Change search
Refine search result
1 - 14 of 14
CiteExportLink to result list
Permanent link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Rows per page
  • 5
  • 10
  • 20
  • 50
  • 100
  • 250
Sort
  • Standard (Relevance)
  • Author A-Ö
  • Author Ö-A
  • Title A-Ö
  • Title Ö-A
  • Publication type A-Ö
  • Publication type Ö-A
  • Issued (Oldest first)
  • Issued (Newest first)
  • Created (Oldest first)
  • Created (Newest first)
  • Last updated (Oldest first)
  • Last updated (Newest first)
  • Disputation date (earliest first)
  • Disputation date (latest first)
  • Standard (Relevance)
  • Author A-Ö
  • Author Ö-A
  • Title A-Ö
  • Title Ö-A
  • Publication type A-Ö
  • Publication type Ö-A
  • Issued (Oldest first)
  • Issued (Newest first)
  • Created (Oldest first)
  • Created (Newest first)
  • Last updated (Oldest first)
  • Last updated (Newest first)
  • Disputation date (earliest first)
  • Disputation date (latest first)
Select
The maximal number of hits you can export is 250. When you want to export more records please use the Create feeds function.
  • 1.
    Francisco, Susanne
    et al.
    Charles Sturt University.
    Mahon, Kathleen
    University of Borås, Faculty of Librarianship, Information, Education and IT.
    Kemmis, Stephen
    Charles Sturt University.
    Transforming education and professional practice2017In: Exploring education and professional practice: Through the lens of practice architectures / [ed] Kathleen Mahon, Susanne Francisco, Stephen Kemmis, Singapore: Springer, 2017, p. 257-264Chapter in book (Other academic)
    Abstract [en]

    In this chapter, we return to the notion of exploring education and professional practices, the key focus of this volume. In the opening chapter, we argued that the theory of practice architectures is simultaneously a theoretical, an analytical, and a transformative resource. Here we highlight some of the ways the chapters in this book have capitalised on the affordances of the theory of practice architectures as their authors have explored education and professional practices. We comment on how, individually and collectively, the chapters contribute to ongoing conversations about particular practices, and our understanding of practices in general.

  • 2.
    Kemmis, Stephen
    et al.
    Charles Sturt University.
    Mahon, Kathleen
    University of Borås, Faculty of Librarianship, Information, Education and IT. Charles Sturt University.
    Coming to ‘Practice Architectures’: A Genealogy of the Theory2017In: Exploring education and professional practice: Through the lens of practice architectures / [ed] Kathleen Mahon, Susanne Francisco, Stephen Kemmis, Singapore: Springer, 2017, p. 219-238Chapter in book (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    This chapter provides an account, from the perspective of one of the authors of the theory of practice architectures, of how the theory came about and has evolved. The theory was first articulated as the ‘theory of practice architectures’ by Stephen Kemmis and Peter Grootenboer in 2008 in the book Enabling Praxis: Challenges for Education. However, it was many years in the making before 2008, and it has continued to be refined since then through Kemmis and Grootenboer’s engagement in research and conversation with other scholars. The narrative presented here provides insights into many of the theory’s key influences, explaining how and why some of its central assertions and ideas have emerged. Thus the chapter builds on explanations of the theory presented in this book and elsewhere.

  • 3. Kemmis, Stephen
    et al.
    Mahon, Kathleen
    University of Borås, Faculty of Librarianship, Information, Education and IT.
    Practice architectures of university education2017In: Practice theory perspectives on pedagogy and education / [ed] Peter Grootenboer, Christine Edwards-Groves, Sarojni Choy, Singapore: Springer, 2017, p. 107-141Chapter in book (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    This chapter aims to challenge the narrative of the university in decline in the late twentieth and early twenty-first centuries, by showing how earlier forms of university life and practice persist within emerging forms. It uses the resources of practice theory — more precisely, the theory of practice architectures — to illuminate the analysis. The chapter proceeds in five main steps. First, the theory of practice architectures is outlined. Second, three vignettes of Australian university life in different eras (1964, 1987, 2015) are presented. These give a sense of the changes underway in Australian university life and practice; each is briefly contextualised by reference to a specific university at the time, and in relation to wider Australian culture, economy, and society and politics. Third, the notion of ‘practice landscapes’ is used to interpret and characterise the ‘look and feel’ of Australian university life and practice across the three periods being explored. We describe the university of 1964 as the juridical university, the university of 1987 as the negotiated university, and the university of 2015 as theentrepreneurial university. Fourth, we return to the notion of practice architectures to show how multiple forms of university life and practice have coexisted over time, with earlier forms persisting within later ones. Finally, we draw the argument to its conclusion, namely, that change in the life and practice of (some) Australian universities 1964–2015 is not a linear progress (or regress) in which earlier forms of the university are destroyed and replaced, but, rather, a complex process in which earlier forms are sedimented and displaced within contemporary university life and practice as a contested terrain. We think this alternative perspective offers scope and hope for transformative action for recovery and renewal in the Australian university.

