Mimetic desire and intersubjectivity in disciplinary cultures: constraints or enablers to learning in higher education?

References

• Bakhtin, M. 1986. Speech Genres and Other Late Essays. Translated by V. McGee. Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.
   Google Scholar
• Benjamin, J. 2004. “Beyond the Doer and Done To: An Intersubjective View of Thirdness.” The Psychoanalytic Quarterly LXXIII (1): 5–46.
   Google Scholar
• Benjamin, J. 2006. “Two-Way Streets: Recognition of Difference and the Intersubjective Third.” Differences: A Journal of Feminist Cultural Studies 17 (1): 116–146.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berkenkotter C., and T. Huckin. 1995. Genre Knowledge in Disciplinary Communication: Cognition, Culture and Power. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
   Google Scholar
• Billett, S. 2010. “Lifelong Learning and Self: Work, Subjectivity and Learning.” Studies in Continuing Education 32 (1): 1–16.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Blackmann D., and E. Sadler-Smith. 2009. “The Silent and the Silenced in Organizational Knowing and Learning.” Management Learning 40 (5): 569–585. http://mlq.sagepub.com/content/40/5/569.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Breen R., and R. Lindsay. 1999. “Academic Research and Student Motivation.” Studies in Higher Education 24 (1): 75–93.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bullen, E., S. Robb, and J. Kenway. 2004. “‘Creative Destruction’: Knowledge Economic Policy and the Future of the Arts and Humanities in the Academy.” Journal of Education Policy 19 (1): 3–22.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Collini, S. 2012. What are Universities For?. London: Penguin.
   Google Scholar
• Davis, J. 2007. “Dialogue, Monologue and Soliloquy in the Large Lecture Class.” International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education 19 (2): 178–182. http://www.isetl.org/ijtlhe/pdf/IJTLHE195.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Decety J., and T. Chaminade. 2005. “The Neurophysiology of Imitation and Intersubjectivity.” In Perspectives on Imitation: From Neuroscience to Social Science, vol. 1, edited by S. Hurley and N. Chater, 119–140. Cambridge: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Duff, P. A. 2010. “Language Socialisation into Academic Discourse Communities.” Annual Review of Applied Linguistics 30: 169–192.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Duranti, A. 2010. “Husserl, intersubjectivity and anthropology.” Anthropological Theory 10 (12): 16–35.
   Google Scholar
• Gallese, V. 2005. “‘Being Like Me’: Self-Other Identity, Mirror Neurons, and Empathy.” In Perspectives on Imitation: From Neuroscience to Social Science, Vol. 1, edited by S. Hurley and N. Chater, 101–118. Cambridge: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Gallese, V. 2009. “The Two Sides of Mimesis: Girard's Mimetic Theory, Embodied Simulation and Social Identification.” Journal of Consciousness Studies 16 (4): 21–44.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Garrels, S. 2006. “Imitation, Mirror Neurons, and Mimetic Desire: Convergence between the Mimetic Theory of René Girard and Empirical Research on Imitation.” Contagion: Journal of Violence, Mimesis, & Culture 12–13: 47–86. http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/ctn/summary/v012/12.garrels.html.
   Google Scholar
• Girard, R. 1961. Deceit, Desire & the Novel: Self and Other in Literary Structure. Translated by Y. Freccero. Baltimore: John Hopkins Press.
   Google Scholar
• Girard, R. 2005.Violence and the Sacred. Translated by P. Gregory. London: Continuum.
   Google Scholar
• Guetzkow, J., M. Lamont, and G. Mallard. 2004. “What is Originality in the Humanities and Social Sciences?” American Sociological Review 69 (2): 190–212.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gunn, V. 2003. “Transforming Subject Boundaries: The Interface between Higher Education Teaching and Learning Theories and Subject-Specific Knowledge.” Arts and Humanities in Higher Education 2 (3): 265–280.
   Google Scholar
• Häiviö, H. 2010. “The Moral Order of Business Studying.” In Cultural Perspectives on Higher Education, edited by J. Välimaa and O.-H. Ylijoki 59–74. Dordrecht: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Halperin, D. 2007. What Do Gay Men Want? An Essay on Sex, Risk, and Subjectivity. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hengst J. A., and P. J. Miller. 1999. “The Heterogeneity of Discourse Genres: Implications for Development.” World Englishes 18 (3): 325–342.
   Google Scholar
• Henkel, M. 2004. “Teaching and Research: The Idea of a Nexus.” Higher Education Management and Policy 16 (2): 19–31.
   Google Scholar
• Hyland, K. 2009. Academic Discourse. London: Continuum.
   Google Scholar
• Kreber, C. 2009. The University and its Disciplines: Teaching and Learning within and Beyond Disciplinary Boundaries. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Laurillard, D. 2002. Rethinking University Teaching: A Framework for the Effective Use of Learning Technologies. 2nd ed. Abingdon: RoutledgeFarmer.
   Google Scholar
• Lervik, J., K. Fahy, and M. Easterby-Smith. 2010. “Temporal Dynamics of Situated Learning in Organizations.” Management Learning 41 (3): 285–301. http://mlq.sagepub.com/content/41/3/285.refs.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lewis, M. 2000. “Exploring Paradox: Toward a More Comprehensive Guide.” Academy of Management Review 25 (4): 760–776. http://www.mendeley.com/catalog/exploring-paradox-toward-more-comprehensive-guide/.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Livingston, P. 1992. Models of Desire: René Girard and the Psychology of Mimesis. Baltimore: John Hopkins Press.
   Google Scholar
• Livingston, P. 1994. “What is Mimetic Desire?.” Philosophical Psychology 7 (3): 291–305.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lucas, L. 2007. The Research Game in Academic Life. Maidenhead: SRHE/Open University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Maingueneau, D. 2002. “Analysis of an Academic Genre.” Discourse Studies 4 (3): 319–342. http://dis.sagepub.com/content/4/3/319.full.pdf?patientinform-links=yes&legid=spdis;4/3/319.
   Google Scholar
• Maingueneau, D. 2010. “Literature and Discourse Analysis.” ActaLinguisticaHafniensia 42 (suppl. 1): 147–158.
   Google Scholar
• Martin, J. 1992. Cultures in Organisations: Three Perspectives. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Martin, A. J., and M. Dowson. 2009. “Interpersonal Relationships, Motivation, Engagement, and Achievement: Yields for Theory, Current Issues, and Educational Practice.” Review of Educational Research 79 (1): 327–365.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Meyer J. H. F., and R. Land. 2005. “Threshold Concepts and Troublesome Knowledge (2): Epistemological Considerations and a Conceptual Framework for Teaching and Learning.” Higher Education 49 (3): 373–388.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Midgley, D. 2006. “Intersubjectivity and Collective Consciousness.” Journal of Consciousness Studies 13 (5): 99–109. http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/imp/jcs/2006/00000013/00000005/art00009.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nelson Laird, T. F., R. Shoup, G. D. Kuh, and M. J. Schwarz. 2008. “The Effects of Discipline on Deep Approaches to Student Learning and College Outcomes.” Research in Higher Education 49 (6): 469–494.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Norton, L., T. Dickins, and N. Cook. 1996. “‘Rules of the Game’ in essay writing.” Psychology Teaching Review 5 (1): 1–13.
   Google Scholar
• Norton, L. S., A. J. Tilley, S. E. Newstead, and A. Franklyn-Stokes. 2001. “The Pressure of Assessment in Undergraduate Courses and their Effect on Student Behaviours.” Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education 26 (3): 269–284.
   Google Scholar
• Nussbaum, M. 2010. Not for Profit: Why Democracy Needs the Humanities. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• O'Shea, A. 2010. René Girard and Charles Taylor on the Crisis of Modernity. London: Continuum.
   Google Scholar
• Parker, J. 2001. “Humanities Higher Education: New Models, New Challenges.” In Contemporary Themes in Humanities in Higher Education, edited by E. A. Chambers, 21–43. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
   Google Scholar
• Potolsky, M. 2006. Mimesis. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Roxä T., and K. Martensson. 2009. “Significant Conversations and Significant Networks – Exploring the Backstage Teaching Arena.” Studies in Higher Education 34 (5): 547–559.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sadler, D. R. 1989. “Formative Assessment & the Design of Instructional Systems.” Instructional Science 18 (2): 119–144.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schapiro, B. 2009. “Negotiating a Third Space in the Classroom.” Pedagogy: Critical Approches to Teaching Literature, Language, Composition, and Culture 9 (3): 423–439.
   Google Scholar
• Smart, J., K. Feldman, and C. Etherington. 2000. Academic Disciplines: Holland's Theory and the Study of College Students and Faculty. Nashville: Vanderbilt University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Smith C., and D. Bath. 2006. “The Role of the Learning Community in the Development of Discipline Knowledge and Generic Graduate Outcomes.” Higher Education 51 (2): 259–286.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Trowler, P. 2008. Cultures and Change in Higher Education: Theories and Practice. Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan.
   Google Scholar
• Ylijoki, O.-H. 2000. “Disciplinary Cultures and the Moral Order of Studying: A Case-Study of Four Finnish University Departments.” Higher Education 39 (3): 339–362.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zahavi, D. 2005. Subjectivity and Selfhood: Investigating the First-Person Perspective. Cambridge: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar