Suchergebnisse

The supervision of work-based research requires complex capabilities from supervisor(s) as they seek to: ? address the diverse needs of a candidate operating at doctoral level within a work environment where their priorities are, in part at least, set by the needs of their organisation and work role; and ? supervise the creation of knowledge at doctoral level. And yet there has to date been little study of these needs and no commonly accepted framework of practice for supervisors is currently available to draw upon. In moving beyond this state of the art the project team won Erasmus funding for a project whose objectives were to: ? Access best practice in the supervision/advising of modern doctorates: ? Identify the host/sponsoring organisation?s requirements from supervision (if any) and their contribution to it ? Develop a framework of practice (supported by training resources) suitable for modern doctorates ? Disseminate this best practice framework to all stakeholders ? Produce a sustainable impact on supervisory practice throughout the EU. This handbook is one of the outputs for the project and its aim is to provide a quick reference guide for supervisors wishing to enhance their practice in the area of modern doctorates through accessing the rich experience of others in the field.

In March 2010 the Higher Education Ministers of the European Higher Education Area issued the Budapest-Venue Ministerial Declaration. This statement, inter alia called for ?a more supportive environment? for academic staff across the Continent of Europe?. By this important Declaration the Ministers made two statements, at least by logical implication; that a healthy and thriving system of Higher Education requires the provision of a supportive environment for the academic staff who are charged with delivering it and; that the current environment is not supportive enough. Whilst welcoming this important recognition of the role and entitlements of academics, ETUCE, the European Region of Education International1 felt that there was an obvious need to spell out in detail just precisely what European academics themselves would identify as the elements necessary to build the supportive environment which had just been given such strong political support. ETUCE therefore conducted a detailed study across nine European Counties (carefully selected for representational balance); Denmark, Germany, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Portugal, Romania, Serbia and the UK. The Irish section of this massive research project was conducted by the Irish Federation of University Teachers (IFUT) and the Teachers? Union of Ireland (TUI). This report contains the details of the Irish case study findings. The report constitutes, we believe, essential reading for any person or body with an interest in Higher Education in Ireland. The report maps out the current issues, concerns and challenges of the sector, sign-posting routes for enhancing supportive work environments for academics, including researchers. If they are, in the main, predictable then all the more reason to take them extremely seriously. We see familiar themes such as lack of funding, deteriorating staff-student ratios, lack of confidence in the thrust of national policy for the sector, deteriorating working conditions, excessive workloads, and pressure to raise funds externally. Other concerns that emerged may be less familiar but are equally deeply felt and crucial for the health of the sector. These issues require even greater attention from those in positions of authority who find them novel or surprising. These include the following: teaching-related duties not adequately funded, lack of pedagogical support, lack of institutional support for research-led teaching, teaching not valued or consideration of when it comes to career progression.

PUBLISHED ; This article advances the thinking of Lima, Ostermann and Rezende?s ?Marxism in Vygotskian approaches to cultural studies of science education? and Mark Zuss? response to their paper. Firstly, it introduces Catherine Malabou?s concept of plasticity, from which Hegel?s dialectic can be re-read as historical materialist self-determination in a way that embraces science but non-reductively, and which leads to the possibility of challenging theoretical rigidity as a form of transformative action. Secondly, this response article provides political analysis of scientific concepts as they reproduce and reinforce particular interests and are expropriated by policy makers and unaware teacher educators whose understanding lies within a technical-instrumentalism and diluted humanism framework. Both arguments feature the human brain as an object of research in science education. From Malabou, the emancipatory conceptualisation of the brain as material, historical and sociocultural; whilst `Brain Gym? exemplifies a non-science and nonsensical misappropriation of scientific concepts for commercial gain via a para-educational intervention.