Advertisement

Changing Cultures of Knowledge and Professional Learning

  • Monika NerlandEmail author
  • Karen Jensen
Chapter
Part of the Springer International Handbooks of Education book series (SIHE)

Abstract

This chapter examines the relationship between knowledge cultures and professionals’ learning in education and work. An overarching question is: What roles do knowledge cultures play as constitutive arenas for professional learning and development? The chapter reviews theoretical and empirical contributions to this topic, focusing on how the relationship between knowledge cultures and learning has been addressed in research on higher education and in the context of professional work. Strengths and weaknesses from different research strands are discussed, and it is proposed that analytical resources from the Social Studies of Science may be helpful for capturing this relationship as dynamic and emergent in practice. Drawing especially on the perspectives of Karin Knorr Cetina, we present findings from two larger Norwegian research projects, where different ways of organizing knowledge and supporting practitioners’ continuing learning are compared and discussed as differences in professional knowledge cultures. A premise for this discussion is that professional learning today should be understood in relation to wider ecologies of knowledge and practice, and that the continuing enrolment of practitioners in a profession-specific field of knowledge is a critical condition for participation.

Keywords

Knowledge cultures Epistemic objects Epistemic practices Fields of expertise Professions 

References

  1. Becher, T., & Trowler, P. R. (2001). Academic tribes and territories: Intellectual inquiry and the cultures of disciplines (2nd ed.). Buckingham: Society for Research into Higher Education/Open University Press.Google Scholar
  2. Bechky, B. (2003). Object lessons: Workplace artifacts as representations of occupational jurisdiction. American Journal of Sociology, 109(3), 720–752.Google Scholar
  3. Bechmann, G., Gorokhov, V., & Stehr, N. (Eds.). (2009). The social integration of science. Institutional and epistemological aspects of the transformation of knowledge in modern society. Berlin: Edition Sigma.Google Scholar
  4. Biglan, A. (1973). Relationships between subject matter characteristics and the structure and output of university departments. Journal of Applied Psychology, 57(3), 204–213.Google Scholar
  5. Billett, S. (2008). Learning throughout working life: A relational interdependence between social and individual agency. British Journal of Education Studies, 55(1), 39–58.Google Scholar
  6. Billett, S., Smith, R., & Barker, M. (2005). Understanding work, learning, and the remaking of cultural practices. Studies in Continuing Education, 27(3), 219–237.Google Scholar
  7. Boyer Commission on Educating Undergraduates in Research Universities. (1998). Reinventing undergraduate education: A blueprint for America’s research universities. Princeton: Carnegie Foundation.Google Scholar
  8. Bråten, I., Gil, L., Strømsø, H., & Vidal-Abarca, E. (2009). Personal epistemology across cultures: Exploring Norwegian and Spanish university students’ epistemic beliefs about climate change. Social Psychology of Education, 12, 529–560.Google Scholar
  9. Brew, A. (2010). Enhancing undergraduate engagement through research and inquiry. National teaching fellowship final report. Sydney: Australian Learning and Teaching Council Ltd.Google Scholar
  10. Brint, S. (1994). In the age of experts. The changing role of professionals in politics and public life. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  11. Brint, S., Cantwell, A., & Hanneman, R. (2008). Two cultures of undergraduate academic engagement. Research in Higher Education, 49, 383–402.Google Scholar
  12. Bulterman-Bos, J. A. (2008). Will a clinical approach make education research more relevant for practice? Educational Researcher, 37(7), 412–420.Google Scholar
  13. Callon, M. (1991). Techno-economic networks and irreversibility. In J. Law (Ed.), A sociology of monsters: Essays on power, technology and domination (pp. 132–161). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  14. Chaiklin, S., & Lave, J. (Eds.). (1993). Understanding practice: Perspectives on activity and context. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  15. Christiansen, B. (2010). Why do nurses use textual knowledge sources at work? Vård i Norden, 30(4), 4–8.Google Scholar
  16. Christiansen, B., Carlsten, T. C., & Jensen, K. (2009). Fagutviklingssykepleieren som brobygger mellom forskning og klinisk praksis. Sykepleien Forskning, 2, 101–106.Google Scholar
