Search

While long part of vocational and professional training, forms of practice-based education like Work-integrated learning (WIL) are now spreading to academic disciplines like Political Science. The pedagogical entailed in WIL is that student learning requires the theoretical knowledge and practice of both the classroom and the workplace, and therefore pledges better employability for graduates. At the same time, this promise entails a potential threat to disciplines that may call into question the assumptions of market and state relations. The question thus emerges: is it possible to do critical WIL, and what would it look like? This paper makes a normative case that a critical WIL is both desirable and possible by turning to Hanna Arendt and Richard Turner to differentiate 'banal' from 'critical' education. It further argues that any 'critical' educational programme must be based on three principles. First, students must learn about how social systems work and how to be successful in them, but they must also learn to critically reflect on the systems themselves, and to do so in normative terms linked to ending domination. Second, are students required to develop both the dispositions and attributes required for working life, and those required for acting to end domination. Finally, there must be sufficient institutional independence of the programme from its partner institutions to protect the critical WIL agenda. These claims are illustrated through reference to a real-world attempt to institutionalise WIL in a Political Studies Masters programme in Sweden.

The article develops a model for how an academic discipline like Political Studies can embrace work-integrated learning (WIL) to the benefit of students, the discipline, and wider society by interpreting WIL in relation to discipline-specific forms of knowledge and knower. The model is of a new Master's in WIL in Political Studies (WIPS) at University West, Sweden, an institution that is experimenting with the idea of WIL as a discipline beyond the mainstream framing of WIL as pedagogy only. In this innovative context, three ideas are central to WIPS. First, the content of WIPS is about research knowledge, rather than Political Studies knowledge. Second, drawing on political philosophy, the important relationship between theory or science ("episteme") and practice ("techne") is framed in terms of an additional concept of practical knowledge ("phronesis") regarding the particulars of political action to equitable ends and wisdom ("sophia") in regard to the philosophical and ethical nature of those ends. Third, WIPS re-thinks student learning in ontological ways that focus on the capabilities of the political knower. In sum, WIPS frames WIL as "reflective practice on research-intensive political work", offering a novel and enriched theoretical model of higher education learning of interest to other academic disciplines looking to embrace WIL.

This article investigates how the Swedish forest industry, as represented by the three largest Swedish private forest companies (Svenska Cellulosa AB, Stora Enso, and Holmen), through their main public relations (PR) channels frame the current dominant Swedish forestry model and alternative models that are promoted by the European Union (EU). The content analysis of the three companies' trade magazines published between 2019 and 2022 explores the patterns in the PR framing of the forest management models with respect to economic, environmental, and social aspects. The time interval is centered by the July 2021 announcement of the EU's new Forest Strategy for 2030. The magazines' target audience is private forest owners, from whom Svenska Cellulosa AB, Stora Enso, and Holmen buy 40-50% of the timber used in production. The main finding of the study is that these corporations did not present alternative methods as viable options to replace the Swedish forestry model. The magazines, with some individual variations, respond to the alternative methods promoted by the EU and environmental associations by an increased emphasis on the benefits, mainly environmental, of the Swedish forestry model - framing the model as not only the most profitable but also the most ecologically sustainable. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this essay I revisit The Prince and the Discourses and argue that across the design of these two texts on the theme of conspiracy Machiavelli constructs an ambush on Medici princes. I reconsider Mary Dietz's (1986), and Langton's and Dietz's (1987) suggestion that Machiavelli's The Prince was a deceptive political act through an exploration of the link Dietz and Sheldon Wolin (2004) draw between Machiavelli's method and Renaissance artistry. I suggest that Machiavelli applied a one-point linear perspective – a scientific and visual method of pictorial representation and geometrical modelling that emerged for the first time in the Renaissance – to the political field. I test this hypothesis on the theme of conspiracy in Machiavelli’s work by arguing that The Prince ultimately presents one vantage point – that of the prince – while the Discourses offers another – that of the conspirators. I argue that a blind spot is created by these two texts when they are jointly considered: conspirators seduced, recruited, and trained by the Discourses eliminate a prince caught off guard for having followed the advice on conspiracy in The Prince. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

While long part of vocational and professional training, forms of practice-based education like Work-integrated learning (WIL) are now spreading to academic disciplines like Political Science. The pedagogical entailed in WIL is that student learning requires the theoretical knowledge and practice of both the classroom and the workplace, and therefore pledges better employability for graduates. At the same time, this promise entails a potential threat to disciplines that may call into question the assumptions of market and state relations. The question thus emerges: is it possible to do critical WIL, and what would it look like? This paper makes a normative case that a critical WIL is both desirable and possible by turning to Hanna Arendt and Richard Turner to differentiate 'banal' from 'critical' education. It further argues that any 'critical' educational programme must be based on three principles. First, students must learn about how social systems work and how to be successful in them, but they must also learn to critically reflect on the systems themselves, and to do so in normative terms linked to ending domination. Second, are students required to develop both the dispositions and attributes required for working life, and those required for acting to end domination. Finally, there must be sufficient institutional independence of the programme from its partner institutions to protect the critical WIL agenda. These claims are illustrated through reference to a real-world attempt to institutionalise WIL in a Political Studies Masters programme in Sweden. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]