تمایز و بازتولید اجتماعی در میدان آموزشی: پدیدارشناسی درک تمایز اجتماعی در بین دانشجویان دانشگاه کردستان

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسنده

استادیار گروه مدیریت آموزشی، دانشگاه فرهنگیان، تهران، ایران.

چکیده

پژوهش حاضر درپی پدیدارشناسی درک تمایز اجتماعی در بین دانشجویان دانشگاه کردستان از بازتولید اجتماعی در میدان آموزش است. با درنظر داشتن نظریات مربوط به بازتولید اجتماعی نظریه‌پردازانی هم‌چون: «بوردیو»، «اپل»، «باولز» و «جینتیس» به تفسیر وضعیت تمایز اجتماعی و چگونگی بازتولید آن در میدان آموزش پرداخته شده است. آنان بر آن‌‌ هستند که آموزش رسمی وسیله‌‌ای است در دست اقشار و طبقات خاص جامعه برای تحکیم ارزش‌‌ها و هنجارهای موردنظرشان، دوام و قوام قدرت خود در درون جامعه، که میدان آموزش آن را بازتولید می‌‌کند. برای دستیابی به این هدف، درک دانشجویان را مورد تفسیر قرار داده و از روش پدیدارشناسی که در آن درپی کشف تجربۀ مشترک تغییرناپذیر همۀ مشارکت‌کنندگان از این امر می‌‌باشد، استفاده شده است. در این‌راستا با ٣٠نفر از دانشجویان دانشکده‌‌های دانشگاه کردستان در رشته‌‌های مختلف مصاحبه عمیق به‌عمل آمد و داده‌‌ها از طریق مراحل چهارگانه خواندن و درک کلیت متن داده‌‌ها، افق‌سازی و تلخیص داده‌‌ها، تشکیل واحدهای معنایی و توصیف مضامین گردآوری، تجزیه‌وتحلیل گردید. نتایج نشان‌داد که تمایز در انتخاب رشته، اولین نمود تمایزی است که دانشجویان طبقات بالا برای دستیابی و تسلط برای میدان آموزشی انجام می‌‌دهند. این امر گرچه در دوران دبیرستان با گرایش به آموزش خصوصی شروع شده است، اما به‌جهت دسترسی به منابع، امکانات و فرصت‌‌ها در دوران آموزش‌عالی تمایز پررنگ شده و در نهایت به تداوم جایگاه طبقاتی آن‌ها منجر می‌‌شود؛ هم‌چنین نتایج نشان می‌‌دهد که پیوند سرمایۀ اقتصادی و فرهنگی دانشجویان طبقات بالا در میدان آموزش دانشگاهی سبب حفظ تمایزات طبقاتی و خانوادگی و هم‌چنین هموار شدن ورود آن‌ها به بازار کار می‌‌شود. 

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات


عنوان مقاله [English]

Social Differentiation and Reproduction in the Field of Education (Phenomenology of Understanding the Social Differentiation of Kurdistan University Students)

نویسنده [English]

  • Nasim Abdolahzadeh
Assistant Professor, Department of Educational Administration, Farhangian University, Tehran, Iran.
چکیده [English]

Abstract
The present study seeks the phenomenology of understanding the social differentiation of Kurdistan University students from social reproduction in the field of education. Considering the theories of social reproduction of people such as Bourdieu, Apple, Bowles and Genies, the status of social differentiation has been interpreted and how it is reproduced in the field of education. These theorists believe that formal education is a tool in the hands of certain strata and classes of society to consolidate their desired values and norms and the permanence and consistency of their power within the society that reproduces the field of education. To achieve this goal, we interpret students’ perceptions of this and use the phenomenological method, which seeks to discover the unchanging common experience of all participants. Therefore, in-depth interviews were conducted with 30 students of Kurdistan University faculties in different fields, and the data were formed through four steps of reading and understanding the totality of the data, horizontalization and summarization of the data, and the formation of semantic units. Results: The topics were described and collected and analyzed. The results show that the distinction in choosing the field is the first manifestation of the distinction that upper class students make to achieve and master the educational field. Although this started in high school with a tendency towards private education, due to access to resources, facilities and opportunities in higher education, the distinction is also highlighted and ultimately leads to the continuation of their class position.
Keywords: Social Differentiation, Social Reproduction, Educational Field, Phenomenology, Kurdistan University.
 
