Search results

There has been an unprecedented increase in online learning worldwide, including in teacher education. However, student lurking can be a common issue, leading to a non-interactive learning environment.

The authors employed a qualitative case study with thematic analysis to examine a novel “self-directed” pre-service teacher online degree module that engaged students in regular peer-feedback, which intended to promote student engagement and interactivity. The research questions were as follows: To what extent did the seminar series represent the principles of self-directed learning and were learning outcomes effective from the process? And, how effective was the use of peer feedback?

The thematic analysis revealed that student progression and course completion was successful, and it represented some principles of self-directed learning; but (a) it cannot be presumed that pre-service teachers are competent in giving (peer) feedback and (b) pre-service teachers may need specific guidance and training for providing competent feedback.

This paper is highly original in respect of its combination of the self-directed learning framework with use of peer feedback, to engage students in an interactive learning environment. The present paper identifies that peer feedback is a powerful tool in online learning; peer feedback can supplement self- and teacher-assessment; but it should not be assumed that pre-service teachers are competent in providing (peer) feedback – pre-service teachers may need specific training in providing feedback.

Rather than add another review of the numerous scholarly publications of success factors and performance of International Joint Ventures (IJVs) this study offers an overview of the extant research based on the findings, criticisms and recommendations of previous reviews. Scholars and practitioners interested in the research field may profit from our contribution in several ways. First, we provide a comprehensive overview of the state-of-the-art of the field in a table listing the characteristics of the most relevant review studies published in leading management journals. These special reviews offer more detailed analyses of the studies under investigation, different frameworks and proposals for future research directions. Finally, we summarize the criticisms and recommendations of previous researchers that have been ignored and discuss why many of those recommendations have gone unheeded and how future research may benefit from more systematic development of this field.

If we look to the uniqueness of IB/IM scholarship and ask where it stands separate from standard and traditional management and business research we really have only two differentiating, but exceedingly important, factors that justify discussing IB/IM as a separate research paradigm (See, e.g., Devinney, Pedersen, & Tihanyi, 2010).

In reflective writing, students are encouraged to examine their own setbacks and progress. With a shortage of guidance in how to provide feedback to students on this type of writing, teachers are often left to figure it out on the job. The central hypothesis in this paper is that the lens of reflective practice can help focus teacher efforts and ultimately improve both feedback and instruction. The purpose of this paper is not to produce a universal prescription for assessing reflective writing but rather a protocol for teacher reflective practice that can apply to challenging grading and feedback-giving situations.

Student assessment is a chance for teachers to learn about their students’ abilities and challenges and to provide feedback for improvement. Assessment and grading sessions can also become opportunities for teachers to examine their own instructional and assessment practices. This self-examination process, a cornerstone of reflective practice (Schön, 1984), is challenging, but it may be especially valuable when guidelines for feedback and assessment are hard to come by. Such may be said to be the case in student-centered learning environments such as school Fablabs and makerspaces, where stated goals commonly include cultivating learner self-regulation and resilience. These hard-to-measure constructs are typically assessed through analysis of student reflective journals. This in-depth case study uses mixed-methods to examine how a semester-long intervention affected the grading, feedback and instructional practices of a teacher in a hands-on design classroom. The intervention involved 10 grade-aloud sessions using a computer-based rubric tool (Gradescope) and a culminating card-sorting task. The lens of reflective practice was applied to understanding the teacher’s development of their own reflective capabilities.

During the intervention, the participating teacher grappled with grading and feedback-giving dilemmas which led to clarifications of assessment objectives; changes to instruction; and improved feedback-giving practices, many of which persisted after the intervention. The teacher perceived the intervention as adding both rigor and productive “soul-searching” to their professional practice. Lasting changes in feedback behaviors included a comprehensive rubric and an increase in the frequency, specificity and depth of feedback given to student written work.

Significant prior efforts have been directed separately at the use of reflective practice for teachers, in general, and on the feedback and grading of student process journals. This work combines these lines of inquiry in the reflective classroom assessment protocol, a novel on-the-job professional development opportunity that fosters reflective practice in times of assessment to improve instructional and feedback practices.

The purpose of this paper is to examine and synthesize Argyris and Schön's Theory of Action and Kegan and Lahey's theory of Immunity to Change in order to produce an integrated model.

Literature discussing Argyris and Schön's Theory of Action (Model I and Model II), single and double‐loop learning, espoused theory and theory‐in‐use; and Kegan and Lahey's theory of Immunity to Change was examined. The two theories were then summarized, analyzed, compared and synthesized into an integrated model.

Within Kegan and Lahey's model of an immunity system, the Argyris and Schön Model I Unilateral Control Model should be considered a competing commitment. Kegan and Lahey's theory identifies a critical causal element (underlying assumption) not previously identified by the Argyris and Schön Theory of Action, thus opening the potential for expanded effectiveness by practioners of Argyris and Schön's theory.

Little attention has been given in the literature to comparing or integrating these two theories. The synthesis of the two theories opens the possibility of overcoming limitations experienced by practitioners promoting double‐loop learning in organizations.

