Contemporary Influences on the Role of Imams in Britain: A Critical Analysis of Leadership and Professionalisation for the Imamate in 21st Century Britain
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article is based on the findings from a research project, referred to hereafter as #ImamsBritain, commenced with a series of discussions with Imams in the north of England. The role of the Imam has undergone far-reaching changes over the last thirty years chiefly due to the changing socio-economic and political climate, which in turn has directly affected the needs of Muslim communities. Consequently, Imams are now seen as professionals who need a wider range of pastoral care skills that go beyond those of their traditional role, which was mainly focused on religious teaching and spiritual guidance, The second stage of the data analysis for the research involved the exploratory Group Delphi technique, in which the Imam respondents underwent the processes of two critical reflections on the data collected. The resultant findings reflect their individual perceptions of the kind of training and development they need. This provides a unique framework for constructing a professional guide for Imams in Great Britain. The discussions and critical analyses in this paper draw on the discourses of professionalisation and pastoral care and relevant reports and reviews on Imam training in Europe and Canada.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.011 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.017 | 0.024 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".