Document Type : پژوهشی
Authors
1
PhD student, Department of Educational Aministration and Human Resources Development, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Mashhad, Iran,
2
Associate Professor, Department of Educational Aministration and Human Resources Development, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Mashhad, Iran
3
Assistant Professor, Department of Social science, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Mashhad, Iran
4
Professor, Department of History, University of Tehran, Tehran ,Iran
10.22067/fedu.2024.87016.1332
Abstract
The main purpose of this study is to analyze the nature of educational administration and leadership as an influential subfield in relation to the fields of power and religion within the historical context of Iran. Grounded in Bourdieu's Theory of Social Fields, this study adopt a new sociological perspective on education and upbringing. This approach posits that for a comprehensive analysis of specific phenomena such as the field of educational administration and leadership, necessitates examining them in the broader social issues. Therefore, utilizing the method of document research and employing the thematic analysis technique aligned with the Bourne and Clark approach, as well as the Atrayd Sterling model, the social history of Iran was studied in two periods: pre-Islamic (Ancient Iran) and post-Islamic (up to the mid-Qajar period and modern educational developments). The results revealed that in ancient times, educational administration and leadership took shape within the hierarchy of Zoroastrian Mobeds with different levels of cultural capital, aristocratic social capital, and symbolic capital derived from political positions. This resulted in a limited professional inheritance in social classes, a prominent characteristic of this specific field. The primary function of this field was the dominance of cognitive knowledge, the stratification of knowledge along class lines, and the reproduction of classes based on a managerial value system. In the Islamic period, due to the diminishing link between the fields of power and religion, as well as the relative independence of the educational field, especially during flourishing periods, educational administration and leadership became more specialized and intrinsic in nature. Renowned religious scholars, in their roles as custodians or representatives of authority, assumed responsibility for educational administration based on their professional qualifications and cultural capital. The function of this field is explicable based on its degree of independence.
Keywords: field of educational administration and leadership, central capitals, sociology of education, Bourdieu, field of power
Synopsis
Studies on educational leadership and administration can be chronologically divided into two waves of convergence and divergence. The first wave, influenced by the positivist paradigm in the 1960s and coinciding with the theory movement in educational administration, occurred alongside the globalisation wave. During this period, the global foundation of educational leadership and administration knowledge was established and exported from the Western world to other countries as a universal model. The second wave, influenced by interpretive and critical paradigms, rejected universal theories of educational leadership and administration and emphasized the need to consider the social context in the production of knowledge in this field. Studies centered on East and Southeast Asia highlighted the importance of social values and norms as a neglected factor in educational leadership studies and incorporated these values into indigenous leadership models.
New approaches, such as social constructivism, have emphasized the re-conceptualization of educational leadership and administration with a focus on its textual dimension. From the perspective of sociologists like Bourdieu, educational leadership and administration can be conceptualized as a position and action associated with that position, resulting from the interaction of structure and agency. According to Bourdieu(2009), society is composed of a set of fields that are influenced by macro-fields such as the field of power. Each field, while being influenced by the field of power, must also be able to maintain the necessary independence from the forces exerted by it in order to carry out its inherent functions. Viewing educational leadership and administration as a field influenced by the field of power and religion as an ideological field has a close relationship with the new sociology of education and Richard Bates' critical approach to educational administration, which views it as a tool for knowledge control and social control that has a close relationship with the top of society's power and serves as a channel for implementing the policies of the field of power )Bates, 1980(.
Based on this reasoning, the present study examines the nature of educational leadership and administration consistent with historical transformations in Iran, with the aim of developing indigenous knowledge of educational leadership and administration based on the cultural and social differences of Iranian society. To achieve this goal, the historical-documentary research method was employed, using the content analysis technique based on Braun and Clarke's approach and Stride Sterling's model. The social history of Iran in two periods, pre-Islam (ancient Iran) and post-Islam (until the mid-Qajar period and new educational reforms), was studied.
Conclusion
Iran's historical trajectory has been marked by two distinct periods: Ancient Iran and Islamic Iran. These eras have witnessed the emergence of education administration and leadership in varying forms, shaped by the evolving relationship between the power field, the religious field, and the logic governing these spheres. During Ancient Iran, the actors in the field of education administration and leadership were selected based on the prevailing class-based logic of society and a professional inheritance approach. These individuals were entrusted with implementing the will of the ruling power, wielding significant cultural capital and symbolic status. With their epistemic dominance, they served as instruments of social control and symbolic violence.
The Islamic era brought about a transformation in the logic and interconnectedness of these fields, expanding the circle of actors involved. Education administration and leadership shifted to individuals from the field of education who, while possessing substantial cultural capital, also received significant economic and social capital from the power field. Prominent scholars were selected based on their cultural capital alignment with the power field and promoted accordingly. These scholars, as school administrators, relied on economic capital from the religious field to manage educational institutions. Throughout Islamic Iran, whenever the field of education administration and leadership maintained its autonomy vis-à-vis the dominant ideology, its inherent functions became more prominent. This underscores the crucial role of field autonomy in enabling effective education administration and leadership.
Education administration and leadership in Iran's historical context have been profoundly influenced by the power and religious fields. Analyzing this field without considering its connection to these overarching forces is an incomplete endeavor. The differences between education administration and leadership in ancient and Islamic times stem from the changing relationship between the power field and the field of education administration and leadership, as well as the latter's fluctuating autonomy shaped by the prevailing logic of the era. Subordinating education administration and leadership to ideology undermines the field's inherent functions. When the power of the religious or political field overwhelms the professional aspects of education, effective administration and leadership become compromised.
In essence, Iran's historical journey highlights the intricate interplay between education administration and leadership, power dynamics, and religious influence. Understanding this complex relationship is essential for comprehending the evolution of education systems and their impact on society.
Keywords
)
Send comment about this article