Abstract
Three decades have passed since the victory of the Islamic Revolution in Iran and, entering the fourth decade, major changes are apparent in the structure and content of the nation's education system. Because of the victory of the Islamic Revolution of Iran and the regime change and formation of an Islamic state, the changes in the educational system have been necessary to fulfill the ideals and goals of the new Islamic government. There have been discourses for each of these four decades, which controlled and directed the process of change in the education system. A comparative study of these changes shows that none of the four discourses following the Islamic Revolution have been helpful in the creation of real change of the educational system; and, hence, the educational system of Iran has not been able to achieve the fundamental reforms in social, political, cultural and religious fields. The aim of this paper is to present and explain the four discourses which have dominated the four decades of the Islamic revolution, how and why these discourses prevented the emergence of a changed and successful educational system and, ultimately, suggest ways to solve the problems that have arisen with regard to the educational system.
Introduction
After the victory of the Islamic Revolution of Iran (1979), fundamental changes in all fields, especially in the educational system of the nation, were of great importance. Since the time of the Revolution, and now with entry into its fourth decade, wide-ranging and major changes in different parts of educational system are apparent. The educational system of Iran after the Islamic Revolution can be classified into four categories and there have been a particular discourses for each of these four periods which controlled and directed the process of changes in the educational system. Different policies that were allocated to each of those four periods were also affected by the four different discourses. These four discourses, the products of political and social changes that have occurred during this period, have affected not only the educational policy making of those periods, but also any other areas such as economic, cultural and political fields. These four discourses are: the Islamic Revolution Discourse (1979–1987), the Construction Discourse (1987–1995), the Reformation Discourse (1987–2005) and the Justice Discourse (2005–2013). In order to achieve the targets of these discourses, politicians and decision makers in the field of education were, inevitably, forced to make changes in the educational system – changes that were necessary to fulfill the ideas and goals contained within the discourses.
The basic assumption of this paper is that within four decades following the Islamic Revolution, the orientation of most of the policies and decision making has been toward the paradigm of ‘change within the educational system’ which is based on ‘the outside into the inside of educational system's point of view’. Even the important and basic proceedings of some actors and pundits of the educational system during the most recent years, who oversee the codification of the governing documents for education, such as the ‘Fundamental Evolution Document’ and the ‘National Document of [the] Curriculum’ were not able to avoid this paradigm of ‘change within the educational system’. For this reason, the changes that have occurred during the four decades of the Islamic Revolution of Iran have been based more on the political inclinations of the ruling group rather than being based on the long-term benefits to society and enacted regardless of the policies of the ruling group. The present author believes that the existence of the sovereignty of political inclinations with regard to policy and decision making, together with a rigid ideology, is the main obstacle to the creation of an evolutionary educational system. Therefore, one of the main purposes of this paper is to compare the dominant discourses on educational policies during the four decades of evolution in educational system, investigating the effectiveness of those discourses on educational policies and, finally, offering a critical analysis of the effects of the dominance of these discourses on educational policies. In other words, the main questions of this paper are why, despite four decades of evolution in the educational system of Iran, it maintains a passive, static and non-productive role toward the society and external necessities and changes, and why this educational system still awaits ‘outside to inside evolution’ instead of promoting evolution in society and playing an active role in order to achieve a safe and secure society. Those experiencing and departing from such an educational system lack the necessary abilities, accepted norms and values in order to enter society. What are the reasons for the passivity and non-productiveness of the educational system, and what are the techniques needed to extricate from this situation?
How can an educational system cause change?
Whether education changes society or society changes the education is an old but very important question, and the answers to it vary from one person to another. Education and school provide the tools and field for making changes in the society. In fact, schools bring about changes and those changes cause other changes in society. Dewey (1915), in his book School and Society, believes that when we look at growth and education of a child as parent, teacher or citizen, we are actually thinking of a society that those who are educated from school would construct it in future.
It seems that education helps to bring about changes in society by playing selected roles; some of which include helping students to accommodate changes that have already happened in society; helping students to anticipate future changes, flows and opportunities; helping students to make changes in society by increasing their knowledge and abilities and encouraging them and leading them into innovation and creativity in the society.
