How to search?
advanced search

Object

Download

Title: University autonomy; the core of academic culture

Abstract:

Academic culture is a set of rules (norms and values) regulating the institution of the university. The central component of academic culture is autonomy both in the sense of independence from external interference and the capacity to decide on research, teaching and organization of the university. Autonomy is endangered by the interference in academic culture of other cultural complexes characteristic for modern society: corporate culture, business culture, bureaucratic culture, financial culture, consumer culture. The resulting cultural clash is the reason for current crisis of the university. The defense of autonomy is the ethical and professional duty of scholars.

Identifier:

oai:journals.pan.pl:110490

Subject and keywords:

autonomy academic culture university social capital

Object collections:

Last modified:

Mar 27, 2024

In our library since:

Feb 13, 2019

Number of object content hits:

$number.toString().replaceAll("[0-9](?=(?:[0-9]{3})+(?![0-9]))", "$0 ")

Number of object content views in PDF format

1182

All available object's versions:

https://journals.pan.pl/publication/126605

Show description in RDF format:

RDF

Show description in OAI-PMH format:

OAI-PMH

Edition name Date
Autonomia – fundament kultury akademickiej Mar 27, 2024

Objects

Similar

The dilemmas of trustworthiness in science

Piotr Sztompka
Nauka | 2022 | No 3 | 7-16 | DOI: 10.24425/nauka.2022.140342
Keywords trust trustworthiness credibility academic culture scientific ethos post-academic science
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

Trust and trustworthiness are crucial for science: equally for the scientific knowledge, scientific institutions and scientific community. For scientific knowledge the main criterion of trustworthiness is the search for truth, for scientific institutions it is the regime of autonomy, and for scientific community – respecting the ethos of science: norms of universalism, communalism, disinterestedness and organized scepticism (peer review and meritocracy). In the traditional academic science due to these criteria the level of deviance (fraud, plagiarism etc.) was very low. Alas in current post-academic science we witness numerous occurrence of fake knowledge, loss of autonomy of academic institutions and the neglect of the ethos of science among scholars. There are several processes responsible for this condition: fiscalisation, privatization, marketization, bureaucratization, and the pressure of non-academic, external forces and interests on scientific community. The regaining of autonomy and reactivation of academic culture (primarily the ethos of science), are the preconditions for overcoming the current crisis of trustworthiness in science.
Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Piotr Sztompka
1 2
  1. członek rzeczywisty PAN
  2. Uniwersytet Jagielloński

Latin America – 100 years after the University Reform

Joanna Gocłowska-Bolek
Nauka | 2018 | No 3 | 125–142
Keywords higher education autonomy university Reform from Cordoba Latin America
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

The University Reform of 1918 was a renewal movement for universities, aimed at their democratization and modernization, initiated by student activities at the National University of Cordoba. Student movements took on a continental dimension and led to many changes in Latin American universities, especially in the field of autonomy and representation of students in university bodies. The introduction of university autonomy has had a profound impact not only on the functioning of the higher education system in Latin America, but also on other areas of social and political life in the region in the following decades. The article presents the Cordoba University Reform from a historical perspective and attempts to evaluate achievements in the implementation of its ideas in the today’s system of higher education in Latin America.
Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Joanna Gocłowska-Bolek

My University

Tomasz Schramm
Historyka Studia Metodologiczne | 2023 | tom 53 | 673-693 | DOI: 10.24425/hsm.2023.147392
Keywords Tomasz Schramm Adam Mickiewicz University in Poznań autonomy of university
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

I have been asked to give a thought on the University. It is arranged in a sequence of “past – yesterday – today”, to which I will occasionally refer. It will not, however, constitute a rigid scheme governing this talk. The inspiration for these thoughts was specified by the question “what perception of the University I imbibed in my family home, how I later confronted this with my own practice or «experience» of the University, how I look at it from the perspective of the experience I have had and from observing the changes taking place.”
Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Tomasz Schramm
1
ORCID: ORCID
  1. Uniwersytet Adama Mickiewicza w Poznaniu