  • 4.
    Langelotz, Lill
    et al.
    University of Borås, Faculty of Librarianship, Information, Education and IT.
    Mahon, Kathleen
    University of Borås, Faculty of Librarianship, Information, Education and IT.
    Academic leading - with a focus on student learning2017Report (Other (popular science, discussion, etc.))
    Abstract [en]

    This report provides a summary and analysis of activities and material generated in the seminar series ‘Academic leading – with a focus on student learning’ developed for staff in management positions at the University of Borås (UB), 2017. The aims of the report are (a) to draw attention to some areas of need and concern that arose during discussions in the seminars (reflected in participants’ written responses in seminar activities); and (b) to make recommendations for consideration of the University’s executive team related to identified concerns/areas of need.

    Seminar discussions highlighted that there are currently many practices (including leading practices) and arrangements within the University that enhance, or support enhancement of, the learning environment. However, discussions also highlighted some constraining university arrangements and challenges faced in fulfilling leading/managing responsibilities that have implications for the learning environment. These include a range of issues from staff workloads to staffing issues and staff relations.  Such issues, it is argued in this report, warrant further discussion/investigation and potentially changes to practices and arrangements in order to sustain and create an environment more conducive to student learning and leading with a focus on student learning.  As well as offering some recommendations in this regard, the report also presents an evaluation of the seminars. 

  • 5.
    Langelotz, Lill
    et al.
    University of Borås, Faculty of Librarianship, Information, Education and IT.
    Mahon, Kathleen
    University of Borås, Faculty of Librarianship, Information, Education and IT.
    Academic Leading with a Focus on Student Learning2018Conference paper (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    Academic Leading with a Focus on Student Learning

    Few people would deny that universities are becoming increasingly complex educational environments due to significant changes in the nature of academic work (e.g., digitalisation of work and learning, educational administration, changing faculty values[1]) and to changing societal expectations. Those in university leadership roles face challenges and opportunities amidst this complexity, especially regarding responsibilities associated with student learning. The capacity of leaders and managers to respond is arguably affected by the arrangements and practices embedded within their own universities. Understanding these challenges and opportunities, and how current arrangements and practices contribute to or limit them, is central for finding sustainable ways of meeting educational responsibilities and supporting leading for student learning.

    This paper explores one university’s efforts to enhance academic leading with a focus on student learning, and to understand the site-based arrangements and practices affecting the practices of leading. These goals underpinned a series of four seminars on ‘Academic leading – with a focus on student learning’ developed for staff in management positions. The seminars were inquiry-focused, generating participant artefacts (e.g., diagrams, PowerPoint presentations, notes) that were used to inform seminar discussions. This material was also analysed to form the basis of this paper. Both the seminars and analysis were theoretically framed by the ‘theory of practice architectures’ and ‘ecologies of practices’[2]. According to the theory, practices are shaped by three kinds of overlapping arrangements: Cultural-discursive arrangements such as discourses and languages affect what is possible to say in and about practice (e.g., deficit discourses, critical discourses, discipline-specific discourses, languages). Material economic-arrangements – material, technological, financial, organisational, and other resources – affect what it is possible to do in practice (e.g., buildings, schedules, workload calculators, funding). Social-political arrangements are arrangements that affect the ways in which it is possible for people to relate to others (and things and places) in practice (e.g., organisational rules, mandates, solidarities, hierarchies). These arrangements form the practice architectures of practices like leading, teaching, and learning. 

