The archaeology of knowledge
01 Sep 1989-pp 227-260
TL;DR: We may not be able to make you love reading, but archaeology of knowledge will lead you to love reading starting from now as mentioned in this paper, and book is the window to open the new world.
Abstract: We may not be able to make you love reading, but archaeology of knowledge will lead you to love reading starting from now. Book is the window to open the new world. The world that you want is in the better stage and level. World will always guide you to even the prestige stage of the life. You know, this is some of how reading will give you the kindness. In this case, more books you read more knowledge you know, but it can mean also the bore is full.
Citations
More filters
Journal Article•
TL;DR: The No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) as discussed by the authors leverages and intensifies the "dividing practices" instituted in the early 20th century as a means of justifying the differential stratification of students in schools, thereby making equitable educational outcomes less likely than not.
Abstract: Background/Context For the past century, mathematics education in the United States has been effective at producing outcomes mirroring society's historical inequities. The enactment of the No Child Left Behind Act in 2001 was intended to address these differential educational outcomes. Given the scope of this legislation's impact on the way in which states, districts, and schools evaluate mathematics learning and conceptualize reforms in the teaching of mathematics, it is critical to examine the possible effects this may have on how mathematical proficiency is determined and distributed. Purpose/Focus of Study This inquiry raises questions about the manner in which the No Child Left Behind Act aims to improve mathematics education through an increased reliance on “objective” science. Specifically, the argument put forth here is that the policies of the No Child Left Behind Act leverage and intensify the “dividing practices” instituted in the early 20th century as a means of justifying the differential stratification of students in schools, thereby making equitable educational outcomes less likely than not. The questions guiding this inquiry are: How did these dividing practices first develop? What are the taken-for-granted assumptions under which they operate? How might technologies related to these practices, given renewed status due to the requirements of the NCLB Act, impact mathematics education? Research Design This inquiry takes the format of an analytic essay, drawing on both a historical perspective of efforts to improve education in the United States through a reliance on scientific methods, and an examination of recent evidence as to how the No Child Left Behind legislation's policies are bring implemented in relation to the assessment and teaching of mathematics. Conclusions/Recommendations Although the intent of the No Child Left Behind legislation is to identify schools in which students are not being educated well and to compel improvement, its approach to doing so is built on a model from which long-standing disparities were constructed in the first place. The use of high-stakes standardized testing and direct instruction (DI) methods of teaching—both likely effects of the policies of the NCLB Act—reify the idea that mathematics is something to be put into students’ heads, apart from their lived experiences and daily lives. This approach to mathematics education provides a rationale for students’ (continued) stratification within an “objective” system of standardized testing and instruction. When considering reforms that aim to reduce inequities in educational outcomes, particularly in mathematics, forms of assessment and instruction must be developed and promoted that get away from the divisiveness of the traditional truth games and move toward a focus on students making sense of mathematics in ways that are meaningful, flexible, and connected to their sense of self.
55 citations
TL;DR: In this article, the authors argue that change fails when local articulations of alternative organizing discourses are unable to permeate mutually reinforcing understandings of organization, and that meaningful change is thus enabled by creating open discursive spaces for organizational participants to constitute new organizing discourse.
Abstract: With an interest in organizing discourses and attention to issues of power, I reconsider the relationship between communication and organizational change to better understand why change fails and what we can do about it. Specifically, I argue change fails because talk of change often suppresses, rather than celebrates, the emergence of conflicting organizational meanings. Embracing a constitutive perspective of communication and the notion that organizations are tension-filled, political sites of meaning-making talk, I argue that change fails when local articulations of alternative organizing discourses are unable to permeate mutually reinforcing understandings of organization. Meaningful change is thus enabled by creating open discursive spaces for organizational participants to constitute new organizing discourses. I provide the findings of a critically inspired, qualitative study of organizational change at a college of art and design to illustrate how embracing a constitutive-political perspective of ...
55 citations
Cites background from "The archaeology of knowledge"
...Foucault (1972, 1980) extends this idea by explaining how alternatives become unthinkable when particular values become embedded in the knowledge of normalized social practices....
[...]
TL;DR: The argument is that the complexity of the research object is epistemically retained in the rich context of an experimental landscape, where the eruption of "volcanic systems" can change the scenery dramatically as the result of particular, unprecedented findings.
Abstract: My paper draws on examples from molecular biology, the details of which I have developed elsewhere (Rheinberger 1992, 1993, 1995, 1997). Here, I can give only a brief outline of my argument. Reduction of complexity is a prerequisite for experimental research. To make sense of the universe of living beings, the modern biologist is bound to divide his world into fragments in which parameters can be defined, quantities measured, qualities identified. Such is the nature of any "experimental system." Ontic complexity has to be reduced in order to make experimental research possible. The complexity of the research object, however, is epistemically retained in the rich context of an experimental landscape, where the eruption of "volcanic systems" can change the scenery dramatically as the result of particular, unprecedented findings.