1. Introduction
Education should be accepted as one of the main determinants of socio-economic status, and its access, acquisition and enjoyment should be considered dependent on the socio-economic base. This fundamental assumption links education to social space. Bourdieu believes that performing the specialized function of the field of education, like other social fields, requires the existence of (general and specific) characteristics of the field, although Bourdieu believes that the field of education has a social function in addition to specialized work, which he did. It is hidden in the shadow of its technical function. "Educational institution, which acts as the principle of pleasure and the principle of reality, is both the stimulus of the libido of knowledge and the stimulus of the libido of domination, which is hidden under the libido of knowledge and derives from competition. Assuming that the institution of education believed that "by preferring individual talents over hereditary privileges, it can establish a kind of meritocracy, in fact, it seeks to establish through hidden connections between academic talent and cultural heritage to provide a real state aristocracy whose authority and legitimacy is guaranteed by academic titles. Therefore, the field of education helps to reproduce these privileges and maintain the status quo, and in this way, it also reproduces power relations. Power relations also confirm the performance of the aforementioned educational action and will lead to social reproduction. The present research will examine students' understanding of differentiation and how it is reproduced among students of Kurdistan University as important actors in the educational field. The interpretation and explanation of the students' experiences and opinions show the basics of analyzing the differentiation of the university education field, within the framework of which it is possible to criticize this situation. It is very important to address that, as the statistical and theoretical data indicate a gap in the tendency of the upper social classes to higher education and far more distinction in entering important fields. On the other hand, studies show that the market has dominated higher education and has doubled this gap. Taking into account the theories of social reproduction, people such as Bourdieu, Apple, Bowles and Gentis interpret the state of social differentiation and how Its reproduction has been discussed in the field of education. The main question will be what students understand about differentiation and its reproduction in the field of university education and how do they interpret it?
 
2. Materials and Methods
The present research method is a qualitative method. Among the qualitative methods, the phenomenology method is more appropriate in terms of its nature and relationship with the subject and target. The current research has sought to provide a comprehensive understanding of students' experiences and perceptions of differentiation and its reproduction in the academic field. For this purpose, the incoming students from 1997 to 1400 from various fields and faculties of Kurdistan University were interviewed about this issue. An attempt has been made to interview a number of students from each faculty based on purposeful sampling (8 people) and based on students' willingness to participate, and data collection will continue until theoretical saturation. The main method of data collection in phenomenology is interview. Because it is the only way that the participant describes his experiences of the phenomenon with his own language and movements. The phenomenological interview is generally in-depth and semi-structured so that the participant can provide full and comprehensive explanations about the phenomenon without any restrictions. The participants who are interviewed are theoretically selected (theory sampling) so that the researcher can create his theory in the best way. According to the methods used in phenomenological research, four stages can be presented for data analysis. "The first stage includes reading and understanding the entire text of the data. At this stage, the researcher tries to read the data he has transcribed (from the interviews), understand the whole text and find out their inner connection.
 
3. Data
Data in 7 semantic units; Inclination to medical and engineering fields, encouragement to continue education, cost for choosing a field and entering university, orientation to non-profit institutions (campus, etc.), access to reverse education, creating educational motivation, educational opportunities, entering the market Work and maintaining class and family distinctions were categorized. Based on this, the main themes were divided into four categories, differentiation in the choice of field, tendency to private education, access to resources and facilities and opportunities, and continuity of class position. In the analysis of the first category, i.e. the distinction in the choice of field, the interviewees are of the opinion that this distinction starts from the very beginning in high school and even earlier, and in high school, the children of the upper classes continue their education in the university with the aim of securing their career future. They are of the opinion that due to the strong tendency of upper-class families to continue their education and choose their children's majors in the fields of medicine and engineering, it becomes difficult to enter this competitive field, and because they have access to more facilities and resources, They occupy that position. In the second main theme, that is, the trend towards private education, at the high school level, which is the stage before entering higher education, the trend of parents and upper-class families towards private education has increased. In the third theme, that is, access to facilities and opportunities, such as the manifestations of this field of action that the interviewees believe that economic capital has gained more power and strength in the educational space, higher education and access to it depend on the acquisition of capital. He knows economics. In the fourth theme, that is, the continuation of the class position, the reproduction of the class position is not only limited to the category of income and economic capital, but it occupies another field which can be explained mostly by cultural capital.
 
