Zoekresultaten

Publish and still perish? : a citation analysis of African immigrant scholars in tourism and hospitality scholarship.

Fear-Free Cross-Cultural Communication: Toward a More Balanced Approach With Insight From Neuroscience

In cross-cultural communication and adjunct disciplines such as cross-cultural management and international business, there is a negativity bias of seeing cultural differences as a source of potential issues. The emergence of Positive Organizational Scholarship (POS) questions this problem-focused approach. This paper contributes to the ongoing discussion from neuroscience’s perspectives in several ways. Firstly, it provides a neurological look at this bias. Secondly, it proposes that the problem-focused approach may (1) give us a biased outlook of cross-cultural encounters rather than a reality, (2) hinder creativity, (3) lead to the rebound effect, and (4) turn belief into reality. Finally, based on insight from neuroscience and adopting the POS lens with the connection between POS and creativity, it’s recommended that future research takes three directions: (1) Using similarity as the starting point; (2) strategize body language, context and theories; and (3) develop a multicultural mind. In essence, the paper contributes to existing knowledge of the field by employing an interdisciplinary approach, aiming to gain a more holistic view, provoke thoughts, and trigger future empirical studies.

Great Minds, Ideas, Events and People: Ideational Scholarship, Empirical Analysis, and Behavior

Scholarship 2.0 : Analyzing scholars' use of Web 2.0 tools in research and teaching activity

Over the past 15 years the Web has transformed the ways in which we search for information and use it. In more recent years, we have seen the emergence of a new array of innovative tools that collectively go under the name of 'Web 2.0', in which the information user is also increasingly an information producer (i.e., prosumer), by sharing or creating content. The success of Web 2.0 tools for personal use is only partially replicated in the professional sphere and, particularly, in the academic environment in relation with research and teaching. To date, very few studies have explored the level of adoption of Web 2.0 among academic researchers in their research and teaching activity. It is not known in what way how and how much Web 2.0 is currently used within research communities, and we are not aware of the drivers and the drawbacks of the use of Web 2.0 tools in academia, where the majority of people is focused either on research or on teaching activities. To analyse these issues, i.e. the combined adoption of Web 2.0 tools in teaching and research, the authors carried out a survey among teaching and researching staff of the University of Breda in The Netherlands. This country was chosen mainly because it is on the cutting edge as far as innovation is concerned. An important driver in choosing the Breda University's academic community was the fact that one of the two authors of this survey works as senior researcher at this university. The purpose of our survey was to explore the level of adoption of Web 2.0 tools among the academic communities. We were interested in investigating how they were using these tools in the creation of scientific knowledge both in their research and teaching activity. We were also interested in analysing differences in the level of adoption of Web 2.0 tools with regard to researchers' position, age, gender, and research field. Finally, in our study we explored the issue of peer reviewing in the Web 2.0 setting. In particular, we investigated whether social peer review is regarded by researchers as a viable alternative to the current closed peer review system (single-blind or double blind). We approached about 60 staff members, but only 12 faculty members completed the survey fully. This means that our results can only be regarded as exploratory, but we still believe that they represent a complementary perspective with respect to previous studies.

Community-Engaged-Scholarship: Approaching the future by exploring pedagogical experiences

Community Engaged Scholarship (CES) aims to develop mutually beneficial relationships between educational and research institutions and communities. In this project, we understand CES as a commitment to engaging in projects which acknowledge power imbalances and give space to discuss aspects of diversity, decolonization and inclusion with students engaged within them. With many projects being organized in the community as part of Occupational Therapy education, it is important to reflect on the ethics within working with communities, and the role of educators in facilitating them.This workshop is hosted by a group which aims to develop a resource toolkit for occupational therapy educators engaging with communities in education. The toolkit aims to facilitate critical reflection prior to and during community projects on aspects related to organizational issues and theoretical perspectives, as well as critically examining the curriculum, including the hidden curriculum. The workshop will present the findings of a pedagogical project which examined current experiences of students and teachers who have been involved in community projects as part of occupational therapy education grounded in multiple international settings. Participants will engage with the findings, discussing them in a fishbowl format and their relation to potential future guidelines for an educators’ tool-kit.

Understanding Societal Resilience

Societal resilience is an emerging paradigm. It refers to responses and strategies at the level of individuals, groups, organizations, and societies that are dealing with complex societal problems. At the same time, these responses contribute to innovative solutions that make society more resilient to current and future challenges. Societal resilience is, however, conceptually relatively undefined. This ambiguity is generally seen as problematic for scholarly work. In this chapter, the authors show that societal resilience is an important social concept because of its openness. To study resilience requires research methodologies that engage many actual stakeholders. Collaborating with societal stakeholders allows not only for co-generating knowledge of local relevance, but also stimulating a comprehensive and critical research approach. Therefore, the current openness of societal resilience does not constitute an undesirable theory gap. It enables the possibility of having plural perspectives based on the complex realities on the ground.