  17. Collier, S. J., & Ong, A. (2005). Global assemblages, anthropological problems. In S. J. Collier & A. Ong (Eds.), Global assemblages: Technology, politics and ethics as anthropological problems (pp. 3–21). Malden: Blackwell Publishing.Google Scholar
  18. Damşa, C., Kirschner, P., Andriessen, J., Erkens, G., & Sins, P. (2010). Shared epistemic agency: An empirical study of an emergent construct. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 19(2), 143–186.Google Scholar
  19. Donald, J. G. (2002). Learning to think: Disciplinary perspectives. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  20. Edwards, A. (2010). Being an expert professional practitioner: The relational turn in expertise. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  21. Elsen, M., Visser-Wijnveen, G. J., van der Rijst, R. M., & van Driel, J. H. (2009). How to strengthen the connection between research and teaching in undergraduate university education. Higher Education Quarterly, 63(1), 64–85.Google Scholar
  22. Elzinga, A. (1990). The knowledge aspect of professionalization: The case of science-based nursing education in Sweden. In R. Torstendahl & M. Burrage (Eds.), The formation of professions: Knowledge, state and strategy (pp. 151–173). London: Sage.Google Scholar
  23. Engeström, Y. (1987). Learning by expanding: An activity-theoretical approach to developmental research. Helsinki: Orienta–Konsultit.Google Scholar
  24. Engeström, Y. (2001). Expansive learning at work: Toward an activity theoretical reconceptualization. Journal of Education and Work, 14(1), 133–156.Google Scholar
  25. Engeström, Y., & Blackler, F. (2005). On the life of the object. Organization, 12, 307–330.Google Scholar
  26. Engeström, Y., Miettinen, R., & Punamäki, R.-L. (Eds.). (1999). Perspectives on activity theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  27. Entwistle, N., & Peterson, E. (2005). Conceptions of learning and knowledge in higher education: Relationships with study behaviour and influences of learning environments. International Journal of Educational Research, 41(6), 407–428.Google Scholar
  28. Ewenstein, B., & Whyte, J. (2009). Knowledge practices in design: The role of visual representations as ‘epistemic objects’. Organization Studies, 30(1), 7–30.Google Scholar
  29. Fenwick, T., Edwards, R., & Sawchuk, P. (2011). Emerging approaches in educational research: Tracing the socio-material. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  30. Francis, R. (2010). The decentring of the traditional university: The future of (self) education in virtually figured worlds. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  31. Freidson, E. (2001). Professionalism: The third logic. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  32. Giddens, A. (1991). The consequences of modernity. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  33. Goodyear, P., & Zenios, M. (2007). Discussion, collaborative knowledge work and epistemic fluency. British Journal of Educational Studies, 55(4), 351–368.Google Scholar
  34. Grossman, P., Hammersness, K., & McDonald, M. (2009). Redefining teaching, re‐imagining teacher education. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 15(2), 273–289.Google Scholar
  35. Guile, D. (2010). Developing vocational practice and social capital in the jewellery sector. A new model of practice-based learning. In S. Billett (Ed.), Learning through practice: Models, traditions, orientations and approaches (pp. 139–155). Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  36. Haggis, T. (2009a). Student learning research: A broader view. In M. Tight, K. H. Mok, J. Huisman, & C. Morphew (Eds.), The Routledge international handbook of higher education (pp. 23–35). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  37. Haggis, T. (2009b). What have we been thinking of? A critical overview of 40 years of student learning research in higher education. Studies in Higher Education, 34(4), 377–390.Google Scholar
  38. Hakkarainen, K., Palonen, T., Paavola, S., & Lehtinen, E. (2004). Communities of networked expertise: Professional and educational perspectives. Oxford: Elsevier.Google Scholar
  39. Hativa, N., & Marincovich, M. (Eds.). (1995). Disciplinary differences in teaching and learning: Implications for practice. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  40. Healey, M., & Jenkins, A. (2009). Developing undergraduate research and inquiry (Research report to the Higher Education Academy). York: Higher Education Academy.Google Scholar
  41. Hermansen, H., & Nerland, M. (2013). Reworking practice collaboratively through an AfL project: An analysis of teachers’ engagement with new assessment guidelines. British Educational Research Journal. doi: 10.1002/berj.3037.Google Scholar