The Impact of Social Capital on Political Participation of Social Media Users in Poland

Kamil Filipek
Studia Socjologiczne | 2019 | No 2 | 155-177 | DOI: 10.24425/sts.2019.126143
Keywords resources social capital social media political participation
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

Research on participation of social media users has contributed to our understanding of modern citizenship, civic engagement, and contemporary public sphere. Despite a growing interest in participatory practices in social media little is known about the factors affecting political participation of social media users. Based on an online survey of 700 social media users in Poland, this study examines the relationship between social capital (defined at the individual level as a resource embedded in personal networks) and political participation. It has been established that there is a contradictory relationship between social capital and participatory activities of social media users. Apparently, differences between the resources that are only embedded in personal networks on the one hand, and those that can be mobilized for purposive actions on the other, matter when association between social capital and political participation is considered. Moreover, the presence of these resources significantly varies across different types of social relations (family, friends and acquaintances) of respondents engaged in different participatory actions.
Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Kamil Filipek

The Laboratory of Changes

Piotr Sztompka
ACADEMIA. The magazine of the Polish Academy of Sciences | 2007 | Nr 1 (13) 2007 Time | 40-43
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Authors and Affiliations

Piotr Sztompka

Social Capital as a Factor Determining Territorial Development

Danuta Stawasz
Studia KPZK | 2018 | tom 184 Rozwój lokalny i regionalny. Teorie i zastosowania | 151-163
Keywords Social capital social capital impact
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

The concept of social capital is gaining increasing popularity among economists and governance practitioners. This is due to the recognition of the fact that a high level of social capital is important for the creation of socio-economic development of countries or territories – economic areas with a high level of connections between entities, organisations and residents. The formation of social capital, understood as the ability to cooperate with various social groups and operate efficiently within these groups, depends on the political system as well as the adopted norms and attitudes, education, styles of management in business organisations and public sphere entities, family ties, motivation to act, etc. The aim of the paper is to indicate various limitations of social capital development and to demonstrate that it is important to involve different communities in its formation In addition, attention is drawn to the fact that social capital generates externalities that are essential for the efficiency and eff ectiveness of governance in territorial systems, both in the economic and public utility sphere.
Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Danuta Stawasz

It Matters Whom You Know: Mapping the Links Between Social Capital, Trust and Willingness to Cooperate

Katarzyna Growiec Jakub Growiec Bogumił Kamiński
Studia Socjologiczne | 2022 | No 2 | 59-83 | DOI: 10.24425/sts.2022.141423
Keywords social capital social network structure social trust willingness to cooperate
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

Trust and willingness to cooperate depend on the structure of one’s social network and the resources one can access through it. In this study, based on a survey dataset of a representative sample of the Polish population (n = 1000) we create an empirical ‘map’ of four distinct dimensions of social capital: degree (number of social ties), centrality in the social network, bridging social capital (ties with dissimilar others), and bonding social capital (ties with similar others, primarily with kin). We investigate the links between social capital and its key correlates: generalized and particularized trust and willingness to cooperate. We find that centrality (or occupying the position of a network bridge) is positively related to trust, whereas for bonding social capital this relation is negative. We find also a puzzling effect of cooperation without trust in the case of individuals with high bridging social capital resources (ties with dissimilar others).
Go to article

