探索大专院校教师小组进程中的生成性。

Christine Slavik
{"title":"探索大专院校教师小组进程中的生成性。","authors":"Christine Slavik","doi":"10.29173/ijll45","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Like most organizations, a university needs to plan for its success. The environment in which universities operate continues to shift and change consequent to economic realities, changing demographics, changes in technology, and most recently a global pandemic. Planning in higher education must be creative and responsive to address multifaceted demands. To sustain post-secondary education, institutional leaders need to develop skill sets that promote effective dialogue, group work, and generativity within internal organizations. Concepts of leadership for the 21st century shift focus away from the previous approaches of making incremental improvements to already existing processes toward discovering possibilities, exploring potential innovations, and generating actions (Burgess & Newton, 2015; Webber, 2016). Building on existing frameworks for understanding generativity in group work and planning, this study sought to understand generative processes and conversations that compel people to act upon thoughts and feelings arising from social interactions. A descriptive study design was utilized to explore and summarize the experiences of faculty involved in three different group planning processes: brainstorming (Osborn 1953, 1957, 1963), a force field analysis (Lewin, 1947), and a variation of an appreciative inquiry process (Cooperrider & Srivastva, 1987). The development of a generative conversations survey tool focused on how the faculty participants perceived the qualities of their experiences. A key outcome of the research was the creation of a set of recommendations for thinking about the design of group sessions and meetings that can transmethodologically enhance chances for generative results.","PeriodicalId":120758,"journal":{"name":"International Journal for Leadership in Learning","volume":"120 27","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"An exploration of generativity in faculty group processes in post-secondary.\",\"authors\":\"Christine Slavik\",\"doi\":\"10.29173/ijll45\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Like most organizations, a university needs to plan for its success. The environment in which universities operate continues to shift and change consequent to economic realities, changing demographics, changes in technology, and most recently a global pandemic. Planning in higher education must be creative and responsive to address multifaceted demands. To sustain post-secondary education, institutional leaders need to develop skill sets that promote effective dialogue, group work, and generativity within internal organizations. Concepts of leadership for the 21st century shift focus away from the previous approaches of making incremental improvements to already existing processes toward discovering possibilities, exploring potential innovations, and generating actions (Burgess & Newton, 2015; Webber, 2016). Building on existing frameworks for understanding generativity in group work and planning, this study sought to understand generative processes and conversations that compel people to act upon thoughts and feelings arising from social interactions. A descriptive study design was utilized to explore and summarize the experiences of faculty involved in three different group planning processes: brainstorming (Osborn 1953, 1957, 1963), a force field analysis (Lewin, 1947), and a variation of an appreciative inquiry process (Cooperrider & Srivastva, 1987). The development of a generative conversations survey tool focused on how the faculty participants perceived the qualities of their experiences. A key outcome of the research was the creation of a set of recommendations for thinking about the design of group sessions and meetings that can transmethodologically enhance chances for generative results.\",\"PeriodicalId\":120758,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal for Leadership in Learning\",\"volume\":\"120 27\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-12\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal for Leadership in Learning\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.29173/ijll45\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal for Leadership in Learning","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.29173/ijll45","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

与大多数组织一样,大学需要为其成功制定计划。由于经济现实、人口结构变化、技术变革以及最近的全球大流行病,大学所处的环境不断发生变化。高等教育的规划必须具有创造性,并能满足多方面的需求。为了使中等后教育持续发展,机构领导者需要发展促进有效对话、小组工作和内部组织生成的技能。21 世纪领导力的概念将重点从以往对现有流程进行渐进式改进的方法转移到了发现可能性、探索潜在创新和创造行动上(Burgess & Newton, 2015; Webber, 2016)。本研究以了解小组工作和规划中的生成性的现有框架为基础,试图了解迫使人们根据社会互动中产生的想法和感受采取行动的生成过程和对话。本研究采用了描述性研究设计,以探索和总结参与三种不同小组规划过程的教师的经验:头脑风暴(Osborn 1953、1957、1963 年)、力场分析(Lewin,1947 年)和赞赏式探究过程的变体(Cooperrider & Srivastva,1987 年)。开发生成性对话调查工具的重点是教员参与者如何看待其经验的质量。研究的一个重要成果是提出了一套建议,用于思考如何设计小组会议,从而从方法论上提高产生结果的机会。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
An exploration of generativity in faculty group processes in post-secondary.
Like most organizations, a university needs to plan for its success. The environment in which universities operate continues to shift and change consequent to economic realities, changing demographics, changes in technology, and most recently a global pandemic. Planning in higher education must be creative and responsive to address multifaceted demands. To sustain post-secondary education, institutional leaders need to develop skill sets that promote effective dialogue, group work, and generativity within internal organizations. Concepts of leadership for the 21st century shift focus away from the previous approaches of making incremental improvements to already existing processes toward discovering possibilities, exploring potential innovations, and generating actions (Burgess & Newton, 2015; Webber, 2016). Building on existing frameworks for understanding generativity in group work and planning, this study sought to understand generative processes and conversations that compel people to act upon thoughts and feelings arising from social interactions. A descriptive study design was utilized to explore and summarize the experiences of faculty involved in three different group planning processes: brainstorming (Osborn 1953, 1957, 1963), a force field analysis (Lewin, 1947), and a variation of an appreciative inquiry process (Cooperrider & Srivastva, 1987). The development of a generative conversations survey tool focused on how the faculty participants perceived the qualities of their experiences. A key outcome of the research was the creation of a set of recommendations for thinking about the design of group sessions and meetings that can transmethodologically enhance chances for generative results.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Bridging the divide: Exploring inequities between sworn and civilian leaders in a Canadian police service. Breaking down silos: Postsecondary leaders collaborating to advance One Health in education. Experiencing leadership: Perceptions of leadership development for higher education contexts. Imagination as a catalyst for Relational Leadership: Educational leaders’ perspectives. An exploration of generativity in faculty group processes in post-secondary.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1