The Bauhaus as Education Model: Enduring Design and Powerful Knowledge

This chapter is an exploratory investigation of the relationship and interaction between the learning organization and organizational learning in terms of an enabling role of knowledge management. In the severe and dynamic business environment, organizations should respond quickly to their rivals and environment by transforming into a learning organization. A learning organization could provoke innovation and learning through its structure, task and process redesigns, and evermore adapt gradually toward the eventual goal of organizational learning. Therefore, the dynamic process between the learning organization and organizational learning is an important issue of current knowledge management and practice — that is, the enabling role of knowledge management could enhance the interaction between learning organization and organizational learning. Furthermore, the authors will explore the relationship and interaction between the learning organization and organizational learning in terms of knowledge management processes in business. Two cases, TSMC and Winbond, the semiconductor and high-tech firms in Taiwan, will be studied to illustrate the findings and insights for the study and the chapter.

This chapter is an exploratory investigation of the relationship and interaction between the learning organization and organizational learning in terms of an enabling role of knowledge management. In the severe and dynamic business environment, organizations should respond quickly to their rivals and environment by transforming into a learning organization. A learning organization could provoke innovation and learning through its structure, task and process redesigns, and evermore adapt gradually toward the eventual goal of organizational learning. Therefore, the dynamic process between the learning organization and organizational learning is an important issue of current knowledge management and practice — that is, the enabling role of knowledge management could enhance the interaction between learning organization and organizational learning. Furthermore, the authors will explore the relationship and interaction between the learning organization and organizational learning in terms of knowledge management processes in business. Two cases, TSMC and Winbond, the semiconductor and high-tech firms in Taiwan, will be studied to illustrate the findings and insights for the study and the chapter.

The aim of the paper is to demonstrate how everyday knowledge can be incorporated into the classroom practices of institutions of higher learning to inform inclusive outcomes for linguistically and culturally diverse students. Using a metaphor of a marketer’s everyday interrogation of market conditions, a postgraduate guide to proposal writing and the funds of knowledge socio-cultural framework, we illustrate how forms of everyday and school knowledge can be used concurrently in the construction of socially responsive dialogic pedagogy. We argue for scholarship of teaching and learning (SOTL) in the South in which knowledge and theory generation is not a preserve of English only, but more so, of the complex interactions between English and the multiplicity of languages that students bring to the classroom. We conclude that SOTL in the South needs to be founded on the transfiguration of everyday knowledge and formal academic knowledge to facilitate the production of new and more powerful knowledge in multicultural postcolonial society. This would allow for inclusive pedagogy that caters for diversity in classrooms, and activity-based teaching and learning, networking students’ experiential, community/home and formal academic knowledge in the construction of new and powerful knowledge.
 
 How to cite this article:
 BANDA, Felix; BANDA, Dennis. Demystifying research methods: everyday experiences as socio-cultural co(n)texts for effective research methods in teaching and learning in institutions of higher learning in Africa. Scholarship of Teaching and Learning in the South, [S.l.], v. 1, n. 1, p. 60-77, sep. 2017. Available at: <http://sotl-south-journal.net/?journal=sotls&page=article&op=view&path%5B%5D=13>. Date accessed: 12 sep. 2017.
 
 This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

This paper argues that Young and Muller’s ‘powerful knowledge’ requires a more extensive conceptualization of the relation between knowledge and practice. However, rather than focus on the ‘practice turn’ in social theory as Carlgren has suggested, it is argued that what Rouse terms a ‘normative practice’ can help explicate the specialized activities that make powerful knowledge possible. The idea of normative practice provides a basis for the systematic revisability and specialized communities that are said to underpin powerful knowledge, while also illuminating how teachers recontextualise knowledge and reconciling the role of experience with other types of knowledge in a curriculum. Normative practice provides a basis for specialized and ‘knowledgeable’ purposeful practice which suggests that knowledge is never ‘for its own sake’, but always in pursuit of something ‘at stake’, although that which is at stake is always prospective. Furthermore, it is only through generating inclusive and participative forms of (normative) knowledgeable practice that communities can acquire the characteristics that enable knowledge to become meaningful and accessible to all in society without retreating into elitism and obsolescence.

