Validation of a Learning Trajectory-Based Diagnostic Mathematics Assessment System as a Trading Zone

This study reports how a validation argument for a learning trajectory (LT) is constituted from test design, empirical recovery, and data use through a collaborative process, described as a “trading zone” among learning scientists, psychometricians, and practitioners. The validation argument is tied to a learning theory about learning trajectories and a framework (LT-based data-driven decision-making, or LT-DDDM) to guide instructional modifications. A validation study was conducted on a middle school LT on “Relations and Functions” using a Rasch model and stepwise regression. Of five potentially non-conforming items, three were adjusted, one retained to collect more data, and one was flagged as a discussion item. One LT level description was revised. A linear logistic test model (LLTM) revealed that LT level and item type explained substantial variance in item difficulty. Using the LT-DDDM framework, a hypothesized teacher analysis of a class report led to three conjectures for interventions, demonstrating the LT assessment’s potential to inform instructional decision-making.

Negotiating change for gender equality: identifying leverages, overcoming barriers

Introduction. Institutional change through gender equality plans is today the dominant approach to promoting gender equality in higher education and research. Building on our experiences as “technical support partners” in several EU-funded projects, we reflect on how change is negotiated in a variety of contexts. Objectives. Theoretically, using Feminist Institutionalism and the Science and Technology Studies concept of the trading zone, our objective is to analyse institutional negotiations among various, differently positioned actors with diverse backgrounds, value systems and negotiating power. From a practice-oriented perspective, our aim is to demonstrate typical challenges, suggest pathways towards solutions, and identify specific negotiation skills which underscore the capacity-building needs of change agents. Methodology. For our analysis, we have selected eight information-rich case studies through purposive theory-based sampling, illustrating the different transactions in the trading zones, based on our prior knowledge of the circumstances. The methods we draw on are primarily participant observation and textual analysis of project documents. Results. The selected theoretical combination allows us to identify leverages, ways to overcome barriers and the required skills and competences. Specifically, we underscore the use of participatory and co-creation techniques, strategic framing, spotting and using windows of opportunity, and wide mobilisation of stakeholders. We highlight key features of the change process, including its processual and incremental nature, the need for constant negotiation and the capacity-building needs of change agents. Contribution. With this analysis, we contribute, firstly, to the understanding of organisational change by identifying concrete barriers and opportunities as well as considering the ways in which a shared representation of gender equality is developed. The second, theoretical contribution lies in combining Feminist Institutionalism and the concept of the trading zone, which allows us to bring to productive dialogue issues of power, processuality and the need to address both material and discursive enactments of change processes.

Towards a cultural political economy of the illicit

This article intervenes in debates on the illicit in economic geography, notably in the tensions between cultural and political economic approaches. First, it assesses critiques of political economic evaluations of the illicit. It then offers a ‘trading zone’, drawing upon both cultural and political economy, and argues that the two economic epistemologies are complementary, not mutually exclusive. The article instates political and ecological missing links in cultural political economy to foster multidimensional analyses of illicit practices in discursive, material and ecological registers. It concludes by discussing the broader implications of a cultural political economy of the illicit for economic geography.

Foundations of Responsive Crisis Management: Institutional Design and Information

The requirements for effective and responsive crisis management have developed significantly in the face of proliferating transboundary crises and rising societal demands during the information revolution. As crises disturb more and more societal strata and rapidly span across different types of networks, traditional crisis structures need to become more open and responsive. To deal with these contemporary requirements of crisis management, renewed institutional designs are needed. Institutional designs reflect the shared rules, norms, and belief systems that are established as guidelines for social behavior, which shape the nature of decision making, coordination, and information-sharing processes. In practical terms, the call for more engaged crisis management cumulates in the process of developing situational awareness (SA) through the common operational picture (COP) in traditional institutional designs like the Incident Command System (ICS). Two opposing crisis information management doctrines can be defined in this process: the information warehouse and the trading zone. The dominant warehouse doctrine presupposes that all crisis information can be gathered, synthesized, and disseminated in a uniform and unambiguous way. The trading zone doctrine contrasts this assumption by stressing the importance of negotiation through which the meaning, value, and consequences of crisis information is debated and assessed. Institutional designs based on the trading zone doctrine offer a foundation for a more responsive and societally engaged form of crisis management, as they are more sensitive to the (social) stratification and competing demands that are often found in contemporary transboundary crises.