Bibliography

1. Alesina, Alberto, Paola Giuliano. 2010. The Power of the Family. Journal of Economic Growth, 15: 93–125. DOI: 10.1007/s10887-010-9052-z. 2. Algan, Yann, Pierre Cahuc. 2010. Inherited Trust and Growth. American Economic Review, 100: 2060–2092. DOI: 10.1257/aer.100.5.2060. 3. Banfield, Edward C. 1958. Moral Basis of a Backward Society. Glencoe: Free Press. 4. Barber, Bernard. 1983. The Logic and Limits of Trust. Rutgers University Press. 5. Beugelsdijk, Sjoerd, Sjak Smulders. 2003. Bonding and Bridging Social Capital: Which Type Is Good for Economic Growth? In: The Cultural Diversity Of European Unity, ed. W. Arts, L. Halman, J. Hagenaars. Brill (Leiden), 147–184. 6. Bian, Yanjie. 1997. Bridging Strong Ties Back In: Indirect Ties, Network Bridges, and Job Searches in China. American Sociological Review, 62: 366–385. DOI: 10.2307/2657311. 7. Bjørnskov, Christian. 2006. The Multiple Facets of Social Capital. European Journal of Political Economy, 22: 22–40. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejpoleco.2005.05.006. 8. Bjørnskov, Christian, Kim M. Sønderskov. 2013. Is Social Capital A Good Concept? Social Indicators Research, 114: 1225–1242. DOI: 10.1007/s11205-012-0199-1. 9. Bonacich, Phillip. 1972. Technique For Analyzing Overlapping Memberships. Sociological Methodology, 4: 176–185. 10. Bonacich, Phillip. 1987. Power and Centrality: A Family of Measures. American Journal Of Sociology, 92: 1170–1182. 11. Borgatti, Stephen P. 2006. Identifying Sets of Key Players in a Social Network. Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, 12: 21–34. DOI: 10.1007/s10588-006-7084-x. 12. Bourdieu, Pierre. 1986. The Forms Of Capital. In: Handbook of Theory and Research of Sociology of Education, Ed. by J. C. Richardson. Greenwood Press, 117–142. 13. Bowlby, John. 1969. Attachment. The Hogarth Press and the Institute of Psychoanalysis. 14. Burt, Ronald S. 1992. Structural Holes. The Social Structure And Competition. Harvard University Press. 15. Burt, Ronald S. 2005. Brokerage and Closure. An Introduction to Social Capital. Oxford University Press. 16. Burt, Ronald S. 2010. Neighbor Networks: Competitive Advantage Local And Personal. Oxford University Press. 17. Butler, Jeff V., Paola Giuliano, Luigi Guiso. 2016. The Right Amount of Trust. Journal of the European Economic Association, 14: 1155–1180. DOI: 10.1111/jeea.12178. 18. Dasgupta, Partha. 1988. Trust as a Commodity. In: Trust. Making and Breaking Cooperative Relations. Ed. by D. Gambetta. New York: Basil Blackwell, 49–72. 19. De Cremer, David, Mark Snyder, Siegfried Dewitte. 2001. ‘The Less I Trust, The Less I Contribute (Or Not)?’ The Effects of Trust, Accountability and Self-Monitoring in Social Dilemmas. European Journal of Social Psychology, 31: 93–107. DOI: 10.1002/ejsp.34. 20. Ermisch, John, Diego Gambetta. 2010. Do Strong Family Ties Inhibit Trust? Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 75: 365–376. DOI: 10.1016/j.jebo.2010.05.007. 21. Festinger, Leon, Stanley Schachter, Kurt W. Back. 1948. Social Pressures In Informal Groups. Cambridge: MIT Press. 22. Field, John. 2010. Social Capital. Routledge. 23. Florida, Richard. 2004. The Rise of the Creative Class. New York: Basic Books. 24. Franzen, Axel, Dominik Hangartner. 2006. Social Networks and Labour Market Outcomes: The Non-Monetary Benefits of Social Capital. European Sociological Review, 22: 353–368. DOI: 10.1093/esr/jcl001. 25. Gambetta, Diego. 1988. Mafia: The Price of Distrust. In: Trust. Making and Breaking Cooperative Relations. Ed. by D. Gambetta. Basil Blackwell, 158–175. 26. Gellner, Ernest. 1988. Trust, Cohesion and the Social Order. In: Trust. Making and Breaking Cooperative Relations. Ed. by D. Gambetta. Basil Blackwell, 142–157. 27. Giddens, Anthony. 1984. The Constitution of Society. Cambridge: Polity Press. 28. Gittell, Ross J., Avis Vidal. 1998. Community Organizing: Building Social Capital as a Development Strategy. Thousand Oaks: Sage. 29. Granovetter, Mark S. 2005. The Impact of Social Structure on Economic Outcomes. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 19: 33–50. DOI: 10.1257/0895330053147958. 30. Greenberg, Jay R. 1991. Oedipus And Beyond: A Clinical Theory. Harvard University Press. 