lnu.sePublications
Change search
Link to record
Permanent link

Direct link
BETA
Silander, Charlotte
Alternative names
Publications (10 of 56) Show all publications
Silander, C. & Stigmar, M. (2019). Individual Growth or Institutional Development? Ideological perspectives on motives behind Swedish Higher Education Teacher Training. Higher Education, 77(2), 265-281
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Individual Growth or Institutional Development? Ideological perspectives on motives behind Swedish Higher Education Teacher Training
2019 (English)In: Higher Education, ISSN 0018-1560, E-ISSN 1573-174X, Vol. 77, no 2, p. 265-281Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

What are the motives for offering or engaging in higher education teacher trainingcourses? This question is of interest for educational developers, teachers, university managers,and policy makers in order to design courses and to meet stakeholders’expectations. Previousresearch has mainly focused on the impact of higher education development courses on teacherpractice and student learning. Few studies have investigated the motives behind these courses.In this paper, the motives are investigated among students, teachers, university management,and the government. The study is based on national and local documents on educationaldevelopment and on interviews with representatives from four Swedish universities. Theresults show that all stakeholder groups are in favour of compulsory courses but the motivesdiffer. Students, management, and government embrace an institutional perspective on educa-tional development, in line with a social efficiency perspective on the purposes of highereducation emphasising usefulness, function, and the production of skills. University teachers,on the other hand, have a more individual-oriented view on educational development and aremore oriented towards a learning-centred perspective.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Springer, 2019
National Category
Educational Sciences
Research subject
Pedagogics and Educational Sciences
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:lnu:diva-74587 (URN)10.1007/s10734-018-0272-z (DOI)000456209000005 ()2-s2.0-85046724539 (Scopus ID)
Available from: 2018-05-27 Created: 2018-05-27 Last updated: 2019-09-13Bibliographically approved
Karlsson, C., Silander, C. & Silander, D. (Eds.). (2018). Governance and political entrepreneurship in Europe: promoting growth and welfare in times of crisis. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Governance and political entrepreneurship in Europe: promoting growth and welfare in times of crisis
2018 (English)Collection (editor) (Refereed)
Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing, 2018
National Category
Political Science
Research subject
Social Sciences, Political Science
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:lnu:diva-72643 (URN)10.4337/9781788112765 (DOI)9781788112758 (ISBN)9781788112765 (ISBN)
Available from: 2018-04-12 Created: 2018-04-12 Last updated: 2019-09-13Bibliographically approved
Brodin, E., Silander, C., Lindberg, L., Frick, L. & McKenna, S. (2018). Innovation, collaboration, and gender in national policies and guidelines on doctoral education: Shapes from Sweden and South Africa in the 21st century. In: : . Paper presented at Forskning om Högre Utbildning,15-16 May, 2018, Lund.
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Innovation, collaboration, and gender in national policies and guidelines on doctoral education: Shapes from Sweden and South Africa in the 21st century
Show others...
2018 (English)Conference paper, Oral presentation with published abstract (Refereed)
Abstract [en]

In 2011, the European Research Area (ERA) outlined several principles of innovative doctoral training such as research excellence; exposure to industry and other relevant employment sectors; transferable skills training; and quality assurance (Vittorio 2015). Similar policies and guidelines can also be found in doctoral education across the globe, where the request for innovation and societal collaboration is urgent (e.g. Association of American Universities 1998/2017; Australian Council of Learned Academies 2016; HEQSF 2013; Swedish Government Bill, 2008, 2009, 2016). At the same time, it is known that the general conditions for innovation vary across countries (Meeus & Edquist 2006), and that global policy trends are construed and organised differently at national level in doctoral education (Andres et al. 2015). Combined with the fact that gender differences have been found in many studies on doctoral education in general (Jones 2013), it is significant to ask: What are the contextual and gendered conditions for doctoral students to develop their innovative and collaborative capability?

 

In our first approach to this problem field, we will present preliminary results from our analysis of some conditions at macro level in Sweden and South Africa. From a comparative perspective, we will elucidate how expressions of innovation, societal collaboration, gender and related concepts have occurred and converged in their national policies and guidelines on doctoral education in the 21st century. We will use summative content analysis for analysing data, which implies an interpretative process of “identifying and quantifying certain words or content in a text with the purpose of understanding the contextual use of the words or content” (Hsieh & Shannon 2005, p. 1283).

 

Comparing Swedish and South African doctoral education is well justified. Doctoral education is highlighted as a means to increased innovation and collaboration with society in the national policies of both countries. However, they also differ in their organisation of doctoral education, and their societal needs (e.g. for the South African context, see: National Planning Commission 2011). We assume that these differences should reflect nationally diverse ways to conceptualise innovation, societal collaboration, gender and related concepts in policy documents on doctoral education. Also, such a comparative perspective enables deeper understanding of the contextual conditions in Swedish doctoral education.

