’ (1941), Roland Barthes’ structuralism (1977), Julia Kristeva's intertextuality (1966/1986), Ted Nelson's hypertextuality (1965), and Gilles Deleuze's and Felix Guattari's extratextuality (2004/1980). In conclusion, we show that the text is neither simply an artefact nor is it simply a sequence of uttered sounds. The text does not solely reside within the domain of the reader and cannot be considered as the exclusive domain of the author. Looking at relationships between text, textuality, curriculum, and technology, we show that the metaphor of ‘curriculum as text’ is inherently postdigital and that it requires development of a new postdigital language of inquiry and new postdigital forms of textual and non-textual expressions of that language in the years to come.","PeriodicalId":43562,"journal":{"name":"Open Review of Educational Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/23265507.2018.1555488","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49272715","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2018-01-01DOI: 10.1080/23265507.2018.1457453
A. Gibbons, Emit Snake-Beings
ABSTRACT A future-less orientation, as defined in this article, explores approaches to education within the context of precarious, shifting, labour markets and the uncertain future of employment trends. A future-less orientation questions the validity of traditional views of education: as a means of preparing students for an imagined future career; one which may never happen. DiY (Do-it-Yourself) culture has a long tradition of finding innovative solutions to problems which institutions have failed to supply. In this article we explore the potentials of a DiY pedagogy based on a decentralised and transdisciplinary approach which emphasise diversity and community as a strategy to surviving a precarious future.
{"title":"DiY (Do-it-Yourself) pedagogy: a future-less orientation to education","authors":"A. Gibbons, Emit Snake-Beings","doi":"10.1080/23265507.2018.1457453","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/23265507.2018.1457453","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT A future-less orientation, as defined in this article, explores approaches to education within the context of precarious, shifting, labour markets and the uncertain future of employment trends. A future-less orientation questions the validity of traditional views of education: as a means of preparing students for an imagined future career; one which may never happen. DiY (Do-it-Yourself) culture has a long tradition of finding innovative solutions to problems which institutions have failed to supply. In this article we explore the potentials of a DiY pedagogy based on a decentralised and transdisciplinary approach which emphasise diversity and community as a strategy to surviving a precarious future.","PeriodicalId":43562,"journal":{"name":"Open Review of Educational Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/23265507.2018.1457453","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43267201","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2018-01-01DOI: 10.1080/23265507.2018.1546124
G. Ritzer, P. Jandrić, Sarah Hayes
ABSTRACT In the year that George Ritzer publishes the ninth edition of The McDonaldization of Society, moving his famous theory firmly Into the Digital Age, critical educator Petar Jandrić and sociologist Sarah Hayes invited George to a dialogue on the digital transformation of McDonaldization and its critical application to Higher Education. In this article, George first traces for us the origins of his theory that has endured for four decades. A key dimension of McDonaldization is the ‘iron cage’ of control, via rationalization. Once contained within physical sites of bricks and mortar, now, we encounter a ‘velvet cage’ in sites of digital consumption, at the hands of non-human technologies, that threaten human labor and autonomy. Whilst the concept of the McUniversity is not without some critique, this interview provides compelling reasons to open new dialogue about McDonaldization in augmented settings such as Higher Education. With the rise of prosuming machines such as blockchain and bitcoin, that can both produce and consume without intervention from human ‘prosumers’, universities cannot afford to ignore the challenges of prosumer capitalism, which George concludes, will explode into unprecedented and unpredictable directions in the years to come.
