The Field of Higher Education in Pakistan as Experienced by Faculty: A Bourdieusian Analysis
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Faculty play a key role in the development of a nation. Their ideologies, work, knowledge, and attitudes are all significant in not only determining the students’ success but also the overall quality of the education system. This study explores the experiences and struggles faced by the faculty in a public research university in Pakistan and their approaches to navigating their everyday work lives. It employs Bourdieu’s theoretical triad of habitus, capital, and field to highlight the struggles faced by the faculty in their everyday academic lives. The study is designed to understand the shaping and reshaping of academic habitus and the resultant formation of their sense of place. The interviewed participants included PhD holders who earned their degrees internationally as well as those who did so locally, belonging to the departments of Chemistry and Management Sciences. The study highlights ideological differences between the two disciplines, their varying backgrounds and dispositions. The study showed that not all faculty members working in the Pakistani academic environment hail from the same environment or have had similar access to resources and experiences. Their varying backgrounds and dispositions act as paradigms to help them understand and navigate their academic careers, starting with their choice of pursuing a Ph.D. The interviewed faculty experienced a clash between their expectations and reality when it came to new habitus formation, resulting in a very docile and compliant faculty. Overall, the study highlights a key common concern from participants across the board in relation to higher education reforms and systemic issues, which leads to multi-level issues of varying gravity. A lack of importance given to Social Sciences and overt importance given to Sciences were identified as creating rivalry and jealousy amongst the faculties. However, there were some commonalities between the faculties, including the use of the word ‘we’, non-uniform interpretation and implementation of policies, lack of job security, communication, and appreciation. Despite the significant differences amongst international and local PhDs, there did not appear to be consistent differences amongst any two subgroups, irrespective of how one divides the participant pool.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,002 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,036 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».