Análisis de una iniciativa estudiantil de investigación surgida en Criptogamia, una asignatura optativa de segundo ciclo de Biología = Analysis of a students’ research initiative originating in Cryptogamy, an elective course in the last two years of the Biology degree

Presentamos una experiencia exitosa de aprendizaje que partió de Criptogamia (asignatura optativa de segundo ciclo de Biología), que dio lugar a un proyecto de investigación gestionado por los propios alumnos. La iniciativa se consolidó estableciendo una Asociación de Estudiantes centrada en investigación y divulgación. En poco tiempo, los participantes han presentado comunicaciones científicas, y organizado actividades dirigidas a diversos públicos, dentro y fuera de la comunidad universitaria. Actualmente se plantea una colaboración multidisciplinar con otros organismos de investigación y la extensión de su ámbito de estudio. Abordamos su incidencia en el aprendizaje en varios aspectos: científico (técnicas específicas, rigor, búsqueda de información e interpretación de resultados), comunicativo (estructuración y presentación de la información obtenida, para diversos públicos), y organizativo, incluyendo el trabajo en equipo. Aunque de carácter espontáneo, esta experiencia muestra rasgos evaluables en cuanto a sus posibilidades para otras asignaturas. Analizamos las características y planteamiento de esta optativa, el perfil de sus alumnos, y el contexto universitario que la acoge. Detectamos como factores principales los aspectos participativos de la asignatura, la cohesión del grupo, el carácter voluntario de la implicación, los beneficios percibidos por los estudiantes, y la disponibilidad de recursos humanos (supervisión) y materiales (equipamiento y subvenciones)

Innovation, entrepreneurship and outsourcing: essays on the use of knowledge in business environments

Innovació, emprenedoria i subcontractació són els pilars temàtics de la present tesi doctoral. L'ús del coneixement per part de les empreses representa l'element comú d'aquestes temàtiques. Les evidències empíriques provenen principalment del món empresarial, però es complementen amb les del món acadèmic com a principal proveïdor de coneixement a la societat actual, la finalitat de la qual és crear riquesa i benestar socioeconòmic. L'objectiu principal d'aquesta tesi doctoral és contribuir a les diferents àrees de recerca. La primera, gestió de la innovació, més concretament innovació organitzativa, reflexionant sobre la seva importància i monitorització a través d'enquestes. Tot seguit, un exemple d'innovació organitzativa -treball en equip- s'analitza en profunditat, així com també els seus determinants. La segona, analitza el procés de transició d'una universitat tradicional cap a una universitat emprenedora, començant per la fase de disseny fins a l'actualitat contemplant la seva funcionalitat i eficiència en el marc de les institucions públiques de recerca d'Europa. I la tercera, descriu les barreres que les empreses han de fer front a l'hora de cooperar, en general, i amb universitats, en particular. La mateixa mostra d'empreses gasela també serveix per analitzar la decisió de fer-o-comprar. El resum d'aquests resultats, les conclusions, així com les futures línies de recerca finalitzen el treball.

Research and teaching: a holy or an unholy alliance?

Much of the self-image of the Western university hangs on the idea that research and teaching are intimately connected. The central axiom here is that research and teaching are mutually supportive of each other. An institution lacking such a set of relationships between research and teaching falls short of what it means to be a university. This set of beliefs raises certain questions: Is it the case that the presence of such a mutually supportive set of relationships between research and teaching is a necessary condition of the fulfilment of the idea of the university? (A conceptual question). And is it true that, in practice today, such a mutually supportive set of relationships between research and teaching characterises universities? (An empirical question). In my talk, I want to explore these matters in a critical vein. I shall suggest that: a) In practice today, such a mutually supportive set of relationships between research and teaching is in jeopardy. Far from supporting each other, very often research and teaching contend against each other. Research and teaching are becoming two separate ideologies, with their own interest structures. b) Historically, the supposed tight link between research and teaching is both of recent origin and far from universally achieved in universities. Institutional separateness between research and teaching is and has been evident, both across institutions and even across departments in the same institution. c) Conceptually, research and teaching are different activities: each is complex and neither is reducible to the other. In theory, therefore, research and teaching may be said to constitute a holy alliance but in practice, we see more of an unholy alliance. If, then, in an ideal world, a positive relationship between research and teaching is still a worthwhile goal, how might it be construed and worked for? Seeing research and teaching as two discrete and unified sets of activity is now inadequate. Much better is a construal of research and teaching as themselves complexes, as intermingling pools of activity helping to form the liquid university that is emerging today. On this view, research and teaching are fluid spaces, ever on the move, taking up new shapes, and themselves dividing and reforming, as the university reworks its own destiny in modern society. On such a perspective, working out a productive relationship between research and teaching is a complex project. This is an alliance that is neither holy nor unholy. It is an uneasy alliance, with temporary accommodations and continuous new possibilities

PhD Students’ Research Group Social Capital in Two Countries: A Clustering Approach with Duocentred Network Measures

The article examines the structure of the collaboration networks of research groups where Slovenian and Spanish PhD students are pursuing their doctorate. The units of analysis are student-supervisor dyads. We use duocentred networks, a novel network structure appropriate for networks which are centred around a dyad. A cluster analysis reveals three typical clusters of research groups. Those which are large and belong to several institutions are labelled under a bridging social capital label. Those which are small, centred in a single institution but have high cohesion are labelled as bonding social capital. Those which are small and with low cohesion are called weak social capital groups. Academic performance of both PhD students and supervisors are highest in bridging groups and lowest in weak groups. Other variables are also found to differ according to the type of research group. At the end, some recommendations regarding academic and research policy are drawn