31. Growiec, Jakub, Katarzyna Growiec. 2010. Social Capital, Well-Being, and Earnings: Theory and Evidence From Poland. European Societies, 12: 231–255. DOI: 10.1080/14616690902718381. 32. Growiec, Katarzyna. 2015. Ile szczęścia dają nam inni ludzie? Więzi społeczne a dobrostan psychiczny [How Much Happiness Do Others Give Us? Social Ties And Well-Being]. Warszawa: WN PWN. 33. Growiec, Katarzyna, Jakub Growiec. 2014a. Social Capital, Trust, and Multiple Equilibria in Economic Performance. Macroeconomic Dynamics, 18: 282–315. DOI: 10.1017/S136510051200034X. 34. Growiec, Katarzyna, Jakub Growiec. 2014b. Trusting Only Whom You Know, Knowing Only Whom You Trust: The Joint Impact of Social Capital and Trust on Individuals’ Economic Performance and Happiness in CEE Countries. Journal of Happiness Studies, 15: 1015–1040. DOI: 10.1007/s10902-013-9461-8. 35. Growiec, Katarzyna, Jakub Growiec, Bogumił Kamiński. 2018. Social Network Structure and the Trade-Off Between Social Utility and Economic Performance. Social Networks, 55: 31–46. DOI: 10.1016/j.socnet.2018.05.002. 36. Hurlbert, Jeanne S., Valerie A. Haines, John J. Beggs. 2000. Core Networks and Tie Activation: What Kinds of Routine Networks Allocate Resources in Nonroutine Situations? American Sociological Review, 65: 598–618. DOI: 10.2307/2657385. 37. Inglehart, Ronald, Wayne Baker. 2000. Modernization, Cultural Change and the Persistence of Traditional Values. American Sociological Review, 65: 19–51. DOI: 10.2307/2657288 38. Kääriäinen, Juha, Heikki Lehtonen. 2006. The Variety of Social Capital in Welfare State Regimes – A Comparative Study of 21 Countries. European Societies, 8: 27–57. DOI: 10.1080/14616690500491399. 39. Kadushin, Charles. 2002. The Motivational Foundation of Social Networks. Social Networks, 24: 77–91. DOI: 10.1016/S0378-8733(01)00052-1. 40. Kadushin, Charles. 2012. Understanding Social Networks: Theories, Concepts, And Findings. Oxford University Press. 41. Klapwijk, Anthon, Paul A. M. Van Lange. 2009. Promoting Cooperation and Trust in ‘Noisy’ Situations: The Power of Generosity. Journal of Personality And Social Psychology, 96: 83–103. DOI: 10.1037/a0012823. 42. Knack, Stephen, Philip Keefer. 1997. Does Social Capital Have an Economic Payoff? A Cross-Country Investigation. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 112: 1251–1288. DOI: 10.1162/003355300555475. 43. Kroll, Christian. 2011. Different Things Make Different People Happy: Examining Social Capital and Subjective Well-Being by Gender and Parental Status. Social Indicators Research, 104: 157–177. DOI: 10.1007/s11205-010-9733-1. 44. Lawrence, Barbara S. 1997. The Black Box of Organizational Demography. Organization Science, 8: 1–22. DOI: 10.1287/orsc.8.1.1. 45. Lazarsfeld, Paul F., Robert K. Merton. 1954. Friendship as Social Process: ASubstantive and Methodological Analysis. In: M. Berger, T. Abel, C.H. Page, eds. Freedom and Control in Modern Society. New York: Van Nostrand, 18–66. 46. Leonard, Madeleine. 2008. Socialand Subcultural CapitalAmong Teenagersin Northern Ireland. Youth and Society, 40: 224–244. DOI: 10.1177/0044118X08314243. 47. Leung, Ambrose, Cheryl Kier, Tak Fung, Linda Fung, Robert Sproule. 2011. Searching for Happiness: The Importance of Social Capital. Journal of Happiness Studies, 12: 443–462. DOI: 10.1007/s10902-010-9208-8. 48. Lewis, J. David, Andrew Weigert. 1985. Trust as a Social Reality. Social Forces, 63: 967–985. 49. Li, Yaojun, Andrew Pickles, Mike Savage. 2005. Social Capital and Social Trust in Britain. European Sociological Review, 21: 109–123. DOI: 10.1093/esr/jci007. 50. Lin, Nan. 2001. Social Capital. Cambridge University Press. 51. Luhmann, Niklas. 1979. Trust and Power. Chichester: Wiley. 52. Meeussen, Loes, Filip Agneessens, Ellen Delvaux, Karen Phalet. 2018. Ethnic Diversity and Value Sharing: A Longitudinal Social Network Perspective on Interactive Group Processes. British Journal of Social Psychology, 57: 428–447. DOI: 10.1111/bjso.12237. 53. Misztal, Barbara. 1996. Trust in Modern Societies. The Search for the Bases of Social Order. Cambridge: Polity Press. 54. Mouw, Ted. 2003. Social Capital and Finding a Job: Do Contacts Matter? American Sociological Review, 68: 868–898. DOI: 10.2307/1519749. 55. Paldam, Martin. 2000. Social Capital: One or Many? Definition and Measurement. Journal of Economic Surveys, 14: 629–654. DOI: 10.1111/1467-6419.00127. 56. Prell, Christina. 2012. Social Network Analysis. History, Theory and Methodology. Sage. 57. Putnam, Robert D. 2000. Bowling Alone. Collapse and Revival of American Community. New York: Simon & Schuster. 58. Rainie, Lee, Barry Wellman. 2014. Networked: The New Social Operating System. Cambridge: The MIT Press. 59. Sabatini, Fabio. 2009. Social Capital as Social Networks: A New Framework for Measurement and an Empirical Analysis of Its Determinants and Consequences. Journal of Socio-Economics, 38: 429–442. DOI: 10.1016/j.socec.2008.06.001. 60. Sandefur, Rebecca L., Edward O. Laumann. 1998. A Paradigm for Social Capital. Rationality and Society, 10: 481–501. DOI: 10.1177/104346398010004005. 61. Simmel, Georg. 1978. The Philosophy of Money [1900]. Routledge and Kagan Paul. 62. Snijders, Tom A. B. 1999. Prologue to the Measurement of Social Capital. La Revue Tocqueville/The Tocqueville Review, 20: 27–44. DOI: 10.3138/ttr.20.1.27. 63. Sobel, Joel. 2002. Can We Trust Social Capital? Journal of Economic Literature, 40: 139–154. DOI: 10.1257/0022051027001. 64. Sønderskov, Kim M. 2008. Environmental Group Membership, Collective Action and Generalised Trust. Environmental Politics, 17: 78–94. DOI: 10.1080/09644010701811673. 65. Tanis, Martin, Tom Postmes. 2005. A Social Identity Approach to Trust: Interpersonal Perception, Group Membership and Trusting Behaviour. European Journal of Social Psychology, 35: 413–424. DOI: 10.1002/ejsp.256. 66. Tian, Felicia F., Nan Lin. 2016. Weak Ties, Strong Ties, and Job Mobility In Urban China: 1978–2008. Social Networks, 44: 117–129. DOI: 10.1016/j.socnet.2015.08.002. 67. Uslaner, Eric M. 2002. The Moral Foundations of Trust. Cambridge University Press. 68. Valente, Thomas W., Kayo Fujimoto. 2010. Bridging: Locating Critical Connectors in a Network. Social Networks, 32: 212–220. DOI: 10.1016/j.socnet.2010.03.003. 69. Van der Gaag, Martin, Tom A. B. Snijders. 2005. The Resource Generator: Social Capital Quantification with Concrete Items. Social Networks, 27: 1–29. DOI: 10.1016/j.socnet.2004.10.001. 70. Van der Gaag, Martin, Tom A. B. Snijders, Henk D. Flap. 2012. Position Generator Measures and Their Relationship to Other Social Capital Measures. In: Social Capital. An International Research Program. Ed. by N. Lin and B. H. Erickson. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 27–48. 71. Van der Horst, Mariska, Hilde Coffé. 2012. How Friendship Network Characteristics Influence Subjective Well-Being. Social Indicators Research, 107: 509–529. DOI: 10.1007/s11205-011-9861-2. 72. Van Oorschot, Wim, Wil Arts, John Gelissen. 2006. Social Capital in Europe. Measurement and Social and Regional Distribution of a Multifaceted Phenomenon. Acta Sociologica, 49: 149–167. DOI: 10.1177/0001699306064770. 73. Winkelmann, Rainer. 2009. Unemployment, Social Capital, and Subjective Well-Being. Journal of Happiness Studies, 10: 421–430. DOI: 10.1007/s10902-0089097-2. 74. Woolcock, Michael. 1998. Social Capital and Economic Development: Towards a Theoretical Synthesis and Policy Framework. Theory and Society, 27–28: 151–208. DOI: 10.1023/A:1006884930135. 75. Woolcock, Michael. 2001. The Place of Social Capital in Understanding Social and Economic Outcomes. Isuma: Canadian Journal of Policy Research, 2: 11–17. 76. Xin, Sufei, Ziqiang Xin, Chongde Lin. 2016. Effects of Trustors’ Social Identity Complexity on Interpersonal and Intergroup Trust. European Journal of Social Psychology, 46: 428–440. DOI: 10.1002/ejsp.2156. 77. Yamagishi, Toshio, Karen S. Cook, Motoki Watabe. 1998. Uncertainty, Trust, and Commitment Formation in The United States and Japan. American Journal of Sociology, 104: 165–194. DOI: 10.1086/210005. 78. Zak, Paul J., Stephen Knack. 2001. Trust and Growth. Economic Journal, 111: 295–321. DOI: 10.1111/1468-0297.00609.
Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Katarzyna Growiec
1
ORCID: ORCID
Jakub Growiec
2
ORCID: ORCID
Bogumił Kamiński
2
ORCID: ORCID
  1. SWPS Uniwersytet Humanistycznospołeczny
  2. Szkoła Główna Handlowa w Warszawie