Aim/Purpose: Drawing on theories of organizational learning, this study analyzes the mechanism of Internet integration capability affecting knowledge generation by 399 Chinese enterprises. This paper will further explore whether there is a moderating role of learning orientation in the mechanism of Internet integration capability affecting enterprise knowledge generation. Background: The Internet has gradually integrated into the enterprise innovation system and penetrated into all aspects of technological innovation, which has promoted the integration and optimization of resources inside and outside the organization. However, there is limited understanding of how the combination of the Internet and integration capability can drive enterprise knowledge generation. Methodology: The study uses survey data from 399 organizations in China. Through structural equation modeling, this study assesses the relationship between Internet integration capability, organizational learning, knowledge generation, and uses PROCESS macro program to test the mediated moderation effect of learning orientation. Contribution: First, this study provides empirical evidence for managers to better build Internet integration capability and ambidextrous learning to promote enterprise knowledge generation. Second, this study highlights the important moderating role of learning orientation in the mediating role of ambidextrous learning. Findings: First, the study confirms the mediating role of exploratory learning and exploitative learning in knowledge generation driven by Internet integration capability. Second, the results show that when organizations have a strong learning orientation, the indirect path of Internet integration capability influencing knowledge generation through exploratory learning will be enhanced. Recommendations for Practitioners: Enterprises should pay full attention to the improvement of internet integration capability and ambidextrous learning to promote knowledge generation. In addition, enterprises should establish a good learning atmosphere within the organization to strengthen the bridge role of exploratory learning between Internet integration capability and knowledge generation. Recommendation for Researchers: Researchers could collect data from countries with different levels of economic development to verify the universal applicability of the proposed theoretical model. Impact on Society: This study provides references for enterprises using Internet integration capability to promote their knowledge generation capability under the internet background. Future Research: Future research can compare the impact of Internet integration capability on knowledge generation in different industries.

Aim/Purpose: The aim of this study is to analyze doctoral schools as a new form of doctoral education in Poland through the prism of the concept of a learning organization. This paper not only reshapes the landscape of doctoral education but also contributes profoundly to the field of organizational learning theory by examining how this new model can enhance educational environments. By demonstrating the transformative potential of doctoral schools as learning organizations, the author highlights their critical role in driving educational innovation and fostering a culture of continuous improvement within academia. Given the evolving legal and organizational environment and the increasing demands of universities and young researchers, this approach is crucial for the future success of doctoral education. Doctoral schools are undeniably positioned to adapt and thrive in this changing landscape, aligning with the core principles of learning organizations. Background: A learning organization can rapidly adapt to changing conditions and boldly create transformative opportunities for improvement for all individuals associated with its functioning. In a learning organization, it is crucial to focus on the continuous acquisition of new skills, actively searching for opportunities, and boldly introducing innovative patterns of action. Equally important is receiving constructive feedback on mistakes made, learning how to avoid them, and, when they do occur, swiftly correcting them to foster ongoing improvement. Methodology: This study explores the concept of doctoral schools as learning organizations, emphasizing their potential to drive educational innovation and foster a culture of continuous improvement within academia. The author employs qualitative methodology, analyzing literature, and has also incorporated autoethnography to address important aspects of managing a doctoral school relating to individual areas of a learning organization. The basis for the author’s considerations is the theory of the ‘learning organization’ by Peter Senge. Contribution: The novelty of this article lies in its analysis of a relatively new form of doctoral education that has existed in Poland since the academic year 2019/2020 and is still evolving. The contribution also considers this form a learning organization, offering practical implications for policymakers and academic leaders. Furthermore, this study extends existing research on learning organizations by applying this theoretical framework to doctoral education, a field where such an approach has been underexplored. By integrating insights from organizational learning theory, the research provides a broader perspective on how doctoral schools can function as dynamic, adaptive institutions that foster academic development and institutional resilience. This research also fills a gap in the literature by demonstrating how learning organization principles can be systematically implemented in doctoral education. Findings: Doctoral schools in Poland exemplify the characteristics of dynamic learning organizations. Their key features include learning from mistakes, continuously reviewing operational procedures, fostering the ongoing development of management staff, supervisors, and administrative personnel, taking calculated risks, actively searching for ways to enhance the quality and effectiveness of education, and making informed, evidence-based decisions. These aspects underscore the transformative potential of doctoral schools in shaping a more adaptable and innovative higher education system. Recommendations for Practitioners: The doctoral school in Poland is such an innovative concept in relation to previous practices related to educating doctoral students that it requires structural and organizational changes and a shift in mindset among those responsible for training young researchers. Recommendation for Researchers: Future research should investigate the extent to which doctoral schools perceive themselves as learning organizations and the degree to which they consciously implement this concept. Additionally, analyzing these institutions through alternative theoretical models and conducting empirical research would provide deeper insights into their evolving role in higher education. Impact on Society: The findings of this study offer practical implications for doctoral school management. The analyses presented here can inform the development of strategies that align doctoral schools more closely with the principles of a learning organization, ultimately supporting their mission to cultivate a dynamic and progressive academic environment. Future Research: Future research should further explore the extent to which doctoral schools identify as learning organizations and the degree to which they actively implement this concept. Additionally, investigating the specific challenges and strategies in integrating learning organization principles within doctoral education would provide deeper insights. Empirical studies comparing different models of doctoral education could also contribute to a more comprehensive understanding of how these institutions evolve and adapt in response to educational reforms. Furthermore, future studies could focus on identifying the key factors that influence the successful implementation of these principles, such as institutional culture, leadership styles, and faculty engagement. Exploring the potential barriers to adopting a learning organization approach within doctoral schools, including resistance to change or resource limitations, would also be valuable. This would encourage a more nuanced understanding of the complexities involved and inform strategies for overcoming these challenges.