55 citations
Cites background from "The archaeology of knowledge"
...…discontinuity, dependence, and transformation]; it is around such an ensemble that this analysis of discourse I am thinking of is articulated, certainly not upon those traditional themes which the philosophers of the past took for 'living history' " (Foucault 1972b, 230).1 Foucault (1972a, esp....
[...]
TL;DR: In this article, the authors examine the relationship between commercial gambling, framed as one example of global capitalist development, and the ways in which western societies respond to the social harms of commercial gambling.
Abstract: In this essay I examine the relationship between commercial gambling, framed as one example of global capitalist development, and the ways in which western societies respond to the social harms thi...
54 citations
Cites background from "The archaeology of knowledge"
...The tradition of this research in the social sciences is attributable largely to the work of Foucault (1970, 1972) who, in the spirit of Nietzsche (1994), was fundamentally interested in the relationships between power, knowledge and subjectivities....
[...]
Book•
11 Oct 2006
TL;DR: The author examines the development of scientific communication through digitization, the impact of digitization on scientific communication, and the dynamics of change in the period 1987-2004.
Abstract: INTRODUCTION.- 1 The birth of the electronic journal.- 2 The electronic journal 'revolution'.- 3 Electronic journals: the issues.- 4 Studying digitization.- 5 Information Science.- 6 Theory.- 7 Methodology.- 8 Level of analysis.- 9 Outline.- 2. THE DEVELOPMENT OF SCIENTIFIC COMMUNICATION.- 1 The historical perspective.- 1.1 The Scientific Revolution.- 1.2 The early impact of printing.- 1.3 The scientific societies.- 1.4 The scientific journal.- 1.5 The development of the electronic journal.- 2 The scientific journal.- 2.1 The structure of the scientific article.- 2.2 The evolution of the scientific article.- 3. THE SCIENTIFIC COMMUNICATION SYSTEM.- 1 Scientific communication.- 2 Models and metaphors.- 2.1 The conduit metaphor.- 2.2 The information chain.- 3 Early models.- 4 Transaction space.- 5 Continuum model.- 6 Functions of scientific communication.- 7 The author.- 8 From print to digital.- 8.1 The digital information chain.- 8.2 Systems based communication.- 8.3 Institutional repositories.- 9 Innovation of the scientific journal.- 9.1 Scholarly Communication Forums.- 9.2 The innovation chain.- 10 Complexity of scientific communication.- 4. THE DIGITIZATION OF INFORMATION RESOURCES.- 1 Introduction.- 2 The concept of digitization.- 3 Networked information.- 4 Dynamic information.- 5 Quasi-intelligent documents.- 6 The functional document.- 7 The 'copy paradox'.- 8 The problem of authenticity.- 9 Reading, creating and control.- 10 Characterizing the digital article.- 10.1 The digital document.- 10.2 The digital scientific article.- 5. THE ELECTRONIC JOURNAL 1987-2004.- 1 Analytical framework.- 2 Research data.- 3 Results of the survey.- 3.1 Scientific fields and publication year.- 3.2 Submission formats.- 3.3 Publication formats.- 3.4 Multimedia.- 3.5 Data resources.- 3.6 Revision.- 3.7 Response.- 3.8 Customization.- 3.9 External hyperlinks.- 3.10 Functionality.- 3.11 Navigation.- 3.12 Peer review.- 3.13 Copyright.- 3.14 Editorialpolicies.- 4 Open Access journals.- 5 Evaluation.- 6 The impact of digitization.- 6. DIGITIZATION AND THE EVOLUTION OF SCIENTIFIC COMMUNICATION.- 1 Explaining development.- 1.1 The closure of scientific communication.- 1.2 An evolutionary view of scientific communication.- 1.3 The diffusion of innovations.- 2 The technology myth.- 3 Transforming scientific communication.- 3.1 The significance of the electronic journal.- 3.2 The illusion of new media.- 3.3 The shadow of the format.- 3.4 The epistemological position.- 4 The impact of digitization on scientific communication.- 4.1 The illusion of a revolution.- 4.2 The dynamics of change.- 5 Final conclusions.- BIBLIOGRAPHY.- INDEX.
