نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی
نویسندگان
1 استادیار گروه مردم‌شناسی، دانشکدۀ علوم اجتماعی، دانشگاه یزد، یزد، ایران (نویسندۀ مسئول).
2 کارشناسی‌ارشد جامعه‌شناسی، گروه جامعه‌شناسی، دانشکدۀ علوم اجتماعی، دانشگاه یزد، یزد، ایران.
چکیده
کلیدواژه‌ها
موضوعات
عنوان مقاله [English]
نویسندگان [English]
Abstract
The university in Iran has a problematic situation and researchers have so far expressed and formulated this problem in different ways. This situation is more obvious for humanities and social sciences because these sciences are more contextualized. The purpose of this research is to get a close-up and field picture of the situation of these sciences in Iran by analyzing the lived experience of a number of humanities faculty members of one of the provincial universities. For this purpose, the strategy of grounded theory with the systematic approach of Strauss and Corbin was used. The statistical community of the research is made up of all the faculty members of different fields of humanities and social sciences of Yazd University, from among them 20 people were selected in a purposeful and theoretical manner and a semi-structured interview was conducted with them and the interviews were conducted until data saturation was reached. Data were analyzed using open, axial and selective coding techniques. The findings indicate that the members of the faculties imagine themselves under a ceiling, one dimension of which is the narrowness of livelihood, one dimension is the limitations and considerations of ideology, and the other dimension is the limitations and it creates bureaucratic pressures. The two strategies of the humanities and social sciences faculty members in the university in facing this phenomenon are instrumental view of science and university, and silence and indifference regarding the issues of the country, especially the official agendas of the government. The result of this situation is the disturbance in the process of socialization of students, the lack of space for criticism, discussion and creativity in these fields, and the isolation and differentiation of the various fields of humanities and social sciences.
Keywords: Human and Social Sciences, Ideology, Quantitative and Centralized Assessment System, Instrumental View of Science and University.
1. Introduction
The university in Iran has a problematic situation, and researchers have formulated this problem in different ways. This situation is more obvious for the humanities and social sciences, because these sciences are more contextual than other sciences, and the issue of objectivity is more complex in these sciences. For this reason, the main part of social and philosophical studies on science in Iran has been focused on the humanities and social sciences. Studying the status of humanities and social sciences in Iran has at least three fundamental aspects. First, these sciences play an important role in creating historical awareness and self-awareness in the country (Tabatabai 2019) and rethinking the country’s cultural, social, political, and literary traditions. Second, these sciences play a large role in creating international connections in the cultural, political, and economic fields and helping to shape the country’s map on a global level. Third, a large percentage of university students and graduates in Iran are students and graduates of humanities and social sciences, and it is naturally expected that at least some of these individuals will be able to obtain job positions and help society and the government in properly confronting and solving many human and social problems, and help form a strong society and an efficient government in Iran. the aim of the research is to provide a close and field-based picture of the status of these sciences by analyzing the lived experience and views of the faculty members of the humanities and social sciences at Yazd University, as an example of universities outside Tehran, and based on that, to further test the theoretical studies conducted about these sciences in Iran.
2. Materials and Methods
The present study used qualitative methodology. Here, in order to examine the lived experience of humanities and social sciences professors, the grounded theory strategy with the systematic approach of Strauss and Corbin was used (Cresswell, 2019). To select the samples, a purposive and theoretical sampling strategy was used, and 20 people were selected for interviews from among all faculty members of various humanities and social sciences disciplines in Yazd. The data collection tool was a semi-structured interview. The data were analyzed systematically and continuously through open coding, axial coding, and selective coding.
3. Discussion
Data analysis in a coherent and systematic process in a scheduled manner led to the formation of the core category (central phenomenon) of “the short ceiling of livelihood, ideology, and bureaucracy on the humanities and social sciences.” This phenomenon includes 13 main categories, 135 subcategories, and 457 concepts. Main categories includes “concerns about their livelihoods and job security”, “science in the Fence of the Centralized and Quantitative Bureaucracy”, “university in the Shadow of Ideology and Politics”, “lack of self-confidence among the Faculty members and students of the humanities and social sciences”, “lack of authority of the humanities and social sciences and failure to utilize their potential in society”, “humanities and social sciences in the shadow of technical and engineering sciences”, “weakness of language and international relations in science and isolation from the global scientific community”, “Low interest of elites in entering the humanities and social sciences”, “a feeling of inability to be effective and efficient”, “An instrumental view of science and universities”, “the prevalence of individualism and insularity in the humanities and social sciences”, “lack of formation of a scientific community and a specific paradigm in academic humanities and social sciences”, “the lack of institutionalization of the culture of criticism in the academic humanities and social sciences ecosystem.” Table 1 only presents the main and core categories and Figure 1 presents research paradigm model.
4. Conclusion
The findings of the study indicate that the humanities and social sciences faculty members imagine themselves under a roof that is made up of livelihood constraints, ideological restrictions, and bureaucratic restrictions. The three ceilings have caused, on the one hand, a significant portion of the faculty members of the humanities and social sciences in Iranian universities to tend towards a kind of silence, indifference, and passivity regarding the country’s issues, especially regarding issues of concern to the government, and on the other hand, some of them to move towards a kind of instrumental view of science and universities. On the other hand, when some scholars of the humanities and social sciences feel that they are not an authority in solving the country’s major human problems, that their expert opinions are not given sufficient attention, and that they are faced with the prevalence of regulations and privilege in universities, they take the path of adapting to these conditions and turn to gaining more privileges by writing articles and conducting research projects, without being too concerned about their effectiveness. . In the absence of real and dynamic scientific connections and the lack of formation of scientific communities as the institutional basis for the life of science, in the words of a kind of “research individualism and atomism” and “epistemological and social anomaly” prevails in the faculties of humanities and social sciences. Also, humanities and social sciences faculties face the problem of “lack of a space of shared symbolic attention and rituals of interaction between professors” (Abdollahy and Khastoo 2012) and “lack of intellectual centrality and epistemic authority and lack of agreed-upon scientific hierarchies” (Ganeirad 2014). The result is disruption in the socialization process of students, the lack of an atmosphere for criticism, dialogue, and creativity in these disciplines, and the increasing isolation and differentiation of different disciplines in the humanities and social sciences. This is something that is almost common in humanities and social sciences faculties in Iran.
کلیدواژه‌ها [English]
)