{"title":"The velvet cage of educational con(pro)sumption","authors":"G. Ritzer, P. Jandrić, Sarah Hayes","doi":"10.1080/23265507.2018.1546124","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/23265507.2018.1546124","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT In the year that George Ritzer publishes the ninth edition of The McDonaldization of Society, moving his famous theory firmly Into the Digital Age, critical educator Petar Jandrić and sociologist Sarah Hayes invited George to a dialogue on the digital transformation of McDonaldization and its critical application to Higher Education. In this article, George first traces for us the origins of his theory that has endured for four decades. A key dimension of McDonaldization is the ‘iron cage’ of control, via rationalization. Once contained within physical sites of bricks and mortar, now, we encounter a ‘velvet cage’ in sites of digital consumption, at the hands of non-human technologies, that threaten human labor and autonomy. Whilst the concept of the McUniversity is not without some critique, this interview provides compelling reasons to open new dialogue about McDonaldization in augmented settings such as Higher Education. With the rise of prosuming machines such as blockchain and bitcoin, that can both produce and consume without intervention from human ‘prosumers’, universities cannot afford to ignore the challenges of prosumer capitalism, which George concludes, will explode into unprecedented and unpredictable directions in the years to come.","PeriodicalId":43562,"journal":{"name":"Open Review of Educational Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/23265507.2018.1546124","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48180860","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2018-01-01DOI: 10.1080/23265507.2018.1546552
Ayano Fujiwara
ABSTRACT This study analyzed the factors required for a researcher to become a professor in the humanities and sociology, science and engineering, medicine and biology, and general studies fields. The study focuses on research productivity and analyzes the impact of hiatuses in research production on promotion in universities as well as the time at which such hiatuses have the least impact on promotions. I divided the factors required for promotion into three categories: academic performance (the number of published articles, books, and competitive grants and funding sources acquired), social elements (gender), and elements related to the duration of periods with no research output and their timing. The results show that the probability of promotion to professorship increases as the number of papers in Scopus, the number of books published, and the amount of acquired competitive funds increase. As expected, longer declines in research productivity reduce the probability of promotion. However, it is not always necessary for researchers to publish continuously throughout their careers; the results show that a decline in research productivity other than during the first five years and the period from 20 to 30 years after the start of the research career has no influence on academic promotions.
{"title":"When can academic researchers rest? An event history analysis on researchers’ research productivity and promotion in academia from 1980 to 2016 in Japan","authors":"Ayano Fujiwara","doi":"10.1080/23265507.2018.1546552","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/23265507.2018.1546552","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This study analyzed the factors required for a researcher to become a professor in the humanities and sociology, science and engineering, medicine and biology, and general studies fields. The study focuses on research productivity and analyzes the impact of hiatuses in research production on promotion in universities as well as the time at which such hiatuses have the least impact on promotions. I divided the factors required for promotion into three categories: academic performance (the number of published articles, books, and competitive grants and funding sources acquired), social elements (gender), and elements related to the duration of periods with no research output and their timing. The results show that the probability of promotion to professorship increases as the number of papers in Scopus, the number of books published, and the amount of acquired competitive funds increase. As expected, longer declines in research productivity reduce the probability of promotion. However, it is not always necessary for researchers to publish continuously throughout their careers; the results show that a decline in research productivity other than during the first five years and the period from 20 to 30 years after the start of the research career has no influence on academic promotions.","PeriodicalId":43562,"journal":{"name":"Open Review of Educational Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/23265507.2018.1546552","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46143869","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2017-01-01DOI: 10.1080/23265507.2016.1266693
R. Nasser
ABSTRACT Until the late 1990s, Qatar’s educational system used the intrinsic-nationalistic and cultural traditions of Arabic schools. The Qatari leadership and stakeholder was outdated; hence, they approached the RAND Corporation to examine and analyze the existing educational system and recommend options for building a new educational system. The RAND assessment study concluded that the country’s education system was rigid and lacked standards and international benchmarks. Consequently, this led to the reform in which a system of Independent Schools was established, new curriculum standards were set, and teacher and leadership professional development were enhanced to find the most effective systems for Qatari students to succeed along international and particularly Western benchmarks. The reform imputed by key principles of autonomy, accountability, variety and choice. Post-reform evaluation suggests that the system is still far from being what it should be. New teacher development initiatives have stressed on improving professional development for teachers through licensing and increased professional development programs. The present schooling is markedly different from what was presented in the reform. This article gives a brief historical preface of the educational system in Qatar and discusses the reform in terms of its future implications on teacher development in the K-12 educational system.
