پیوندهای مفید
اخبار و اعلانات
آمار
| تعداد نشریات | 25 |
| تعداد شمارهها | 937 |
| تعداد مقالات | 7,696 |
| تعداد مشاهده مقاله | 12,616,014 |
| تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله | 8,979,872 |
پژوهش میانرشتهای حلقه مفقودهای در پژوهشهای اعضای هیئتعلمی؛ دلایل و راهکارها | ||
| اندیشه های نوین تربیتی | ||
| مقاله 2، دوره 17، شماره 4 - شماره پیاپی 62، دی 1400، صفحه 35-64 اصل مقاله (637.39 K) | ||
| نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی | ||
| شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.22051/jontoe.2021.35796.3317 | ||
| نویسندگان | ||
| محسن نظرزاده زارع* 1؛ مریم سادات قریشی خوراسگانی2؛ سعید نورالهی3 | ||
| 1استادیار گروه علوم تربیتی، دانشکده ادبیات و علوم انسانی، دانشگاه ملایر، ملایر، ایران | ||
| 2استادیار گروه مدیریت و برنامه ریزی آموزشی، دانشکده علوم تربیتی و روانشناسی، دانشگاه الزهرا، تهران، ایران | ||
| 3دانشجوی دکتری مدیریت آموزشی، دانشکده ادبیات و علوم انسانی، دانشگاه بوعلی سینا، همدان، ایران | ||
| چکیده | ||
| امروزه پژوهشهای میانرشتهای با هدف پاسخگویی به مسائل و چالشهای روز جهان به یک ضرورت در پژوهشهای علمی تبدیلشده است. بااینوجود، توسعه آن بهخصوص در حوزههای علوم انسانی و اجتماعی موانعی را برای جامعه دانشگاهی به همراه داشته است. براین اساس، هدف مطالعه حاضر بررسی دلایل تمایل اندک اعضای هیئتعلمی حوزههای علوم انسانی و اجتماعی برای انجام پژوهشهای میانرشتهای و ارائه راهکارهایی برای برونرفت از آن بود. برای دستیابی به این هدف، از روش کیفی از نوع مطالعه موردی استفاده شد. نمونه پژوهش شامل تعداد 16 نفر از پژوهشگران دانشگاهی و مؤلفان حوزه میانرشتهای بودند که با استفاده از روش نمونهگیری نظری انتخاب و مورد مصاحبه قرار گرفتند. برای تجزیهوتحلیل مصاحبهها نیز از روش تحلیل مضمون و برای بررسی اعتبار یافتهها از دو روش بازبینی توسط مشارکتکنندگان و بازبینی توسط همکاران استفاده شد. یافتهها نشان داد، دلایل تمایل اندک اعضای هیئتعلمی برای انجام پژوهشهای میانرشتهای را میتوان در سه دسته دلیل کلی: نهادی، سازمانی و فردی و راهکارهای برونرفت از آن نیز در چهار راهکار نهادی، سازمانی، علمی و فردی طبقهبندی کرد. بر اساس یافتهها، افزایش تمایل اعضای هیئتعلمی به انجام پژوهش میانرشتهای، مستلزم بهکارگیری صحیح راهکارهای ارائهشده است و اثربخشی این راهکارها زمانی بیشتر خواهد بود که نگاه مدیران، حاکمیت همه آنها در بستر دانشگاهی باشد. | ||
| کلیدواژهها | ||
| میانرشتهای؛ پژوهشهای میانرشتهای؛ اعضای هیئتعلمی؛ علوم اجتماعی؛ علوم انسانی | ||
| عنوان مقاله [English] | ||
| Interdisciplinary Research, a Missing Link in Faculty Members’ Research: Reasons and Solutions | ||
| نویسندگان [English] | ||
| Mohsen Nazarzadeh Zare1؛ Maryam Sadat Ghoraishi Khorasgani2؛ Saeid Norollahee3 | ||
| 1Assistant Professor, Department of Educational Sciences, Faculty of Literature and Humanities, Malayer University, Malayer, Iran | ||
| 2Department of Educational Administration and Planning, Faculty of Education and Psychology, Alzahra University, Tehran, Iran | ||
| 3Ph.D. Student, Educational Management, Faculty of Literature and Humanities, Bu Ali Sina University, Hamadan, Iran | ||
| چکیده [English] | ||
| Abstract This study aimed to investigate the reasons for faculty members’ lack of interest in conducting interdisciplinary research in the fields of humanities and social sciences and to provide solutions for that. A qualitative case study method was hence used to achieve this goal. The research sample comprised 16 academic researchers and interdisciplinary authors who were selected and interviewed using theory-based sampling. The interviews were analyzed using thematic analysis method and the findings were credited using member checking and peer checking. The findings showed that the reasons for faculty members’ lack of interest in conducting interdisciplinary research can be divided into three general categories of institutional, organizational, and individual. Furthermore, institutional, organizational, scientific, and individual solutions comprise the four solutions for this issue. Introduction Interdisciplinary research is currently considered the key to tackling the complex contemporary social challenges and the impetus for scientific innovation because scientific discoveries and innovations often occur at the intersection of disciplines. Academics are thus more likely to engage in research fields that surpass the traditional boundaries of their field (Sun et al., 2021). Most scholars believe that disciplinary research alone cannot cope with the complex challenges of societies, and competitive and