Współczesne przemiany czynników rozwoju społeczno-gospodarczego

Barbara Konecka-Szydłowska Paweł Churski Michał Dolata Joanna Dominiak Jan Hauke Tomasz Herodowicz Adam Nowak Robert Perdał Marcin Woźniak
Studia KPZK | 2018 | tom 183 Teoretyczne i aplikacyjne wyzwania współczesnej geografii społeczno-ekonomicznej
Keywords socio-economic development factor megatrends human capital social capital material capital financial capital innovations
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

Contemporary changes of socio-economic development factors. The aim of the work is to determine the scope of contemporary changes of socio-economic development factors, paying attention to the consequences for their interpretation and mechanism of impact relating to the regional and local level. The main goal is specified by formulating the following research questions: (1) What major megatrends shape contemporary developmental transformations? (2) What is the direction and scope of changes in socio-economic development factors? (3) How are the conditions of development processes changing as a result of these changes and how they differentiate the processes of development in space? The article is a synthesis of the results of two research projects of the National Science Center: NN 306 79 19 40: Socio-economic development and the development of areas of growth and areas of economic stagnation (2011–2014) and OPUS 10 – 2015/19/B/HS5/00012: New challenges of regional policy in shaping the factors of socio-economic development of less developed regions (2016–2019) and the results of own authors’ research – employees of the Regional Analysis Department at the Institute of Socio-Economic Geography and Spatial Management of the Adam Mickiewicz University in Poznań.
Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Barbara Konecka-Szydłowska
Paweł Churski
Michał Dolata
Joanna Dominiak
Jan Hauke
Tomasz Herodowicz
Adam Nowak
Robert Perdał
Marcin Woźniak
More
×

Citation

Citation style: $citations.get(0)

This page uses 'cookies'. Learn more