Contemporary organizations are facing an operating environment characterized by volatile, uncertain, complex, ambiguous, and “permanent whitewater.” To sustain high performance in this context, organizations must be able to change and develop as efficiently and effectively as possible. Within organizations, there are actors who catalyze and advance change in this manner; these actors are known as “champions.” Yet the scholar who wishes to conduct research concerning champions of change and organizational development is likely to be met by a highly fragmented literature. Varying notions of champions are scattered throughout extant research, where authors of articles cite different sources when conceptualizing champions; often superficially. Furthermore, many types of highly specific and nuanced non-generalizable champions have proliferated, making it difficult for practitioners and researchers to discover useful findings on how to go about making meaningful changes in their context. The purpose of this study was to address these problems for practitioners and researchers by engendering thoroughness, clarity, and coherence within champion scholarship. This was done by conducting the first comprehensive, critical yet insightful review of the champion literature within the organizational sciences using content analysis to re-conceptualize champions and develop a meaningful typology from which the field can be advanced. The chapter first suggests a return to Schön (1963) as the basis from which to conceptualize champions and, second, offers a typology consisting of 10 meta-champions of organizational change and development – Collaboration, Human Rights, Innovation, Product, Project, Service, Strategic, Sustainability, Technology, and Venture Champions – from which change practice and future research can benefit.

The purpose of this paper is to answer the question ‘Why reflection is important to introduce in the teaching and learning’. This paper commences with a brief literature review on reflection, followed by the provision of tentative results of a study on the role of reflection in learning. Data collected from a sample population of 257 undergraduate students at business ethics undergraduate class in Australia were analysed. The data were collected from students’ own reflections that formed part of two of their assessments in the unit. In the first assessment, students were asked to reflect on their own moral development, using Schon’s reflection in and on action, to allow the markers understand the students’ own moral development as highlighted by Kohlberg levels and stages of Moral Development. In the second assessment, the students were asked to reflect on their personal learning as a global citizen and how this assessment has informed their views and perspective on ethical decision-making process and global citizenship using one of the frameworks introduced during the semester (e.g. situation, task, action, result, learning, planning – S.T.A.R.L.P., Gibbs or Kolb). This paper will not discuss students moral developments levels or their ethical decision making, but, will only discuss the ‘reflection’, thus, the findings from this research come in twofold: (i) students acknowledged the new skills they gained, the development of other skills they had through their reflections, such as critical thinking, time management. (ii) Most of the students have demonstrated an understanding of reflection in higher education, and ethical decision making, through use of different frameworks. However, some students felt reflection is difficult, thus, the paper concludes with a recommendation to introduce reflection in the first year of university.

An EU Asia-Link grant offered the opportunity to examine the appropriate sequence of teaching and learning for architecture students working in developing countries. That process is more or less taken for granted wherever architecture is taught as a discipline, yet its premises are seldom examined in any detail. Following a suggestion by A. N. Whitehead, a sequence of learning is described, which gives a proper place to design. The thinking of the American philosopher Donald Schön is re-examined to see if it throws light on the practice of architecture and the principles to be adopted in teaching it. I argue that, properly constituted, a studio-based programme of architectural education remains an appropriate methodology for the teaching of design in the context of developing countries, even as it acts as a critique of the conventional pedagogic methodologies of parent institutions in both west and east.

The purpose of this paper is to provide a framework and conceptualization of approaches to salespersons’ negative reactions to performance-improvement coaching. This is done by first depicting “negative reaction to coaching” (such as defensiveness, reluctance, fear, confusion, or apathy) as the manifestation of an underlying psychological “basic issue” held by the salesperson. Next, from the sales coaching and psychology literature, the theoretical underpinnings of the following coaching approaches are introduced: humanistic, behavioral, cognitive, and psychodynamic. Finally, applications of coaching conversations are presented for each “basic issue” and “coaching approach” pairing.

This study is conceptual and is depicted using a framework illustration (table) of how each negative reaction to coaching (i.e. basic issue) maps to a theoretical approach rooted in the psychology and coaching literature.

Dealing with a rep’s negative reaction to performance-improvement coaching should be treated like the process of handling any sales objection, issue, or concern. This process consists of, first, recognizing, clarifying, or attempting to better understand the rep’s negative reaction; and second, responding to the negative reaction using the appropriate psychology-rooted coaching approach to clarify or explain the purpose or rationale for coaching. Examples and sample coaching conversations are presented for each negative reaction–coaching approach pairing.

The conceptual research presented in this paper provides scholars one way to view and understand such negative reactions to performance-improvement coaching from salespeople, as it maps to the underlying psychological basic issues (behind negative reactions) and theoretical basis (to coaching approaches). Using the framework of Argyris and Schon, this paper conceptualizes these negative reactions to coaching as “action strategies” as a rep’s means to protect him/herself psychologically.

For practicing sales managers (coaches), a better understanding of negative reactions to performance-improvement coaching and underlying theoretical approaches to responding to them could better help shape the most constructive coaching conversations with reps. These conversations should follow the same format as responding to a customer objection (e.g. better understand the reaction and then respond to it).

This conceptual paper blends the theory and practice of sales coaching by providing a framework to aid sales managers in overcoming and minimizing the obstacles posed by salespeople when they are not open to coaching conversations.