Pedagogy of recognition: Winnicott, Honneth and learning in psychosocial spaces

This paper explores the links between Donald Winnicott and Axel Honneth in relation to developing a pedagogy based on recognition. Winnicott's understanding of emotional development is centred on the intimate infant/mother dyad, in which the notions of ‘good enough mothering’, potential spaces and the true and false self are central to developing a sense of selfhood. Honneth’s three part model of relating-to-self proposes that the recognition of others has an impact on constructing an identity that has social and cultural value. A synthesis of these two approaches provides a pedagogical framework based on mutual recognition with caring relationships. For example, ‘good enough’ (m)others are able to recognise and acknowledge that the infant is deserving of love, which leads to a learner who has the self-confidence to feel as though their efforts are of value. Recognition that learners have autonomy and can participate in playful potential spaces provides self-respect to enable learners to separate and be active agents. Finally, the wider recognition that individuals are valued and contribute to the community provides learners with a meaningful sense of self that has sufficient self-esteem for a creative and spontaneous true self to encounter learning throughout the lifespan

The Geography of \u3cem\u3eRevlon\u3c/em\u3e-Land

In Revlon, Inc. v. MacAndrews & Forbes Holdings, Inc., the Delaware Supreme Court explained that, when a target board of directors enters Revlon-land, the board’s role changes from that of “defenders of the corporate bastion to auctioneers charged with getting the best price for the stockholders at a sale of the company.” Unfortunately, the Court’s colorful metaphor obfuscated some serious doctrinal problems. What standards of judicial review applied to director conduct outside the borders of Revlon-land? What standard applied to director conduct falling inside Revlon-land’s borders? And when did one enter that mysterious country? By the mid-1990s, the Delaware Supreme Court had worked out a credible set of answers to those questions. The seemingly settled rules made doctrinal sense and were sound from a policy perspective. Indeed, my thesis herein is that Revlon and its progeny should be praised for having grappled—mostly successfully—with the core problem of corporation law: the tension between authority and accountability. A fully specified account of corporate law must incorporate both values. On the one hand, corporate law must implement the value of authority in developing a set of rules and procedures providing efficient decision making. U.S. corporate law does so by adopting a system of director primacy. In the director primacy (a.k.a. board-centric) form of corporate governance, control is vested not in the hands of the firm’s so-called owners—the shareholders—who exercise virtually no control over either day-to-day operations or long-term policy, but in the hands of the board of directors and their subordinate professional managers. On the other hand, the separation of ownership and control in modern public corporations obviously implicates important accountability concerns, which corporate law must also address. Academic critics of Delaware’s jurisprudence typically err because they are preoccupied with accountability at the expense of authority. In contrast, or so I will argue, Delaware’s takeover jurisprudence correctly recognizes that both authority and accountability have value. Achieving the proper mix between these competing values is a daunting—but necessary—task. Ultimately, authority and accountability cannot be reconciled. At some point, greater accountability necessarily makes the decision-making process less efficient. Making corporate law therefore requires a careful balancing of these competing values. Striking such a balance is the peculiar genius of Unocal and its progeny. In recent years, however, the Delaware Chancery Court has gotten lost in Revlon-land. A number of chancery decisions have drifted away from the doctrinal parameters laid down by the Delaware Supreme Court. In this Article, I argue that they have done so because the Chancellors have misidentified the policy basis on which Revlon rests. Accordingly, I argue that chancery should adopt a conflict of interest–based approach to invoking Revlon, which focuses on where control of the resulting corporate entity rests when the transaction is complete

Revitalizing SEC Rule 14a-8’s Ordinary Business Exclusion: Preventing Shareholder Micromanagement by Proposal

Who decides what products a company should sell, what prices it should charge, and so on? Is it the board of directors, the top management team, or the shareholders? In large corporations, of course, the answer is the top management team operating under the supervision of the board. As for the shareholders, they traditionally have had no role in these sort of operational decisions. In recent years, however, shareholders have increasingly used SEC Exchange Act Rule 14a-8 (the so-called “Shareholder Proposal Rule”) to not just manage but even micromanage corporate decisions. The Rule permits a qualifying shareholder of a public corporation registered with the SEC to force the company to include a resolution and supporting statement in the company’s proxy materials for its annual meeting. In theory, Rule 14a-8 contains limits on shareholder micromanagement. The Rule permits management to exclude proposals on a number of both technical and substantive bases, of which the exclusion of proposals relating to ordinary business operations under Rule 14a-8(i)(7) is the most pertinent for present purposes. Rule 14a-8(i)(7) is intended to permit exclusion of a proposal that “seeks to ‘micro-manage’ the company by probing too deeply into matters of a complex nature upon which shareholders, as a group, would not be in a position to make an informed judgment.” Unfortunately, court decisions have largely eviscerated the ordinary business operations exclusion. For example, corporate decisions involving “matters which have significant policy, economic or other implications inherent in them” may not be excluded as ordinary business matters. This creates a gap through which countless proposals have made it onto corporate proxy statements. This Article proposes an alternative standard that is not only grounded in relevant state corporate law principles but is easier to administer than the existing judicial tests. Under it, courts first look to the state law definition of ordinary business matters. The court then determines whether the matter is one of substance rather than procedure. Only proposals passing muster under both standards should be deemed proper

Graph-RAT: Combining data sources in music recommendation systems

The complexity of music recommendation systems has increased rapidly in recent years, drawing upon different sources of information: content analysis, web-mining, social tagging, etc. Unfortunately, the tools to scientifically evaluate such integrated systems are not readily available; nor are the base algorithms available. This article describes Graph-RAT (Graph-based Relational Analysis Toolkit), an open source toolkit that provides a framework for developing and evaluating novel hybrid systems. While this toolkit is designed for music recommendation, it has applications outside its discipline as well. An experiment—indicative of the sort of procedure that can be configured using the toolkit—is provided to illustrate its usefulness

Identifying music documents in a collection of images

Digital libraries and search engines are now well-equipped to find images of documents based on queries. Many images of music scores are now available, often mixed up with textual documents and images. For example, using the Google “images” search feature, a search for “Beethoven” will return a number of scores and manuscripts as well as pictures of the composer. In this paper we report on an investigation into methods to mechanically determine if a particular document is indeed a score, so that the user can specify that only musical scores should be returned. The goal is to find a minimal set of features that can be used as a quick test that will be applied to large numbers of documents. A variety of filters were considered, and two promising ones (run-length ratios and Hough transform) were evaluated. We found that a method based around run-lengths in vertical scans (RL) that out-performs a comparable algorithm using the Hough transform (HT). On a test set of 1030 images, RL achieved recall and precision of 97.8% and 88.4% respectively while HT achieved 97.8% and 73.5%. In terms of processor time, RL was more than five times as fast as HT

Creating digital library collections with Greenstone

The Greenstone digital library software is a comprehensive system for building and distributing digital library collections. It provides a way of organizing information based on metadata and publishing ti on the Internet. This paper introduces Greenstone and explains how librarians use it to create and customize digital library collections. Through an end-user interface, they add documents and metadata to collections, create new collections whose structure mirrors existing ones, and build collections and put them in place for users to view. More advanced users can design and customize new collection structures

A workflow for document level interoperability

This article describes a software environment called the Exchange Center that helps digital librarians manage the workflow of sourcing documents and metadata from various repositories. The software is built on Greenstone but does not require its use as the final digital library server. After describing the software architecture we provide two scenarios of its use: a private library of recipes, which ultimately involves collaboration with other cooks; and a digital library that aggregates the collections of various host institutions that use different repository software