  42. Hu, S., Scheuch, K., Schwartz, R., Gayles, J. G., & Li, S. (2008). Reinventing undergraduate education: Engaging college students in research and creative activities (ASHE Higher Education Report, 33, No. 4). San Francisco: Wiley Subscription Services at Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  43. Jensen, K. (2007). The desire to learn. An analysis of knowledge- seeking practices among professionals. Oxford Review of Education, 33(4), 499–502.Google Scholar
  44. Jensen, K., & Christiansen, B. (2012). New patterns of epistemic engagement among nurses. An exploratory study into the policy and practices of non-knowledge. In K. Jensen, L. C. Lahn, & M. Nerland (Eds.), Professional learning in the knowledge society (pp. 211–228). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.Google Scholar
  45. Jensen, K., & Lahn, L. (2005). The binding role of knowledge. An analysis of nursing students’ knowledge ties. Journal of Education and Work, 18(3), 307–322.Google Scholar
  46. Jensen, K., Lahn, L., & Nerland, M. (2012a). A cultural perspective on knowledge and professional learning. In K. Jensen, L. C. Lahn, & M. Nerland (Eds.), Professional learning in the knowledge society (pp. 1–24). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.Google Scholar
  47. Jensen, K., Lahn, L., & Nerland, M. (Eds.). (2012b). Professional learning in the knowledge society. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.Google Scholar
  48. Jewson, N. (2007). Cultivating network analysis: Rethinking the concept of ‘community’ within ‘communities of practice’. In J. Hughes, N. Jewson, & L. Unwin (Eds.), Communities of practice: Critical perspectives (pp. 68–82). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  49. Jones, A. (2009). Redisciplining generic attributes: The disciplinary context in focus. Studies in Higher Education, 34(1), 85–100.Google Scholar
  50. Karseth, B., & Nerland, M. (2007). Building professionalism in a knowledge society: Examining discourses of knowledge in four professional associations. Journal of Education and Work, 20(4), 335–355.Google Scholar
  51. Kastenhofer, K. (2007). Converging epistemic cultures? A discussion drawing on empirical findings. Innovation: The European Journal of Social Science Research, 20(4), 359–373.Google Scholar
  52. Klette, K., & Carlsten, T. C. (2012). Knowledge in teacher learning: New professional challenges. In K. Jensen, L. C. Lahn, & M. Nerland (Eds.), Professional learning in the knowledge society (pp. 69–84). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.Google Scholar
  53. Klette, K., & Smeby, J. C. (2012). Professional training and knowledge sources. In K. Jensen, L. C. Lahn, & M. Nerland (Eds.), Professional learning in the knowledge society (pp. 143–162). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.Google Scholar
  54. Knight, R. T., & Trowler, P. R. (2000). Department-level cultures and the improvement of learning and teaching. Studies in Higher Education, 25, 169–183.Google Scholar
  55. Knorr Cetina, K. (1997). Sociality with objects: Social relations in post-social knowledge societies. Theory, Culture and Society, 14(4), 1–30.Google Scholar
  56. Knorr Cetina, K. (1999). Epistemic cultures: How the sciences make knowledge. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  57. Knorr Cetina, K. (2001). Objectual practice. In T. Schatzki, K. Knorr Cetina, & E. von Savigny (Eds.), The practice turn in contemporary theory (pp. 175–188). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  58. Knorr Cetina, K. (2002). Transitions in post-social knowledge societies. In E. Ben Rafael & Y. Sternberg (Eds.), Identity, culture, and globalisation (pp. 611–628). Leiden: Brill Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  59. Knorr Cetina, K. (2006). Knowledge in a knowledge society: Five transitions. Knowledge, Work and Society, 4(3), 23–41.Google Scholar
  60. Knorr Cetina, K. (2007). Culture in global knowledge societies: Knowledge cultures and epistemic cultures. Interdisciplinary Science Reviews, 32(4), 361–375.Google Scholar
  61. Knorr Cetina, K., & Bruegger, U. (2000). The market as an object of attachment. Exploring postsocial relations in financial markets. Canadian Journal of Sociology, 25(2), 141–168.Google Scholar
  62. Knorr Cetina, K., & Preda, A. (2001). The epistemization of economic transactions. Current Sociology, 49(4), 27–44.Google Scholar
  63. Lahn, L. C. (2011). Professional learning as epistemic trajectories. In S. Ludvigsen, A. Lund, I. Rasmussen, & R. Säljö (Eds.), Learning across sites. New tools, infrastructures and practices (pp. 53–68). Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
