Volume 33, Issue 1 (Spring 2020)                   JMDP 2020, 33(1): 171-201 | Back to browse issues page


XML Persian Abstract Print


Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:

shahvali M, moezzi F, Marzooghi R. A Methodology for Paradigm Shift to Explain Sustainable University. JMDP 2020; 33 (1) :171-201
URL: http://jmdp.ir/article-1-3698-en.html
1- Agricultural Education and Extension, Shiraz University, Iran.
2- Agricultural Education and Extension, Shiraz University, Iran , moezzi@shirazu.ac.ir
Abstract:   (5778 Views)

The sustainable university concept is rooted in prevalent paradigms pertained to economic, social and environmental development, which all focus on systemic thought and rationality; besides, they tend to discover and solve problems by applying an interdisciplinary approach. However, the epistemic component is what these paradigms have ignored. The purpose of this study is to explain a methodology for the shift from current paradigms to spiritual ones for sustainable higher education. To reach this end, meta-synthesis method was applied, based on which 46 qualitative researches covering sustainability domain were gathered and their findings were analyzed and evaluated. The viewpoints of these studies were put together and synthesized to introduce a more comprehensive substitute. Results show that the dynamic spiritual paradigm based on wisdom and objective knowledge is in line with the divine wisdom of Iranian universities.

Full-Text [PDF 644 kb]   (1145 Downloads)    
Type of Study: Research | Subject: Public Administration
Received: Oct 05 2019 | Accepted: Mar 04 2020 | ePublished: Oct 13 2020

References
1. Aguirre, R. T., & Bolton, K. W. (2014). Qualitative Interpretive Meta-Synthesis in Social Work Research: Uncharted Territory. Journal of Social Work, 14(3), 279-294. [DOI:10.1177/1468017313476797]
2. Alexander, V. G. (2015). Development and Validation of the Critical Thinking about Sustainability Scale. (Doctor of Philosophy), Purdue University.
3. Bergdahl, E. (2019). Is Meta-Synthesis Turning Rich Descriptions Into Thin Reductions? A Criticism of Meta-Aggregation as a Form of Qualitative Synthesis. Nursing Inquiry, 26(1), 1-8. [DOI:10.1111/nin.12273]
4. Calder, W., & Dautremont-Smith, J. (2009). Higher Education: More and More Laboratories for Inventing a Sustainable Future. Agenda for a Sustainable America, 93-107.
5. Clark, W. C., & Dickson, N. M. (2003). Sustainability Science: The Emerging Research Program. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 100(14), 8059-8061. [DOI:10.1073/pnas.1231333100]
6. Finfgeld-Connett, D. (2006). Meta-Synthesis of Presence in Nursing. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 55(6), 708-714. [DOI:10.1111/j.1365-2648.2006.03961.x]
7. Giroux, H. A. (2017). Neoliberalism's War against Higher Education and the Role of Public Intellectuals. The Future of University Education (pp. 185-206): Springer. [DOI:10.1007/978-3-319-46894-5_10]
8. Godemann, J., Bebbington, J., Herzig, C., & Moon, J. (2014). Higher Education and Sustainable Development. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 27(2), 218-233. [DOI:10.1108/AAAJ-12-2013-1553]
9. Lozano, R., Ceulemans, K., Alonso-Almeida, M., Huisingh, D., Lozano, F. J., Waas, T., ... Hugé, J. (2015). A Review of Commitment and Implementation of Sustainable Development in Higher Education: Results from a Worldwide Survey. Journal of Cleaner Production, 108(1), 1-18. [DOI:10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.09.048]
10. Lozano, R., Lukman, R., Lozano, F. J., Huisingh, D., & Lambrechts, W. (2013). Declarations for Sustainability in Higher Education: Becoming Better Leaders, Through Addressing the University System. Journal of Cleaner Production, 48(1), 10-19. [DOI:10.1016/j.jclepro.2011.10.006]
11. Petratos, P., & Damaskou, E. (2015). Management Strategies for Sustainability Education, Planning, Design, Energy Conservation in California Higher Education. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 16(4), 576-603. [DOI:10.1108/IJSHE-03-2014-0038]
12. Sandelowski, M. (2008). Reading, Writing and Systematic Review. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 64(1), 104-110. [DOI:10.1111/j.1365-2648.2008.04813.x]
13. Sandelowski, M., & Barroso, J. (2007). Handbook for Synthesizing Qualitative Research. Springer Publishing Company.
14. Shiel, C., Leal Filho, W., do Paço, A., & Brandli, L. (2016). Evaluating the Engagement of Universities in Capacity Building for Sustainable Development in Local Communities. Evaluation and Program Planning, 54(1), 123-134. [DOI:10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2015.07.006]
15. Shriberg, M. (2002). Institutional Assessment Tools for Sustainability in Higher Education: Strengths, Weaknesses, and Implications for Practice and Theory. Higher Education Policy, 15(2), 153-167. [DOI:10.1016/S0952-8733(02)00006-5]
16. Timulak, L. (2009). Meta-Analysis of Qualitative Studies: A Tool for Reviewing Qualitative Research Findings in Psychotherapy. Psychotherapy Research, 19(4-5), 591-600. [DOI:10.1080/10503300802477989]
17. UNESCO. (2002). Education for Sustainability from Rio to Johannesburg: Lessons Learnt from a Decade of Commitment: UNESCO Paris.
18. UNESCO. (2007). The UN Decade for Education for Sustainable Development (DESD 2005-2014): The First Two Years, UNESCO, Paris.
19. Zawadzki, M. (2017). "The Last in the Food Chain": Dignity of Polish Junior Academics and Doctoral Candidates in the Face of Performance Management. The Future of University Education (pp. 63-84): Springer. [DOI:10.1007/978-3-319-46894-5_4]

Add your comments about this article : Your username or Email:
CAPTCHA

Rights and permissions
Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

© 2024 CC BY-NC 4.0 | Management and Development Process

Designed & Developed by : Yektaweb