PurposeIndustry 4.0 has been one of the most topics of interest by researches and practitioners in recent years. Then, researches which bring new insights related to the subjects linked to the Industry 4.0 become relevant to support Industry 4.0's initiatives as well as for the deployment of new research works. Considering “organizational learning” as one of the most crucial subjects in this new context, this article aims to identify dimensions present in the literature regarding the relation between organizational learning and Industry 4.0 seeking to clarify how learning can be understood into the context of the fourth industrial revolution. In addition, future research directions are presented as well.Design/methodology/approachThis study is based on a systematic literature review that covers Industry 4.0 and organizational learning based on publications made from 2012, when the topic of Industry 4.0 was coined in Germany, using data basis Web of Science and Google Scholar. Also, NVivo software was used in order to identify keywords and the respective dimensions and constructs found out on this research.FindingsNine dimensions were identified between organizational learning and Industry 4.0. These include management, Industry 4.0, general industry, technology, sustainability, application, interaction between industry and the academia, education and training and competency and skills. These dimensions may be viewed in three main constructs which are essentially in order to understand and manage learning in Industry 4.0's programs. They are: learning development, Industry 4.0 structure and technology Adoption.Research limitations/implicationsEven though there are relatively few publications that have studied the relationship between organizational learning and Industry 4.0, this article makes a material contribution to both the theory in relation to Industry 4.0 and the theory of learning - for its unprecedented nature, introducing the dimensions comprising this relation as well as possible future research directions encouraging empirical researches.Practical implicationsThis article identifies the thematic dimensions relative to Industry 4.0 and organizational learning. The understanding of this relation has a relevant contribution to professionals acting in the field of organizational learning and Industry 4.0 in the sense of affording an adequate deployment of these elements by organizations.Originality/valueThis article is unique for filling a gap in the academic literature in terms of understanding the relation between organizational learning and Industry 4.0. The article also provides future research directions on learning within the context of Industry 4.0.

Purpose– Research on sustainability in higher education has focused on environmental management of the university campus, case studies and examples of good practice. Although the value and contribution of these initiatives has been articulated, little holistic and structural transformation of universities has been achieved so far. This paper aims to explore different theoretical frameworks to better understand and improve the effectiveness of organisational change processes towards sustainability in universities.Design/methodology/approach– The combination of different theoretical approaches on organisational learning such as organisational learning theory, the idea of expansive learning at work, the ideal of the learning organisation and transformative learning theory are reviewed in this paper. These ideas in combination with leadership for sustainability and education for sustainability lead to an integrative model that links theory and practice, cultural and social aspects influencing learning, and the ability of individuals to critically reflect and challenge existing worldviews to learn and develop new practices.Findings– The theoretical foundations and model presented seek to provide useful theoretical basis with which to better understand the process of transformation towards sustainability in higher education. This involves a continuous process of learning to rethink existing practices and worldviews by individuals within the organisation, which lead to community learning, which in turn lead to organisational learning. Six key implications for action have also been identified.Originality/value– Little research exists that uses organisational learning to inform the design and development of the research reporting on the achievements, opportunities and challenges emerged during the change process towards embedding sustainability in higher education. The suggested framework is envisaged as an integrative theoretical framework that can help understand the “how to”, thus the learning processes associated with embedding sustainability in the core activities of universities.

Perhaps the slow evolution toward greater school choice reflects an understanding among state policymakers that choice works—that it is an improvement over current practice. A number of scholars in the fields of policy and organizational studies believe that policy change and reform are the products of organizational or institutional learning. Organizational learning may be defined as “a process whereby an organization is able to correct its course of action on the basis of information about consequences of its own previous actions and decisions or on the basis of information about the consequences of the actions and decisions of others.”1 Organizational learning reflects a deliberate attempt to adjust policy in the light of past experience and policy-relevant knowledge. One of the earliest works in the field posits that organizational learning:

Previous subject-specific education research has shown that education in social studies subjects is dominated by strong subject traditions, while current social issues are seldom addressed and the connection to academic disciplines is weak. Putting this result into context, we discuss how the debate initiated by Michael Young about 'powerful knowledge' as a curriculum principle for the selection of school knowledge gives important theoretical insights. However, we argue that these insights can be developed further by linking them to continental Didaktik theory, in particular to Wolfgang Klafki's models of 'categorical Bildung' and 'critical-constructive didactics' and Ingrid Carlgren's perspective on teaching as different knowledge practices. These ideas make clear the link between the selection of knowledge at curriculum level and the selection and transformation of knowledge at classroom level. Based on this theoretical argument, we discuss how researchers and teachers can collaborate around the selection and transformation of knowledge in a school setting, thereby contributing to a knowledge reservoir for the teaching profession. We conclude with a discussion of an ongoing case study taking place in an upper primary school in Sweden, which exemplifies our theoretical argumentation, showing how a 'time-geographical' perspective can inform teaching about migration as a phenomenon and current social issue.

This article explores the difference between learning in an organization and organizational learning. I construct a conceptual framework for understanding organizational learning at an organizational level of analysis. This framework is based on the proposition that organizational learning is visible in the organizational dynamics created from the interaction between politics (power relations) and emotion within an organization. Using a combination of psychodynamic theory and reflections on the politics of organizing I develop the idea that organizations are learning when the 'establishment' that is being created through the very process of organizing can be identified and critically reflected upon. I use a case example of a change initiative within Hyder PLC, a multinational company, to identify organizational dynamics that limit organizational learning. In the final part of the article, I discuss the conclusions that emerged from the case example and the implications of these conclusions for the theory and practice of organizational learning.

With the improvement of living standards and increasing aesthetic demands, the need for highly skilled orthodontic professionals is on the rise. China is continuously improving its medical education models to cultivate excellent orthodontic physicians. This study systematically reviews the current status of orthodontic medical education and physician training models in China, America and European countries, reveals core differences through multidimensional comparisons and proposes optimised pathways for reform in China while exploring goals and directions for deepening educational innovation. This paper searched databases such as PubMed, Web of Science and the official websites of representative dental schools in various countries. The article summarises and compares the orthodontic education models in China and other countries, from the aspects of educational systems, degree conferment, curriculum design and clinical practice and so on. At present, the training of orthodontic specialists in China is mainly after undergraduate education. There are many similarities between China and the United States and Europe in terms of orthodontics. The educational system can be roughly divided into the basic oral medicine and the orthodontic professional education stage. However, there are differences in the specific study period and the curriculum arrangement of each stage. The education model system for Chinese orthodontic specialists has advantages such as systematisation, standardisation and interdisciplinary joint training. However, compared to America and European countries, there is still a gap, with problems such as a lack of general education and medical humanities courses, insufficient scientific research training and so on. We propose possible solutions to address the existing shortcomings and further improve the clinical and scientific research level of Chinese orthodontists.

This paper theorises a curriculum model containing four features. We use these features as criteria to analyse and evaluate two distinctive curriculum design types: ‘21st Century Learning’ and ‘Powerful Knowledge’. The four features are: (i) the underpinning theory of knowledge in each curriculum design type; (ii) the knowledge structures used to organise the curriculum material; (iii) the organisation of the concepts and content according to the principle of conceptual progression; and (iv) the pedagogy associated with the curriculum design, such as direct instruction or personalised learning. The distinction we make between the two curriculum design types and the comparative approach taken in the paper is justified by the differences found in each of the types with respect to all of the four features. Following the analysis of each feature in the body of the paper we judge the relative merits of each design type in terms of the logical connections between the four theorised features and the ways in which they are realised in 21st Century Learning and Powerful Knowledge respectively.

The term ‘organisational learning’ was popularised by Peter Senge in ‘The Fifth Discipline’, his seminal book from 1990. Since then, the term has become widely accepted among those interested in organisational learning and change management. However, partly due to the somewhat ambiguous situation which arises in a university which is a ‘learning organisation’ in a different sense, academic staff may experience some confusion when this term is used in a higher education institutional context. Further, the embedded notions of single- and double-loop learning and tacit and explicit knowledge, which are features of organisational learning, are not widely understood by those affected by organisational learning initiatives, leading again to some unintended confusion of purpose in situations of change.

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to apply the organizational learning framework to the management accounting literature to better understand why management accounting innovations succeed or fail in organizations.Design/methodology/approachA theoretical framework integrating diffusion and organization learning theories is developed. Diffusion theory is used to describe the process whereby the innovation is implemented. Argyris' and Argyris and Schon's theory of organizational learning is used to describe the type of learning – single loop or double loop – required by the innovation. Finally, the works of Attewell, and of Schulz relating to organizational learning, and of Rogers and of Sandberg relating to adoption and diffusion theories, were utilized to identify and understand the potential pitfalls faced by managements implementing an accounting innovation.FindingsThe paper advances the notion that an organization's approach to learning and innovation should be of interest to management accounting researchers. The single‐loop (incremental/organizational development (OD)) and the double‐loop (radical/organizational transformation (OT)) learning influences the adoption (stage one) and diffusion (stage two) strategies that are appropriate for the design and implementation of management accounting innovations.Originality/valueThe paper makes an important contribution to the behavioral accounting literature by integrating sociological diffusion and organizational learning behavior literatures and relating them to management accounting research.