{"title":"Qatar’s educational reform past and future: challenges in teacher development","authors":"R. Nasser","doi":"10.1080/23265507.2016.1266693","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/23265507.2016.1266693","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Until the late 1990s, Qatar’s educational system used the intrinsic-nationalistic and cultural traditions of Arabic schools. The Qatari leadership and stakeholder was outdated; hence, they approached the RAND Corporation to examine and analyze the existing educational system and recommend options for building a new educational system. The RAND assessment study concluded that the country’s education system was rigid and lacked standards and international benchmarks. Consequently, this led to the reform in which a system of Independent Schools was established, new curriculum standards were set, and teacher and leadership professional development were enhanced to find the most effective systems for Qatari students to succeed along international and particularly Western benchmarks. The reform imputed by key principles of autonomy, accountability, variety and choice. Post-reform evaluation suggests that the system is still far from being what it should be. New teacher development initiatives have stressed on improving professional development for teachers through licensing and increased professional development programs. The present schooling is markedly different from what was presented in the reform. This article gives a brief historical preface of the educational system in Qatar and discusses the reform in terms of its future implications on teacher development in the K-12 educational system.","PeriodicalId":43562,"journal":{"name":"Open Review of Educational Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2017-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/23265507.2016.1266693","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43309019","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2017-01-01DOI: 10.1080/23265507.2017.1364143
C. Mika, G. Stewart
ABSTRACT We recently attended a conference at which a non-Māori presenter, drawing on a particular metaphor already established by Māori writers, related Māori natural world features to a research method. The presentation was useful because it highlighted several issues that call for our concern as Māori philosophers. In this article, we outline these concerns, which are: first, that a blunt response to such a presentation is not undertaken lightly from a Māori viewpoint; and, second, that the presenter’s talk exemplifies a wider problem of warping Māori concepts and labels to fit a Western philosophical approach. We call this latter problem ‘Translation’, because it involves moving the Māori world and its phenomena over into one that is palatable for policy and research. The aim of the article is not to single out the presenter, but rather to refer to his presentation in order to consider the prior issue of Translation. In cases where Translation occurs, a Māori critical philosophical stance is clearly needed, in order to both investigate the warping of Māori thought on which it relies, and review the place of Māori philosophy and philosophical response in the arena of educational research.
{"title":"Lost in translation: western representations of Māori knowledge","authors":"C. Mika, G. Stewart","doi":"10.1080/23265507.2017.1364143","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/23265507.2017.1364143","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT We recently attended a conference at which a non-Māori presenter, drawing on a particular metaphor already established by Māori writers, related Māori natural world features to a research method. The presentation was useful because it highlighted several issues that call for our concern as Māori philosophers. In this article, we outline these concerns, which are: first, that a blunt response to such a presentation is not undertaken lightly from a Māori viewpoint; and, second, that the presenter’s talk exemplifies a wider problem of warping Māori concepts and labels to fit a Western philosophical approach. We call this latter problem ‘Translation’, because it involves moving the Māori world and its phenomena over into one that is palatable for policy and research. The aim of the article is not to single out the presenter, but rather to refer to his presentation in order to consider the prior issue of Translation. In cases where Translation occurs, a Māori critical philosophical stance is clearly needed, in order to both investigate the warping of Māori thought on which it relies, and review the place of Māori philosophy and philosophical response in the arena of educational research.","PeriodicalId":43562,"journal":{"name":"Open Review of Educational Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2017-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/23265507.2017.1364143","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46988069","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2017-01-01DOI: 10.1080/23265507.2016.1266694
T. Lorentzen
ABSTRACT The background of the article is the recurrent discussion about allocation of playing time in team sports involving children and young athletes. The objective is to analyse why playing time is a topic for discussion among parents, coaches and athletes. The following question is addressed: Under which condition is it ‘fair’ to use equal and under which condition ‘fair’ to use unequal playing time? Methodologically the article combines literature in the field of psychology, physiology and sociology – and simple mathematics is applied in developing a model for estimating playing time, frequency and timing of substitutions. The article shows that team sports are arenas where social interaction takes place, where norms and rules are internalized and where allocation of a given playing time implies inclusion and exclusion of individuals. The article shows that there exists a single, objective ‘unfair’ allocation of playing time, but a variety of ‘fair’. Lack of objective criteria drives the discussion of fair allocation of playing time. A policy implication of the findings is that an insight into psychosocial mechanisms can change practice to obtain a better and sustainable organization of team sports where young athletes are involved.