knowledge-based economies, as well as pluralistic democracies (Bozic & Pohoryles, 2009). Thus, the issues and challenges facing contemporary society require the collaboration of several disciplines with different cultures, standards, and languages (Boix Mansilla, 2016). Addressing interdisciplinary fields and interdisciplinary research is one of the policies and strategies of the Islamic Republic of Iran to accelerate and develop science, especially in the field of humanities. The Comprehensive Scientific Map of Iran proposes “supporting the development of interdisciplinary sciences and technologies”, and “creation and expansion of interdisciplinary subfields in humanities and other sciences” as part of national strategies and measures (Comprehensive Scientific Map of Iran, 2011: 47-61). However, despite the great emphasis on the necessity and importance of interdisciplinary fields and interdisciplinary research in Iran, its development, especially in the fields of humanities and social sciences, has brought challenges to the academic community. Considering that the proper development of interdisciplinary research in universities requires a change in scientific policy, institutional strategy, and research and development in universities by higher education policymakers, analyzing the reasons for Iranian faculty members’ lack of interest in the fields of humanities and social sciences can help to achieve this goal. Research question: What are the reasons for faculty members’ lack of interest in conducting interdisciplinary research in the fields of humanities and social sciences? What solutions can be proposed to increase their willingness to conduct interdisciplinary research? Methodology The present study aimed to provide a detailed explanation of the reasons for faculty members’ lack of interest in conducting interdisciplinary research in the fields of humanities and social sciences and to provide solutions for the problem. Such an explanation requires a careful study of the phenomenon from various aspects. Mertens and Wilson (2019) believe that the case study method is suitable for such explanations of the phenomenon under study because it allows the researcher to collect different types of data to better understand the phenomenon (p. 152). A case study focuses specifically on a phenomenon, event, issue, program, group, etc. (Mertens, 2015: 305). In the present study, researchers sought an in-depth analysis of the reasons for the lack of interest in interdisciplinary research and solutions to increase willingness among faculty members in the fields of humanities and social sciences through qualitative research. Hence, a case study method was used. Since the researchers used the inclusion criteria of having at least one written book or translated book published about interdisciplinary research or having at least two articles in this field, they used the theory-based sampling method to select the participants. In theory-based sampling, the researcher selects people who theoretically represent the desired phenomenon as a sample (Mertens, 2010: 222, 233). To this end, 16 academic researchers and interdisciplinary authors were interviewed as experts (individuals who were more knowledgeable about the research subject and had at least one written or translated book or two articles about interdisciplinary research). The research data collection tool was a semi-structured interview. The thematic analysis method was used to analyze the interviews. Two methods of member checking and peer checking were used to credited the research findings. Results Based on the thematic analysis of the interview, the themes and subthemes related to each of the reasons and solutions are presented in following. Reasons The reasons for faculty members’ lack of interest in conducting interdisciplinary research include the following three main categories: Institutional reasons include subcategories of weakness of academic disciplines, misunderstanding of interdisciplinary research, dominance of a disciplinary view in Iran’s higher education system, lack of supportive policies for interdisciplinary research, and centralization of Iran’s higher education system. Organizational reasons have subcategories of lack of reward and motivation systems, organizational cultural problems, disciplinary barriers, and structural problems. Individual reasons comprise subcategories of inherent barriers to interdisciplinary research, lack of interdisciplinary skills, and lack of motivation to do interdisciplinary research. Solutions The solutions to increase faculty members’ interest in conducting interdisciplinary research include the following four main categories: Organizational solutions have subcategories of structural review, strengthening the culture of interdisciplinary research among academics, and formation of interdisciplinary interactions in the academic community. Institutional solutions have subcategories of developing incentive policies and dominance of philosophy of higher education. Scientific solutions have the subcategory of dominance of philosophy of conducting interdisciplinary research. Individual solutions have the subcategory of nurturing and empowering interdisciplinary researchers. Discussion and conclusion Our findings showed that institutional, organizational, and individual reasons can be considered as the most important reasons for faculty members’ lack of interest in conducting interdisciplinary research. Institutional reasons refer to upstream institutions, including the Ministry of Science, and are beyond the will and authority of the university. Organizational reasons refer to the structure of universities as well as their management and culture. Finally, individual reasons refer to the personality traits and individual competencies of the faculty members. In addition to identifying the reasons for faculty members’ lack of interest, four solutions, namely organizational, institutional, scientific, and individual solutions were identified to increase the interest of faculty members to conduct interdisciplinary research from university experts’ point of view. Organizational solutions lead to elimination of or reduction in organizational barriers to conducting interdisciplinary research. Institutional solutions depend on changes in the policies of upstream institutions, including the Ministry of Science. The scientific solutions refer to the dominance of the interdisciplinary attitude toward academic research, which requires academics to be familiar with the nature and importance of interdisciplinary research. Finally, individual solutions seek to eliminate the weakness of faculty members in conducting interdisciplinary research and help to enhance their personal competencies in conducting interdisciplinary research. In conclusion, the increase in faculty members’ interest in conducting interdisciplinary research requires applying the presented solutions. Meanwhile, the efficacy of these solutions is enhanced when administrators’ attitude approves their application in universities. | ||
| کلیدواژهها [English] | ||
| Interdisciplinary, Interdisciplinary Research, Faculty Members, Social Sciences, Humanities | ||
|
سایر فایل های مرتبط با مقاله
|
||
| مراجع | ||
|
Balaghat, S. (2011). Study of Humanities and its Interdisciplinary Fields Development Challenges in Iran: (The Case Study of Educational Science Course With 3 Lnterdisciplinary Fields, Comparative, Preschool and Primary Education. Interdisciplinary Studies in the Humanities, 3(4), 117-129. doi: 10.7508/isih.2011.12.006 (Text in Persian) Barkovic, D. (2010). Challenges of Interdisciplinary Research. Interdisciplinary Management Research,6(1): 951-960. Boix Mansilla, V. (2006). Quality assessment of interdisciplinary research: Toward empirically grounded validation criteria. Research Evaluation, 14(4): 17–29. Bozic, S., & Pohoryles, R. J. (2009). Why bother with interdisciplinarity in the social and human sciences? Innovation. The European Journal of Social Science Research, 22(2): 143–145. Christensen, J., Ekelund, N., Melin, M., & Widén, P. (2021). The Beautiful Risk of Collaborative and Interdisciplinary Research. A Challenging Collaborative and Critical Approach toward Sustainable Learning Processes in Academic Profession. Sustainability, 13(4723): 1-20. Comprehensive scientific map of the country (2011). Tehran: Secretariat of the Supreme Council of the Cultural Revolution. (Text in Persian) Dalton, A.,Wolff, K., & Bekker, B. (2021). Multidisciplinary Research as a Complex System. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 20 (1):1–11. Ghasemi, A., Emami Meibodi, R. (2016). The Role and Status of Interdisciplinary Studies in the Development of the Humanities in Iran. Interdisciplinary Studies in the Humanities, 7(4), 1-19. doi: 10.7508/isih.2015.28.001 (Text in Persian) Hoidn, S. (2018). Conducting Interdisciplinary Research in Higher Education: Epistemological Styles, Evaluative Cultures and Institutional Obstacles. International Journal of Interdisciplinary Research and Innovations, 6(3): 288-297. Khanjarkhani, Z., Bakhtiar Nasrabadi, H.A., Ibrahimi Dinani, A (2012). An Introduction to the Necessity, Position, and Types of Interdisciplinary Studies in Higher Education. Interdisciplinary Studies in the Humanities, 2(1): 167-186 (Text in Persian) Larson, E. L., Landers, T. F., & Begg, M. D. (2011). Building interdisciplinary research models: a didactic course to prepare interdisciplinary scholars and faculty. Clinical and translational science, 4(1): 38–41. Lugosi, P. (2020). Developing and publishing interdisciplinary research: creating dialogue, taking risks. Hospital Medicine, 10(1): 217-230. MahjoobEshratabadi, H., Malekinia, E., Ghrone, D. (2012). Faculty and Institutional Structure: The Conflict of Interdisciplinarity. Interdisciplinary Studies in the Humanities, 4(4), 1-34. doi: 10.7508/isih.2012.16.001 (Text in Persian) Maton, K. I., Perkins, D. D., & Saegert, S. (2006). Community psychology at the crossroads: Prospects for interdisciplinary research. American Journal of Community Psychology, 38(1-2):9-21. McKercher, B. (2019), ‘How ‘quality research is measured now: Threat or menace!. Tourism Recreation Research, 44(1): 136-138. Mertens, D.M. (2010). Research and Evaluation in Education and Psychology: Integrating Diversity with Quantitative, Qualitative, and Mixed Methods. 3Ed. Los Angeles: SAGE Publications. Mertens, D.M. (2015). Research and Evaluation in Education and Psychology: Integrating Diversity with Quantitative, Qualitative, and Mixed Methods. 4Ed. Los Angeles: SAGE Publications. Mertens, D.M. & Wilson, A.T. (2019). Program Evaluation Theory and Practice: a Comperhensive Guide. 4Ed. New York, London: The Guilford Press. Miller, A.S.C., & Pate, P.E. (2019). A Model for Developing Interdisciplinary Research Theoretical Frameworks. The Qualitative Report, 24(6): 1211-1226. Okumusa, F., Niekerka, M. V., Koseoglub, M. A., & Bilgihanc. A. (2018). Interdisciplinary research in tourism. Tourism Management, 69: 540-549. Pun, J. (2020). Interdisciplinary Research. In J. McKinley & H. Rose (Eds.), The Routledge Handbook of Research Methods in Applied Linguistics. London: Routledge. Patil, J. (2016). Multidisciplinary Research Opportunities: Need of the Hour. Journal of Pharmacovigilance, 4(1):1-2. Peek, L., & Guikema, S. (2021). Interdisciplinary Theory, Methods, and Approaches for Hazards and Disaster Research: An Introduction to the Special Issue. Risk Analysis, 41 (7), 1047-1058. Porter, A., Roessner, J., Cohen, A., & Perreault, M. (2006). Interdisciplinary research: meaning, metrics and nurture. Research Evaluation, 15: 187-195. Razzaq, J., Townsend, T., & Pisapia, J. (2013). Towards an understanding of interdisciplinarity: The case of a British university. Issues in Interdisciplinary Studies, 31: 149- 173. Rudhumbu, N., Zhou, L., & Nhundu, K. (2017). Transdisciplinary Research in Higher Education: Towards a Paradigm for Sustainable Development. Journal of Business and Management, 19(1): 13-19. Safari, S. (2012). Enhancing Quality of Interdisciplinary Science by Faculty Development. Interdisciplinary StuDdes in the Humanities (Iranian Journal of Cultural Research), 4(4 (16)), 35-51. (Text in Persian) Sun, Y., Livan, G., Ma, A., & Latora, V. (2021). Interdisciplinary researchers attain better performance in funding. ArXiv, abs,2104.13091: 1-18. Vajaradul, Y., Aroonsrimorakot, S., Laiphrakpam, M., & Paisantanakij, W. (2021). Key Steps and Characteristics for Successful Interdisciplinary Research: An Analytical Review. The Journal of Behavioral Science, 16 (2): 73-85. Visholm, A., Grosen, L., Norn, M. T., & Lund Jensen, R. (2012). Interdisciplinary research is Key to SolvIng Society´s Problems. Copenhagen: DEA Publications. White, P. J., & Deevy, C. (2020). Designing an Interdisciplinary Research Culture in Higher Education: A Case Study. A Quarterly Review of Education, 51: 499-515. | ||
|
آمار تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 1,015 تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 345 |
||
