بررسی وضعیت موجود و مطلوب آزادی علمی در نظام آموزش عالی ایران

نویسندگان
صمد ایزدی 1
یوسف عالی پور 2
ابراهیم صالحی عمران 3
حجت صفارحیدری 4
1 دانشیار، برنامه‌ریزی درسی، گروه علوم تربیتی، دانشگاه مازندران
2 دانشجوی دکتری آموزش ‌عالی، دانشگاه مازندران
3 استاد، برنامه‌ریزی آموزشی، گروه علوم تربیتی، دانشگاه مازندران
4 دانشیار، فلسفه تعلیم و تربیت، گروه علوم تربیتی، دانشگاه مازندران
10.52547/irphe.28.2.263
چکیده
پژوهش حاضر با هدف مطالعه فهم و برداشت‌های اعضای هیئت علمی از وضعیت موجود و مطلوب آزادی علمی صورت پذیرفت و برای این منظور، رویکرد پژوهش به ­صورت آمیخته (کیفی-کمّی) انتخاب شد. ابزار پژوهش مصاحبه و پرسشنامه محقق­ ساخته (75 سؤالی) شامل پنج خرده ­مقیاس (ابعاد آزادی علمی، چالش‌های آزادی علمی، ملزومات آزادی علمی، راهکارهای نهادینه­ سازی و حدود آزادی علمی) بود که محتوای سؤالات آن بر نتایج بخش کیفی (مصاحبه‌ها) و ادبیات پژوهش مبتنی بود. سؤالات پرسشنامه بر اساس کدهای استخراج شده از مصاحبه‌ها و ادبیات تدوین و گویه‌ها بر مبنای مقوله‌های اصلی و فرعی و ارتباط بین آنها انتخاب شدند. جامعه‌ آماری در بخش کیفی 13 نفر از صاحبنظران و در بخش کمّی 325 نفر از اعضای هیئت علمی دانشگاه‌های کشور بودند که بر اساس فرمول کوکران و به روش نمونه‌گیری تصادفی چند مرحله‌ای انتخاب شدند. داده‌ها با استفاده از نرم‌افزارهای SPSS و LISREL و با بهره‌گیری از آمارهای توصیفی و استنباطی تجزیه و تحلیل شدند. یافته‌های پژوهش در بخش کمّی نشان داد که در وضعیت موجود آزادی علمی، ابعاد اخلاق و حرفه علمی در زیرمؤلفه حدود آزادی علمی دارای بالاترین میانگین و بعد سیاسی و سیاستگذاران دارای کمترین میانگین و رتبه در بین مؤلفه‌های آزادی علمی بودند. همچنین وضعیت مطلوب نتایج حاکی از آن است که  بعد زمینه و ساختار در زیرمؤلفه ملزومات دارای بالاترین میانگین و بعد دولتی و نهادی در زیرمؤلفه چالش‌های آزادی علمی دارای کمترین میانگین و رتبه در بین مؤلفه‌های آزادی علمی بودند.
 

کلیدواژه‌ها

عنوان مقاله English

Investigating the current and desirable situation of academic freedom in the Iranian higher education system

نویسندگان English

Samad Izadi 1
Yousef Alipor 2
Ebrahim Salehi-Omran 3
Hojjat Safar-Haydari 4
1 Associate professor, Department of Education, Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, University of Mazandaran, Babolsar, Iran
2 PhD graduate, Department of Education, Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, University of Mazandaran, Babolsar, Iran
3 Professor, Department of Education, Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, University of Mazandaran, Babolsar, Iran
4 Associate professor, Department of Education, Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, University of Mazandaran, Babolsar, Iran
چکیده English

The current research was conducted with the aim of studying the understanding and perceptions of faculty members about the current and desirable state of academic freedom. For this purpose, a mixed (qualitative and quantitative) research approach was chosen. Research tools included interviews and researcher-made questionnaire (75 questions), including five subscales (dimensions of academic freedom, challenges to academic freedom, requirements of academic freedom, institutionalization strategies and limits of academic freedom). The content of these questions were based on the results of the qualitative section (interviews and research literature). Questionnaire’s questions were developed based on codes extracted from interviews and literature. The variables were selected based on main and sub-categories and the relationship between them. The statistical population of the research in the qualitative part included 13 experts and in the quantitative part included 325 faculty members of the country’s universities who were selected based on Cochran's formula and multi-stage random sampling method. Data were analyzed using SPPS and LISREL software and descriptive and inferential statistics. The findings of the research in the quantitative part indicated that in the status quo of academic freedom, the dimensions of ethics and academic profession under the component of the limits of academic freedom with an average of 52.3 and 26.3 had the highest average and political and policy maker’s dimensions with an average of 22.2 and 37.2 had the lowest average and rank among the components of academic freedom. Moreover, the desirable condition of the results indicated that contextual and structural dimensions under the component of requirements with an average had the highest average and the governmental and institutional dimensions under the components of academic freedom challenges had the lowest average and rank among the components of academic freedom.
 

