Search results

The purpose of this paper is to explain, in the context of the massification and internationalisation of higher education, how Web 2.0 and its socially oriented knowledge system (episteme) has the potential to counter the current neo‐colonial disprivileging of non‐mainstream knowledge systems and discourses.

The paper, drawing on postcolonial, epistemological, and Web 2.0 learning literatures, first deconstructs the continued dominance of the traditional academic discourse in transcultural settings. It then illustrates how Web 2.0's non‐foundational approach to the nature of knowledge gives it the capacity to construct postcolonial transcultural learning zones that are inherently open to other knowledge systems and discourses.

The paper concludes that the socially oriented knowledge system or episteme of Web 2.0 enables educators to create postcolonial, meaning more epistemically inclusive, transcultural learning zones in which no one knowledge system or discourse is automatically privileged.

The paper highlights the role Web 2.0 can play in negating the colonialising impact of dominant educational practices that disprivilege non mainstream knowledge systems and discourses that have entered university learning environments through massification and internationalisation.

The paper addresses a significant gap in the literature by highlighting the pivotal but much neglected role of epistemology in Web 2.0 as well as in the internationalisation and massification of higher education. More specifically, it indicates how the respectful acceptance of different knowledge systems and discourses can create postcolonial architectures of learning and promote a more egalitarian form of cosmopolitanism.

This paper aims to initiate a timely discussion about the epistemological advantages of Web 2.0 as a non‐foundational network‐centric learning space in higher education.

A philosophical analysis of the underpinning design principles of Web 2.0 social media and of conventional “foundational” and emergent “non‐foundational” learning and which uses Wikipedia as a case study.

For academics in higher education to take a more informed approach to the use of Web 2.0 in formal learning settings and begin to consider integrating Web 2.0's architecture of participation with a non‐foundational architecture of learning, focused on acculturation into networks of practice.

The paper argues that the continuing dominance and therefore likely application of conventional old paradigm foundational learning theory will work against the grain of, if not undermine, the powerful affordances Web 2.0 social media provides for learning focused on social interaction and collaborative knowledge construction. The paper puts the case for non‐foundational learning and draws attention to the importance of aligning Web 2.0's architecture of participation with a non‐foundational architecture of acculturation as the latter is better epistemologically placed to more fully realise the potential of Web 2.0 to position students on trajectories of acculturation into their new networks of practice.

This paper exposes the epistemological dilemma Web 2.0's participatory culture poses for academics wedded to conventional ideas about the nature of knowledge and learning as is, for instance, clearly evidenced by their sceptical disposition towards or outright rejection of, Wikipedia.

The purpose of this paper is to outline the aims for this journal with the new editor.

The paper gives an overview of TLO in the past and the possible future direction for the journal.

It is found that: first, the LO as a prescription for organizational change “writ large” has little relevance to contemporary practitioners, consultants, and researchers; second, that the LO concept is in effect a contradiction in terms and therefore fatally flawed to the point it should be abandoned; third, if the journal is to continue the use of the LO concept that it does so pragmatically with a refocusing on tried and tested informal work‐integrated action learning and critical analysis and adopt a distinct critical edge; fourth, that if so, it must adopt broader and more culturally sensitive perspectives that recognise the limitations and biases inherent in this Euro/American‐centric concept and its practices; and fifth, that this of all journals needs to acknowledge and respond to the irresistible tide of the democratisation of information in the digital age and the growth of informal learning both in terms of the papers published and in the way it, as a journal, operates.

The author believes that as an international journal The Learning Organization is eminently placed to engage practitioners, professionals and academics in a progressive dialogue that, though characterized by a questioning stance, recognizes the opportunities to enhance not just organizational productivity and managerial power but also the quality of work environments for all personnel.

There is much hype about academics' attitude to Wikipedia. This paper seeks to go beyond anecdotal evidence by drawing on empirical research to ascertain how academics respond to Wikipedia and the implications these responses have for the take‐up of Web 2.0+. It aims to test the hypothesis that Web 2.0+, as a platform built around the socially constructed nature of knowledge, is inimical to conventional power‐knowledge arrangements in which academics are traditionally positioned as the key gatekeepers to knowledge.

The research relies on quantitative and qualitative data to provide an evidence‐based analysis of the attitudes of academics towards the student use of Wikipedia and towards Web 2.0+. These data were provided via an online survey made available to a number of universities in Australia and abroad. As well as the statistical analysis of quantitative data, qualitative data were subjected to thematic analysis using relational coding.

The data by and large demonstrate that Wikipedia continues to be a divisive issue among academics, particularly within the “soft sciences”. However, Wikipedia is not as controversial as popular publicity would lead one to believe. Many academics use it extensively though cautiously themselves, and therefore tend to support a cautious approach to its use by students. However, evidence supports the assertion that there is an implicit if not explicit awareness among academics that Wikipedia, and possibly by extension Web 2.0+, are disruptors of conventional academic power‐knowledge arrangements.

It is clear that academics respond differently to the disruptive effects that Web 2.0+has on the political economy of academic knowledge construction. Contrary to popular reports, responses to Wikipedia are not overwhelmingly focused on resistance but encompass both cautious and creative acceptance. It is becoming equally clear that the increasing uptake of Web 2.0+in higher education makes it inevitable that academics will have to address the “political” consequences of this reframing of the ownership and control of academic knowledge production.

The paper demonstrates originality and value by providing a unique, evidence‐based insight into the different ways in which academics respond to Wikipedia as an archetypal Web 2.0+application and by positioning Web 2.0+within the political economy of academic knowledge construction.