Manninen (2012) believes that in order to enable an educational system to bring about evolution in society appropriately, there should be convergence and proportion between the thinking of educational policy makers and what is done in school, and also what is taught in books and what should be learned; otherwise, the expectation of education to make fundamental changes would not be a wise expectation (Manninen, 2012). In the view of others, some professionals believe that education helps to create fundamental evolutions in society by producing substantial opportunities and benefits in the society; opportunities such as production of welfare tools, encouraging people to learn that which is necessary and educating active citizens (Desjardins and Schuller, 2007).
In fact the settled logic of the ‘change within education’ paradigm is an ‘external to internal’ view. It means that changes in such an educational system are in direct proportion to the political system's requests, society's expectations, culture and economy. Education should be the creator of ideologies and theories, and should not be a creature of settled ideology in society (Apple, 2013): the fundamental responsibility of an educational system is to prepare children for future citizenship and leadership and making a better future (Kennedy, 1998).
There are some frequently asked questions about the task of education in making changes and evolution in society, including:
What kind of society are we looking for and what is our expectation of an ideal future? What kind of citizens and people do we want to educate to be able to create this utopia, and what kind of abilities and characteristics should they have? What kind of innovations do our paradigms, policies and educational activities need in order to be accepted as an appropriate basis for changes in society? What teacher training systems do we need in order to develop and improve the quality of operations of our future teachers?
From Kennedy's point of view (Kennedy, 2001) the movement towards globalization of values, development of cyber space and the appearance of factors such as global citizens, global identity, etc., are all reasons why paying attention to the role of education in the society of the future is of great importance. In order for an educational system to be able to create changes in society, it is necessary to consider the functions of the educational system with regard to society; functions such as social control, reconstruction of experience and developing moral and social values (Kennedy, 2001).
It appears that achieving an educational system which is able to bring about evolution in different social areas involves the efforts of educational planners and policy makers concerning the duties and expectations which are anticipated to arise from an evolutionary educational system. The main point is whether the four discourses which governed the four decades of changes in educational system after the Islamic Revolution can answer the questions and fulfill the duties and expectations relating to an evolutionary educational system, or whether it has just sufficed to create changes within the educational system. By analyzing the discourses governing the evolution in educational system during last four decades, we can answer the above question as follows.
Development discourses in Iran's educational system after the Islamic Revolution
By studying the developments arising in relation to the educational system after the Islamic Revolution, the four discourses can be evaluated as follows.
Islamic Revolution Discourse (ideological assimilation) (1979–1987)
In order to consolidate the revolutionary forces and calm down the disturbances at the beginning of the overthrow of the Pahlavi regime, a temporary government was established by the governance of Mehdi Bazargan (Karamollahi, 1998). A Revolutionary Council adopted power after the break-up of the temporary government, and one of its main aims was to use more and more people faithful to the Islamic Revolution and to bring into effect fundamental economical and social changes (Mohammadi, 1986: 139–140). This was because the ideology of the ruling group was based on intensifying the effect of the Revolution and converting it to a comprehensive and cultural, political and social revolution, at different levels of society (Movahed Khameneh, 2001). The Government did not have a consolidated structure until 1981, the time of the dismissal of Banisadr from the Presidency, and at which time there was conflict regarding the policies and objectives of the political groups. From the ruling group's point of view, therefore, ideological assimilation by promotion of values and revolutionary and Islamic ideologies appeared to be very important for consolidating the basis of power of new government and calming the situation.
The educational system was given serious consideration, because of the role which could be taken by the system: as a result there were many changes in the rules, structures, goals and plans of the educational system in order to achieve the these plans and goals. The goals of the educational system were determined by the foundation of the Supreme Council of Education in 1980; making changes in the goals and plans, led, somewhat inevitably, to the creation of the Institute of Educational Affairs. Some of those changes included: revision of responsibilities of educational organizations and institutes, increasing the number of educational regions in provinces, counties and districts, and also training and providing manpower in order to coordinate the affairs in the nation's capital and provinces (Safi, 1995: 2–6).
At this time, some of the goals and plans considered by ministers, including Rajayi and Bahonar, included those relating to the dominant discourse – that is, creating an ideological educational system: in addition, the appointed ministers also followed those plans and goals which were congruent with the main discourse. These included promoting Revolutionary-Islamic behaviors in schools, modification of teacher training centers, making changes in the cadre and the educational content, creating the Institute of Educational Affairs in order to promote revolutionary values, increasing the role of people in the construction of schools, applying ideology to the plans and revolutionizing the educational environment, making careful decisions in selecting teachers and using clergymen, training personnel faithful to the Revolution and Islam in order to achieve reconstruction of the educational environment (Torkchi and Tatari, 2009: 18–20) and total, trustworthy service and effort to serve and maintain the Revolution (Bahonar, 1992: 81).
In 1980 the Revolutionary Council was established by the order of Ayatollah Khomeini: some of its duties included sustaining the Cultural Revolution and cleansing the educational environment of material considerations and denying the evidence and effects of Westernization, evolution in the universities and determining disciplinary rules. This process was followed by the suspension of the universities in order to change the educational cadre for religious and political reasons (Movahed Khamene, 2001: 95).
The centralized educational system and the structural problems due to large scale of the structure of ministry, budgetary shortages due to continuing war, lack of appropriate educational structure, and sustaining of moral principles, were some of causes of the absence of specific and effective changes in the educational system. Codification of the statute regarding the Parent Teacher Association (PTA) (approved in 1981), codification of the Council Regulation and School Association (approved in 1983), and Regulation of Private Schools (approved in 1987) were some of the plans of that period that were proposed which could have caused fundamental changes and evolution, given certain prerequisites, but the constraints arising from structural changes, center-based frameworks – in other words, the political limitations – prohibited appropriate evolution of the proposed plans.
A further development during this period was the establishment of the Supreme Council for Planning which was approved in 1984, together with Mousavi's government. This provided for approval of educational statutes and regulations, and it was aimed at monitoring the implementation of educational plans and regulations. According to this Council the most important duty of the educational system was consolidation and sustaining of moral and Shiite principles: it also placed refinement as a priority over education and, according to its principles, selection of teachers who were blessed with divine attributes and supported the Revolution was considered.
At this time it seemed necessary to develop the accepted ideologies in order to establish the government. The main responsibility of the politicians therefore was to centralize the educational system financially and in terms of its management and preservation of its hierarchical structure. As a result of the dominance of the political system over the educational system, the political and ideological approaches of government affected the educational system.
One of the most important actions and developing deeds in that period, which was also convergent with the dominant discourse, was the use of teacher training and educational techniques in order to consolidate the supreme goals and train people in line with the dominant policies and values; and there was also the establishment of the selection committee (Shekari, 1993). However, the issuing of statutes and regulations that determined the duties of teachers and managers as monitoring the implementation of the demands of the government and higher education have negated the freedom and creativity of principals, teachers and other authorities in the educational system. Nevertheless, this was always at the top of the list of educational policy makers at that time.
In that decade, the plan of the Islamization of knowledge and science became the main focus of training and educational planners. Their presupposition was that the Western sciences – such as psychology, sociology, economics and philosophy of education – had developed and grown in contexts and backgrounds that were in contrast with the cultural, social, political and religious contexts and backgrounds of Islamic societies (Nasr, 1991). Those Western sciences could not therefore be used in their entirety: they were to be coordinated and adjusted to the situations, cultural and social needs; and in other words, they were to become domesticated (Thrupp, 1989: 24). Equally, they were to be assessed and criticized on the basis of religious and Islamic training norms. One of the main reasons for the political system insisting on interfering with the control and guidance of the educational system in Iran, in other words, insistence on the paradigm of ‘change within the educational system’ was the concern about the influence of Western sciences. Using a comparative study of the changes that have occurred within the educational system during the past four decades, we can conclude that Islamization of knowledge and sciences is the common factor of these times.
Construction Discourse (1987–1995)
In 1989 and the end of war between Iran and Iraq, the death of Ayatollah Khomeini, and special international conditions, the influence of right wing had increased and the government entered a new phase. The Right Wing had conservative tendencies, believed in simple incorporation of religion and politics, and was opposed to modernity and Western civilization (Barzin, 1998: 63–65). The outcome was the centralization of the governmental structure and the creation of control processes on political and social activities (Zarifinia, 1999): these changes caused further evolution in policy making of the educational system.