کلیدواژه‌ها English

Scientific freedom
status quo
desirable condition
higher education system
Iran
1. Aberbach, J.D. (2018). Academic autonomy and freedom under pressure: Severely limited, or alive and kicking?. Public Organization Review, 1-35.
2. Altbach, P.G. (2010). Academic freedom: A realistic appraisal. CODESRIA.
3. Amy, J.O. (2018). Teaching sociology: The precariousness of academic freedom. Sociological Perspectives, 62(1), 5-22.
4. Bangura, A.K. (2020). Contemporary investigations on academic freedom and conflict in Africa: A metaphorical linguistic analysis. Social science research council working papers. 1-50
5. Bazargan, A. (2009). Introduction to qualitative and mixed research methods. Tehran: Didar [in Persian].
6. Bernhard, Kristen, A., & Kathryn, D.J. (2019). Higher education in an era of violent extremism: Exploring tensions between national security and academic freedom. Higher Education in an Era of Violent Extremism, 74-107.
7. Brown, R.S. (2004). Report of committee A, 1973-1974. AAUP Bulletin 60, no. 2(1974), 148-155.
8. Dehghani, Y., Marzooghi, R., Faghih, N., & Fouladchang, M. (2012). An investigation into the academic freedom of faculty members of Shiraz University based on demographic variables. Journal of Curriculum Research, 1 (2), 29-55 [in Persian].
9. Downs, D.A. (2009). Pope center series on higher education. Academic Freedom. What It Is, What It Isn't, and How to Tell the Difference. May Epistemological Certainty. sagepub.com/journals-permissions DOI: 10.1177/ 1478929920942069 journals.sagepub.com/ home/psrev. Pp:1-15.
10. Farasatkhah, M. (2010). Academic freedom. Journal of Majlis & Rahbord, 10(41), 101-140 [in Persian].
11. Farasatkhah, M. (2004). The adventure of University in Iran: A historical study on the higher education: Emphasizing "economic, social, political and cultural" factors. Resa Publication [in Persian].
12. Farhana, S. (2018). The false equivalence of academic freedom and free speech: Defending academic integrity in the age of white supremacy, colonial nostalgia, and anti-intellectualism. ACME: An International Journal for Critical Geographies, 17(2), 228-257.
13. Giroux, D., Karmis, D., & Rouillard, C. (2015). Between the managerial and the democratic university: Governance structure and academic freedom as sites of political struggle. Studies in Social Justice, 9(2),142- 158.
14. Grimm, J., & Saliba, I. (2018). Free research in fearful times: Conceptualizing an index to monitor academic freedom. Interdisciplinary Political Studies, 3(1), 41-75.
15. Grover, R.B. (2020). Freedom for research, and national development. Current Science, 118(12).
16. Hajer, K., A., & Lissa, L. (2020). Academic freedom and the quality of democracy in Africa. V-Dem Working Papers are available in electronic format at www.v-dem.net, 1-29.
17. Hamdan, D.L. (2008). Relationship between academic freedom and institutional commitment as perceived by faculty members at Palestinian Universities. repository.najah.edu.
18. Hooman, H.A. (2013). Handbook of qualitative research. Samt Publications [in Persian].
19. Huda, N., Badrun, K., Caly, S., & Himawan, P. (2020). Academic freedom: Understanding and experience of higher education lecturers in Indonesia. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 8(10), 4671- 4683.
20. Karimian, K., Kojouri, J., Lotfi, F., & Amini, M. (2012). Higher education administration and accountability the necessity of autonomy and academic freedom from faculties’ Viewpoint. 11(8), 855-863[in Persian].
21. Latif, M. (2014). Acadeic freedom: Problems in conceptualization and research. Higher Educatin Research & Development, 33(2), 399-401.
22. Lee, P. (2015). A contract theory of academic freedom. Saint Louis University law Journal, 59(46), 461- 530.
23. Mahamane, D. (2011). Employment status and faculty satisfaction with academic freedom. A Dissertation Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the degree of Doctor of Education in Educational Leadership: Northern Arizona University.
24. Masri, M. (2011). A tale of two conference: On power, identity, and academic freedom. Journal of Academic Freedom, 1-28.
25. Nandini, S. (2018). Academic freedom and Indian Universities. Economic & Political, lIiI, 48-57.
26. Nishad Nawaz, M., & Gomes, A.M. (2014). Review of knowledge management in higher education institutions. European Journal of Business and Management, 6(7), 71-79.
27. Ruan, N. (2020). Accumulating academic freedom for intellectual leadership: Women professors’ experiences in Hong Kong. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 1-11.
28. Rupe, R.R. (2005). Higher education attorneys’ perceptions regarding academic freedom and challenges to academic freedom. A Dissertation Submitted to the Faculty of The Graduate College in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy Department of Teaching, Learning and Leadership.
29. Salimi, J., & Abdi, A. (2017). Study of faculty members' ideas and perceptions of the concept of academic freedom. Jornal of Iranian Higher Education, 9 (3), 57-88 [in Persian].
30. Sundar, N. (2018). Academic freedom and Indian Universities. Economic & Political Weekly, lIiI (24), 48-57.
31. Tierney, W.G. & Lechuga, V.M. (2005). Academic freedom in the 21st century. The Nea Higher Education Journal, 8, 7-21.
32. Wight, C. (2020). Critical dogmatism: Academic freedom confronts moral and epistemological certainty. Political Studies Review, 1-15.
33. UNESCO (2009). World Conference on Higher Education. Final Report Paris, UNESCO Headquarters, 5 to 8 July 2009, unesdoc.unesco.org/images /0011/ 001163/ 116345e.pdf.

  • تاریخ دریافت 15 اسفند 1401
  • تاریخ انتشار 01 خرداد 1401