{"title":"Allocation of playing time within team sports – a problem for discussion","authors":"T. Lorentzen","doi":"10.1080/23265507.2016.1266694","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/23265507.2016.1266694","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The background of the article is the recurrent discussion about allocation of playing time in team sports involving children and young athletes. The objective is to analyse why playing time is a topic for discussion among parents, coaches and athletes. The following question is addressed: Under which condition is it ‘fair’ to use equal and under which condition ‘fair’ to use unequal playing time? Methodologically the article combines literature in the field of psychology, physiology and sociology – and simple mathematics is applied in developing a model for estimating playing time, frequency and timing of substitutions. The article shows that team sports are arenas where social interaction takes place, where norms and rules are internalized and where allocation of a given playing time implies inclusion and exclusion of individuals. The article shows that there exists a single, objective ‘unfair’ allocation of playing time, but a variety of ‘fair’. Lack of objective criteria drives the discussion of fair allocation of playing time. A policy implication of the findings is that an insight into psychosocial mechanisms can change practice to obtain a better and sustainable organization of team sports where young athletes are involved.","PeriodicalId":43562,"journal":{"name":"Open Review of Educational Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2017-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/23265507.2016.1266694","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44820904","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2017-01-01DOI: 10.1080/23265507.2017.1365623
Noeline Wright, M. Peters
ABSTRACT An article in The Atlantic ‘Quantifying the Ed-Tech Market’ (2015), which draws on a review by the Education Technology Industry Network, reports that the U.S. Ed-tech market totalled $8.38 billion in the 2012–2013 academic year, which is up from $7.9 billion the year before, and up 11.7 per cent from 2009. K-12 online course revenue including any digital curriculum increased some 320% and the testing and assessment market, the largest single category, generated $2.5 billion. The New Zealand business organisation EDTechNZ, indicates on its website that educational technology is the fastest growing sector of a global smart education market worth US$100 billion, forecast to grow to US$394 by 2019. The same source indicates that Cloud-based educational technology is accelerating at 20% growth per annum and is forecast to reach US$12 billion by 2019. These returns are unequalled by most other economic sectors. Our concern in this article is that the market imperative based on selling has become a driving logic for digital technologies in schools while learning gets lost in the rush for companies to profit from schools, creating de facto privatisation by stealth. Aspects of the New Zealand educational context are used to illustrate our thinking, especially since most educational provision is still state owned and taxpayer funded.