4. Discussion
The results of this research showed that the first distinction in entering the university is the distinction in the choice of field, which happened to the upper classes of the society from the very beginning of the education period. The obvious distinction started in high school. A course that is a prelude to entering a higher education course. This distinction with participating in reinforcement classes, participating in non-profit schools, participating in English language classes and getting a private tutor, etc., has been excellent for targeting education and planning for the educational level. The choice of field has started since this time, but at the university level, it has become a choice of a university field that can [and should] serve to differentiate and maintain the social status of the upper classes. So that the upper classes of society have a strong tendency to choose and enter income-generating fields with high social status, including medicine and engineering. What emerges from the interviews is that the distinction is not only limited to the university, but also related to the tendency of the upper social classes to private educational centers.
 
5. Conclusion
Interviews show that high spending in the field of education, participation of children in English language classes, tendency to go to foreign exchange and continue studying abroad, as well as access to resources, facilities, and opportunities, are the tendencies and subsequently their mastery. has paved the field of education. The main point is that this mastery and distinction is not realized only with economic capital, but requires cultural capital, which is the most important capital for the education field. Students understand that having cultural capital along with economic capital leads to smooth access to higher levels of higher education for those who have the most cultural and economic capital. Cultural capital is also the most important feature that can help to maintain the social and class position of students. In a more straightforward way, having the capital makes continuity more solid.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Social differentiation
  • phenomenologySocial Differentiation
  • Social Reproduction
  • Educational Field
  • Phenomenology
  • Kurdistan University
- اباذری، یوسفعلی، و پرنیان، حمیدرضا، (1394). «استقرار آموزشی مکتب نیاوران (تاریخچه ایجاد نهادهای دولتی آموزش مدیریت و اقتصاد بازار آزاد)». مطالعات جامعه‌شناختی، ٢٢(٢): 176-151. https://doi.org/10.22059/jsr.2016.57039
- اپل، مایکل دبلیو، (١٣٩٥)، آیا آموزش می‌‌تواند جامعه را تغییر دهد؟ ترجمۀ نازنین میرزا بیگی، تهران: آگاه. 
- بوردیو، پی‌‌یر، (۱۳۹۰). نظریه کنش: دلایل عملی و انتخاب عقلانی. ترجمۀ مرتضی مردی‌ها، تهران: نقش و نگار.
-  بوردیو، پی‌‌یر، (۱۳۹۳). تمایز: نقد قضاوت‌‌های ذوقی. ترجمۀ ح. چاوشیان، تهران: ثالث.
- جلیلی، فاطمه؛ و شیخ‌‌محمدی، حسام، (١٣٩٨). «خصوصی‌‌سازی و کالایی شدن آموزش‌عالی ایران». سومین همایش ملی روان‌شناسی، تعلیم و تربیت و سبک زندگی، https://civilica.com/doc/1020833/. 
- جنکینز، ریچارد، (13٩٦). پی‌‌یر بوردیو. ترجمۀ لیلا جو افشانی و حسن چاوشیان، تهران: نی. 
- دلانتی، جرارد، (1386). دانش در چالش: دانشگاه در جامعه دانایی. ترجمۀ علی بختیاری‌زاده، تهران: نشر پژوهشکدۀ مطالعات فرهنگی و اجتماعی.
- ذاکری، آرمان، (1395). «تولد پرولتاریای تدریس». دوماهنامۀ علمی-اجتماعی پداگوژی، 1 (2).
- عابدی، حیدرعلی، (۱۳۸۵). «تحقیقات کیفی». روش‌‌شناسی علوم انسانی، ۴۷: ۷۹-۶۲. https://method.rihu.ac.ir/article_497.html