    The analysis highlighted, from a cultural-discursive perspective, the need for explicitly focussing on the learning environment in everyday activities, and for clear articulation of goals and visions on both institutional and departmental levels. These are important for the emergence of shared understandings needed for growth in the area of student learning. From a material-economic perspective, analysis also pointed to the need for opportunities (i.e., time) for staff to reflect in organised ways on their practice and engage in professional learning activities, and for managers to engage in strategic development. This means looking closely at minimising activities and reorienting arrangements that take up time that could otherwise be spent on developing good pedagogical work (e.g., administrative tasks). From a social-political perspective, the analysis emphasised the need for building trusting, productive staff relations within and between departments, academies, and administration.

    The paper invites discussion of the issues raised and consideration of how these issues resonate with educational environments in other universities and how they are being, or might be, addressed. It raises the question of how we can more effectively and sustainably support leading for student learning given the challenges and complexities of academic environments, by creating new practice architectures or by reorienting existing ones that constrain leading and professional learning in unhelpful ways.

    [1] Slaughter, S., and Leslie, L., L.  (1997). Academic Capitalism. Politics, Policies and the Entrepreneurial University. Baltimore, Maryland USA: John Hopkins University Press.

    [2] Kemmis, S., Wilkinson, J., Edwards-Groves, C., Hardy, I., Grootenboer, P., & Bristol, L. (2014). Changing practices, changing education. Singapore: Springer.

  • 6.
    Langelotz, Lill
    et al.
    University of Borås, Faculty of Librarianship, Information, Education and IT.
    Mahon, Kathleen
    University of Borås, Faculty of Librarianship, Information, Education and IT.
    Leading for learning in higher education - challenges and possibilities2018In: AUSTRALIAN ASSOCIATION FOR RESEARCH IN EDUCATION (AARE) CONFERENCE 2018: Education Research Matters: Impact and Engagement / [ed] Professor Annette Woods AARE President, 2018Conference paper (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    Leading for learning in higher education – challenges and possibilities

    Lill Langelotz and Kathleen Mahon, University of Borås, Sweden

    Few people would deny that universities are becoming increasingly complex educational environments due to significant changes in the nature of academic work and to changing societal expectations. University leaders face challenges and opportunities amidst this complexity, especially regarding responsibilities associated with student learning. The capacity of leaders and managers to respond is arguably affected by the arrangements and practices embedded within their own universities. Understanding these challenges and opportunities, and how current arrangements and practices contribute to or limit them, is central for finding sustainable ways of meeting educational responsibilities and supporting leading for student learning.

    This paper explores one Swedish university’s effort to enhance academic leading, and to understand the salient site-based arrangements and practices affecting leading for learning. These goals underpinned a series of four seminars on ‘Academic leading – with a focus on student learning’ developed for all staff in management positions (including administration). The seminars were inquiry-focused, generating participant artefacts (e.g., diagrams, PowerPoint presentations) that were used to inform seminar discussions. This material was also analysed as part of an ongoing practitioner inquiry aimed at understanding and addressing site-based challenges for academic leading. Both the seminars and analysis were theoretically framed by the ‘theory of practice architectures’[1].

    Initial results show a need for explicitly focussing on the learning environment in everyday activities, and for clear articulation of goals and visions on both institutional and departmental levels. They also point to the importance of opportunities (i.e., time) for staff to reflect in organised ways on their practice and engage in professional learning activities and strategic development, as well as the need for further interrogation of activities that take up time that could otherwise be spent on developing good pedagogical work (e.g., administrative tasks). From a social-political perspective, the results emphasise the need for building trusting, productive staff relations within and between departments, faculties, and administration teams.

    The paper raises the question, on the basis of the analysis, of how we can more effectively and sustainably support leading for learning given the challenges and complexities of academic environments, by creating new practice architectures and/or by reorienting existing ones that constrain leading and professional learning in unhelpful ways.

    [1] Kemmis, S., Wilkinson, J., Edwards-Groves, C., Hardy, I., Grootenboer, P., & Bristol, L. (2014). Changing practices, changing education. Singapore: Springer.

