فصلنامه پژوهش و برنامه ریزی در آموزش عالی
مدلی مناسب برای زبان آموزش دانشگاهی در ایران در جهت بین المللی شدن: نظریه برپایه
نویسندگان
1 دکترای برنامه ریزی توسعه آموزش عالی، دانشگاه شهید بهشتی
2 دانشگاه شهید بهشتی
چکیده
جهانی شدن تغییرات زیادی را در نهادهای مختلف به وجود آورده و به دنبال آن بین المللی شدن موجبات رشد و ترقی نظامهای آموزشی را فراهم کرده است. ضرورت و لزوم بین المللی شدن آموزش عالی امروزه در کشور ما هم احساس و این مهم در برنامه توسعه ششم دولت گنجانده شده است. تجارب کشورهای پیشرو نشان می‌دهد که استفاده از زبان واسط همزمان با بین المللی شدن آموزش عالی نقش مهمی در موفقیت و تسریع این پدیده دارد. این درحالی است که استفاده از زبان واسط در آموزش عالی ایران منع قانونی دارد. در این پژوهش تلاش شد تا با نمونه گیری هدفمند و مراجعه به صاحبنظران و مطلعان کلیدی آموزش عالی با روش نظریه برپایه مدل مناسبی برای زبان آموزش دانشگاهی در ایران در خصوص بین المللی شدن ارائه شود. در این مدل دلایل نیاز به استفاده از زبان واسط، عوامل و موانع موجود، راهبردها و پیامدهای آن ارائه شده است. نتایج به دست آمده از مصاحبه عمیق و نیمه ساختاریافته با 28 صاحبنظر و مطلع کلیدی به ارائه این مدل 13 عاملی انجامید که پدیده اصلی آن خیزش و ارتقا کشف شد؛ بدین معنا که تکثر زبان آموزش علم موجبات خیزش و ارتقای نظام آموزش عالی ایران را در پی خواهد داشت.
کلیدواژه‌ها
عنوان مقاله [English]
A proper model for the language of instruction in Iranâs universities in the event of internationalization: Grounded Theory
نویسندگان [English]
- Nasrin Asgharzadeh 1
- Abasalt Khorasani 2
1 Doctoral student in Planning for Higher Education Development, Shahid Beheshti University
2 Shahid Beheshti University
چکیده [English]
Globalisation has caused a lot of changes in different institutions. Subsequently internationalization has made many development and advancement in educational systems. Nowadays, necessity and importance of internationalization are felt in our country and it is included in Iranian government Sixth Development Plan. Experiences of developed and pioneer countries show that using an international language as a medium of instruction, alongside internationalization, has a significant role in the success and acceleration of this phenomenon. Whereas, the use of the interface language in Iran's higher education is prohibited. Using a purposive sampling method, grounded theory and interviewing key informants, the researcher tried to present a proper model for the language of instruction in Iran’s universities in the event of internationalization. In this model, the reasons for using the interface language, existing factors and barriers, their strategies and implications are presented. The result of 28 deep and semi-structured interviews with 28 scholars and key informants led to a 13 factors model that its main phenomenon is upgrading. It means that diversity in the language of instruction makes rising and upgrading in Iran’s higher education system.
کلیدواژه‌ها [English]
- Internationalization
- Academic language
- grounded theory
- Desirable model
2. Altbach, P. G., & Teichler, U. (2001). Internationalization and exchanges in a globalized university. Sage Publications.
3. Ammon, U., & McConnell, G. (2002). English as an academic language in Europe. P. Lang Publisher.
4. Asgharzadeh, N., & Khorasani, A .(2016). The role of English language as a medium of instruction in internationalisation of higher education: A comparative study in Europe. Quarterly Journal of Research and Planning in Higher Education, 22 (3), 89-111. Retrieved from http://journal.irphe.ir/article-1-3064-fa.html&sw (in Persian).
5. Asgharzadeh, N., Khorasani, A., & Farasatkhah, M. (2017). Consequences of internationalisation and using Farsi as the only language of instruction in Iran’s higher education system; Content Analysis. Quarterly Scientific-Research Journal of Management and Planning in Educational Systems, 9 (17), 159-179. Retrieved from http://mpes.sbu.ac.ir/article/view/14388/6282 (in Persian).
6. Brenn-White, M., & Faethe, E. (2013). English-taught master's programs in Europe: A 2013 update. New York: Institute of International Education.
7. Brumfit, C. (2004). Language and higher education: Two current challenges. Arts and Humanities in Higher Education, 3(2), 163-173.
8. Creswell, J.W. (2012). Grounded theory designs. Educational Research-Planning, Conducting and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research. (J.W. Creswell, Ed.). Boston: Pearson Education.
