Educational Contradiction of Explicit Logic of Education Field (A Case Study: Iran Education Field)

Document Type : Original Article

Author

ferdowsi university

Abstract

The present study seeks to explain the features of the explicit-written rules of the field of education. Which laws are more powerful in the field of education? Do these rules coincide with the educational goals? In order to answer these questions, the conceptual framework of the research was based on Bourdieu's ideas. The documentary analysis was employed as the method for collecting and analyzing the data. The corpus consisted of the official documents and regulations of the field of education. The sample for this study was selected through purposive sampling. The collected data were analyzed through Maxqda software and open coding techniques. The results of the study indicate that the rules of the field of education are: acceptance-graduation rules, relative non-repudiation laws, poor discipline rules, poor logic of embodied-objectified cultural capital, general logic, habitus-based logic and the powerful logic of institutional cultural capital ". In addition, the results show that these laws have different powers, so that the powerful logic of institutional cultural capital and acceptance-graduation rules are more powerful than the other laws in the field. In terms of the nature and characteristics of the rules of the field of education, the results reveal that these rules have counter-educational nature and are not consistent with the goals of the education field.

Keywords

References

Bourdieu, Pierre (1986). The forms of capital. In j.G.richardson, handbook of theory and research for sociology of education. Greenwood Press.new York
Friedland, Roger (2009). The endless fields of Pierre Bourdieu. Organization articles. 16 (6), 887-917.
Kitchen, P.J; Howe, David (2013). How can the social theory of Pierre Bourdieu assist sport management research? Sport management review. 16. 123- 134.
Kloot, Bruce (2009). Explaning the value of Bourdieus framework in the context of institutional change. Studies in higher education. 34 (4). 469- 481.
Kloot, Bruce (2015). A historical analysis of academic development using the theoretical lens of Pierre bourdieu. British journal of sociology of education, 36 (6), 958- 976.
Lessard, Chanale; Contandriopoulos, Andre-pierre; Beaulian, Dominiq (2010). The role (or note) of economic evaluation at the micro level: can Bourdieus theory provide away forward for clinical decision –making? Socila Science & Mediciene.70. 1984-1956.
Levien, Michael (2015). Social Capital as obstacle to Devevlopment Brokering land, norms, and trust in rural India. World Devevlopment. 74. 77-92.
Williams, Gulian; Choudry, Sophia (2016). Mathematics capital in the educational field: Bourdieu and beyond. Research in mathematic education. 18 (1). 3-21.
Birks, M., & Mills, J. (2011). Grounded Theory: A Practical Guide. Sage.
Kendall. J. (1999). Axial Coding and the Grounded Theory Controversy. Western Journal of Nursing Research. 21(6), 743-757
Walker. D., & Myrick. F. (2006). Grounded Theory: An Exploration of Process and Procedure. Qualitative Health Research. 16(4), 547-559.
Smit, K. B. & larmier, C.w. (2004). A mixed relationship: bureaucracy and school performance. Public administration review. No. 1
Bohte, j. (2001). School bureaucracy and student performance at the local level. Public administration review. No. 1
Charlton, Bruce G. (2010). The cancer of bureaucracy: How it will destroy science, medicine, education; and eventually everything else. Medical Hypotheses, Volume 74, Issue 6, 961-965.
Yousefi, Mohammad Reza (2014). Challenges of the educational system of Iran and solutions to address these challenges. Indian Journal of fundamental and applied life sciences, 4 (4), 228- 236.

Files

History

  • Receive Date: 20 November 2018
  • Revise Date: 14 March 2019
  • Accept Date: 03 April 2019

Share

How to cite

Statistics