The Philosophy and Practice of Interpretivist Research in Entrepreneurship Quality, Validation, and Trust

Knowledge production in entrepreneurship requires inclusivity as well as diversity and pluralism in research perspectives and approaches. In this article, the authors address concerns about interpretivist research regarding validity, reliability, objectivity, generalizability, and communicability of results that militate against its more widespread acceptance. Following the nonfoundationalist argument that all observation is theory-laden, context specific, and that there are no external criteria against which to assess research design and execution and the data produced, the authors propose that quality must be internalized within the underlying research philosophy rather than something to be tested upon completion. This requires a shift from the notion of validity as an outcome to validation as a process. To elucidate this, they provide a guiding framework and present a case illustration that will assist an interpretivist entrepreneurship researcher to establish and demonstrate the quality of their work.

The practice of book illustration: Three examples by Norah Borges

This article focuses on three different examples of book illustration carried out by Norah Borges in the 1930s and 1940s (Canciones de mar y tierra by Concha Méndez, Platero y yo by Juan Ramón Jiménez, and Paul et Virginie by Bernardin de Saint-Pierre). Its purpose is twofold: to show how illustrations can shape our reading of texts and to examine how the artist's work can be assimilated to a current of neorromanticismo in Spanish letters dating back to the pre-Civil War period. Her work might serve as an illustration of what Ramón Gómez de la Serna termed the cursi bueno, a marginalized reaction to the dehumanization of art that speaks of sentiment, domesticity and, in women's case, of repressed longing.

The Creative Life of Law: Improvisation, Between Tradition and Suspicion

Originally applying solely to chefs, waiters, dishwashers and the like, New York City (NYC) regulations governing cabaret employees were altered in 1943 to include musicians and entertainers, who until the late 1960’s would be required to hold a NYC Cabaret Employee’s Identification Card. The introduction of these notorious “police cards” occurred roughly contemporaneously to the emergence in after-hours night clubs in Harlem of a new and supposedly “wild”, improvisatory brand of jazz: bebop. This article adds to the many rather practical theories on why these cards were introduced a more abstract discussion coined in terms of the relationship between suspicion and tradition and focusing on differing essences of law and improvisatory jazz. While law breathes tradition and is suspicious of improvisation and unpredictability, the converse is true of jazz. Allusion to tradition in jazz improvisation is often viewed as a betrayal of its creative and spontaneous nature. And yet it is only through its departure from the stable transmission of past meaning that improvisation gains meaning. Law, in contrast, while appearing to be entirely composed of tradition, to transmit some sort of determinate and fixed meaning, is constantly betraying itself. As no two legal actions can be exactly the same, judges must improvise on tradition and past precedent every time they are asked to decide a case. Law can thus neither dispense with nor be completely determined by tradition. The legal decision instead lies on the border between what it “is” and what it otherwise could be and every judicial act is, in some sense, a species of improvisation. This article uses the cabaret cards to explore this uncertain terrain between law and improvisation, between tradition and suspicion.

Situating relational ontology and transformative activist stance within the ‘everyday’ practice of coteaching and cogenerative dialogue.

This paper attempts to advance the thinking in Stetsenko’s paper by situating the concepts of relational ontology and transformative activist stance in the context of coteaching and cogenerative dialogue. In so doing, we hope to make Stetsenko’s ideas more operational in terms of access and application by researchers, teachers, policy makers and other stakeholders in education. Stetsenko argues that moving from relational ontology to a transformative activist stance can be considered as moving from participation to contribution. When this model was applied to coteaching and cogenerative dialogue, it was apparent that the coteaching and cogenerative dialogue moved further, from contribution to shared contribution, adding even greater potential for transformation. The paper also discusses the use of cultural historical activity theory in articulating the relationships, dynamics and interpretations of coteaching and cogenerative dialogue in relation to the wider context of their application.