Mutual Learning or Mutual Disappointment

Abstract not available

Introducing disappointment dynamics and comparing behaviors in evolutionary games : Some simulation results

This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly citedThe paper presents an evolutionary model, based on the assumption that agents may revise their current strategies if they previously failed to attain the maximum level of potential payoffs. We offer three versions of this reflexive mechanism, each one of which describes a distinct type: spontaneous agents, rigid players, and 'satisficers'. We use simulations to examine the performance of these types. Agents who change their strategies relatively easily tend to perform better in coordination games, but antagonistic games generally lead to more favorable outcomes if the individuals only change their strategies when disappointment from previous rounds surpasses some predefined threshold.Peer reviewedFinal Published versio

Networked learning in higher education: Practitioners’ perspectives

There is a growing use of a variety of communications media to provide networked learning in higher education. The practitioners in the field vary from experienced educators who have many years’ experience to early adopters who have begun to use networked technology for teaching and learning recently. Using interviews informed by a phenomenographic approach, this paper investigates the varieties of experience of practitioners of networked learning. It reports initial findings that represent an early stage of analysis. The findings point towards a common philosophy held by current practitioners of networked learning but a lack of ‘rules of thumb’. Practitioners expressed ideas close to a new paradigm in education but were cautious about specific design outcomes meeting expectations. This finding raises questions about design and whether networked learning is yet stable enough a field to provide guidance on best practice. The paper also reflects on criticisms of the phenomenographic method, in particular its reliance on interview data, and offers some possible ways of dealing with the criticisms

Religion, religious fervour, and universalist education

This paper is conceived from a secular perspective, and designed to address three elements identified in the call for papers: “Pluralistic tendencies”, their counterpart of “exclusivist attitudes”, and “creating an ethos of inter-religious harmony”. I choose to tackle these aspects by (a) exploring the meaning of religion, (b) addressing a specific attitude often corresponding to religion, namely religious fervour, and (c) assessing the validity and instrumentality of facilitating a universalist education as a tool to defuse “mistrust and hatred among various faith-communities”. The following paper is intended to serve only as a preliminary discussion guidance paper

Hard Lessons about Philanthropy & Community Change from the Neighborhood Improvement Initiative

Between 1996 and 2006, the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation invested over $20 million in the Neighborhood Improvement Initiative (NII), an ambitious effort to help three neighborhoods in the Bay Area reduce poverty and develop new leaders, better services, more capable organizations, and stronger connections to resources. On some counts NII succeeded, and on others it struggled mightily. In the end, despite some important accomplishments, NII did not fulfill its participants' hopes and expectations for broad, deep, and sustainable community change. In those accomplishments and shortcomings, and in the strategies that produced them, however, lies a story whose relevance exceeds the boundaries of a single initiative. Our goal is to examine this story in the context of other foundation sponsored initiatives to see if it can help philanthropy support community change and other types of long-term, community-based initiatives more effectively.As we began to review materials and conduct interviews, we learned of NII's accomplishments in each neighborhood, including new organizations incubated, new services stimulated, and new leaders helped to emerge. We also quickly discovered multiple, and often conflicting, perspectives on NII's design, implementation, and outcomes that were hard to reconcile. Some of this Rashomon effect is to be expected in a complex, long-term community change initiative that evolves over time with changing players. Some can also be attributed to the different dynamics and trajectories in each of the three sites.We have tried to describe all points of view as accurately as possible without favoring any one perspective. Moreover, we have tried to look beyond the lessons drawn exclusively from NII and to position all of these varied opinions within a broader field-wide perspective, wherever possible.The frustrations of NII's participants and sponsors are mirrored in many other foundations' major initiatives. Indeed, our reviewers -- who have been involved in many such initiatives as funders, evaluators, technical assistance providers, and intermediaries -- all underscored how familiar they were with the challenges and pitfalls described here, both those related specifically to community change efforts and those pertinent to other initiatives. Because the opportunity to discuss the frustrations candidly has been limited, however, they often are relegated to concerns expressed sotto voce. So it was particularly important throughout the review to solicit from our interviewees ideas or suggestions for improving their work together. We offer these along with our own observations as a way to stimulate further reflection and debate, because we believe that philanthropy has an important role to play in improving outcomes for poor communities and their residents. Few foundations have been willing to contribute to this level of honest and sometimes painful public dialogue. But by commissioning this retrospective analysis, the Hewlett Foundation demonstrates a desire to help the field learn and move forward, and we applaud that

