Conflict, insecurity and the political economies of higher education

IF 1 Q3 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH International Journal of Comparative Education and Development Pub Date : 2018-08-20 DOI:10.1108/IJCED-07-2018-0015
J. Dillabough, O. Fimyar, Colleen McLaughlin, Zeina Al-Azmeh, Shaher Abdullateef, Musallam Abedtalas
{"title":"Conflict, insecurity and the political economies of higher education","authors":"J. Dillabough, O. Fimyar, Colleen McLaughlin, Zeina Al-Azmeh, Shaher Abdullateef, Musallam Abedtalas","doi":"10.1108/IJCED-07-2018-0015","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nPurpose\nThis paper stems from a 12-month collaborative enquiry between a group of Syrian academics in exile in Turkey and academics from the University of Cambridge into the state of Syrian Higher Education after the onset of the conflict in 2011. The purpose of this paper is to draw on 19 open-ended interviews with exiled Syrian academics; two focus groups; mapping and timeline exercises; and 117 interviews collected remotely by collaborating Syrian academics with former colleagues and students who were still living inside Syria at the time of data collection. The findings of the research suggest that Syrian HE after 2011 was fragmented across regions; in some cases non-existent, and in others deemed to be in a state of reform in order to meet student needs. Key issues that emerged from this work are human rights’ abuses directed against academics and students including the detainment, purging and kidnapping of academics, an increased militarisation of university life and a substantive loss of academic and human capital.\n\n\nDesign/methodology/approach\nThe overall design involved two workshops held in Turkey (in June and July, 2017) at which the Cambridge team explained the stages of undertaking qualitative research and planned the collaborative enquiry with Syrian co-researchers. The first workshop addressed the nature of qualitative research and explored the proposed methods of interviewing, using timelines and mapping. The instruments for interviewing were constructed in groups together and mapping was undertaken with the 21 Syrian academics in exile who attended the workshop. Syrian academics also built their own research plans as a way of expanding the consultation dimension of this project inside Syria, engaged in survey and interview protocol planning and discussed ways to access needed documentation which could be drawn upon to enrich the project. The Syrian co-researchers interviewed remotely HE staff and students who had remained in, or recently left, Syria; the key criterion for group or participant selection was that they had recent and relevant experience of Syrian HE. The second workshop focused on data analysis and writing up. There was also wide consultation with participants inside and outside Syria. As part of the research, the Cambridge team conducted open-ended interviews with 19 Syrian academics and students living in exile in Turkey. This involved interviewing Syrian scholars about their experiences of HE, policy changes over time and their experiences of displacement. The researchers developed this protocol prior to the capacity-building workshops based on previous research experience on academic and student displacement, alongside extensive preparation on the conditions of Syrian HE, conflict and displacement. In addition to interviewing, a pivotal element of methodological rigour was that the authors sought to member check what participants were learning through mapping and timeline exercises and extensive note-taking throughout both workshops. The major issues that the authors confronted were ethical concerns around confidentiality, the need to ensure rigourously the protection of all participants’ anonymity and to be extremely mindful of the political sensitivity of issues when interviewing participants who may not feel able to fully trust “outsider” researchers. Issues of social trust have been reported in the literature as one of the most significant drawbacks in conducting research in “conflict environments” (see Cohen and Arieli, 2011) where academics and students have been working and/or studying in autocratic regimes or were operating within political contexts where being open or critical of any form of institutional life such as university work or the nation could cost them their jobs or their lives.