Change search
Link to record
Permanent link

Direct link
BETA
Erikson, Martin G
Alternative names
Publications (10 of 29) Show all publications
Erikson, M. G. (2019). Potentials and challenges when using possible selves in studies of student motivation. In: Holly Henderson, Jacqueline Stevenson & Ann-Marie Bathmaker (Ed.), Possible Selves and Higher Education: New Interdisciplinary Insights (pp. 13-26). Abingdon: Routledge
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Potentials and challenges when using possible selves in studies of student motivation
2019 (English)In: Possible Selves and Higher Education: New Interdisciplinary Insights / [ed] Holly Henderson, Jacqueline Stevenson & Ann-Marie Bathmaker, Abingdon: Routledge, 2019, p. 13-26Chapter in book (Other academic)
Abstract [en]

(unpublished abstract)

Student motivation covers such a diverse set of behaviours that it must be explicated through specific theories, which can meet the needs for answering particular research questions. In this chapter, it is argued that the theory of possible selves can help us understand students’ individual expectations about the future, and these expectations’ function for motivation. Three areas are singled out as particularly interesting, for both theoretical and methodological reasons. The first is the complexity of emotional valence in possible selves, where recent findings show that it is an oversimplification to assume that possible selves are either positive or negative. The second is the important distinction between possible selves and more general strivings – for example in terms of life tasks – which in particular offer methodological challenges. The third is the notion of ‘possible others’, explicating the social dimension of possible selves with a potential to solve some methodological problems. All three areas are discussed with a particular focus on motivational issues for students uncertain about the life in academia or about the merits of higher education.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Abingdon: Routledge, 2019
Keywords
Possible selves, Student motivation, Possible others, Widening participation
National Category
Educational Sciences
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:hb:diva-14763 (URN)978-1-138-09799-5 (ISBN)978-1-138-09803-9 (ISBN)978-1-315-10459-1 (ISBN)
Available from: 2018-07-17 Created: 2018-07-17 Last updated: 2019-06-17Bibliographically approved
Erikson, M., Erikson, M. G. & Punzi, E. (2018). A single-question qualitative bachelor’s programme evaluation. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education
Open this publication in new window or tab >>A single-question qualitative bachelor’s programme evaluation
2018 (English)In: Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, ISSN 0260-2938, E-ISSN 1469-297XArticle in journal (Refereed) Epub ahead of print
Abstract [en]

Conventionally, quantitative surveys are used for student evaluations in higher education, but the validity of this practice has been questioned. In the present study, we investigated a qualitative method for evaluating a bachelor’s programme. Forty-one first-year students and twenty-eight third- year students on a bachelor’s programme in Public Administration were asked to answer a single question in relation to their programme: ‘What could have been done in order to support your learning?’ The students provided rich responses of a depth and breadth not attainable through conventional surveys, making this method worthwhile for educational development at the programme level. The responses focused on students’ own learning rather than on judgement of teacher performance. The results indicate that the students underwent a transition from the first to third year, suggesting a shift in needs. For example, first-year students asked for direct interaction, whereas third-year students asked for feedback on accomplishments. Practical applications are discussed.

Keywords
Högskolepedagogik, programutvärdering
National Category
Educational Sciences
Research subject
Teacher Education and Education Work
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:hb:diva-13389 (URN)10.1080/02602938.2018.1424319 (DOI)
Available from: 2018-01-10 Created: 2018-01-10 Last updated: 2018-01-16Bibliographically approved
Erikson, M. G. (2018). Akademiskt ansvar – ett möte mellan frihetsideal och samhällsnytta. Borås: Högskolan i Borås
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Akademiskt ansvar – ett möte mellan frihetsideal och samhällsnytta
2018 (Swedish)Report (Other academic)
Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Borås: Högskolan i Borås, 2018
Series
Vetenskap för profession: rapport, ISSN 1654-6520 ; 43
Keywords
Akademiskt ansvar, akademisk frihet
National Category
Other Social Sciences
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:hb:diva-14761 (URN)978-91-88269-93-5 (ISBN)
Available from: 2018-07-17 Created: 2018-07-17 Last updated: 2019-06-10Bibliographically approved
Erikson, M. G. (2018). Beyond learning: Students’ Responsibility for their Knowledge. In: : . Paper presented at Society for Research into Higher Education Annual Research Conference, Newport, UK, December 5-7 2018..
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Beyond learning: Students’ Responsibility for their Knowledge
2018 (English)Conference paper, Oral presentation with published abstract (Refereed)
Abstract [en]

The claim that students should take responsibility for their learning is challenged through the alternative claim that students should be expected to take responsibility for their knowledge. It is argued that students can reflect on responsibilities for knowledge and teachers can support this in an everyday academic discourse regardless of discipline, whereas responsibility for learning is difficult to grasp without an elaborate learning theory. Further, the suggested shift from learning to knowledge will widen the scope to issues beyond learning, explicating a more nuanced student role. Through the focus on knowledge, students’ responsibilities relates to educational purposes, and points to expectations on critical thinking as well as the students’ academic freedom. It also makes it possible to discuss the mutual responsibilities of students and teachers with the same conceptual framework. This can also support the notion of students as co-creators of knowledge.