  • 7.
    Mahon, Kathleen
    University of Borås, Faculty of Librarianship, Information, Education and IT.
    Negotiating democratic relations in a doctoral project examining university conditions and pedagogical praxis2017In: Educational action research, ISSN 0965-0792, E-ISSN 1747-5074, Vol. 25, no 1, p. 71-87Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    This article is a critically reflexive account of how collaborative processes and democratic relations were negotiated in a doctoral research project which combined elements of institutional ethnography, self-study, and, significantly for this article, critical participatory action research. The critical participatory action research dimension of the project involved a group of academics working in the same university faculty, critically and collaboratively examining their own pedagogical practice and the conditions which constrain and enable critical pedagogical praxis in their setting. The article explores what possibilities for democratic participation were created and limited by the circumstances and conditions that constituted this critical participatory action research. I consider the kind of democratic participation that was possible, what enabled this kind of democratic participation, and challenges that emerged in attempts to realise democratic goals. The discussion highlights some of the complexities of fostering democratic participation in critical participatory action research within doctoral research.

  • 8.
    Mahon, Kathleen
    University of Borås, Faculty of Librarianship, Information, Education and IT.
    Praktikteorier i allmänhet och teorin om praktikarkitekturer i synnerhet2019In: Att Utveckla Utbildningspraktiker: Analys, förståelse och förändring genom teorin om praktikarkitekturer / [ed] Ingrid Hennis-Loeb, Lill Langelotz, Karin Rönnerman, Lund, Sweden: Studentlitteratur AB, 2019, p. 27-43Chapter in book (Refereed)
  • 9.
    Mahon, Kathleen
    et al.
    University of Borås, Faculty of Librarianship, Information, Education and IT.
    Francisco, SusanneKemmis, Stephen
    Exploring education and professional practice: Through the lens of practice architectures2017Collection (editor) (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    This book was written to help people understand and transform education and professional practice. It presents and extends the theory of practice architectures, and offers a contemporary account of what practices are composed of and how practices shape and are shaped by the arrangements with which they are enmeshed in sites of practice. Through its empirically-based case chapters, the book demonstrates how the theory of practice architectures can be used as a theoretical, analytical, and transformational resource to generate insights that have important implications for practice, theory, policy, and research in education and professional practice. These insights relate to how practices are shaped by arrangements (and other practices) present in specific sites of practice, including early childhood educationsettings, schools, adult education, and workplaces. They also relate to how practices create distinctive intersubjective spaces, so that people encounter one another in particular ways (a) in particular semantic spaces, (b) that are realised in particular locations and durations in physical space-time, and (c) in particular social spaces. By applying such insights, readers can work towards changing practices by transforming the practice architectures that make them possible.

  • 10.
    Mahon, Kathleen
    et al.
    University of Borås, Faculty of Librarianship, Information, Education and IT.
    Francisco, Susanne
    Charles Sturt University.
    Lloyd, Annemaree
    University of Borås, Faculty of Librarianship, Information, Education and IT.
    Practice Architectures and Being Stirred into Academic Practices of a Research Group2018In: Education in an era of schooling: Critical perspectives of Educational Practice and Action Research. A Festschrift for Stephen Kemmis / [ed] Christine Edwards-Groves, Peter Grootenboer, Jane Wilkinson, Singapore: Springer, 2018, 1st, p. 167-181-Chapter in book (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    This chapter uses the theory of practice architectures to show how particular kinds of arrangements can make particular kinds of academic practices possible. It does this by exploring the authors’ experiences of being stirred in to practices of academia within a particular practice landscape as part of a research group, and the arrangements that enabled and constrained that stirring in. Employing an auto-ethnographic approach, the authors draw on their individual and collective experiences of research and collaboration with Stephen Kemmis and encounters with the theory of practice architectures. Individual narratives are analysed to identify key cultural-discursive, material-economic and social-political arrangements that prefigured our being stirred in, a process which has led to deep and long-lasting research collaborations and commitments that have strong and enduring local and international ties. In sharing our analysis and narratives, we provide a glimpse of how these collaborations and commitments, and the theory of practice architectures (itself a prefiguring arrangement of our practices) have influenced our research into practice in our respective fields. Our discussion offers insights not only into the kinds of practice architectures that make up a university landscape, but also how conditions of possibility can be created for academic practices that resist the de-professionalising effects of troubling university conditions.

