The Interaction between Education and Globalization: A Comparative Study of Four GCC Countries
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The new plans and curricula that have been applied lately to Mass Communication Departments at some GCC countries as United Arab Emirates, Qatar, Bahrain and Oman are one of repercussions of concept of globalization, which recently swept Arab world. But trend towards globalization of curricula was more pronounced in UAE and Qatar and has been linked with quality standards for academic accreditation of academic study programs. However, trend in Oman and Bahrain tended more towards linking various courses with technology as tool which spreads globalization approach, and through which minds can be penetrated. This study is an attempt to clarify impact of globalization of plans and curricula on progress of educational process in four GCC countries (UAE, Qatar, Bahrain and Oman), extent to which those plans could meet needs of media students, requirements of media job market and how we can achieve difficult equation of combining thought of globalization and identity at same time. It was found, through a survey of 502 students from Mass Communication departments of four GCC universities (UAE, Qatar, Oman and Bahrain), a sample survey of 66 media officials and executives working in public relations institutions, as well as a survey of 27 faculty members in four GCC Universities that new vision has been a reflection of developments adopted by concepts of globalization without optimally addressing needs of students and requirements of media job market. Therefore, study suggests a set of recommendations that are considered a platform for action, which should be adopted by development strategy of new vision. Key Words: Globalization; Global student; GCC countries; Media curricula; Internationalization of education INTRODUCTION Education is undergoing constant changes under effects of globalization. Some believe that this process is an invaluable opportunity for of developing countries to raise their skills and standards of education. It brings about a new form of cultural imperialism that is shaping youth, future citizens of world into global citizens, intelligent with a broad range of skills and knowledge to apply to a competitive, information based society (Chinnammai, 2005). Others fear that it is merely a modern version of cultural imperialism that will lead to creation of a universal, ultimately Western society as it has largely been driven by interests and needs of developed world (Grieco & Holmes, 1999). According to Cultural imperialism theory, economic system is dominated by a core of advanced countries while Third World countries remain at periphery of system with little control over their economic and political development. In contrast to cultural imperialism theory in which source of cultural influence is Western civilization, with non-western and less developed countries viewed as being on periphery-as receivers of cultural influences-the cultural flows or network model offers an alternative conception of transmission process, as influences that do not necessarily originate in same place or flow in same direction. Receivers may also be originators. In this model, cultural globalization corresponds to a network, which no clearly defined centre or periphery (Krugman & Verables, 1995). Globalization as an aggregation of cultural flows or networks is a less coherent and unitary process than cultural imperialism and one in which cultural influences move in many different directions. David Orr (Orr, 1999) argued that through Western education, people are losing their vernacular knowledge, by which he meant the knowledge that have of their places or in other words their identity. He also believed that our graduates of tomorrow will be trained, above all, to keep wheels of economy turning. …
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".