National Category
Educational Sciences
Research subject
Teacher Education and Education Work
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:hb:diva-15642 (URN)
Conference
Society for Research into Higher Education Annual Research Conference, Newport, UK, December 5-7 2018.
Available from: 2019-01-08 Created: 2019-01-08 Last updated: 2019-01-14Bibliographically approved
Erikson, M. G. (2018). Examinatorns akademiska ansvar. Borås: Högskolan i Borås
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Examinatorns akademiska ansvar
2018 (Swedish)Report (Other academic)
Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Borås: Högskolan i Borås, 2018
Series
Vetenskap för profession: rapport, ISSN 1654-6520 ; 43
Keywords
Akademiskt ansvar, examination, akademisk frihet
National Category
Educational Sciences
Research subject
Teacher Education and Education Work
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:hb:diva-14762 (URN)978-91-88269-93-5 (ISBN)
Available from: 2018-07-17 Created: 2018-07-17 Last updated: 2019-06-10Bibliographically approved
Erikson, M. G. & Erikson, M. (2018). Learning outcomes and critical thinking – good intentions in conflict. Studies in Higher Education
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Learning outcomes and critical thinking – good intentions in conflict
2018 (English)In: Studies in Higher Education, ISSN 0307-5079, E-ISSN 1470-174XArticle in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

The notion of critical thinking and its theoretical complexity are used as a case for an epistemological critique of the model of intended learning outcomes. The conclusion is that three problems of learning outcomes, previously discussed in the literature, become even more challenging when seen in the light of critical thinking. The first problem concerns interpretations, as the use of learning outcomes is dependent on advanced but implicit interpretative frameworks. The second is the problem of educational goals that cannot be expressed through learning outcomes, and the third is the risk that learning outcomes may establish a ceiling for student ambitions. It is argued that the example of critical thinking shows the seriousness of the epistemological critique of learning outcomes and how the use of learning outcomes can divert teachers’ and students’ attention away from important goals.

Keywords
Critical thinking, learning outcomes, purposes of education, student experience, curriculum
National Category
Educational Sciences
Research subject
Teacher Education and Education Work
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:hb:diva-14764 (URN)10.1080/03075079.2018.1486813 (DOI)2-s2.0-85048742355 (Scopus ID)
Available from: 2018-07-17 Created: 2018-07-17 Last updated: 2018-07-30Bibliographically approved
Macfarlane, B. & Erikson, M. G. (2018). The right to teach in higher education – a provocation?. In: : . Paper presented at Philosophy and Theory of Higher Education Conference, London, 10-12 September 2018.
Open this publication in new window or tab >>The right to teach in higher education – a provocation?
2018 (English)Conference paper, Oral presentation with published abstract (Refereed)
Abstract [en]

Who has the right to teach in higher education? It is a question rarely posed. The way that such a right is understood in compulsory education is largely defined by reference to the possession of a teaching qualification. However, in a higher education (HE) context this question is as much a philosophical as a legal one given its distinctive values and characteristics, including the role of research and academic freedom. The philosophical literature on rights covers a lot of approaches and a demarcation of the right to teach is needed. Following Hohfeld (1919), we suggest that the right to teach should be regarded as a privilege. There is also an ensuing power, for example to place expectations on students (where students are given rights in return, something beyond the scope of this paper). To have the right to teach is to have a privilege to act in a number of situations. The exact scope of actions for a given teacher depend to a large extent on the organization of the educational venture, but potentially the rights include setting a curriculum or interpreting an existing curriculum. It includes deciding on the relative merit of theoretical and methodological perspectives, and the depth and scope of what to include in teaching activities and assessments. It is the right to assess students’ skills and knowledge. It is also the right to set and interpret the literature, and to take a stand on it in front of the students, including criticizing the authors’ claims.

 

Regardless of any other expectations we can place on teachers, a necessary condition for the right to teach is to have the competence to accomplish what is discussed above. It can be argued that this competence is manifest through an ability to reflect critically on the subject matter – this ought to come naturally given the fact that the development of students’ critical thinking is considered one of the most important aspects of higher education. The general rule in higher education, going back to Humboldt, is that the right to teach comes from being a researcher – a rule also enforced in many countries through educational acts, either as the implicit effect of a set of demands or as explicit legal requirements, as in New Zealand. A number of universities have also committed themselves during the last decades by signing Magna Charta Universitatum, which states: “recruitment of teachers, and regulation of their status, must obey the principle that research is inseparable from teaching”. Throughout the centuries, the right to teach has also been based on a formal recognition of research skills. In the medieval university the earliest degrees were the licentiateship (ie licentia docendi), in effect, a teaching licence.  In modern international higher education, a doctorate is the norm, emerging from the German tradition which has become the basis for the elite research university. In addition, teachers are often required to undertake teaching courses specific to HE. In the mainland European tradition, the position of teacher is often confirmed through ‘habilitation’, involving either the production of a second doctoral thesis or achieved cumulatively through high quality publications. Implicit or explicit, through a venia legendi, is a permission to teach a particular subject for life.