《大西洋月刊》2015年的一篇文章《量化教育技术市场》(Quantifying The Ed-Tech Market)引用了教育技术产业网络(Education Technology Industry Network)的一篇综述，报告称，2012-2013学年，美国教育技术市场总额为83.8亿美元，高于前一年的79亿美元，比2009年增长了11.7%。包括任何数字课程在内的K-12在线课程收入增长了约320%，最大的单一类别测试和评估市场创造了25亿美元的收入。新西兰商业组织EDTechNZ在其网站上指出，教育技术是全球智能教育市场中增长最快的部门，价值1000亿美元，预计到2019年将增长到394美元。同一来源表明，基于云的教育技术正以每年20%的速度增长，预计到2019年将达到120亿美元。这些回报是大多数其他经济部门无法比拟的。我们在这篇文章中担心的是，基于销售的市场需求已经成为学校数字技术的驱动逻辑，而学习在企业从学校获利的热潮中迷失了，暗中创造了事实上的私有化。新西兰教育环境的各个方面被用来说明我们的想法，特别是因为大多数教育仍然是国有的和纳税人资助的。
{"title":"Sell, sell, sell or learn, learn, learn? The EdTech market in New Zealand’s education system – privatisation by stealth?","authors":"Noeline Wright, M. Peters","doi":"10.1080/23265507.2017.1365623","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/23265507.2017.1365623","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT An article in The Atlantic ‘Quantifying the Ed-Tech Market’ (2015), which draws on a review by the Education Technology Industry Network, reports that the U.S. Ed-tech market totalled $8.38 billion in the 2012–2013 academic year, which is up from $7.9 billion the year before, and up 11.7 per cent from 2009. K-12 online course revenue including any digital curriculum increased some 320% and the testing and assessment market, the largest single category, generated $2.5 billion. The New Zealand business organisation EDTechNZ, indicates on its website that educational technology is the fastest growing sector of a global smart education market worth US$100 billion, forecast to grow to US$394 by 2019. The same source indicates that Cloud-based educational technology is accelerating at 20% growth per annum and is forecast to reach US$12 billion by 2019. These returns are unequalled by most other economic sectors. Our concern in this article is that the market imperative based on selling has become a driving logic for digital technologies in schools while learning gets lost in the rush for companies to profit from schools, creating de facto privatisation by stealth. Aspects of the New Zealand educational context are used to illustrate our thinking, especially since most educational provision is still state owned and taxpayer funded.","PeriodicalId":43562,"journal":{"name":"Open Review of Educational Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2017-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/23265507.2017.1365623","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44362026","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2017-01-01DOI: 10.1080/23265507.2017.1334575
R. Raaper, M. Olssen
ABSTRACT It is challenging to define who Michel Foucault was, whether he was a theorist, a philosopher, a historian, or a critic. In many of his books, and essays, Foucault denied being a philosopher or a theorist, nor did he want to be called a writer or a prophet. He described himself as an experimenter by saying that his work simply consists of ‘philosophical fragments put to work in a historical field of problems’. Like Ball [2013. Foucault, power, and education. New York: Routledge, p. 2], we believe that Foucault tried hard not to be ‘a something’, opening up opportunities to develop and practise theory. Emeritus Professor Mark Olssen has written widely on Foucault’s theoretical underpinnings and legacy. This conversation aims to revisit Olssen’s work, as well as Foucault’s own writings in order to engage with Foucault’s philosophical background and the methods he developed. By exploring Foucault’s theoretical and methodological approaches, the conversation situates his work within broader traditions of social theory, particularly within the works of Marx and Hegel. Our conversation starts by discussing Foucault’s relationship with Marx and Hegel and moves towards his approach to history and his wider contribution to poststructuralist school of thought.
{"title":"In conversation with Mark Olssen: on Foucault with Marx and Hegel","authors":"R. Raaper, M. Olssen","doi":"10.1080/23265507.2017.1334575","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/23265507.2017.1334575","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT It is challenging to define who Michel Foucault was, whether he was a theorist, a philosopher, a historian, or a critic. In many of his books, and essays, Foucault denied being a philosopher or a theorist, nor did he want to be called a writer or a prophet. He described himself as an experimenter by saying that his work simply consists of ‘philosophical fragments put to work in a historical field of problems’. Like Ball [2013. Foucault, power, and education. New York: Routledge, p. 2], we believe that Foucault tried hard not to be ‘a something’, opening up opportunities to develop and practise theory. Emeritus Professor Mark Olssen has written widely on Foucault’s theoretical underpinnings and legacy. This conversation aims to revisit Olssen’s work, as well as Foucault’s own writings in order to engage with Foucault’s philosophical background and the methods he developed. By exploring Foucault’s theoretical and methodological approaches, the conversation situates his work within broader traditions of social theory, particularly within the works of Marx and Hegel. Our conversation starts by discussing Foucault’s relationship with Marx and Hegel and moves towards his approach to history and his wider contribution to poststructuralist school of thought.","PeriodicalId":43562,"journal":{"name":"Open Review of Educational Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2017-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/23265507.2017.1334575","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49659677","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：