Experience and Educationis the best concise statement on education ever published by John Dewey, the man acknowledged to be the pre-eminent educational theorist of the twentieth century. Written more than two decades after Democracy and Education(Dewey's most comprehensive statement of his position in educational philosophy), this book demonstrates how Dewey reformulated his ideas as a result of his intervening experience with the progressive schools and in the light of the criticisms his theories had received. Analysing both "traditional" and "progressive" education, Dr. Dewey here insists that neither the old nor the new education is adequate and that each is miseducative because neither of them applies the principles of a carefully developed philosophy of experience. Many pages of this volume illustrate Dr. Dewey's ideas for a philosophy of experience and its relation to education. He particularly urges that all teachers and educators looking for a new movement in education should think in terms of the deeped and larger issues of education rather than in terms of some divisive "ism" about education, even such an "ism" as "progressivism." His philosophy, here expressed in its most essential, most readable form, predicates an American educational system that respects all sources of experience, on that offers a true learning situation that is both historical and social, both orderly and dynamic.

经验与教育 = Experience and education

What makes organizations so similar? We contend that the engine of rationalization and bureaucratization has moved from the competitive marketplace to the state and the professions. Once a set of organizations emerges as a field, a paradox arises: rational actors make their organizations increasingly similar as they try to change them. We describe three isomorphic processes-coercive, mimetic, and normative—leading to this outcome. We then specify hypotheses about the impact of resource centralization and dependency, goal ambiguity and technical uncertainty, and professionalization and structuration on isomorphic change. Finally, we suggest implications for theories of organizations and social change.

The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields (Chinese Translation)

Social identity theory and the organization

The scale development process is critical to building knowledge in human and social sciences. The present paper aimed (a) to provide a systematic review of the published literature regarding current practices of the scale development process, (b) to assess the main limitations reported by the authors in these processes, and (c) to provide a set of recommendations for best practices in future scale development research. Papers were selected in September 2015, with the search terms “scale development” and “limitations” from three databases: Scopus, PsycINFO, and Web of Science, with no time restriction. We evaluated 105 studies published between 1976 and 2015. The analysis considered the three basic steps in scale development: item generation, theoretical analysis, and psychometric analysis. The study identified ten main types of limitation in these practices reported in the literature: sample characteristic limitations, methodological limitations, psychometric limitations, qualitative research limitations, missing data, social desirability bias, item limitations, brevity of the scale, difficulty controlling all variables, and lack of manual instructions. Considering these results, various studies analyzed in this review clearly identified methodological weaknesses in the scale development process (e.g., smaller sample sizes in psychometric analysis), but only a few researchers recognized and recorded these limitations. We hope that a systematic knowledge of the difficulties usually reported in scale development will help future researchers to recognize their own limitations and especially to make the most appropriate choices among different conceptions and methodological strategies.

/pdf/scale-development-ten-main-limitations-and-recommendations-2d611m1jfj.pdf

Scale development: ten main limitations and recommendations to improve future research practices

Employee intrapreneurship and work engagement: A latent change score approach

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to develop a measurement instrument for individual entrepreneurial orientation to be used to measure the entrepreneurial orientation of students and other individuals.Design/methodology/approach – A measure of Individual Entrepreneurial Orientation (IEO) was generated, validated, and then tested on 1,100 university students. The items for the scale were based on the definitions of the five entrepreneurial orientation dimensions presented by Lumpkin and Dess. Final analysis of the IEO items using exploratory factor analysis resulted in reliable and valid measures for three of the dimensions.Findings – The scale development process for IEO resulted in three distinct factors that demonstrated reliability and validity: innovativeness, risk‐taking, and proactiveness, which statistically correlated with measures of entrepreneurial intention.Research limitations/implications – The study comprised students at one university in the central southern USA and should be extended ...

Individual entrepreneurial orientation: development of a measurement instrument

Purpose – By proposing a comprehensive measurement framework, this paper attempts to move the nascent body of theoretical and empirical work on performance measurement in social entrepreneurship ventures (SEVs) into reach for practitioners The purpose of this paper is to help social entrepreneurs and academics put current knowledge to work to gain usable feedback about the success of operationsDesign/methodology/approach – This paper offers a framework for measuring firm survival, social action, and social change in SEVs based on a review of theoretical and empirical workFindings – Early work in SEV performance measurement shows consensus that social impact is at least as important as organizational viability, albeit more difficult to measure The SEV measurement framework developed herein creates the link between firm viability (Survival), direct social action (Action), and long‐term social impact on the technical, political, and cultural aspects of society (Change) leading to the SAC frameworkOrigin

Angels on the head of a pin: The SAC framework for performance measurement in social entrepreneurship ventures

INTRODUCTION How organizations respond to and shape the larger social systems in which they are embedded is a topic that has intrigued sociologists, organizational theorists, historians, and others for decades (eg, Chandler, 1962; Parsons, 1956, 1960; Selznick, 1957; Weick, 2005) While Holm (1995) asks how organizations conditioned by institutions can change the very institutions by which they are conditioned, Giddens (1984) reminds us that structurated systems provide both choice and constraint Choice allows institutional inhabitants to break free from their institutional moorings within prescribed limits, limits which give "stability and meaning to social behavior" (Scott, 1998: 133) Institutions, however, proscribe the extent of the choice sets available Given this brief background, the authors will suggest in this paper that one way scholars can clear the crowded avenue of these theoretical perspectives is to view institutional theory as implying stability, organizational legitimacy as implying approval, and environmental enactment as implying change, albeit change that ultimately continues to generate further institutionalization A series of tables is developed, culminating in Table 4, that more clearly shows the distinctive footprint of each theoretical perspective Institutional theory (eg, Broom and Selznick, 1955), organizational legitimacy (eg, Suchman, 1995), and environmental enactment (eg, Weick, 1979) have described specific aspects of organization-social system relationships As this body of literature has grown, researchers from various disciplines have adopted their own vocabularies in describing various organizational phenomena While this has contributed to theory development, it has also resulted in researchers talking past one another, defining the associated terminology according to each discipline's language and research traditions while sometimes overlooking subtle nuances of meaning when transferred across disciplinary boundaries What should be clear often becomes muddied as the various disciplines develop their own definitions and applications (Pfeffer, 2005) Although others have suggested relationships among institutional theory, organizational legitimacy, and environmental enactment (Farjoun, 2010; Pfeffer, 2005; Glenn et al, 2000; Scott, 1998), the current literature lacks a formal integration of these perspectives Given the need for clear definitional and theoretical integration, the purpose of this research is to clarify and integrate institutional theory, organizational legitimacy, and environmental enactment into a cohesive framework while leaving their theoretical distinctions intact As pointed out by Weick (2005) and Pfeffer (2005), "sense making" in theory development should be undertaken to assure that theory provides a contribution on which researchers can build upon each other's results This study's intent is to contribute to this foundation Rather than provide an exhaustive review of each theory, this research highlights characteristics that are applicable across a variety of scholarly disciplines in an effort to increase the multidisciplinary utility of ongoing efforts to research organizational phenomena that utilize institutional theory, organizational legitimacy, and environmental enactment as the theoretical lens To sharpen this lens and bring further clarity, each term is carefully defined as the study progresses Table 1 lists brief definitions of each of the major concepts discussed throughout this paper with definitions of secondary concepts shown in Tables 2 and 3 Table 4 then provides a summary and provides detail regarding the relationships between the three constructs To begin, the following sections define each theoretical perspective-institutional theory, organizational legitimacy, and environmental enactment Institutional theory is described first, as it has applications to understanding both environmental enactment and organizational legitimacy; however, there is iteration among the three perspectives …

Intersecting Three Muddy Roads: Stability, Legitimacy, and Change

This conceptual research suggests that path dependence historically created a limited array of entrepreneurial choices in rural China including various forms of collective and private business ownership. However, collective ownership historically gave rural Chinese entrepreneurs increased sociopolitical legitimacy thereby increasing access to resources such as capital; however, during China’s reform era many rural entrepreneurs chose private rather than collective ownership, an economically illogical choice. This seemingly illogical choice resulted in changes in China’s institutional fabric such that the most historically illogical choice—private business ownership—became the most logical choice. This suggests that entrepreneurial choice extends beyond economic rationality to a more complex environment of options.

/pdf/strategic-choice-and-institutional-ambiguity-a-history-of-11jjgpqbdr.pdf

Strategic Choice And Institutional Ambiguity: A History Of Entrepreneurial Emergence In Rural China

Student team projects provide benefits to the education process and provide experience valued by employers, but they can also be a source of conflict, free-riding and are fraught with ‘fairness’ issues. The advantages of using teams for faculty are that they provide opportunities for synergies and collaboration, while also simulating group work processes. However, due to free-riding, scheduling problems and differing goals, there are fertile grounds for team conflicts. Therefore, there exists a need for better methods of forming teams and a process to assure shared goals by team members. This research proposes an innovative approach to team creation where students participate in a ‘hiring’ process that increases team cohesiveness and ultimately team performance. Preliminary empirical validation is also provided that supports this approach.

/pdf/effective-student-teams-a-faux-hiring-and-peer-evaluation-2a3lthdzkx.pdf

Michelle D. Lane

Papers

Individual entrepreneurial orientation: development of a measurement instrument

Angels on the head of a pin: The SAC framework for performance measurement in social entrepreneurship ventures

Intersecting Three Muddy Roads: Stability, Legitimacy, and Change

Strategic Choice And Institutional Ambiguity: A History Of Entrepreneurial Emergence In Rural China

Effective Student Teams: A Faux Hiring And Peer Evaluation Process