- عبداله‌زاده، نسیم؛ بلندهمتان، کیوان؛ و شیربگی، ناصر، (1400). «خصوصی‌‌سازی مدارس و بازتولید نابرابری آموزشی: برساخت تجارب مدیران مدارس سطح متوسطه شهر سنندج». برنامه‌‌ریزی رفاه و توسعۀ اجتماعی، ١٣(٤٨): ١٤٧_١٨٦. doi: 10.22054/qjsd.2021.60201.2159. 
- غزنویان، محمد، (1395). «کالایی سازی آموزش و کودکان بی‌‌آرزو». دوماهنامه علمی-اجتماعی پداگوژی، 1 (2).
- فخرزاده، مهدی، (١٤٠٠). «آموزش رایگان؛ رؤیایی که خصوصی‌سازی شد». دو ماهنامۀ چشم انداز ایران، ۱۲۶.
- فراستخواه، مقصود، (١٣٩٨). روش تحقیق کیفی در علوم اجتماعی با تأکید بر «نظریۀ بر پایه» گراندد تئوری(GTM). تهران: آگاه.
- فلیک، اووه، (١٣٨٧). درآمدی بر تحقیق کیفی. ترجمۀ هادی جلیلی، تهران: نی.
- فونتن، اولیویه؛ و شوبره، کریستی‌ین، (١٣٨٥). واژگان بوردیو. ترجمۀ مرتضی کتبی، تهران: نی.
- کریمی، جلیل، منصوری، امید؛ و رضایی، نادیه، (1398). «سیطره‌ نظام بازار بر نظام آموزش‌وپرورش ایران». مطالعات جامعه‌شناختی، ٣٦ (١): 38-9. https://doi.org/10.22059/jsr.2019.72840
- مالجو، محمد، (1394). کالایی‌شدن آموزش، در سایت اقتصاد سیاسی. https://pecritique.com/?s.
- مرادی پردنجانی، حجت الله؛ و صادقی، ستار، (۱۳۹۳). «پدیدارشناسی؛ رویکردی فلسفی، تفسیری و روش‌شناختی به مطالعات کارآفرینی». مطالعات روش‌‌شناسی دینی، ۲: ۷۲-۶۲. https://religion.journals.pnu.ac.ir/article_1781.html
- نصرتی، روح اله، اردلان راد، شادمان. (1398). «مطالعۀ انسان‌شناختی نحوۀ بازنمایی دیگربودگی و تمایز اجتماعی در شهر سنندج». پژوهش‌های انسان‌شناسی ایران، ٩(١): ٧-٣٠. https://doi.org/10.22059/ijar.2019.73044.
- Abazari, Y. & Parnian, H., (2015). “Educational establishment of Niavaran school, history of establishing government insti-tutions, management education and free market economy”. Sociological Studies (Social Science Letter), 22 (2): 151-176. https://www.sid.ir/fa/journal/ViewPaper.aspx?id=32086.
- Abdolahzadeh, N., Bolandhematan, K. & Shirbagi, N., (2021). “Privatization of schools and reproduction of educational ine-quality; the construction of experiences of principals of high school students in Sanandaj”. Social Development & Welfare Planning, 13(48): 147-186. https://doi.org/10.22054/qjsd.2021.60201.2159.
- Abedi, H., (2006). “Qualitative Research”. Methodology of Social Sciences and Humanities, 12(47): 62-80.
- Anderson, V., (2010). The experience of night shift registered nurses in an acute care setting: a phenomenological study Montana State University-Bozeman. College of Nursing.
- Apple., W., (2016). Can Education Change Society? Translated by: Nazanin Mirza Beigi, Tehran: Agah Publications.
- Bourdieu, P., (2011). Theory of action: practical reasons and rational choice. Translated by M. Men). Tehran: Naghsh and Negar.
- Bourdieu, P., (2014). Distinction: Critique of taste judgments. Translated by: H. Chavoshan. Tehran: Third.
- Bowles, S. & Gintis, H., (2011). Schooling in capitalist America: Educational reform and the contradictions of economic life. Haymarket Books. 
- Brezis, E. S. & Hellier, J., (2017). “Social mobility at the top and the higher education system”. European Journal of Political Economy, S0176-2680 (16): 30116-1.
- Brezis, E. S. & Hellier, J., (2017). “Social mobility at the top and the higher education system”. European Journal of Political Economy, S0176-2680(16): 30116-1.
- Chan, T. W. & Goldthorpe, J. H., (2007). “Social stratification and cultural consumption: Music in England”. European Socio-logical Review, 23(1), 1-19. https://doi.org/10.1093/esr/jcl016.
- Creswell, J. W., (2007). Qualitative inquiry and research design: choosing among five approaches. Thousand oaks, ca; sage publications.
- De Castro, A., (2011). “Introduction to Giorgi’s existential phenomenological research method”. Psicología desde el Caribe, 11: 45-56.
