Figure 1 - uploaded by Dirk Baecker
Content may be subject to copyright.
Source publication
Systems are theory. They are distinguished by observers, scientific or intellectual; and talked about with other observers. They describe a complexity, consisting of a highly integrated differentiation, established and maintained by a boundary, which selectively separates a unit from and connects it with an environment as seen by an observer. The p...
Context in source publication
Context 1
... are revealed only to the initiated; everyone else lives in a world of passing events to be considered traps set by the powers that be. But even for the initiated, systems such as the early Gnostic Simon Magus's scheme of AEnology, a teaching of the various emanations of God, was to be taken as a ladder to be left behind once a higher degree and deeper level of comprehension was reached (Figure 1; see Mead 1892/1985, p. 63). ...
Citations
... La teoría de sistemas sociales -preocupada por el rol de los observadores en definir los límites de los sistemas (Baecker, 2014)ofrece una literatura interesante al respecto, en tanto no predefine los límites de un sistema, pero tampoco abandona en este proceso su conceptualización. Como teoría universalista, esta reclama para sí el estatus de una teoría de segundo orden: observa cómo ciertos sistemas se definen a sí mismos. ...
El concepto de sistema es central en el análisis de las universidades contemporáneas. El presente artículo tiene dos propósitos. En primer lugar, criticar la noción de sistema nacional utilizada en los estudios de educación superior y, en segundo término, proponer en su reemplazo el concepto de sistema interorganizacional. Posteriormente, para poner a prueba los rendimientos de este enfoque, se analiza la evolución histórica de las universidades chilenas en dichos términos. El ensayo finaliza señalando las consecuencias de la utilización de la noción propuesta de sistema universitario.
... 4. Social system Rogers ( 2003 , p. 23) defi nes the social system as 'a set of interrelated units engaged in joint problem solving to accomplish a common goal'. This works differently in different social systems (Baecker, 2014 ;Barker, 2004 ), but in the university, this equates to faculties and departments or units engaged with common destiny and objectives. This is especially important in our case because of the interdisciplinary and cross-organisational nature of an agile PBL curriculum and pedagogy (see Chap. 4 ). ...
In this book we respond to a higher education environment that is on the verge of profound changes by imagining an evolving and agile problem-based learning ecology for learning. The goal of doing so is to humanise university education by pursuing innovative approaches to student learning, teaching, curricula, assessment, and professional learning, and to employ interdisciplinary methods that go far beyond institutional walls and include student development and support, curriculum sustainability, research and the scholarship of teaching and learning, as well as administration and leadership.
An agile problem-based learning (PBL) ecology for learning deliberately blurs the boundaries between disciplines, between students and teachers, between students and employers, between employers and teachers, between academics and professional staff, between formal and informal learning, and between teaching and research. It is based on the recognition that all of these elements are interconnected and constantly evolving, rather than being discrete and static.
Throughout this book, our central argument is that there is no single person who is responsible for educating students. Rather, it is everyone’s responsibility – teachers, students, employers, administrators, and wider social networks, inside and outside of the university. Agile PBL is about making connections, rather than erecting barriers.
In summary, this book is not about maintaining comfort zones, but rather about becoming comfortable with discomfort. The actual implementation is beyond the scope of this book and we envisage that changing perceptions towards this vision will itself be a mammoth task. However, we believe that the alternative of leaving things as they are would ultimately prove untenable, and more distressingly, would leave a generation of students afraid to think, feel, and act for themselves, let alone being able to face the challenges of the 21st century.
... La teoría de sistemas sociales -preocupada por el rol de los observadores en definir los límites de los sistemas (Baecker, 2014)ofrece una literatura interesante al respecto, en tanto no predefine los límites de un sistema, pero tampoco abandona en este proceso su conceptualización. Como teoría universalista, esta reclama para sí el estatus de una teoría de segundo orden: observa cómo ciertos sistemas se definen a sí mismos. ...
The concept of system is central to the analysis of contemporary universities. this publication has two purposes. First, it criticizes the notion of a national system used in higher education studies and, secondly, in its place, it proposes the concept of an inter-organizational system. The historical evolution of chilean universities is subsequently analyzed in these terms, to explore the possibilities of this approach. This essay ends by indicating the consequences of using the proposed notion of a university system.
Sociologists often imagine society as spaces, yet how social spaces are related remains ambiguous in most theories. In developing his field theory, Bourdieu used extensively the concept of homology to describe the structural similarities across fields, but he had not taken seriously the spaces between fields or how fields are related to each other. Adopting the Simmelian approach of formal sociology, this article outlines six basic social forms by which social spaces are related. It argues that relations between social spaces can be understood along two dimensions: heterogeneity and social distance. In terms of heterogeneity, social spaces can be kindred, symbiotic or oppositional. In terms of social distance, they can be linked, nested or overlapping. These social forms of interspatial relations are constituted by the boundary work of a variety of actors, including guardians, brokers and space travellers. The article provides a general vocabulary for thinking about how social spaces are related and how they interact across boundaries.
When it comes to implementing a curriculum that aligns with an agile PBL ecology for learning, there are a myriad of elements and factors to consider, and they all impact to some extent on the ultimate success: graduates who can demonstrate the desired learning outcomes and are empowered with agile twenty-first-century skills that allow them to contribute to society with agency. The development, implementation and teaching of an agile PBL curriculum are ideally at the very least a whole-of-institution endeavour, which involves the micro- and exo-systems, but the goal from the beginning should always be to consciously involve all systems in the ecology. Excluding, for example, the macro-system from curriculum and pedagogy exposes the curriculum to the risk of not achieving the desired learning outcomes identified and required for a twenty-first-century supercomplex world. However, we do realise that a fully functioning curriculum in alignment with an agile PBL ecology for learning is an ideal situation, whereby the whole institution is on the same page and ‘every duck is lined up’. This whole-institution implementation represents one end of a continuum, whereas agile PBL implemented in single courses taught by individual enthusiastic lecturers is considered at the other end of the continuum. The case we outline in this chapter leans towards the former, and the idea is that readers treat this as the ideal scenario, as something to work towards. In this chapter, we discuss some of the factors that are involved in an overhaul of the curriculum towards an agile PBL. This is followed by an outline of how to make this practice sustainable and how to create a culture of continuous improvement, so that the agile PBL curriculum and pedagogy stay agile in the long term.
Luhmann’s theory has been commonly considered as a radical overcoming of the traditional philosophy. The interpreters often refer to the non-ontological background of the theory as the criticism of the conscience's centrality, the emphasis in conflict and distinction and the influence of sciences as cybernetic, biology and mathematics. In the present paper we try to demonstrate that there is also an important philosophical heritage in the Luhmann’s sociological work: the Hegelian heritage. We refer to four main points: the congruence of being and thought; the being as the unity of unity/distinction; the rationality as auto-reference and the congruence between theory and society. The focus of our analysis is on the complications of the system theory when it tries to eliminate the idea of spirit.