  • 11.
    Mahon, Kathleen
    et al.
    University of Borås, Faculty of Librarianship, Information, Education and IT. Charles Sturt University.
    Galloway, Letitia
    Charles Sturt University.
    Provoking Praxis Amidst a Faculty Restructure: A Practice Architecture Perspective2017In: Exploring education and professional practice: Through the lens of practice architectures / [ed] Kathleen Mahon, Susanne Francisco, Stephen Kemmis, Singapore: Springer, 2017, p. 183-199Chapter in book (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    It is argued in this chapter that critical pedagogical praxis is a kind of social-justice oriented, critically reflexive, and informed teaching practice that is needed in universities in these times of complexity and rapid change. However, critical pedagogical praxis can sometimes be difficult to enact amidst pressures associated with mass education, changing community expectations, and the influences of neoliberalism and managerialism; pressures that are being experienced in educational institutions world-wide. This chapter discusses how the theory of practice architectures can shed light on some of the challenges of enacting critical pedagogical praxis in higher education. In the discussion, we draw primarily on a doctoral research project which examined enabling and constraining conditions for critical pedagogical praxis within a particular Australian university through the lens of practice architectures and other practice theories. We explore some of the salient architectures that were identified in the research, focussing our discussion on possibilities for enacting critical pedagogical praxis in the context of a faculty restructure. Ways in which academics were able to negotiate the changing conditions and create enabling architectures are discussed in the analysis.

  • 12.
    Mahon, Kathleen
    et al.
    University of Borås, Faculty of Librarianship, Information, Education and IT.
    Heikkinen, Hannu, L.T.
    Jyväskylä University, Finland.
    Huttunen, Rauno
    Turku University, Finland.
    Critical educational praxis in university ecosystems: Enablers and constraints.2018In: Pedagogy, Culture & Society, ISSN 1468-1366, E-ISSN 1747-5104Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    Universities serve several important functions in society today through research, education, and community engagement, not least helping people to live meaningfully in society, and helping to create a world worth living in. A kind of practice that seems particularly important in fulfilling such responsibilities is critical educational praxis, a social-justice oriented, educational practice/praxis, with a focus on asking critical questions and creating conditions for positive change. Yet, the contemporary university is not exactly a niche for critical educational praxis. There are many practices and arrangements within higher education that make the enactment of critical educational praxis very challenging. This paper explores this concern by explicating the notion of critical educational praxis and examining enablers and constraints for critical educational praxis drawing on an empirical study conducted in one university setting. Our aim in doing so is to prompt consideration of the kind of university ecosystems currently being created, and the implications of this for academic communities and society. 

  • 13.
    Mahon, Kathleen
    et al.
    University of Borås, Faculty of Librarianship, Information, Education and IT.
    Kemmis, Stephen
    Charles Sturt University.
    Francisco, Susanne
    Charles Sturt University.
    Lloyd, Annemaree
    University of Borås, Faculty of Librarianship, Information, Education and IT.
    Introduction: Practice Theory and the Theory of Practice Architectures2017In: Exploring education and professional practice: Through the lens of practice architectures / [ed] Kathleen Mahon, Susanne Francisco, Stephen Kemmis, Singapore: Springer, 2017, p. 1-30Chapter in book (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    This chapter introduces the theory of practice architectures and locates it within the theoretical terrain of practice theory. It highlights what is distinctive about the theory as a practice theory, and discusses its affordances as a theoretical, analytical, and transformational resource for practitioners and researchers. We argue that, to create new possibilities for practice in our disciplines and professions, and/or to challenge unsustainable or untoward practices in education and professional practice more broadly, our current practices must be interrogated. The theory of practice architectures can inform such interrogative work. This chapter provides a foundation for the case chapters in this book which variously illustrate the kinds of insights yielded by exploring education and professional practice through the lens of practice architectures.

  • 14.
    Mahon, Kathleen
    et al.
    University of Borås, Faculty of Librarianship, Information, Education and IT.
    Sjoelie, Ela
    Norwegian University of Science and Technology.
    Kemmis, Stephen
    Charles Sturt University.
    Langelotz, Lill
    University of Borås, Faculty of Librarianship, Information, Education and IT.
    Boyle, Tess
    Southern Cross University.
    Kauko, Mervi
    Monash University.
    Santos, Doris
    National University of Colombia.
    Researching practice in higher education2018In: AUSTRALIAN ASSOCIATION FOR RESEARCH IN EDUCATION (AARE) CONFERENCE 2018: Education Research Matters: Impact and Engagement / [ed] Professor Annette Woods AARE President, 2018Conference paper (Refereed)
1 - 14 of 14
CiteExportLink to result list
Permanent link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf