The DOI matches its Crossref record.
What do we mean by “learning” in the context of higher education?
Abstract
Instead of the traditional view of learning as acquiring cognitive knowledge or data, the author argues for a broader notion of knowledge that includes emotions, values, intuition, and creativity.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Higher education campuses exhibit unique features such as loose coupling, being highly values-oriented rather than data-oriented in decision-making, and lacking robust data systems.
“While trends in studies of organizational learning in higher education tend to reflect the general trends across the multi-disciplinary research base, campuses exhibit some unique features such as loose coupling, which makes information flow and communication challenging (Kezar, 2005;Weick, 1976); being highly valuesoriented rather than data-oriented in terms of decision-making (Kezar, 2005); and”
From Moving Toward Institutional Culture Change in Higher Education: An Exploration into Cross-functional Professional Learning Communities (2025) · cites this paper as Kezar, 2005
Citations
Cites
No references could be resolved yet.
Research works printed but not linked: 31
- Barret L., 2002, The Wisdom in Feeling: Psychological Processes in Emotional Intelligence
- Belenky M., 1986, Women's Ways of Knowing
- Bensimon E., 1993, Redesigning Collegiate Leadership
- Claxton G., 1999, Wise Up
- 10.1177/105649269324010 · DOI
- Cox T., 1993, Cultural Diversity in Organizations
- Craft A., 2001, Creativity in Education
- Damaio A., 1994, Descartes' Error: Emotion, Reason, and Human Brain
- Davis‐Floyd R., 1997, Intuition: The Inside Story
- Dierkes M., 2001, Handbook of Organizational Learning and Knowledge, 10.1093/oso/9780198295839.001.0001 · DOI
- Gardner H., 1982, Art, Mind, and Brain: A Cognitive Approach to Creativity
- Gardner H., 1983, Frames of Mind
- Gardner H., 1993, Multiple Intelligences: The Theory in Practice
- Goleman D., 1995, Emotional Intelligence
- Goleman D., 1998, Working with Emotional Intelligence
- Hogarth R., 2001, Educating Intuition
- Kezar A., 2001, Reconceptualizing and Guiding Change in the Twenty‐First Century
- Klein G., 2002, Intuition at Work
- Laughlin C., 1997, Intuition: The Inside Story
- LeDoux J., 1996, The Emotional Brain
- Monsay E., 1997, Intuition: The Inside Story
- 10.1016/0160-2896(94)90056-6 · DOI
- Salovey P., 1997, Emotional Development and Emotional Intelligence: Educational Implications
- Senge P., 1990, The Fifth Discipline
- Shaw M., 1994, Creativity and Affect
- Stage F., 1998, Creating Learning Centered Classrooms: What Does Learning Theory Have to Say?
- Sternberg R., 1999, The Nature of Cognition, 10.7551/mitpress/4877.001.0001 · DOI
- Sternberg R., 1999, The Nature of Cognition, 10.7551/mitpress/4877.001.0001 · DOI
- 10.1017/CBO9780511807947 · DOI
- Sternberg R., 2001, Complex Cognition: The Psychology of Human Thought
- Varela F., 1991, The Embodied Mind: Cognitive and Human Experience, 10.7551/mitpress/6730.001.0001 · DOI · Paper page
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Reframing Professional Development Through Understanding Authentic Professional Learning
Webster-Wright, A. (2009) · Review of Educational Research · doi:10.3102/0034654308330970 · Cited by 1,174
Kezar, A., Hallett, R. E., Corwin, Z. B., & Hypolite, L. (2025) · Innovative Higher Education · doi:10.1007/s10755-024-09753-1 · Cited by 50
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Kezar, A.
- Venue
- New Directions for Higher Education
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2005-09
- Volume
- 2005
- Issue
- 131
- Pages
- 49-59
- ISSN
- 0271-0560
- 1536-0741
- Cited by
- 8
- References
- 0
- Language
- en
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