At that time, the government of Hashemi Rafsanjani focused on economic development in order to reconstruct and indemnify the losses of war. Privatization and investment were plans that were implemented in all organizations and institutions, and the educational system was no exception. The investments at this time gave rise to outcomes such as budgetary shortages, changes in the population structure of Iran, the creation of new social classes, quantitative increases in levels of literacy, the development of higher education and the growth of academic educations and cultural initiatives (Fouzi, 2005: 246). Privatization and the establishment of private universities also led to freedoms in higher education and, as a result, increased the political and social consciousness in society and also increased the number of requests by citizens to take part in social activities (Mousavinia, 2007). The increases of inequality in the social classes, the inflation that emerged after the war and pressure on the lower social classes gave rise to some kind of educational injustice (Amirmohammadi, 2007: 86).
The preceding problems of educational system were still effective as a barrier to the development of constructive changes, and so the ministers of the time proposed actions to compensate these policies:
the establishment of private schools (which are known as non-profit schools in Iran) in order to decrease the laziness and the substantial size of the educational system; the submission of executive affairs to the schools in order to firmly establish the educational system; and facilitation of the process of teacher selection.
However, because of hierarchical structure of the educational system and the persistent conservatism of some parts of government, these actions were not regarded as practicable. The privatization of schools, considered as a kind of public participation, would be expected to result in positive changes such as public participation in the educational system and provision of new financial resources, increasing the quality of education in schools, formulization of special schools and clarification of their activities, negating the requirement for government subsidies and thus releasing more funds to subsidize the public schools. However, privatization in Iranian society that was centralized, in terms of policies and decision making, caused disorder and inconsistencies between the programs of the private schools and those issued by the government. The government took control of state schools that had been established in the preceding period, because state schools provided for allocation of government facilities to those accepted as students and, as a result, brought about discrimination in the educational system (Alikhani and Salmani, 2009).
Considering the psychological environment and cultural and social needs at that time, the creation of changes appropriate to such conditions seemed very necessary. Therefore, some programs, such as the law dealing with the establishment of educational system councils in provinces, cities and districts (approved in 1993), were proposed and in that instance the council was founded, but it did not succeed in fulfilling its goals such as flexibility in decision making, decentralization of decision making, provision of new financial resources and decreasing the financial pressure on the government (Ghasemipouya, 2001: 106–111). Lack of implementation mechanisms, the weakness of management and lack of systematic approaches prevented that council from achieving its goals, the evolutionary plans of the educational system and society respectively.
As mentioned earlier, centralization of the educational system led to a situation in which the performance of government and the political system directly or indirectly affected the educational system. Justifications such as endangering the national benefits and revolutionary values, shortage of funds, the advent of multi-division groups in society, answering social needs, elimination of discrimination, and improving the quality of the educational system resulted in the use of some policies that made a series of changes which prevented the realization of an evolutionary educational system: these policies were to the result of lack of political, cultural, scientific and economical necessities. All of the following – the policy of economic adjustment, the control of conservatives in the body of the educational system, the dismissals and appointments made according to political tendencies of the capital, lack of constructive communication with other countries, lack of research-based plans and decisions, lack of preparation of the environment and situations, lack of warning before the execution of evolutionary changes and plans, lack of freedom and constructive cooperation, lack of clarity of some laws, regulations and limiting instructions, and so on – reveal clearly the lack of necessary prerequisites for realization of a revolutionary educational system.
Reformation Discourse (1987–2005)
One of the changes that was to have taken place in the construction period was increasing the political awareness and educational levels of individuals, which led to the growth of individual cooperation in political and educational affairs: however, for the reasons already described these reforms were not executed.
The new government chose as its new slogan ‘political reformation as part of political development’. Supportive councils, political parties, press and student movements can be regarded as indicators of political development in many societies. As a result, according to internal and external situations, some slogans were stated, such as: freedom of parties’ activities, freedom of press and political groups, civil society, revision of foreign policy and the need to confront centralization. The proposed policies and plans caused some changes, directly and indirectly, in educational system.