 

For the purpose of this conference, we will delimit our literature review to Swedish studies on doctoral education. While such studies are generally rare (Elmgren et al. 2015), they are almost non-existent in relation to innovation and collaboration. Some of these studies are rather focused on research policies and institutional conditions in general (Langfeldt et al. 2015; Stensaker & Benner 2013), than on doctoral education per se. Others are more concerned with doctoral students’ conditions for societal collaboration in practice (Andræ Thelin 2009; Bienowska & Klofsten 2012; Heldal 2016; Lundqvist & Benner 2012; Bienkowska, Klofsten and Rasmussen 2016; Wallgren 2007). However, when it comes to studies on innovation, there is dearth in the research literature. But we do know that doctoral students’ creativity is not always encouraged (Brodin 2015, 2016, 2017), and that other scholars have expressed similar concerns (Wingren 2015). Such results matters, as meta-analyses show a strong correlation between individuals’ creativity and innovation and also that contextual factors influence their innovative output (Sarooghi, Libaers & Burkemper 2015). We also know that concepts such as independence, critical thinking, and communication skills are frequently associated with innovation and collaboration (Cobo 2013). Thus our will include such related concepts in our analysis.  

 

This conference contribution aims at distributing our study to a Swedish audience, while the same results will be presented at the international Quality in Postgraduate Research conference (QPR) in Adelaide, 17-19 April 2018.

National Category
Educational Sciences
Research subject
Pedagogics and Educational Sciences
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:lnu:diva-74580 (URN)
Conference
Forskning om Högre Utbildning,15-16 May, 2018, Lund
Available from: 2018-05-27 Created: 2018-05-27 Last updated: 2019-02-26Bibliographically approved
Brodin, E., Silander, C., Lindberg, L., Frick, L. & McKenna, S. (2018). Issues on innovation, societal collaboration, and gender in doctoral education: Their historical appearances and relationships in Sweden and South Africa. In: : . Paper presented at Quality in Postgraduate Research (QPR), Adelaide, April 17-19, 2018.
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Issues on innovation, societal collaboration, and gender in doctoral education: Their historical appearances and relationships in Sweden and South Africa
Show others...
2018 (English)Conference paper, Oral presentation with published abstract (Refereed)
Abstract [en]

In 2011, the European Research Area (ERA) outlined several principles of innovative doctoral training such as research excellence; exposure to industry and other relevant employment sectors; transferable skills training; and quality assurance (Vittorio, 2015). Similar policies and guidelines can also be found in doctoral education across the globe, where the request for innovation and societal collaboration is urgent (e.g. Association of American Universities, 1998/2017; Australian Council of Learned Academies, 2016; HEQSF, 2013; Swedish Government Bill, 2008, 2016). At the same time, it is known that the general conditions for innovation vary across countries (Meeus & Edquist, 2006), and that global policy trends are construed and organised differently at national level in doctoral education (Andres et al., 2015). Furthermore, studies have shown that doctoral students’ inter-sectorial work could be hindered by the fact that the universities are not always near to knowledge-intensive industries, or that the industry is ill prepared to make use of the doctoral students’ qualifications (Vittorio, 2015). Combined with the fact that gender differences have been found in a number studies on doctoral education in general (Jones, 2013), it is accordingly significant to ask: What are the contextual and gendered conditions for doctoral students to develop their innovative and collaborative capability? Current research has no satisfying answer to this complex question yet. Against this background, our conference contribution is founded in a newly started project entitled "Developing innovative and collaborative capability in doctoral education from a gender perspective: Conditions, processes and outcomes in Sweden and South Africa". Based on social rule theory (Burns & Carson, 2002), we assume that learning practices are governed by a range of social rules founded in policies, organisational leadership, scholarly norms, and societal stakeholders. In particular, we are interested in how diverse levels of the doctoral educational system are related (or not) to each other, and how different systems affect the students’ innovative and collaborative development. While our overall project consists of several self-contained but interrelated studies to fulfil this holistic and systems theoretical approach, the first part of our study, reported on here, focuses on the macro level only by analysing national policies and guidelines related to doctoral education. Hence, based on summative content analysis (Hsieh & Shannon, 2005), this conference contribution will illuminate how the expressions of innovation, societal collaboration, gender and related concepts have occurred, converged and developed over time in Swedish and South African national policies on doctoral education from 1970-2017. Certain attention will be given to differences and similarities in these regards when comparing the two nations. Comparing Swedish and South African doctoral education is well justified. In contrast to Sweden, with its long traditions of societal welfare and of producing doctorates, South Africa is now in a phase of significant expansion and construction of doctoral education – with the political aim to strengthen the economy and democracy of their nation (National Planning Commission, 2011). Due to these national differences, our project can contribute to a deeper understanding of both context-specific and global issues within the problem field.