 

If accepting the Humboldtian model and the unity of teaching and research, it may be argued that real university level teaching can only be undertaken by those actively engaged in research. This position has been consistently asserted for over one hundred years by thinkers such as Ashby, Eliot, Jaspers, Russell, Truscot, and von Humboldt, encapsulated in the words of Stout (1965:61) who stated that ‘all teaching at the university level should be alive with the spirit of discovery’. The teacher needs to be at the cutting edge of examining knowledge claims rather than simply passing on received wisdom to students, whereas someone not currently engaged in research will only be able to pass on taken-for-granted knowledge claims. Yet possessing a doctorate or habilitation does not automatically mean that a person is currently engaged in research. This implies two issues. First, there is a need to define minimum requirements on research activity that should give the right to teach. Second, there is a need to discuss if the traditional life-long venia legendi is appropriate unless it is supplemented by a demand continuously meet the standards of research or professional activity.

National Category
Educational Sciences
Research subject
Teacher Education and Education Work
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:hb:diva-15641 (URN)
Conference
Philosophy and Theory of Higher Education Conference, London, 10-12 September 2018
Available from: 2019-01-08 Created: 2019-01-08 Last updated: 2019-01-15Bibliographically approved
Richards, T., Erikson, M. G., Eriksson, A., Nagy, A. & Johnson, E. (2017). A conceptual model of how research can influence student development. In: : . Paper presented at Connecting Higher Education: International perspectives on research-based education, London, 26-28 June, 2017.
Open this publication in new window or tab >>A conceptual model of how research can influence student development
Show others...
2017 (English)Conference paper, Oral presentation only (Refereed)
National Category
Educational Sciences
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:hb:diva-12581 (URN)
Conference
Connecting Higher Education: International perspectives on research-based education, London, 26-28 June, 2017
Available from: 2017-09-18 Created: 2017-09-18 Last updated: 2017-09-19Bibliographically approved
Allwood, C. M. & Erikson, M. G. (2017). Grundläggande vetenskapsteori: för psykologi och andra beteendevetenskaper (2:aed.). Lund: Studentlitteratur AB
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Grundläggande vetenskapsteori: för psykologi och andra beteendevetenskaper
2017 (Swedish)Book (Other academic)
Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Lund: Studentlitteratur AB, 2017. p. 217 Edition: 2:a
Keywords
vetenskapsteori psykologi
National Category
Psychology
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:hb:diva-13315 (URN)978-91-44-11415-6 (ISBN)
Available from: 2018-01-03 Created: 2018-01-03 Last updated: 2018-01-03Bibliographically approved
Erikson, M. G. (2017). Kindness, Communication and Academic Responsibility in Higher Education. In: : . Paper presented at 2nd Symposium on Values in Higher Education, Oxford UK, September 11-13, 2017.
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Kindness, Communication and Academic Responsibility in Higher Education
2017 (English)Conference paper, Oral presentation only (Other academic)
Abstract [en]

The purpose of this paper is to discuss functions of kindness in social practices guided by values in higher education. Definitions of kindness are briefly discussed and kindness is handled as a quality in social interactions between teacher and students, and between students. It is argued that kindness must be seen in a framework of values of higher education that are guiding the social interactions discussed – interactions that in turn are presumed to promote and communicate such values, and facilitate an academic development in line with these values. Quality of communication is suggested as an overall value for this purpose, as it is argued that quality of communication in a broad sense is at the core in every academic endeavour, both in research and in higher education. Communication is further related to academic freedom and academic responsibility, seen as two sides of the same coin. The overall discussion focus on how kindness can promote communication in higher education, and on how kindness as thus can be seen in terms of academic responsibility for both teachers and students. A caveat is that kindness is not about delimiting what can be said in an academic discourse, as this is guided by academic freedom, but of how it ought to be said to enable the best outcome in relation to academic values. It is also discussed how communication and academic freedom, in relation to kindness, are influenced by whether students are seen as customers, as victims, or as free adults being academic partners in the construction of knowledge.

National Category
Educational Sciences
Research subject
Teacher Education and Education Work
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:hb:diva-12787 (URN)
Conference
2nd Symposium on Values in Higher Education, Oxford UK, September 11-13, 2017
Available from: 2017-10-03 Created: 2017-10-03 Last updated: 2017-12-15Bibliographically approved
Organisations

Search in DiVA

Show all publications