The following are examples of change and evolution in the educational system during the first period of reformation, (approved in 1998).
school-based plan as an effective plan in order to develop the quality of schools; decentralization and removal of complex problems of the Ministry (Nasr, 2000: 7); shutting down state schools in order to deal with existing discrimination; establishment of teacher associations and regulation of student councils.
However, lack of attention in geographical and native situations and the limited cooperation of students and staff in religious, national, financial and developmental activities led to a situation in which teachers, parents and students were not able to create effective plans and, as a result, the expected evolutions did not occur. The activities of parties, political conflicts, the concerns of the ruling group, and commotion and turbulence due to the political atmosphere caused the Reform Government to change its top-priority concerns in order to keep the country calm and create stability in the educational system. This resulted in incomplete and unfinished reforms and the creation of superficial changes only (Zarifinia, 1999).
The following factors caused Khatami to state economical development as being the main aim of his Government in the second phase of his Presidency: a reduction in oil prices, budgetary shortage, the increasing levels of unemployment, the necessity of being independent of oil revenues, decreasing the pressure on Government (Organization of Management and Planning, performance report, 1997–2001).
The plans of Khatami's first phase of presidency, which were based on political development, had caused some changes and evolution in the educational system and also in society at large: one of the main changes of the period was the cooperation of the people and the authorities involved with the educational system. The Minister of Education and Training therefore proposed plans to meet the cooperative needs of teachers, students, and others. Some of those plans included: selecting by teachers of principals, devolution of some administrative affairs to the schools, softening the political atmosphere of schools, the establishment of autonomous schools, and reinforcement of student's guild organizations. However, these plans were either not implemented or remained incomplete due to political opposition, economic problems and non-organized political conditions.
Another proposed plan for making changes in the structure and quality of the educational system was educationally complex: attempting to importing and copy the concepts from schools in other countries regardless of conditions in Iran led to failure of the plan (Azizzadeh, 2001: 7). The student assembly also failed due to centralized elections and hierarchical or top-to-bottom structure. The plan of autonomous schools was designed to increase creativity in the education system and prevent the loss of human and other resources (Nafisi, 2001: 7).
The structural problems of the previous period were persistent in this period as well; some actions were taken in order to remove those problems, including: simplification of the devolution of administrative affairs of schools to the teachers, proposed in order to limit the structure of educational system; decreasing the volume of duties of the Ministry; and elimination of the deputy of research. However, these actions were also ineffective in addressing and solving the problems. In addition, the existence of political conflicts, relocation of managers, the poor performance of managers, lack of motivation and appropriate administrative structures postponed evolution and improvement in educational system.
The political aspect of the educational system obliged ministers and authorities to take political action rather than paying attention to and implementing reform. This situation led gradually to inappropriate implementation of educational plans and activities and demolishing quality-based education. Some other factors caused the educational system to fail to achieve the positive results anticipated in the Reform era, including lack of an appropriate political, social and occupational environment for teachers, especially with regard to cooperation; failure to pay attention to scientific developments; an excessive focus on economics and politics; lack of appropriate supervision mechanisms; duality of discourses in government and the overall policy of the government; and the opposition of other bodies in society to the government of the time (Mehran, 2003).
Fundamentalism Discourse (Justice Seeker) (2005–2012)
Considering the conditions that had developed in the political, social and educational environment of the Reform era, and the opposition that had appeared in government and political circles to the reforms, a political course named Fundamentalism or Justice Seeker gradually became predominant. After taking power, the Justice Seeker Fundamentalists planned to promote and sustain the Revolutionary and Islamic values of the first decade of Islamic Revolution (the Islamic Revolution Discourse), because they believed that those values had become decayed due to the internal and external conditions of the Reform era. The government of Ahmadinejad therefore assigned promoting and sustaining the Islamic and Revolutionary values as the principal duty of the educational system and proposed some plans and changes in order to create fundamental evolution in the educational system according to those values.
Some changes and plans that were created in the structure and content of the educational system, to fulfill the goals of that period, were as follows:
renewal of the ‘Council of Enjoining to Good Deeds and Prohibiting from Evil Deeds’; emphasizing the religious and political thoughts of Ayatollah Khomeini, the founder of the Islamic Republic of Iran; revival of educational deputies in order to counteract cultural assaults and new Western ideas, anti-religion and anti-revolutionary ideas; halting the cooperation of non-governmental sections in schools; dismissal and appointment of managers of previous periods; employing clergymen in the educational system; reviewing the codification of textbooks (making changes in the content of religious and history books and omitting some sections); reviewing the plan of Parent Teacher Councils; increasing supervision with regard to the performance of schools; focusing on close cooperation between universities and theological schools; dismissing the public cooperation deputy; developing and sustaining religious training; employing personnel with high levels of religious ability; Islamization of the content of textbooks; increasing the role of councils.
The Ministers in the Education Ministry, as in other periods, believed that all of the problems of the educational system were the result of budgetary shortages and its substantial and complex structure, and they proposed that optimized management of the educational system would be achieved by reducing its structure. However, their actions were unable to decrease the structural problems and they were not able to create any effective changes in the content of the educational system (Azizzadeh, 2001: 9). In addition, failure by the government to execute the slogans that were declared at the beginning of the government of Fundamentalism (President Ahmadinejad's Government), and also the opposition of political parties that initially had been supporters of the Fundamentalism Government, on one hand, and the hurried and inexpert planning in the field of making continuous changes in the educational system, on the other hand, have increased the occurrence of no more than variability of the educational system rather than its evolution.
So, what can be concluded from the analysis of the four dominant discourses in the educational system of Iran after the Islamic Revolution is that instead of making changes and creating evolution, the educational system has changed itself; it can be said, in other words, that with the changes that took place in the structure of the educational system, there was no place for creating evolutionary changes in society, one of the main duties of an educational system. We will discuss the most important reasons in next section.
Conclusion (critical analysis)
In societies in which the educational system is centralized and in the control of its government, political, social and economic approaches cause some changes, directly or indirectly, in the structure and content of the educational system. Policies such as dismissals and appointments, special political and cultural orientations and the tendencies of the government, focusing on the goals of the political system, and precedence of government benefits over social benefits, and vice versa, produce no results other than the promotion of special values and beliefs that are accepted by the government.
The political, social, economic and cultural approaches of the government have always affected the educational system of Iran after the Islamic Revolution due to centralized political and ideological system. Reviewing the changes and evolutions created in the educational system after the Islamic Revolution shows that these changes and evolutions have caused no more than conservative and superficial changes to the educational system rather than creating a background for the creation of an evolutionary system. Failure to provide political, cultural, economic and educational fields on the one hand, and, on the other, the obligation of the educational system in realizing the ideas, tendencies and political needs of the dominant political parties during the four decades after the Islamic Revolution have been an obstacles on the journey of creating an evolutionary educational system. In such a situation, the results and outputs of the educational system are unable to improve and develop long term quality at different levels and dimensions of society, and it becomes distant from goals such as the creation of an appropriate society. In centralized educational systems, if the permissions and instructions that come from center are approved in order to make evolutions, they should lack any vagueness and ambiguity because one of the requirements of correct and appropriate implementation of plans and programs is clarity and lack of limiting frameworks. Creation of evolutionary changes also needs synchronized and up-to-date considerations; but achieving this goal is not possible by preserving previous structures and conservative processes.
Centralized policy making and the domination of political, philosophical and ideological principles, and the impact of the tendencies of political parties, have some effects on the educational decision making process, such as:
unilateral perspective in the codification of goals; approval of idealist goals disregarding the real obligations and limitations; preventive disparities between internal factors of the system including: disparities between goals, rules, instructions and operations; contradiction of existing rules with evolutionary methods and techniques; lack of compatibility between the educational system and political and social developments; selection for employment; limiting the duties of councils; lack of scientific perspective; inappropriate management of schools; unequal educational services in different schools; lack of attention to the abilities and freedom of learners and other staff of the schools; lack of attention to the process of globalization; and failure to pay attention to the variety of ideas and tastes in educational plans.
