“If America’s universities are indeed poor value for money, why might that be? The main reason is that the market for higher education, like that for health care, does not work well. The government rewards universities for research, so that is what professors concentrate on. Students are looking for a degree from an institution that will impress employers; employers are interested primarily in the selectivity of the institution a candidate has attended. Since the value of a degree from a selective institution depends on its scarcity, good universities have little incentive to produce more graduates. And, in the absence of a clear measure of educational output, price becomes a proxy for quality. By charging more, good universities gain both revenue and prestige.”
If you are like me, you’ll hate to fill book details by hand into a database, even by copy/paste from some other database. Well, I just found my new best friend, at least book wise: RefME. Just point the phone camera to a book bar code and, “magically”, you get the full reference of the book. I´m certainly give some time to this app.
An interesting approach by Gert Biesta, with free access online:
GBiesta (2015). On the two cultures of educational research, and how we might move ahead: Reconsidering the ontology, axiology and praxeology of education. European Educational Research Journal, Vol. 14(1) 11–22
A citation from the abstract:
“In this paper I focus on a split within the field of educational research between those who approach education as an activity or practice governed by cause–effect relationships and those who see education as a human event of communication, meaning making and interpretation.”
“This paper advocates that connectivity is the technological foundation of digital scholarship and argues that the characteristics of modern science, i.e. data-centric, multidisciplinary, open, network-centric and heavily dependent on internet technologies entail the creation of a linked, semantically enhanced scholarly record composed of interconnected discipline-specific literature and scientific, social, and humanities data spaces. The changing scenario of the scholarly record is illustrated by describing the principal transformations now being enabled by advanced linking and semantic technologies. The main functionality of a cyberscholarship infrastructure is described, i.e. the ability to effectively and efficiently support a linking environment.”
Source: www.sciencedirect.com (free access)
A probable glimpse of the future, I hope …
“That set me thinking. Could it be that my friends and I didn’t in fact miss an event of world-historical importance? Was the fall of the Berlin Wall not really History with a capital H, but just news with a lower-case n-a wonderful story for journalists but, 20 years on, actually not that big a deal? Could it be that what happened 10 years earlier, in the annus mirabilis 1979, was the real historical turning point?”
What is an historic turning point? Does it mean really something or it is just a convenient label?