PROBLEMS IN ASSESSING EPISTEMIC AUTHORITY OF UNIVERSITY PROFESSORS

Solveiga Blumberga, Aleksejs Vorobjovs

Abstract


The authors provides reasons for the significance of assessment of epistemic authority of university professors, explicates the concept of epistemic authority and the issues related to research into this concept. In English, epistemic or epistemological means “of, relating to, or involving knowledge; cognitive”. An epistemic authority is a source of information who has a determining role in the process knowledge formation (Kruglanski, 1989). Authors analysed conceptual approaches to problems related to assessment of epistemic authority of university professors and to expand on the explanations to the problems in view of the results of the research study on student-perceived epistemic authority of university professors. The article includes the results of students (N=152) and graduates (N=210) of institutions of higher education located in Riga (Latvia). 


Keywords


epistemic authority; problems assessing epistemic authority

Full Text:

PDF

References


Asmuß, B., Svennevig, J. (2009). Meeting Talk : An Introduction. Journal of Business Communication, 46, 3 – 22.

Bar-Tal, D. (1990). Causes and consequences of delegitimization: Models of conflict and ethnocentrism. Journal of Social Issues, 46 (1), 65-81.

Bar-Tal, D., Raviv, A., Raviv, A. (1991). The concept of epistemic authority in the process of political knowledge acquisition: the effect of similarity. Representative Research in Social Psychology, 19, 107 – 120.

Bozalek, V., and Matthews, L. (2009). E-learning : A cross-institutional forum for sharing socio-cultural influences on personal and professional identity. International Social Work, 52, 235 – 246.

Buehl, M. M., and Alexander, A. P. (2005). Motivation and performance differences among domain-specific epistemological belief clusters. American Educational Research Journal, 42, 697-726.

Chiang, S.Y. (2009). Personal power and positional power in a power-full ‘I’: a discourse analysis of doctoral dissertation supervision. Discourse & Communication, 3, 3, 255 –271.

Geiger, D. (2009). Revisiting the Concept of Practice: Toward an argumentativeunderstanding of practicing. Management Learning, 40(2), 129-144.

Gherardi, S. (2000). Practice-Based Theorizing on Learning and Knowing in Organizations. Organization, 7(2), 211-223.

Goldman, A.I. (2002). Pathways to Knowledge: Private and Public. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Goodman, J. (2010). Student authority: Antidote to alienation. Theory and Research in Education, 8, 227 – 247.

Habermas, J. (1989). The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere. Cambridge: MIT Press.

Hardwig, L. (1991). The Role of Trust in Knowledge. The Journal of Philosophy ,88, 693-708.

Heritage, J., and Raymond, G. (2005). The Terms of Agreement: Indexing Epistemic Authority and Subordination in Talk-in-Interaction. Social Psychology Quarterly, 68, 1, 15 - 38.

Jacobson, N. (2007). Social Epistemology : Theory for the ''Fourth Wave'' of Knowledge Transfer and Exchange Research. Science Communication, 29, 116- 127.

Jillapalli, K. R., and Wilcox, B. J. (2010). Professor Brand Advocacy: Do Brand Relationships Matter? Journal of Marketing Education, 32, 328 – 340.

Kruglanski, A. W. (1989). Lay epistemics and human knowledge: Cognitive and motivational bases. New York: Plenum.

Kruglanski, A. W., Raviv, A., Bar-Tal, D., Raviv, A., Sharvit, K., Ellis, S., Bar, R., Pierro, A., & Mannetti, L. (2005). Says who?: Epistemic authority effects in social judgment. Advances in experimental social psychology, 37, 346-392.

McGuire, W.J. (1985). Attitudes and attitude change. In G. Lindzey and E.Aronson, eds.,The Handbook of Social Psychology 3rd ed. (Volume 2, p.136-314). New York: Random House.

Mugny, G., Chatard, A., Quiamzade, A. (2006). The Social Transmission of Knowledge at the University: Teaching Style and Epistemic Dependence. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 21, 4, 413-427.

Ordonez, G. X., Ponsoda, V., Abad, J. F., and Romero, J. S. (2009). Measurement of Epistemological Beliefs : Psychometric Properties of the EQEBI Test Scores. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 69, 287-302.

Pounder, S. J. (2008). Full-range Classroom Leadership: Implications for the Cross- organizational and Cross-cultural Applicability of the Transformational-transactional Paradigm. Leadership, 4, 115-135.

Raviv, A., Bar-Tal, D., Raviv, A., Abin, R. (1993). Measuring epistemic authority: studies of politicians and professors. European Journal of Personality,7, 119-138.

Raviv, A., Bar-Tal, D., Raviv, A., Biran, B., Sela, Z. (2003) Teachers’ Epistemic Authorities: Perceptions of Students and Teachers. Social Psychology of Education, 6 (1), 17-42.

Raviv, A., Bar-Tal, D., Raviv, A., Peleg, D. (1990). Perception of epistemic authorities by children and adolescents. Journal of Youth and adolescents. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 19, 495-510.

Schmidt, A. T, Houston, B. M, Bettencourt, A. L, and Boughton, D. P. (2003). The Impact of Voice and Justification on Students' Perceptions of Professors' Fairness. Journal of Marketing Education, 25, 177-186.

Schmitt, F. (1994). Socializing Epistemology: The Social Dimensions of Knowledge. Lanham, Maryland: Rowman and Littlefield.

Schommer-Aikins, M. 2004. Explaining the Epistemological Belief System: Introducing the Embedded Systemic Model and Coordinated Research Approach. Educational Psychologist, 39(1), 19-29.

Sismondo, S. (2011). Bourdieu's Rationalist Science of Science: Some Promises and Limitations. Cultural Sociology, 5, 83-97.

Subramaniam, B. (2010). Imperfect Oracle: The Epistemic and Moral Authority of Science. Contemporary Sociology: A Journal of Reviews, 39, 6, 687-688.

Tremayne, M., Chen, X., Figur, N., & Huang, J. S. (2008). Perceived authority and communication channel: Experiments with instant messaging. Social Science Computer Review, 26(2), 178-189.

Zimmerman, H. D. (2007). Mind and Institution: An Interactional Perspective. Contemporary Sociology: A Journal of Reviews, 36, 3, 219-221.

Воробьев, А. B. (1997). Персонология: проблемы содержания и активности личности. Даугавпилс.

Кондратьев, М. Ю. (1988). Некоторые особенности восприятия учащимися мастеров производственного обучения. Индивидуальность педагога и формирование личности школьников. Даугавпилс.

Петровский, А. В. (1982). Личность. Деятельность. Коллектив. (Над чем работают, о чем спорят философы). М.: Политиздат.




DOI: https://doi.org/10.17770/sie2014vol1.742

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.