Redesigning the Trading Zone between Systematics and Conservation: Insights from Malagasy mouse lemur classifications, 1982 to present

Translating information between the domains of systematics and conservation requires novel information management designs. Such designs should improve interactions across the trading zone between the domains, herein understood as the model according to which knowledge and uncertainty are productively translated in both directions (cf. Collins et al. 2019). Two commonly held attitudes stand in the way of designing a well-functioning systematics-to-conservation trading zone. On one side, there are calls to unify the knowledge signal produced by systematics, underpinned by the argument that such unification is a necessary precondition for conservation policy to be reliably expressed and enacted (e.g., Garnett et al. 2020). As a matter of legal scholarship, the argument for systematic unity by legislative necessity is principally false (Weiss 2003, MacNeil 2009, Chromá 2011), but perhaps effective enough as a strategy to win over audiences unsure about robust law-making practices in light of variable and uncertain knowledge. On the other side, there is an attitude that conservation cannot ever restrict the academic freedom of systematics as a scientific discipline (e.g., Raposo et al. 2017). This otherwise sound argument misses the mark in the context of designing a productive trading zone with conservation. The central interactional challenge is not whether the systematic knowledge can vary at a given time and/or evolve over time, but whether these signal dynamics are tractable in ways that actors can translate into robust maxims for conservation. Redesigning the trading zone should rest on the (historically validated) projection that systematics will continue to attract generations of inspired, productive researchers and broad-based societal support, frequently leading to protracted conflicts and dramatic shifts in how practioners in the field organize and identify organismal lineages subject to conservation. This confident outlook for systematics' future, in turn, should refocus the challenge of designing the trading zone as one of building better information services to model the concurrent conflicts and longer-term evolution of systematic knowledge. It would seem unreasonable to expect the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Red List Index to develop better data science models for the dynamics of systematic knowledge (cf. Hoffmann et al. 2011) than are operational in the most reputable information systems designed and used by domain experts (Burgin et al. 2018). The reasonable challenge from conservation to systematics is not to stop being a science but to be a better data science. In this paper, we will review advances in biodiversity data science in relation to representing and reasoning over changes in systematic knowledge with computational logic, i.e., modeling systematic intelligence (Franz et al. 2016). We stress-test this approach with a use case where rapid systematic signal change and high stakes for conservation action intersect, i.e., the Malagasy mouse lemurs (Microcebus É. Geoffroy, 1834 sec. Schüßler et al. 2020), where the number of recognized species-level concepts has risen from 2 to 25 in the span of 38 years (1982–2020). As much as scientifically defensible, we extend our modeling approach to the level of individual published occurrence records, where the inability to do so sometimes reflects substandard practice but more importantly reveals systemic inadequacies in biodiversity data science or informational modeling. In the absence of shared, sound theoretical foundations to assess taxonomic congruence or incongruence across treatments, and in the absence of biodiversity data platforms capable of propagating logic-enabled, scalable occurrence-to-concept identification events to produce alternative and succeeding distribution maps, there is no robust way to provide a knowledge signal from systematics to conservation that is both consistent in its syntax and acccurate in its semantics, in the sense of accurately reflecting the variation and uncertainty that exists across multiple systematic perspectives. Translating this diagnosis into new designs for the trading zone is only one "half" of the solution, i.e., a technical advancement that then would need to be socially endorsed and incentivized by systematic and conservation communities motivated to elevate their collaborative interactions and trade robustly in inherently variable and uncertain information.

The Declining Significance of Disciplinary Memory: The Case of Communication Research

The chapter argues that disciplinary memory claims in US American communication research have become smaller, more parochial, and less potent, as their underlying referent—the discipline—has splintered in the wake of the digital in the mid-1990s. For decades after its institutionalization in the 1950s, US communication research had relied on grand narratives, like Wilbur Schramm’s “four founders” myth, to bind together a heterogeneous field. But the would-be discipline’s already porous borders have, since the mid-1990s arrival of the World Wide Web, given way to an onrush of interest from scholars housed in neighboring disciplines. The upshot of this new, cross-disciplinary trading zone of digital scholarship, which has only swelled in the twenty-first century, is that very little shared knowledge could be assumed. A half-legitimate postwar newcomer in need of mnemonic glue had, by the turn of the millennium, given way to a poly-disciplinary free-for-all. Memory claims have narrowed as a result, localized to multi-disciplinary subfields in shifting configurations. The old shorthands and storylines—the discipline-spanning type—are no longer legible. An analysis of memory claims in two special issues of the flagship Journal of Communication, in 1983 and 2018, supports the chapter’s conclusion that disciplinary history has a waning hold on US American communication research.