Keywords
doctoral education; national policies; innovation; societal collaboration; gender
National Category
Educational Sciences
Research subject
Pedagogics and Educational Sciences
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:lnu:diva-73143 (URN)
Conference
Quality in Postgraduate Research (QPR), Adelaide, April 17-19, 2018
Available from: 2018-04-21 Created: 2018-04-21 Last updated: 2019-02-12Bibliographically approved
Silander, C. & Stigmar, M. (2018). Negotiating a crowded curriculum: a stakeholder perspective on the content of higher education development courses. In: : . Paper presented at Forskning om högre utbildning, 15-16 May, 2018, Lund.
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Negotiating a crowded curriculum: a stakeholder perspective on the content of higher education development courses
2018 (English)Conference paper, Oral presentation with published abstract (Refereed)
Abstract [en]

Our presentation and seminar aims at contributing to theunderstanding of different stakeholders' views and expectationson the content of higher education teacher training (HETT).University teachers are typically carefully trained in doingresearch, however, frequently they lack formal pedagogicaltraining (Gosling, 2009; Holt, Palmer, & Challis, 2011; SwedishNational Union of Students (SFS), 2015). One way to addressthe lack of pedagogical experience is to arrange teachertraining courses. As the quality of higher education becomesthe focus of attention in the Western world and the demandon teaching and learning increase, so does the requirement ofuniversity teachers to take part in teacher training (Gibbs, 2013;Havnes & Stensaker, 2006). As universities can be describedas "loosely coupled systems" (Weick, 1976) where differentparts are expected to have diverging goals and course planningrequire the accommodation of many different perspective,several actors are likely to have different opinions about thecontent of higher education development courses. Accordingly,our research seeks to investigate how different stakeholdersview and value the content of HETT. This research field remainsunder-explored and insufficiently problematized.The aim of our seminar is to problematize and discuss fourstakeholders' views of course content in higher educationteacher training in Sweden, namely: 1) students, 2) universityteachers, 3) university management and 4) government. Wewill present patterns, similarities and differences, concerningcourse content in HETT, among the four different stakeholders.Methodologically, our investigation is based on interviewsand document analysis to explore different viewpoints on thecontent in HETT among students, university teachers, centraluniversity managers in four Swedish new universities and the government. Theoretically the analysis will be guided by Ellström's (2006) and Dreyfus' (1986) approaches to the relationbetween theory and practice.Preliminary results indicate diverging views between differentstakeholder groups where teachers and university management, expect HETT to be primarily practically oriented andrelate to constructive alignment (Biggs, 2005). However, inthe national recommendations on outcomes for HETT, theemphasis is on theoretical rather than practical applicability(SUHF, 2017).In the seminar, we wish to discuss the following suggestionsfor HETT:– Introduce and emphasize practical recommendations aslearning outcomes for teaching qualifications required foremployment as academic teacher,– Include concrete practical teachings tips in physical anddigital learning environments,– Present and problematize the concept of constructivealignment including course improvements and teachingquality regarding: learning outcomes, concrete teachingmethods and a variation of examination forms,– Compile HETT-evaluations not only on a regular and localuniversity basis, but also nationally and clarify how progressand improved quality is promoted in HETT-courses based onprevious local and national evaluations,– Encourage and enable for teams of teachers to participatein the same HETT,– Closely link the HETT content to the documentation ofquality work at the university.

National Category
Educational Sciences
Research subject
Pedagogics and Educational Sciences
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:lnu:diva-74581 (URN)
Conference
Forskning om högre utbildning, 15-16 May, 2018, Lund
Available from: 2018-05-27 Created: 2018-05-27 Last updated: 2019-09-13Bibliographically approved
Silander, D. & Silander, C. (2018). State of the Union for a Prosperous Europe. In: Charlie Karlsson, Charlotte Silander, Daniel Silander (Ed.), Governance and political entrepreneurship in Europe: promoting growth and welfare in times of crisis (pp. 271-280). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing
Open this publication in new window or tab >>State of the Union for a Prosperous Europe
2018 (English)In: Governance and political entrepreneurship in Europe: promoting growth and welfare in times of crisis / [ed] Charlie Karlsson, Charlotte Silander, Daniel Silander, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing, 2018, p. 271-280Chapter in book (Refereed)
Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing, 2018
National Category
Political Science
Research subject
Social Sciences, Political Science
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:lnu:diva-72652 (URN)978 1 78811 275 8 (ISBN)978 1 78811 276 5 (ISBN)
Available from: 2018-04-12 Created: 2018-04-12 Last updated: 2019-09-13Bibliographically approved
Silander, D. & Silander, C. (2018). The European Commission: the EU as agenda-setter for economic growth and entrepreneurship. In: Charlie Karlsson, Charlotte Silander, Daniel Silander (Ed.), Governance and Political Entrepreneurship in Europe: Promoting Growth and Welfare in Times of Crisis (pp. 57-81). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing
Open this publication in new window or tab >>The European Commission: the EU as agenda-setter for economic growth and entrepreneurship
2018 (English)In: Governance and Political Entrepreneurship in Europe: Promoting Growth and Welfare in Times of Crisis / [ed] Charlie Karlsson, Charlotte Silander, Daniel Silander, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing, 2018, p. 57-81Chapter in book (Refereed)
Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing, 2018
National Category
Political Science
Research subject
Social Sciences, Political Science
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:lnu:diva-72651 (URN)978 1 78811 275 8 (ISBN)978 1 78811 276 5 (ISBN)
Available from: 2018-04-12 Created: 2018-04-12 Last updated: 2019-09-13Bibliographically approved
Silander, C. & Berggren, C. (2018). The social efficiency of entrepreneurship education. In: Charlie Karlsson, Charlotte Silander & Daniel Silander (Ed.), Governance and political entrepreneurship in Europe: promoting growth and welfare in times of crisis (pp. 154-179). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing
Open this publication in new window or tab >>The social efficiency of entrepreneurship education
2018 (English)In: Governance and political entrepreneurship in Europe: promoting growth and welfare in times of crisis / [ed] Charlie Karlsson, Charlotte Silander & Daniel Silander, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing, 2018, p. 154-179Chapter in book (Refereed)
Abstract [en]

In this chapter, EU policy towards entrepreneurship education is analysed from an ideological perspective. The authors discuss how EU policies have influenced the direction of higher education. Increasing expectations on higher education graduates to contribute to welfare and economic growth through self-employment have pushed the development of entrepreneurship education at European universities. They show how the EU is striving to introduce entrepreneurship education into the education system through policies to improve entrepreneurial performance, both vertically and horizontally. The authors also show how the social efficiency perspective dominates, under which the overall purpose of higher education is to efficiently and scientifically contribute to economic growth and fight unemployment. This represents an instrumentalist view on education that focuses on the individual entrepreneur as a hero figure and in which entrepreneurship education is often expected to present role models to students and teach them the proper behaviour to become successful.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing, 2018
National Category
Political Science
Research subject
Social Sciences, Political Science
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:lnu:diva-84542 (URN)10.4337/9781788112765.00015 (DOI)9781788112758 (ISBN)9781788112765 (ISBN)
Available from: 2019-06-04 Created: 2019-06-04 Last updated: 2019-09-13Bibliographically approved
Silander, C. & Berggren, C. (2017). A career asself-employed?  Entrepreneurshipeducation for women ? Transitions, career learning and career managementskills. In: : . Paper presented at 2017 KAV conference: Multi-disciplinary and critical perspectives, October 19-20, Stockholm..
Open this publication in new window or tab >>A career asself-employed?  Entrepreneurshipeducation for women ? Transitions, career learning and career managementskills
2017 (English)Conference paper, Oral presentation with published abstract (Refereed)
National Category
Educational Sciences
Research subject
Pedagogics and Educational Sciences
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:lnu:diva-74582 (URN)
Conference
2017 KAV conference: Multi-disciplinary and critical perspectives, October 19-20, Stockholm.
Note

Ej belagd 20181030

Available from: 2018-05-27 Created: 2018-05-27 Last updated: 2018-10-30Bibliographically approved
Silander, C. & Bergren, C. (2017). Entrepreneurship in Higher Education. In: Uddevalla Symposium2017: Special Session: Governance and Political Entrepreneurship in Europe´s Economic Crisis. Paper presented at Uddevalla Symposium 2017, 15-17 June, Trollhättan, Sweden.
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Entrepreneurship in Higher Education
2017 (English)In: Uddevalla Symposium2017: Special Session: Governance and Political Entrepreneurship in Europe´s Economic Crisis, 2017Conference paper, Oral presentation with published abstract (Refereed)
National Category
Educational Sciences
Research subject
Pedagogics and Educational Sciences
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:lnu:diva-79121 (URN)
Conference
Uddevalla Symposium 2017, 15-17 June, Trollhättan, Sweden
Available from: 2018-12-07 Created: 2018-12-07 Last updated: 2018-12-07Bibliographically approved
Organisations

Search in DiVA

Show all publications