AUTUMN SEMINAR
Wednesday October 19th
Irene Malcolm, University of Dundee
Time: 4.00pm - 5.30pm
Location: Behrens 2.1, Didsbury Campus
Professional learning in the software localisation industry: privileging knowledge and the problem of gender in digital working
Abstract:
This paper takes the software localisation industry as a case to examine knowledge practices among a group of “new” professionals in the digital economy. The international study on which the paper is based examined the practices of 10 workers from continental Europe, Ireland, the UK and South America. Localisers’ work entails the linguistic, cultural and software adaptation of digital products to support global communication. Given its significance, the lack of attention to this industry is surprising, with work in the social sciences limited to previous studies by the present author (Malcolm et al, 2003; Malcolm, 2009; Malcolm, 2011). Individual localisers are usually freelance, many are (women) home-workers who have no continuity of employment, and whose co-workers are geographically dispersed.
The problem that the paper addresses is how knowledge is developed and sustained among professionals whose activity is distributed. Much discussion of professional knowledge and work assumes some co-location of workers, shared work goals and a defined knowledge base (Eraut, 2007). Established theories of professional learning require further development to account for the different circumstances of those working in new contexts where sustaining shared professional practices and building shared knowledge are challenged. To explore this problem, the paper draws on a theorisation of professional knowledge in a tradition of continental European thought. It summarises some key ideas in the theories of Karin Knorr Cetina (1999, 2001, 2007, 2010), drawing on two central concepts: macro epistemics and information knowledge. It uses these to explore the social practices of warranting knowledge in the research data, illustrating the knowledge cultures involved. The paper discusses paradoxes that emerged from the data, highlighting gendered and exclusionary practices in the ways some knowledges were privileged.