54 citations
References
More filters
Book•
18 Jul 2003
TL;DR: Part 1: Social Analysis, Discourse Analysis, Text Analysis 1. Introduction 2. Texts, Social Events, and Social Practices 3. Intertextuality and Assumptions Part 2: Genres and Action 4. Genres 5. Meaning Relations between Sentences and Clauses 6. Discourses 8. Representations of Social Events Part 4: Styles and Identities 9. Modality and Evaluation 11. Conclusion
Abstract: Part 1: Social Analysis, Discourse Analysis, Text Analysis 1. Introduction 2. Texts, Social Events, and Social Practices 3. Intertextuality and Assumptions Part 2: Genres and Action 4. Genres 5. Meaning Relations between Sentences and Clauses 6. Types of Exchange, Speech Functions, and Grammatical Mood Part 3: Discourses and Representations 7. Discourses 8. Representations of Social Events Part 4: Styles and Identities 9. Styles 10. Modality and Evaluation 11. Conclusion
6,407 citations
TL;DR: A set of principles for the conduct and evaluation of interpretive field research in information systems is proposed, along with their philosophical rationale, and the usefulness of the principles is illustrated by evaluating three publishedinterpretive field studies drawn from the IS research literature.
Abstract: This article discusses the conduct and evaluatoin of interpretive research in information systems. While the conventions for evaluating information systems case studies conducted according to the natural science model of social science are now widely accepted, this is not the case for interpretive field studies. A set of principles for the conduct and evaluation of interpretive field research in information systems is proposed, along with their philosophical rationale. The usefulness of the principles is illustrated by evaluating three published interpretive field studies drawn from the IS research literature. The intention of the paper is to further reflect and debate on the important subject of grounding interpretive research methodology.
5,588 citations
Book•
01 Jan 1999
TL;DR: In Sorting Things Out, Bowker and Star as mentioned in this paper explore the role of categories and standards in shaping the modern world and examine how categories are made and kept invisible, and how people can change this invisibility when necessary.
Abstract: What do a seventeenth-century mortality table (whose causes of death include "fainted in a bath," "frighted," and "itch"); the identification of South Africans during apartheid as European, Asian, colored, or black; and the separation of machine- from hand-washables have in common? All are examples of classification -- the scaffolding of information infrastructures. In Sorting Things Out, Geoffrey C. Bowker and Susan Leigh Star explore the role of categories and standards in shaping the modern world. In a clear and lively style, they investigate a variety of classification systems, including the International Classification of Diseases, the Nursing Interventions Classification, race classification under apartheid in South Africa, and the classification of viruses and of tuberculosis. The authors emphasize the role of invisibility in the process by which classification orders human interaction. They examine how categories are made and kept invisible, and how people can change this invisibility when necessary. They also explore systems of classification as part of the built information environment. Much as an urban historian would review highway permits and zoning decisions to tell a city's story, the authors review archives of classification design to understand how decisions have been made. Sorting Things Out has a moral agenda, for each standard and category valorizes some point of view and silences another. Standards and classifications produce advantage or suffering. Jobs are made and lost; some regions benefit at the expense of others. How these choices are made and how we think about that process are at the moral and political core of this work. The book is an important empirical source for understanding the building of information infrastructures.
4,480 citations
TL;DR: In this article, two such metaphors are identified: the acquisition metaphor and the participation metaphor, and their entailments are discussed and evaluated, and the question of theoretical unification of research on learning is addressed, wherein the purpose is to show how too great a devotion to one particular metaphor can lead to theoretical distortions and to undesirable practices.
Abstract: This article is a sequel to the conversation on learning initiated by the editors of Educational Researcher in volume 25, number 4. The author’s first aim is to elicit the metaphors for learning that guide our work as learners, teachers, and researchers. Two such metaphors are identified: the acquisition metaphor and the participation metaphor. Subsequently, their entailments are discussed and evaluated. Although some of the implications are deemed desirable and others are regarded as harmful, the article neither speaks against a particular metaphor nor tries to make a case for the other. Rather, these interpretations and applications of the metaphors undergo critical evaluation. In the end, the question of theoretical unification of the research on learning is addressed, wherein the purpose is to show how too great a devotion to one particular metaphor can lead to theoretical distortions and to undesirable practices.
3,660 citations
TL;DR: Problematization is proposed as a methodology for identifying and challenging assumptions underlying existing literature and, based on that, formulating research questions that are likely to lead to more influential theories.
Abstract: It is increasingly recognized that what makes a theory interesting and influential is that it challenges our assumptions in some significant way. However, established ways for arriving at research questions mean spotting or constructing gaps in existing theories rather than challenging their assumptions. We propose problematization as a methodology for identifying and challenging assumptions underlying existing literature and, based on that, formulating research questions that are likely to lead to more influential theories.
1,126 citations