9. Coleman, J.A. (2006). English-medium teaching in European higher education. Language Teaching, 39(01), 1-14.
10. Crystal, D. (2000). Emerging English. English Teaching Professional, 14(January).
11. Crystal, D. (2003 a). English as a global language (2nd Ed.). Cambridge, UK, New York: Cambridge University Press.
12. Dearden, J. (2014 a). English as a medium of instruction- a growing global phenomenon: phase 1: Interim report: British Council.
13. Doiz, A., Lasagabaster, D., & Sierra, J. (2013). English-medium instruction at universities: Global challenges. Multilingual Matters.
14. Erkin Arkin, I. (2013). English-medium instruction in higher education: A case study in a Turkish University context. (Doctoral diseration). Gazimaguse, North Cyprus.
15. Farasatkhah, M. (2014). Higher education systems and needs for the intelligence of quality. The Second National Conference on Assessment and Quality of University Systems. Tehran (in Persian).
16. Farasatkhah, M. (2016). The qualitative methodology: Grounded theory. Agah Publication (in Persian).
17. Farrell, D., & Grant, A. (2005). Addressing China's looming talent shortage. McKinsey Global Institute.
18. Graddol, D. (1997). The future of English: A guide to forecasting the popularity of the English language in the 21st century. The English Company (UK) Ltd.
19. Green, M. (2007). Change management masterclass: A step-by-step guide to successful change management. London: Kogan Page.
20. Haberland, H. (2009). English- the language of globalism. Rask.
21. Haberland, H. (2011). Ownership and maintenance of a language in transnational use: Should we leave our lingua franca alone? Journal of Pragmatics, 43(4), 937-949.
22. Hellekjaer, G.O., & Westergaard, M. (2003). An exploratory survey of content learning through English at Nordic universities. Charles van Leeuwen & Robert Wilkinson, 65-80.
23. Hénard, F., Diamond, L., & Roseveare, D. (2012). Approaches to internationalization and their implications for strategic management and institutional practice. New York: OECD Higher Education Program.
24. Hincks, R. (2010). Speaking rate and information content in English Lingua Franca oral presentations. English for Specific Purposes, 29(1), 4-18.
25. Hudzik, J. K. (2011). Comprehensive internationalization: From concept to action. NAFSA, Retrieved from www.nafsa.org/cizn.
26. Hudzik, J.K. (2013). Changing paradigm and practice for higher education internationalization. An introduction to higher education internationalization (De Wit, Ed.). Milano: V & P.
27. Kirkpatrick, A. (2011a). Internationalization or englishization: Medium of instruction in today's universities. Hong Knong Institute of Education.
28. Kirkpatrick, A. (2011b). Internationalization or englishization? Medium of instruction in today’s universities. Centre for Governance and Citizenship Working Paper Series 2011/003. Hong Kong: Institute of Education.
29. Knight, J., & Wit, H.D. (1997). Internationalization of higher education in Asia Pacific countries. Amsterdam, the Netherlands: European Association for International Education, in cooperation with IDP Education Australia and the Program on Institutional Management in Higher Education of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.
30. Klaassen, R. G. (2001). The international university curriculum: Challenges in English-medium engineering education. (Doctoral diseretion). Delft, the Netherlands.
31. Lincoln, Y.S., & Guba, E.G. (1994). Competing paradigms in qualitative research. American Journal of Evaluation, 15(2), 179-192.
32. Macaro, E. (Ed.) (2013). Defining and researching English medium of instruction: The need for clear thinking and a clear research agenda. British Council.
33. Maiworm, F., & Wächter, B. (2002). English-language-taught degree programs in European higher education: Trends and success factors. ACA papers on international cooperation in education. Bonn: Lemmens.
34. Mehrad, J. (2010). Problems of internationlisation for Iranian universities. Mehr Press.
35. Shaw, P., & Mc Million, A. (2008). Proficiency effects and compensation in advanced second-language readng. Nordic Journal of English Studies, 7(3), 123-143.
36. Strauss, A.L., & Corbin, J.M. (1998). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory (2nd Ed.). Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications.
37. The European Commission (2013). European higher education in the world. Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, The European Economic and Social Committee and Committee of the regions, Com (2013), 499.
38. The European Higher Education Area in 2015: Bologna process implementation report. Brussels.
39. Wächter, B., & Maiworm, F. (2008). English taught programmes in European higher education: The picture in 2007. ACA papers on international cooperation in education. Bonn: Lemmens.
40. Wächter, B., & Maiworm, F. (2014). English-taught programmes in European higher education: The state of play in 2014. ACA papers on international cooperation in education. Bonn: Lemmens.
41. www.weforum.org/agenda/2015/07/which-countries-are-the-top-destinations-for-foreign-students/.
42. www.English Proficiency Index: www.ef.co.uk/epi
)