La sutileza poética en “El libro de Buen Amor”

La autora estudia la sutileza del arte de Juan Ruiz que consiste en el equilibrio entre didactismo e ironía. Para ello se centra en tres aspectos del poema: a) la relación entre el Arcipreste prologuista y el Arcipreste protagonista; b) algunas sentencias didácticas en sus respectivos contextos; c) la función que cumplen las trece aventuras amorosas del Arcipreste. The author studies the subtlety of Juan Ruiz’s art, which consists in the equilibrium between didactics and irony. Thus, she focuses on three aspects of the poem: a) the relation between the Archpriest that writes the prologue and the protagonist Archpriest; b) some didactic sentences in their respective contexts; c) the function of the Archpriest’s thirteen love affairs

La sutileza poética en “El libro de Buen Amor”

La autora estudia la sutileza del arte de Juan Ruiz que consiste en el equilibrio entre didactismo e ironía. Para ello se centra en tres aspectos del poema: a) la relación entre el Arcipreste prologuista y el Arcipreste protagonista; b) algunas sentencias didácticas en sus respectivos contextos; c) la función que cumplen las trece aventuras amorosas del Arcipreste. The author studies the subtlety of Juan Ruiz’s art, which consists in the equilibrium between didactics and irony. Thus, she focuses on three aspects of the poem: a) the relation between the Archpriest that writes the prologue and the protagonist Archpriest; b) some didactic sentences in their respective contexts; c) the function of the Archpriest’s thirteen love affairs

Academic domains as political battlegrounds: A global enquiry by 99 academics in the fields of education and technology

This article theorizes the functional relationship between the human components (i.e., scholars) and non-human components (i.e., structural configurations) of academic domains. It is organized around the following question: in what ways have scholars formed and been formed by the structural configurations of their academic domain? The article uses as a case study the academic domain of education and technology to examine this question. Its authorship approach is innovative, with a worldwide collection of academics (99 authors) collaborating to address the proposed question based on their reflections on daily social and academic practices. This collaboration followed a three-round process of contributions via email. Analysis of these scholars’ reflective accounts was carried out, and a theoretical proposition was established from this analysis. The proposition is of a mutual (yet not necessarily balanced) power (and therefore political) relationship between the human and non-human constituents of an academic realm, with the two shaping one another. One implication of this proposition is that these non-human elements exist as political ‘actors’, just like their human counterparts, having ‘agency’ – which they exercise over humans. This turns academic domains into political (functional or dysfunctional) ‘battlefields’ wherein both humans and non-humans engage in political activities and actions that form the identity of the academic domain. For more information about the authorship approach, please see Al Lily AEA (2015) A crowd-authoring project on the scholarship of educational technology. Information Development. doi: 10.1177/0266666915622044

Academic Domains As Political Battlegrounds: A Global Enquiry By 99 Academics in The Fields of Education and Technology

This article theorizes the functional relationship between the human components (i.e., scholars) and non-human components (i.e., structural configurations) of academic domains. It is organized around the following question: in what ways have scholars formed and been formed by the structural configurations of their academic domain? The article uses as a case study the academic domain of education and technology to examine this question. Its authorship approach is innovative, with a worldwide collection of academics (99 authors) collaborating to address the proposed question based on their reflections on daily social and academic practices. This collaboration followed a three-round process of contributions via email. Analysis of these scholars' reflective accounts was carried out, and a theoretical proposition was established from this analysis. The proposition is of a mutual (yet not necessarily balanced) power (and therefore political) relationship between the human and non-human constituents of an academic realm, with the two shaping one another. One implication of this proposition is that these non-human elements exist as political actors', just like their human counterparts, having agency' - which they exercise over humans. This turns academic domains into political (functional or dysfunctional) battlefields' wherein both humans and non-humans engage in political activities and actions that form the identity of the academic domain. For more information about the authorship approach, please see Al Lily AEA (2015) A crowd-authoring project on the scholarship of educational technology. Information Development. doi: 10.1177/0266666915622044.Wo