- Delanetti, G., (2007). Knowledge in Challenge: University in the Knowledge Society. translated by Ali Bakhtiari Zadeh. Tehran: Research Institute for Cultural and Social Studies.
- Destin, M. & Debrosse, R., (2017). “Upward social mobility and identity”. Current Opinion in Psychology, 18: 99 104. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2017.08.006
- Fakhrzadeh, M., (2021). “Free education; The Dream That was Privatized”. Iran Vision Bi-Monthly, No. 126.
- Faraskhah, M., (2020). A method of qualitative research in the social sciences with an emphasis on “grounded theory” (GTM). Publisher: Agah.
- Flick, O., (2007). An Introduction to Qualitative Research. translated by: Hadi Jalili, Tehran: Ney Publishing.
- Gegel, L., Lebedeva, I. & Frolova, Y., (2015). “Social Inequality in Modern Higher Education”. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 214: 368 – 374. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.11.662
- Ghaznavian, M., (2016). “Commodification of Education and Desire less Children”. Bio-Scientific Journal of Pedagogy, 1 (2).
- Glaser, B. G., (2002). “Conceptualization: On theory and theorizing using grounded theory”. International journal of qualita-tive methods, 1(2): 23-38.https://doi.org/10.1177/160940690200100203
- Jalili, F. & Sheikh Mohammadi, H., (2020). Privatization and Commodification of Higher Education in Iran, Third National Conference on Psychology, Education and Lifestyle, https://civilica.com/doc/1020833/.
- Jenkins, R., (2016). Pierre Bourdieu. translated by: Leila Javafshani and Hassan Chavoshian, Tehran: Ney Publishing.
- Karimi, J., Mansouri, O. & Rezaei, N., (2019). “Domination of Market on Higher Education in Iran”. Sociological Review, 26(1): 9-38. https://doi.org/10.22059/jsr.2019.72840.
- Little, C., (2015). “The flipped classroom in further education: literature review and case study”. Research in Post-Compulsory Education, 20(3): 265-279. https://doi.org/10.1080/13596748.2015.1063260
- Maljoo, M., (2015). The Commodification of Education is available on the Political Economy website (https://pecritique.com/?s).
- Moradi Pardanjani, H. & Sadeghi, S., (2014). “Phenomenology; A Philosophical, Interpretive and Methodological Approach to Entrepreneurial Studies”. Bi-Quarterly Journal of Religious Methodological Studies, 2: 72-62.
- Nosrati, R. & Ardalanrad, S., (2019). “Anthropological Study of the Way of Representing Alterity and Social Distinction in Sanandaj”. Iranian Journal of Anthropological Research, 9(1): 7-30. https://doi.org/10.22059/ijar.2019.73044.
- Yang, R., (2004). “Toward Mystification: Higher Education Development in the Peoples Republic of China since 1949”. In: Higher Education: Handbook of Theory and Research. Ed. John Smart, Dordrecht: Kluwer, 311-374. https://doi.org/10.1007/1-4020-2456-8_8
- Yang, R., (2006). “The commodification of education and its effects on developing countries: A focus on China”. Journal fur Enkwicklungspolitik, 22(4): 52-69. https://doi.org/10.20446/JEP-2414-3197-22-4-52
- Liu, Y., Huang, Y. & Shen, W., (2022). “Building Halos: How do Chinese elites seek distinction through (mis) rec-ognising studying abroad?”. International Journal of Educational Development, 19: 102589. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijedudev.2022.102589
- Zakeri, A., (2016). “The Birth of the Teaching Proletariat, Bimonthly”. Journal of Pedagogy, 1 (2).
- Zimdars, A., Sullivan, A., Heath, A. E., (2009). “Higher Education Admissions in the Arts and Sciences: Is Cultural Capital the Key”? Sociology,  43(4): 648-666. https://doi.org/10.1177/0038038509105413