\n\n\nFindings\nThe accounts of Syrian academics and students emerging from this work point to some of the state-building expressions of HE manifested in the shaping of professional and personal experiences, the condition and status of HE, its spatial arrangements and their associated power formations, and resulting in feelings of intense personal and professional insecurity among Syrian scholars and students since 2011. While acknowledging that the Syrian situation is deemed one of the worst humanitarian crises in the region in recent decades, these accounts resonate, if in different ways, with other studies of academics and students who have experienced highly centralised and autocratic states and tightly regulated HE governance regimes (Barakat and Milton, 2015; Mazawi, 2011).\n\n\nOriginality/value\nCurrently, there is virtually no research on the status and conditions of higher education in Syria as a consequence of the war, which commenced in 2011. This work presents a first-person perspective from Syrian academics and students on the state of HE since the onset of the conflict. The major contribution of this work is the identification of key factors shaping conflict and division in HE, alongside the political economies of HE destruction which are unique to the Syrian war and longstanding forms of authoritarian state governance.\n","PeriodicalId":51967,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Comparative Education and Development","volume":"53 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-08-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"7","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Comparative Education and Development","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCED-07-2018-0015","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 7

Abstract

Purpose This paper stems from a 12-month collaborative enquiry between a group of Syrian academics in exile in Turkey and academics from the University of Cambridge into the state of Syrian Higher Education after the onset of the conflict in 2011. The purpose of this paper is to draw on 19 open-ended interviews with exiled Syrian academics; two focus groups; mapping and timeline exercises; and 117 interviews collected remotely by collaborating Syrian academics with former colleagues and students who were still living inside Syria at the time of data collection. The findings of the research suggest that Syrian HE after 2011 was fragmented across regions; in some cases non-existent, and in others deemed to be in a state of reform in order to meet student needs. Key issues that emerged from this work are human rights’ abuses directed against academics and students including the detainment, purging and kidnapping of academics, an increased militarisation of university life and a substantive loss of academic and human capital. Design/methodology/approach The overall design involved two workshops held in Turkey (in June and July, 2017) at which the Cambridge team explained the stages of undertaking qualitative research and planned the collaborative enquiry with Syrian co-researchers. The first workshop addressed the nature of qualitative research and explored the proposed methods of interviewing, using timelines and mapping. The instruments for interviewing were constructed in groups together and mapping was undertaken with the 21 Syrian academics in exile who attended the workshop. Syrian academics also built their own research plans as a way of expanding the consultation dimension of this project inside Syria, engaged in survey and interview protocol planning and discussed ways to access needed documentation which could be drawn upon to enrich the project. The Syrian co-researchers interviewed remotely HE staff and students who had remained in, or recently left, Syria; the key criterion for group or participant selection was that they had recent and relevant experience of Syrian HE. The second workshop focused on data analysis and writing up. There was also wide consultation with participants inside and outside Syria. As part of the research, the Cambridge team conducted open-ended interviews with 19 Syrian academics and students living in exile in Turkey. This involved interviewing Syrian scholars about their experiences of HE, policy changes over time and their experiences of displacement. The researchers developed this protocol prior to the capacity-building workshops based on previous research experience on academic and student displacement, alongside extensive preparation on the conditions of Syrian HE, conflict and displacement. In addition to interviewing, a pivotal element of methodological rigour was that the authors sought to member check what participants were learning through mapping and timeline exercises and extensive note-taking throughout both workshops. The major issues that the authors confronted were ethical concerns around confidentiality, the need to ensure rigourously the protection of all participants’ anonymity and to be extremely mindful of the political sensitivity of issues when interviewing participants who may not feel able to fully trust “outsider” researchers. Issues of social trust have been reported in the literature as one of the most significant drawbacks in conducting research in “conflict environments” (see Cohen and Arieli, 2011) where academics and students have been working and/or studying in autocratic regimes or were operating within political contexts where being open or critical of any form of institutional life such as university work or the nation could cost them their jobs or their lives. Findings The accounts of Syrian academics and students emerging from this work point to some of the state-building expressions of HE manifested in the shaping of professional and personal experiences, the condition and status of HE, its spatial arrangements and their associated power formations, and resulting in feelings of intense personal and professional insecurity among Syrian scholars and students since 2011. While acknowledging that the Syrian situation is deemed one of the worst humanitarian crises in the region in recent decades, these accounts resonate, if in different ways, with other studies of academics and students who have experienced highly centralised and autocratic states and tightly regulated HE governance regimes (Barakat and Milton, 2015; Mazawi, 2011). Originality/value Currently, there is virtually no research on the status and conditions of higher education in Syria as a consequence of the war, which commenced in 2011. This work presents a first-person perspective from Syrian academics and students on the state of HE since the onset of the conflict. The major contribution of this work is the identification of key factors shaping conflict and division in HE, alongside the political economies of HE destruction which are unique to the Syrian war and longstanding forms of authoritarian state governance.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
冲突、不安全和高等教育的政治经济
本文源于一群流亡土耳其的叙利亚学者和剑桥大学的学者对2011年冲突爆发后叙利亚高等教育状况的为期12个月的合作调查。本文的目的是利用19个与流亡的叙利亚学者的开放式访谈;两个焦点小组;绘图和时间轴练习;117个访谈是由叙利亚学者与在数据收集时仍居住在叙利亚的前同事和学生合作远程收集的。研究的结果表明,叙利亚在2011年之后他支离破碎的跨区域;在某些情况下不存在,而在其他情况下则被认为处于改革状态,以满足学生的需要。从这项工作中出现的关键问题是针对学者和学生的人权侵犯,包括拘留、清洗和绑架学者,大学生活日益军事化以及学术和人力资本的实质性损失。设计/方法/方法总体设计涉及在土耳其举行的两次研讨会(2017年6月和7月),剑桥团队在研讨会上解释了进行定性研究的阶段,并计划与叙利亚合作研究人员进行合作调查。第一次讲习班讨论了定性研究的性质,并探讨了使用时间表和绘图的拟议访谈方法。访谈工具是分组制作的,并与参加讲习班的21名叙利亚流亡学者一起绘制了地图。叙利亚学者也制定了自己的研究计划,作为扩大该项目在叙利亚境内的咨询层面的一种方式,参与调查和访谈协议规划,并讨论了获取所需文件的方法,这些文件可以用来丰富该项目。叙利亚的共同研究人员远程采访了留在叙利亚或最近离开叙利亚的高等教育学院员工和学生;小组或参与者选择的关键标准是他们最近有叙利亚高等教育的相关经验。第二个工作坊的重点是数据分析和写作。还与叙利亚国内外的与会者进行了广泛磋商。作为研究的一部分,剑桥团队对19名流亡土耳其的叙利亚学者和学生进行了开放式访谈。这包括采访叙利亚学者,了解他们的高等教育经历、随着时间的推移政策变化以及流离失所的经历。在能力建设研讨会之前,研究人员根据之前关于学术和学生流离失所的研究经验制定了这一协议,同时还就叙利亚高等教育、冲突和流离失所的情况进行了广泛的准备。除了访谈之外,方法严谨的一个关键因素是,作者试图通过绘图和时间轴练习以及整个研讨会的大量笔记来检查参与者所学到的内容。作者面临的主要问题是关于保密的伦理问题,需要严格保护所有参与者的匿名性,并且在采访可能无法完全信任“外部”研究人员的参与者时,要特别注意问题的政治敏感性。社会信任问题在文献中被报道为在“冲突环境”中进行研究的最显著缺陷之一(见Cohen和Arieli, 2011),其中学者和学生一直在专制政权中工作和/或学习,或者在政治环境中运作,在这种环境中,对任何形式的制度生活(如大学工作或国家)持开放态度或持批评态度可能会使他们失去工作或生命。从这项工作中得出的叙利亚学者和学生的描述指向了高等教育的一些国家建设表达,表现在专业和个人经验的塑造、高等教育的状况和地位、其空间安排及其相关的权力形成,并导致2011年以来叙利亚学者和学生强烈的个人和职业不安全感。虽然承认叙利亚局势被认为是近几十年来该地区最严重的人道主义危机之一,但这些描述与其他学者和学生的研究产生了共鸣,如果以不同的方式,他们经历了高度集中和专制的国家以及严格监管的高等教育治理制度(Barakat和Milton, 2015;Mazawi, 2011)。目前,由于2011年开始的战争,几乎没有关于叙利亚高等教育现状和条件的研究。这项工作从叙利亚学者和学生的第一人称视角介绍了自冲突开始以来高等教育的状况。 这项工作的主要贡献是确定了影响高等教育冲突和分裂的关键因素,以及叙利亚战争和长期专制国家治理形式所特有的高等教育破坏的政治经济。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
10
期刊最新文献
A critical evaluation of the validity of socioeconomic measures used in PISA Envisioning quality education for sustainability transformation in teacher education: perspectives from an international dialogue on Sustainable Development Goal 4 Vedic mathematics for sustainable knowledge: a systematic literature review Educational aspirations of school adolescents in Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan: how are these aspirations shaped? Reasonable adjustment for inclusive development: a cautionary case study of Australian VET teachers’ experience
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1