Search

This article develops a conceptual framework of the dynamics of trust between parents and professionals in early childhood education and care. In contemporary Western society, the heightened risk awareness with respect to early childhood has led to an increased focus on the collaboration between home and daycare. Mutual trust is a core aspect of this collaboration, resulting in a trust imperative. Drawing on Knud Eilar Løgstrup, Noomi Matthiesen, Paula Cavada-Hrepich, and Lene Tanggaard argue here that trust is a spontaneous, relational phenomenon rooted in practice and emerging in a normatively structured order. They develop a conceptual framework of trust that has two dimensions: a "basic dimension" and a "competence dimension." The basic dimension is connected to the willingness of the other to do what is good and right according to the normative order, while the competence dimension has to do with the ability to do so. The authors contend that, while trust is a spontaneous and sovereign phenomenon outside of individuals' control, parents and professionals in daycare "perform" in ways that are recognized as more or less trust-"worthy." They also perform in ways that signal they are trust-"ful." However, these conscious performances can paradoxically reduce the possibility of spontaneous trust.

Creativity forms a part of educational curriculum and is an important element of education research. Clearly, creativity research of the past has made a great impact in the ways in which creativity has been integrated within education and educational practice. Yet how creativity has been studied and how the methodologies of these studies shape produced knowledge and impact educational practice are still rather limited and limiting. This chapter calls for methodological experimentation, various forms of performativity, and creativity in the context of research utilizing speculative wonderings. We situate our arguments in different trends in creativity research and discuss more methodologically diverse, speculative, and creative futures.

Education plays a vital role in making children feel they are part of life in their society and culture. However, what is the supposed role of education in creating this sense of agency and what kinds of implications might this have for multicultural education? This paper shows how a sense of agency and social responsibility are central aspects of creativity. The paper draws on a distinction between functional and value-based education for creativity and, on this basis, it is suggested that a new, updated paradigm of creativity and innovation will teach students to think in terms of 'we' and togetherness as the central axis around which the novel idea are generated. It will teach students that creativity is often dependent on the support from others and it therefore strives for a broad and inclusive idea of education in line with recent attempts to see multicultural education as a vehicle for cultivating humanity in a global age.

This article addresses the question of whether and how creativity is important in children's lives in relation to creative expression in school, with a focus on the Danish educational system. It starts by outlining different conceptions of creativity: the first generation view considers it largely innate and specific for a selected few; the second generation perspective 'democratizes' creativity and emphasizes the fact that we can both teach and learn it. On the background of this latter approach, we analyze the common claim that schools can 'kill' creativity and the implications of this assertion. This leads to a consideration of the implicit and explicit epistemological and ontological assumptions behind creativity theories and the realization that adopting a 'romantic' view of what it means to create can actually be counterproductive in a school setting, at least for some students. An invitation to engage with creativity critically and reflectively in education is offered towards the end.

Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to ask: what effect does moving from individual to collective understandings of the entrepreneur in enterprising education have on the student's learning? And given this shift in understanding, is there a need for a new paradigm in entrepreneurship learning? Design/methodology/approach This paper draws on ethnographic data from entrepreneurship education (EEd) at a summer school in Denmark. The purpose of the summer school was to bring the students from an awareness of their own competences to a shared understanding of resources, relationships and opportunities for becoming enterprising. Findings: Drawing on the recent developments in understanding creativity, the authors' explore the potential for similarities between becoming an entrepreneur in collaboration with others and being creative in collaboration with others. The authors' found that a focus on the collaborative and distributed character of entrepreneurship, as within the We-paradigm from creativity, does not exclude the importance of perceptions of individuals' self-images as part of a course in entrepreneurship. Yet, a reformulation of these could be an entry point for richer group work and articulation of diverse group potential. Research limitations/implications: This study suggests that it is possible to take at least one step further in what can be achieved during an EEd course. Rather than remain a focus on individual learning and treating group work a didactics instrument, team formation processes can be used as a pedagogy/andragogy experiential tool in the classroom with its own learning outcomes, as presented and discussed above. For educators, this means that they have an additional tool to aid the complicated task of bringing EEd to students across campus. For students, this new approach means that the often dreaded and frustrating process of classroom team formation can become a positive experience of purposeful team assembly and collaboration. Two possible limitations regarding the findings of this paper can be identified: for students with extensive experience in forming teams and working in groups, taking them through this process may not have the desired effect as they may rely on habits and known mechanism without much reflection; it may be difficult to achieve the desired effect with students that know each other well before the course starts, as they may have too strong hidden agendas about who they want to work with and who they do not want to work with that this will over-power the idea/opportunity/subject-matter driven approach (Aldrich and Kim, 2007). Educators should consider if they may be subject to these limitations as this may have an effect on the use of active, opportunity-driven team formation in practise. To counter the second limitation, educators may want to consider how far into a course they want to facilitate the team formation; especially for courses running over significantly longer periods than two weeks. Future research may be able to assess the significance of these limitations. Practical implications: This paper explores how students experience and handle a shift from an individual to a collaborative understanding of entrepreneurship imposed on them by the novel and unique design of a course that explicitly incorporates the team formation process into the curriculum. This is undertaken to gauge the extent to which students experience this shift as fitting the actual and perceived need for shared practices in developing enterprising behaviour, and to shed light on what action/process-based EEd courses may benefit from actively including a team formation process in the course design. Social implications: EEd may be offered for a number of reasons. New enterprises are seen as a potential source of economic wealth and for the student, this type of education offers the possibility of using their knowledge in new ways, becoming entrepreneurs or intrapreneurs. Also, from the perspective of both the higher education institution and the student, in the fast changing world in which we live, the digital mobility and multiplicity of work environments requires a workforce that possesses a range of individual competences. Such as being persistent, engaged and having good ideas, competences that are difficult to teach and hard to learn. Adding to our knowledge of how to handle these concerns, the paper points at a number of social implications of EEd. Originality/value: The research conducted in this research paper contributes to the field of EEd by exemplifying how conceptual understandings of entrepreneurship as a collective enterprise, rather than an individual one, impact students' understanding and experience of entrepreneurship. Furthermore, it provides a foundation for expanding research aimed at providing students with a learning experience more in line with the everyday life of an entrepreneur.

Based on two empirical studies on education in health and elderly care, this paper reflects on the possible role of "old ideas" involved in creative innovation. Most researchers agree that creativity and innovation are the results of a combination of what is new and valuable. What tends to be paid less attention, however, is the fact that many creative activities and everyday innovations in modern-day organisations actually build upon what is already there. Creative products and processes are often the result of some kind of learning from or even re-creation of existing processes and materials. The paper argues that there is excessive enthusiasm towards the novelty aspects of creativity and innovation, which overshadow the potential of old ideas and past experience as drivers of change.

Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to contribute to the discussion about the complexity and heterogeneity of entrepreneurship education. In order to achieve this objective, this paper combines educational psychology with perspectives from entrepreneurship education research to make explicit educators tacit assumptions in order to understand how these assumptions guide teaching. Design/methodology/approach: Using ethnographic analysis, the paper reports data from the continuous development and implementation of a single course over a period of ten years bringing in the educator's and the students perspectives on their achievements and course content. Findings: The authors find that it is sometimes advantageous to invoke and combine different learning theories and approaches in order to promote entrepreneurial awareness and mindset. It is also necessary to move away from entrepreneurship education as being teacher led to being more student-centred and focused on experiential and existential lifelong learning practices. Practical implications: Practically, the authors make suggestions for the design and delivery of a course that demonstrates how four diverse learning theories can be combined to consolidate entrepreneurial learning in students invoking experiential and curiosity-based learning strategies. Originality/value: There are very few examples of concrete course designs that have been researched longitudinally in-depth using ethnographic methods. Moreover, most courses focus on the post-foundation period, whereas this paper presents a course that is a primer to the entrepreneurial process and exclusively centred on the pre-foundation phase. Rather than building on a single perspective, it combines a range of theories and approaches to create interplay and progression.

This paper presents two studies of how the conduct of life in itself can be a creative act. Very often, creativity research is concerned with the study of what enables people to express themselves creatively or aesthetically or to produce creative ideas and products. Creativity as it arises in the mundane processes of everyday life is, however, seldom highlighted by researchers working explicitly on creativity. The premise of the present paper is that a focus on everyday life can help us understand creative processes in broader terms. I "creative pathways" may serve as a useful term for researchers interested in the simultaneous development of persons and social practices. Pathways are created in ordinary life; their formation may involve creativity and the improvisational co-creation of opportunities for action. Studying pathways may therefore direct creativity researchers toward the potentials of creativity in daily life and shed light of the processes of creativity. Creative pathways are present in existing ways of moving and doing things; they are also created in the here-and-now by persons acting in correspondence with the affordances in social practices. A focus on creative pathways is consistent with recent research calling for more process orientation and an explicit focus on materiality and social practices.