实践话语:KEF及其对AL/HRD社区的影响

IF 1.1 Q3 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Action Learning Pub Date : 2021-07-29 DOI:10.1080/14767333.2021.1954880
Catharine Ross, Lynn Nichol, Carole Elliott, S. Sambrook, J. Stewart
{"title":"实践话语:KEF及其对AL/HRD社区的影响","authors":"Catharine Ross, Lynn Nichol, Carole Elliott, S. Sambrook, J. Stewart","doi":"10.1080/14767333.2021.1954880","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The contribution of scholarship to practice is an on-going concern of the AL/HRD community. This paper explores how one influential discourse may shape AL/HRD’s understanding of that contribution. In 2020 the UK Government implemented the Knowledge Exchange Framework (KEF) to gather data on English Universities’ knowledge exchange activities. Using Gee’s tools of enquiry and building tasks we undertook discourse analysis of two key KEF texts to explore its likely impact on the AL/HRD community’s understanding. We compare the discourses used in those texts with three AL/HRD orders of discourse identified in existing literature to explore which if any are reinforced by the KEF discourses, and the potential material consequences this may have for AL/HRD understandings and practice. We find evidence of performance/performance discourses but no evidence of learning/emancipatory and critical discourses in the first text, but some limited elements of learning/emancipatory and critical discourses in the second. In contrast to models of inter-organisational learning, analysis of other texts referred to in this second source suggests that this change did not arise from the documented formal processes but micro-level informal interactions. We suggest this gives individual AL/HRD community members the space to develop alternative, non-performance discourses and practices of knowledge exchange.","PeriodicalId":44898,"journal":{"name":"Action Learning","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2021-07-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/14767333.2021.1954880","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Discourses of practice: an examination of KEF and its effects on the AL/HRD community\",\"authors\":\"Catharine Ross, Lynn Nichol, Carole Elliott, S. Sambrook, J. Stewart\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/14767333.2021.1954880\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT The contribution of scholarship to practice is an on-going concern of the AL/HRD community. This paper explores how one influential discourse may shape AL/HRD’s understanding of that contribution. In 2020 the UK Government implemented the Knowledge Exchange Framework (KEF) to gather data on English Universities’ knowledge exchange activities. Using Gee’s tools of enquiry and building tasks we undertook discourse analysis of two key KEF texts to explore its likely impact on the AL/HRD community’s understanding. We compare the discourses used in those texts with three AL/HRD orders of discourse identified in existing literature to explore which if any are reinforced by the KEF discourses, and the potential material consequences this may have for AL/HRD understandings and practice. We find evidence of performance/performance discourses but no evidence of learning/emancipatory and critical discourses in the first text, but some limited elements of learning/emancipatory and critical discourses in the second. In contrast to models of inter-organisational learning, analysis of other texts referred to in this second source suggests that this change did not arise from the documented formal processes but micro-level informal interactions. We suggest this gives individual AL/HRD community members the space to develop alternative, non-performance discourses and practices of knowledge exchange.\",\"PeriodicalId\":44898,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Action Learning\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-07-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/14767333.2021.1954880\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Action Learning\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/14767333.2021.1954880\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Action Learning","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14767333.2021.1954880","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

学术对实践的贡献是人工智能/人力资源开发社区持续关注的问题。本文探讨了一个有影响力的话语如何影响ai /HRD对这一贡献的理解。2020年,英国政府实施了知识交流框架(KEF),以收集英国大学知识交流活动的数据。使用Gee的查询和构建任务工具,我们对两个关键的KEF文本进行了话语分析,以探索其对人工智能/人力资源开发社区理解的可能影响。我们将这些文本中使用的话语与现有文献中确定的三种ai /HRD话语顺序进行比较,以探索KEF话语强化了哪些话语,以及这可能对ai /HRD理解和实践产生的潜在实质性后果。我们在第一篇文章中发现了表演/表演话语的证据,但没有发现学习/解放和批判话语的证据,但在第二篇文章中发现了学习/解放和批判话语的一些有限元素。与组织间学习模型相反,对第二种来源中提到的其他文本的分析表明,这种变化不是来自记录的正式过程,而是微观层面的非正式互动。我们建议,这给人工智能/人力资源开发社区成员提供了发展替代性、非绩效话语和知识交流实践的空间。
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
Discourses of practice: an examination of KEF and its effects on the AL/HRD community
ABSTRACT The contribution of scholarship to practice is an on-going concern of the AL/HRD community. This paper explores how one influential discourse may shape AL/HRD’s understanding of that contribution. In 2020 the UK Government implemented the Knowledge Exchange Framework (KEF) to gather data on English Universities’ knowledge exchange activities. Using Gee’s tools of enquiry and building tasks we undertook discourse analysis of two key KEF texts to explore its likely impact on the AL/HRD community’s understanding. We compare the discourses used in those texts with three AL/HRD orders of discourse identified in existing literature to explore which if any are reinforced by the KEF discourses, and the potential material consequences this may have for AL/HRD understandings and practice. We find evidence of performance/performance discourses but no evidence of learning/emancipatory and critical discourses in the first text, but some limited elements of learning/emancipatory and critical discourses in the second. In contrast to models of inter-organisational learning, analysis of other texts referred to in this second source suggests that this change did not arise from the documented formal processes but micro-level informal interactions. We suggest this gives individual AL/HRD community members the space to develop alternative, non-performance discourses and practices of knowledge exchange.
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
Action Learning
Action Learning EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
1.60
自引率
40.00%
发文量
47
期刊最新文献
Critical incident technique and action learning to enable organizational learning How to facilitate critical action learning How to promote inclusion, collective intelligence and democracy Action learning aiding innovation In memoriam – Professor John Burgoyne
×
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