Search results

This chapter explores the theorising practices of successful researchers in higher education. The biographical case studies use teaching and learning as their focus to provide four succinct accounts of how the researcher’s thinking around their signature concepts evolved over time. They analyse the narrative that surrounds these signature concepts to understand what successful researchers do with their ideas to maximise their symbolic capital in the higher education research field. The researcher’s experiences of theorising highlight the contextual factors that have influenced them as they tried to explain how they achieved the outcomes of their research. The chapter concludes with an overview of the beneficial strategies used in these four cases, so potential researchers can appreciate the approaches to theorising that are compatible with higher education research traditions.

The purpose of this paper is threefold. First, the authors set out to advance the thesis that lesson study should be considered as the signature pedagogy of teachers. Second, the authors want to argue that combining the core attributes of Chinese lesson study and Learning study will improve the practice of lesson study. Third, the authors attempt to demonstrate how teachers discover necessary aspects of the object of learning (here called “keys to learning”) through their engagement in Learning studies.

The paper conducted a contrastive analysis of two varieties of lesson studies: the Chinese lesson study and the Learning study.

Lesson studies form a field of varieties, but the commonality among them (i.e. the focus on the lesson) makes the lesson study a strong candidate for being “the signature pedagogy” of teachers. The most important attribute of the Chinese lesson study is its close connection to the daily work of teachers through its embeddedness in teacher research group (arguably the core organisational principle of the Chinese educational system). The most important attribute of the Learning study is its theoretical grounding which helps teachers create an environment for the students to discern and appropriate necessary aspects of the object of learning.

Different varieties may be enriched by including the two core attributes found in the Chinese lesson study and the Learning study.

Two empirical studies are used to exemplify how teacher might discover previously unknown necessary aspects of the object of learning (here called “keys to leaning”).

One important contribution of variation theory to learning study is that it brings the focus of the learning study sharply on the object of learning and provides a theoretical grounding to understand some of the necessary conditions of learning. The purpose of this paper is to argue that variation theory can serve as a guiding principle of pedagogical design.

Data from two case studies are used to support the argument.

This paper shows that variation theory is indeed a guiding principle; what the teacher is supposed to do in the classroom does not follow mechanically, as exemplified by two learning study cases. The first example shows that the principles of variation theory imply what features of the object of learning has to be invariant and what should vary in the students' experience. However, this is a necessary but not sufficient condition for learning. The second example shows also that even if one is aware of the pattern of variation and invariance needed, still it might take quite a bit of ingenuity to bring it about.

Teachers need a sound theory to help them make wise decisions about teaching. Variation theory provides a theoretical grounding to understand some of the necessary conditions of learning, so that wise pedagogical decisions can be made. This paper contributes to a deeper understanding of variation theory and its application in practice. Furthermore, the paper also shows that while a learning theory enhances the quality of a lesson study, a lesson study can also provide a platform for the testing and application of a learning theory.

This paper aims to explore the varying ways in which academic archivists in the USA experience archives, how these experiences compare to those of academic librarians and how we can use these findings to improve communication and collaboration.

Using a phenomenographic research approach, academic archivists were interviewed and the transcripts were examined to develop categories reflecting varying experiences.

There are three different ways of experiencing archives: as organizational records, as archival enterprise and as connection. The connection category is a more complex way of experiencing archives as it incorporates the aspects of the other two categories as well as the awareness of archives connecting people to their histories.

This study is limited to academic archivists in the USA.

Understanding that there are different ways of experiencing archives means that information professionals should clarify their definitions of before beginning collaborative projects. Also, by understanding these varying experiences, information professions should be able to communicate and engage more fully with each other and their users in projects and programs that leverage archival collections.

This is the first study to use phenomenography to investigate archivists’ experiences of archives. This understanding of the lived experience of archivists, combined with understanding how librarians experience archives, should enable better communication and ultimately collaboration between the two professions.

The purpose of this chapter is to investigate students’ qualitatively different ways of understanding the learning object in three undergraduate courses in the discipline of accounting. The theoretical framework of variation theory, a general learning theory, is applied. The lecturers chose a learning object which is investigated under two different teaching conditions – the conventional lecture model and the variational method. Two student groups were identified as a comparison group and a target group, comparable in various relevant parameters. All students took three required accounting courses. In the comparison group, the lecturers used the conventional lecture model and in the target group the variational model. The results indicated significant differences between the two groups’ examination results in the three courses, with students in the target group performing much better. The educational implications and limitations of the study, and areas for further research, are discussed.

The purpose of this short reflection is to allow for an informed use of both phenomenography and phenomenology in information studies and cognate fields.

The paper apprises uses of phenomenography found particularly in accounts of information literacy commonly describing phenomenography as distinct from phenomenology.

Both phenomenography and phenomenology continue to hold much credence in methods applied across scores of academic fields, with information studies being among those in the vanguard. Claims displaying differences of phenomenography from phenomenology are misleading and incomplete descriptions of phenomenology.

The paper presents newer materials on the origins of phenomenography and phenomenology to advocate for tighter relationships between and clearer applications of these methods in information studies and beyond.

There has been rapid proliferation of Lesson Studies and Learning Studies over the world. Do they really help teachers’ professional development and student learning? The purpose of this paper is to review studies from 2000 to 2010 on Lesson Study and Learning Study to unravel their benefits on teachers and students.

Relevant studies were screen and extracted on available electronic databases to evaluate outcome of Lesson Study and Learning Study. The results were based on nine studies which examined the achievement of Learning Study and Lesson Study.

All reviews identified positive evidence supporting the benefits of Lesson Study and Learning Study as powerful tool to help teachers examine their practices and enhance student learning. Although all nine studies showed positive effects of Lesson Study and Learning Study on teaching, learning or both, different outcome measures were employed and the study designs varied in qualities.

More well-controlled studies with consistent and validated outcome measures were recommended in the future to address the short- and long-term effects of Lesson Study on students, teachers, and school level. Efforts should be focussed on unveiling the relationship between what is taught and what is learned. Studies using these approaches with more vigorous procedures in randomization and blinding should be implemented.