  64. Lahn, L. C. (2012). The use of knowledge sources amongst novice accountants, engineers, nurses and teachers: An exploratory study. In K. Jensen, L. C. Lahn, & M. Nerland (Eds.), Professional learning in the knowledge society (pp. 109–123). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.Google Scholar
  65. Lahn, L. C., & Christiansen, B. (2012). Good professional work in accounting, engineering, nursing and teaching: From practice-based to research-based quality assessment? In K. Jensen, L. C. Lahn, & M. Nerland (Eds.), Professional learning in the knowledge society (pp. 125–142). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.Google Scholar
  66. Lahn, L., & Jensen, K. (2006). Models of professional learning. Exploring the epistemic tool perspective. Knowledge, Work and Society, 4(3), 63–82.Google Scholar
  67. Lave, J. (1993). The practice of learning. In S. Chaiklin & J. Lave (Eds.), Understanding practice: Perspectives on activity and context. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  68. Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  69. Ludvigsen, S., Lund, A., Rasmussen, I., & Säljö, R. (2011). Introduction: Learning across sites; new tools, infrastructures and practices. In S. Ludvigsen, A. Lund, I. Rasmussen, & R. Säljö (Eds.), Learning across sites. New tools, infrastructures and practices (pp. 1–13). Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
  70. Marton, F., & Booth, S. (1997). Learning and awareness. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  71. Marton, F., & Säljö, R. (1976a). On qualitative differences in learning. I. Outcome and process. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 46(4), 4–11.Google Scholar
  72. Marton, F., & Säljö, R. (1976b). On qualitative differences in learning. II. Outcome as a function of the learner’s conception of the task. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 46, 115–127.Google Scholar
  73. Marton, F., Hounsell, D., & Entwistle, N. (Eds.). (1984). The experience of learning. Edinburgh: Scottish Academic Press.Google Scholar
  74. Mathisen, A. (2012). Temporal design in auditors’ professional learning: Contemporary epistemic machineries and knowledge strategies in risk auditing. In K. Jensen, L. C. Lahn, & M. Nerland (Eds.), Professional learning in the knowledge society (pp. 85–105). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.Google Scholar
  75. Mathisen, A., & Nerland, M. (2012). The pedagogy of complex work support systems: Infrastructuring practices and the production of critical awareness in risk auditing. Pedagogy, Culture & Society, 20(1), 71–91.Google Scholar
  76. Meyer, M., & Molyneux-Hodgson, S. (2009). Introduction: The dynamics of epistemic communities. Sociological Research Online, 15(2), 14.Google Scholar
  77. Miettinen, R. (1999). The riddle of things: Activity theory and actor network theory as approaches of studying innovations. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 6, 170–195.Google Scholar
  78. Miettinen, R., & Virkkunen, J. (2005). Epistemic objects, artefacts and organizational change. Organization, 12(3), 437–456.Google Scholar
  79. Moen, A., & Nes, S. (2012). Consolidating work descriptions: Creating shared knowledge objects. In A. Moen, A. I. Mørch, & S. Paavola (Eds.), Collaborative knowledge creation: Practices, tools, concepts (pp. 249–260). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.Google Scholar
  80. Mørk, B. E., Aanestad, M., Hanseth, O., & Grisot, M. (2008). Conflicting epistemic cultures and obstacles for learning across communities of practice. Knowledge and Process Management, 15(1), 12–23.Google Scholar
  81. Mueller, J. (2009). Forms of knowledge and curriculum coherence. Journal of Education and Work, 22(3), 205–226.Google Scholar
  82. Muis, K. R., & Sinatra, G. M. (2006). University cultures and epistemic beliefs: Examining differences between two academic environments. In M. S. Khine (Ed.), Knowing, knowledge and beliefs: Epistemological studies across diverse cultures (pp. 137–150). Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  83. Muukkonen, H., Lakkala, M., Kastinen, J., & Nyman, G. (2010). Knowledge creating inquiry in a distributed project-management course. Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning, 5(2), 73–96.Google Scholar
  84. National Research Council. (2012). Discipline-based education research: Understanding and improving learning in undergraduate science and engineering. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.Google Scholar
  85. Nerland, M. (2008). Knowledge cultures and the shaping of work-based learning: The case of computer engineering. Vocations and Learning: Studies in Vocational and Professional Education, 1(1), 49–69.Google Scholar
  86. Nerland, M. (2012a). Professions as knowledge cultures. In K. Jensen, L. C. Lahn, & M. Nerland (Eds.), Professional learning in the knowledge society (pp. 28–48). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.Google Scholar
  87. Nerland, M. (2012b). Self-technologies in work-based learning. In K. Jensen, L. C. Lahn, & M. Nerland (Eds.), Professional learning in the knowledge society (pp. 195–209). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.Google Scholar
  88. Nerland, M., & Jensen, K. (2007). The construction of a new professional self: A critical reading of the curricula for two professional groups in Norway. In A. Brown, S. Kirpal, & F. Rauner (Eds.), Identities at work (pp. 339–360). Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  89. Nerland, M., & Jensen, K. (2010). Objectual practice and learning in professional work. In S. Billett (Ed.), Learning through practice: Models, traditions, orientations and approaches (pp. 82–103). Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  90. Nerland, M., & Jensen, K. (2012). Epistemic practices and object relations in professional work. Journal of Education and Work, 25(1), 101–120.Google Scholar
  91. Nerland, M., & Karseth, B. (2013). The knowledge work of professional associations: Approaches to standardisation and forms of legitimisation. Journal of Education and Work. doi: 10.1080/13639080.2013.802833.Google Scholar
  92. Nes, S., & Moen, A. (2010). Constructing standards: A study of nurses negotiating with multiple modes of knowledge. Journal of Workplace Learning, 22(6), 376–393.Google Scholar
  93. Nespor, J. (1994). Knowledge in motion: Space, time and curriculum in undergraduate physics and management. London: The Falmer Press.Google Scholar
  94. Neumann, T., Parry, S., & Becher, T. (2002). Teaching and learning in their disciplinary contexts: A conceptual analysis. Higher Education, 25(4), 405–417.Google Scholar
  95. Nielsen, K., & Kvale, S. (1997). Current issues of apprenticeship. Nordic Educational Research Journal, 17(3), 130–139.Google Scholar
  96. Reed, P., & Shearer, N. B. C. (2011). Nursing knowledge and theory innovation. Advancing the science of practice. New York: Springer Publishing Company.Google Scholar
  97. Rudberg, M. (2012). Gender, knowledge and desire: A story of change? In K. Jensen, L. C. Lahn, & M. Nerland (Eds.), Professional learning in the knowledge society (pp. 179–193). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.Google Scholar
  98. Schommer-Aikins, M., Duell, O. K., & Barker, S. (2003). Epistemological beliefs across domains using Biglan’s classification of academic disciplines. Research in Higher Education, 44, 347–366.Google Scholar
  99. Smeby, J.-C. (2007). Connecting to professional knowledge. Studies in Higher Education, 32(2), 207–224.Google Scholar
  100. Smeby, J.-C. (2012). The significance of professional education. In K. Jensen, L. Lahn, & M. Nerland (Eds.), Professional learning in the knowledge society (pp. 49–67). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.Google Scholar
  101. Spronken-Smith, R. (2010). Undergraduate research and inquiry-based learning: Is there a difference? Insights from research in New Zealand. Council on Undergraduate Research, 30(4), 28–35.Google Scholar
  102. Strand, T., & Jensen, K. (2012). Researching the current dynamics of professional expertise: Three analytic discourses. In M. Vukasović, P. Maasen, M. Nerland, B. Stensaker, & A. Vabø (Eds.), Effects of higher education reforms: Change dynamics (pp. 59–78). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.Google Scholar
  103. Tight, M. (2007). Bridging the divide: A comparative analysis of articles in higher education journals published inside and outside North America. Higher Education: The International Journal of Higher Education and Educational Planning, 53(2), 235–253.Google Scholar
  104. Tight, M. (2013). Discipline and methodology in higher education research. Higher Education Research & Development, 32(1), 136–151.Google Scholar
  105. UHR. (2010, July). Utdanning + FoU = Sant. Rapport om forskningsbasert utdanning [Report on the concept of research-based education]. Oslo, Norway: The Norwegian Association for Higher Education Institutions.Google Scholar
  106. Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  107. Zimbardi, K., & Myatt, P. (2012, iFirst). Embedding undergraduate research experiences within the curriculum: a cross-disciplinary study of the key characteristics guiding implementation. Studies in Higher Education, 39(2), 233–250.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of EducationUniversity of OsloOsloNorway

Personalised recommendations