Multi-Stakeholder Dialogues as Instrument for Design and Qualitative Research in Educational Organisations

Author:

Helbig Christian,Hofhues Sandra,Lukács Bence

Abstract

AbstractThe article focuses on the value of group discussions both as a method of organisational development and as a method of empirical social research. These two perspectives are discussed as a “double meaning”, which often occurs simultaneously in different forms. The concept of “multi-stakeholder dialogues” takes up this challenge. Following on from this, dimensions of the design and research of group discussions will be discussed. The contribution relates to the subproject “Multi-stakeholder Dialogues and Qualitative Evaluation” of the joint project “#ko.vernetzt”. The subproject had the task of accompanying, structuring and researching organisational development in a networked educational institution with dialogue formats. A total of nine dialogues were conducted with different groups of participants, six of which were analysed using qualitative methods. The research perspective is based on a concept of organisations from a praxeological perspective and an understanding of organisational culture as collective conjunctive experience. Thus, the object of qualitative research is the reconstruction of typical modus operandi of the processing of requirements. The results show that structural deficits in educational organisations are reproduced and reinforced by digitisation.

Funder

German Federal Ministry of Education and Research

Publisher

Springer International Publishing

Reference52 articles.

1. Altenrath, M., Helbig, C., & Hofhues, S. (2020). Deutungshoheiten. Digitalisierung und Bildung in Programmatiken und Förderrichtlinien Deutschlands und der EU. In K. Rummler, I. Koppel, S. Aßmann, P. Bettinger & K. D. Wolf (Eds.), Jahrbuch Medienpädagogik 17: Lernen mit und über Medien in einer digitalen Welt (pp. 565–594). Zürich: Zeitschrift MedienPädagogik, Sektion Medienpädagogik (DGfE).

2. Amling, S., & Vogd, W. (2017). Dokumentarische Organisationsforschung. Perspektiven der praxeologischen Wissenssoziologie. Opladen\Berlin\Toronto: Budrich.

3. Argyris, C., & Schön, D. A. (1978). Organizational learning: A theory of action perspective. Boston: Addison-Wesley.

4. Avis, J. (2018). Socio-technical imaginary of the fourth industrial revolution and its implications for vocational education and training: A literature review. Journal of Vocational Education and Training, 70(3), 337–363.

5. Bohnsack, R., Pfaff, N., & Weller, W. (Eds.). (2010). Qualitative analysis and documentary method in international educational research. Opladen: B. Budrich.

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3