Israel Kirzner on Coordination and Discovery

Israel Kirzner has been one of the leaders in fashioning an Austrian school of economics. In his rendering of the Austrian school, one finds a marriage between Friedrich Hayek’s discourse with Ludwig von Mises’s deductive, praxeological image of science — a marriage that seems to us somewhat forced. The Misesian image of science stakes its claims to scientific status on purported axioms and categorical, 100-percent deductive truths, as well as the supposed avoidance of any looseness in evaluative judgments. In keeping with the praxeological style of discourse, Kirzner claims that his notion of coordination can be used as a clear-cut criterion of economic goodness. Kirzner wishes to claim that gainful entrepreneurial action in the market is always coordinative. We contend that Kirzner’s efforts to be categorical and to avoid looseness are unsuccessful. We argue that looseness inheres in the economic discussion of the most important things, and associate that viewpoint with Adam Smith. We suggest that Hayek is much closer to Smith than to Mises, and that Kirzner’s invocations of Hayek’s discussions of coordination are spurious. In denying looseness and trying to cope with the brittleness of categorical claims, Kirzner becomes abstruse. His discourse erupts with problems. Kirzner has erred in rejecting the understanding of coordination held by Hayek, Ronald Coase, and their contemporaries in the field at large. Kirzner’s refraining from the looser Smithian perspective stems from his devotion to Misesianism. Beyond all the criticism, however, we affirm the basic thrust of what Kirzner says about economic processes. Once we give up the claim that voluntary profitable activity is always or necessarily coordinative, and once we make peace with the aesthetic aspect of the idea of concatenate coordination, the basic claims of Kirzner can be salvaged: Voluntary profitable activity is usually coordinative, and government intervention is usually discoordinative. But the Misesian image of science must be dropped.coordination; concatenation; discovery; entrepreneurship;

Biologists meet statisticians: A workshop for young scientists to foster interdisciplinary team work

Life science and statistics have necessarily become essential partners. The need to plan complex, structured experiments, involving elaborated designs, and the need to analyse datasets in the era of systems biology and high throughput technologies has to build upon professional statistical expertise. On the other hand, conducting such analyses and also developing improved or new methods, also for novel kinds of data, has to build upon solid biological understanding and practise. However, the meeting of scientists of both fields is often hampered by a variety of communicative hurdles - which are based on field-specific working languages and cultural differences. As a step towards a better mutual understanding, we developed a workshop concept bringing together young experimental biologists and statisticians, to work as pairs and learn to value each others competences and practise interdisciplinary communication in a casual atmosphere. The first implementation of our concept was a cooperation of the German Region of the International Biometrical Society and the Leibnitz Institute DSMZ-German Collection of Microorganisms and Cell Cultures (short: DSMZ), Braunschweig, Germany. We collected feedback in form of three questionnaires, oral comments, and gathered experiences for the improvement of this concept. The long-term challenge for both disciplines is the establishment of systematic schedules and strategic partnerships which use the proposed workshop concept to foster mutual understanding, to seed the necessary interdisciplinary cooperation network, and to start training the indispensable communication skills at the earliest possible phase of education

The elusive quest for the golden standard: Concepts, policies and practices of accountability in development cooperation

Promoting public accountability plays an ever increasing role in the recent discourse on development cooperation. It is said to encourage a more efficient use of public funds, to decrease corruption, add to more legitimate, responsive and democratic institutions including government and therefore to enhance aid effectiveness (OECD/DAC, 2005). To realize these ideals, a wide range of stakeholders, from international institutions, national governments to International Non-Governmental Organisations (INGOs), unite in their elusive quest for the golden standard to promote public accountability in their policies. More accountability seems to have become the universal cure for all democratic deficits and ineffective policies in developing countries. However, in contrast to their high expectations, accountability promotion policies have not yet delivered the expected results. This paper seeks to understand why this has been the case by analysing the current state of affairs of promoting public accountability in development cooperation with a focus on donor interventions and particularly on the interaction between donors' concepts, policies and practices. We start by exploring how accountability gained importance in development cooperation and what the underlying development paradigms, ideologies and concepts were. A multilevel governance framework is established in which four key interrelated accountability relationships are identified and examined that characterize accountability in development cooperation. The paper proceeds by exploring the main types of donor practices in accountability promotion and discusses their effects. It introduces a new perspective on assessing donor policies and practices to understand the mismatch between expectations and result from which conclusions and recommendations for future aid interventions and for further research in the area of promoting public accountability are formulated.public accountability, development cooperation, multi-level governance, evidence based approaches, political science, public policy analysis, development aid