Filtern
Dokumenttyp
- Dissertation (2)
- Bachelorarbeit (1)
Sprache
- Englisch (3) (entfernen)
Schlagworte
- Negotiation (1)
- Prestige (1)
- Verhandlung (1)
- Verhandlungsergebnis (1)
- Zugeständnis (1)
Institut
- Fakultät Bildung (3) (entfernen)
In contrast to the U.S., little research on the impact of structural racism in education in Germany has been conducted so far. Also, the Critical Race Theory (CRT) has little to no relevance in education. As school significantly influences the further life of children and young people, equal opportunities must be ensured to prevent the reinforcement of the social division in Germany. Therefore, this work will examine whether findings from studies in the U.S. can be transferred to the German educational system since both countries struggle with a substantial rise in racism, racially motivated violence, and hate.Hence this work aims to answer the following research question: How does the CRT influence the U.S. educational system and to what extent can these findings be transferred to the German context? First, key terms and the Critical Race Theory will be defined, which are at the core of education reforms and controversies in the US. Then, the history of the U.S. will be examined to contextualise the status quo of the educational system in the U.S. With this background knowledge and drawing from the theoretical framework of CRT, recent educational reforms and their impact will be analysed. Lastly, based on these findings, possible implications for Germany will be formulated.
This doctoral thesis contributes to the vibrant discourse on boundary-crossing collaboration in the German teacher education system. It offers theoretical advancements, programmatic guidelines, and empirical findings which advocate for a transdisciplinary perspective. In order to do so, the framing paper critically links persistent challenges and current reform processes in the teacher education system with theoretical foundations and conceptual positions of transdisciplinarity. Against this backdrop, four articles provide further insights on: a) how to expand the prevalent systematic of innovation and transfer approaches (top-down, bottom-up, cooperative) by a transdisciplinary perspective, b) outlining guiding principles for the realization of transdisciplinary collaboration in the context of a boundary-crossing research and development project, c) providing empirical findings on effect relationships between transdisciplinary dimensions of integration characteristics, and d) identifying empirical types of actors based on specific assessment patterns towards these characteristics.
Various researchers have been hypothesizing on and agreeing that, in negotiations, resources play a fundamental role in parties' behaviors and outcomes. Paradoxically, empirical findings that provide insights into the effects of resources are scarce. The current research seeks to shed light on the overwhelming consensus that resources may shape negotiations. Specifically, in a series of four original research articles, we systematically examine the overarching question of how tangible and even intangible resources affect parties' attitudes, behaviors, and outcomes. Resources in negotiations can be characterized as all the tangible and intangible aspects of the negotiation that are related to the negotiators' interests. Thus, the central activity of the bargaining relationship is the allocation of tangible resources, while intangibles are simultaneously involved. Consistent with this basic idea, we assume that whether parties focus on catching hold of obtaining their adversaries' tangible resources or on losing grip of their own tangibles impacts their concession behavior and outcomes. Parties with a focus on losing their own tangible resources should experience more loss aversion, concede less, and should achieve better outcomes than parties who focus on catching hold of obtaining their counterpart's tangibles. It follows that what should be essential in the ongoing negotiation process should apply to the first move at the bargaining table as well. When first-movers lead responders to focus on catching hold of tangible resources, the well-documented anchoring effect should occur, benefitting the first-mover. Contrarily, when the first-mover induces a focus on the resource the responder is about to lose, responders should be motivated to adjust their counterproposal far away from the opening anchor. Responders' motivation to adjust should leverage the anchoring effect in negotiations. Further, we outline the very special role of money in negotiations, that is perceived as likely the most important tangible resource. Ultimately, we address the important role of intangible resources, in addition to that of tangible resources, and suggest that the intangible resource of professional experience is related to the negotiator´s attitudes towards unethical bargaining tactics. Overall, the findings of these research projects suggest that not only tangible but also intangible resources do in fact have the fundamental impact on negotiators' behavior and outcomes that has been hypothesized for a long time. Parties who focus on losing grip of their own tangible resources concede less and are better off at the end of the negotiations than parties who focus on catching hold of their counterparts' resources. The researchers report evidence for this basic finding, from the first move at the bargaining table to the final agreement. Their findings help to better understand the key role of money in negotiations and to highlight the "mythical" components of this legendary resource. In addition to the findings on tangible resources, the study reveals a strong negative relationship between negotiators' intangible resource of professional experience and their tendency to endorse unethical bargaining tactics. The research work concludes that losing tangible resources and keeping sight of intangible resources may have profound effects on parties' negotiation attitudes, behaviors, and outcomes.