The results of the educational system and the changes that have been made in that system in every period of the discourses presented above make clear the above reality.
In contrast, in order to evaluate the scale of effectiveness of the educational system of Iran after the Islamic Revolution in creating a dynamic society, evaluation of the scale of realization of goals and duties of the system with regard to society is a very effective method for achieving this goal. These are the same goals, expectations and functions as those presented at the beginning of this paper, including social change and control; reconstruction of experience and environment; development of moral and social values; development and improvement of the quality of future teachers (Kennedy, 2001); helping the students to anticipate future changes, processes and opportunities; helping the students to become adjusted to changes that take place; helping the students to make changes in the society by increasing their knowledge and abilities; creation of substantial resources at social level, such as welfare, stimulating citizens to learn that which is necessary and training active citizens, creation of new ideologies or theories in the society (Apple, 2013), improvement of the operation of the political system, especially the relations between the educational system and the government, development of the convergence between the educational system and global changes, and logical encounters with contemporary social, philosophical and educational theories, the sensitivity of educational and training plans and the contents of important documents regarding the existing situation, and so on.
One of the reasons why the educational system of Iran was prevented from executing the roles and expectations is the influence of external expectations, including political, economical and cultural expectations, on the educational system. In other words, the educational system plays an exogenous role rather than an endogenous role. If the policy and decision makers of the educational system are willing, by way of codification of the philosophical, ideological, and cultural regulations which are approved as the definitive or prospectus documents, to make the educational system play its role as a function of the first and second rank philosophical order, they are actually making the educational system play its roles as a function of external appropriateness; and this is we call the ‘change within the educational system’ paradigm. The realization of an evolutionary system which actually is able to change the society needs, meanwhile, emphasis on the endogenous role or the movement of society according to its potential for making movements. Being endogenous means freedom of an educational system from pre-constructed limitations and obstacles, or what has been described as the constitution or prospectus document, and also it means creating a atmosphere suitable for internal growth, a kind of growth which is the nature of any educational system and is able to construct a society according to the society's needs.
Unfortunately, the apparent and hidden conflict between the supporters of the Democratization of the Political System and the supporters of Islamization of the Political System can be considered as one of the major factors in the failure of the educational system to bring about developments in Iranian society and, as a result, the domination of the ‘change within educational system’ paradigm. Referring to the religious and Islamic doctrines, some people believe that there is a reverse relationship between the level of people's freedom and their obedience to the religious rules, and that having more freedom in determining their own destiny they withdraw from their religion and (in this instance) consequently from Islam, and therefore have a tendency to move toward democracy; and democracy is regarded as a western and improper phenomenon (Anderson, 2000).
This group believes that the government must dominate and control the educational system. Given the anxiety about the influence of Western democracy in schools and universities, they believe in strengthening centralization in the educational system. In contrast, with regard to the primary aims of the Revolution such as freedom, independence and justice, some people believe in freedom and the rights of people in choosing their own destination and that the educational system must thus prepare a necessary field for individual participation in society. According to this group, who believe in the ‘education for change’ paradigm, reduction of the domination of the political system over the educational system and providing more scope for freedom in the education system in training and educating the students are the indispensable conditions for the participation of those graduating from the educational system into society. Unfortunately, due to the lack of accurate and scientific theories about the relationship between democracy and Islam (Al-Faruqi, 1982), the weakness of political agents in governing and thus the related destructive effects of factors on the performance of the educational system in Iran such as strengthening the centralization in educational system, there is a passivity and lack of both sensitivity and suitable action to the peripheral problems.
In any event, the experience of four decades of change in the educational system of Iran has shown that not only were those graduating at all levels from the educational system not successful in causing evolution in cultural fields, but also they have not been successful in realizing the social, cultural and religious aims desired by the political system, which completely controls the educational system. Actions such as the Islamization of universities, and the Islamization of sciences, and so on (Al-Attas, 1984), have been implemented by the political system of Iran to accompany the educational system with its desired aims and goals. However, because these actions imposed change from outside to inside the educational system, the actions have not been useful for enhancing the role of the educational system with regard to society.
Haynes (2002) believes that, for example in case of the higher educational system, while university research and projects are based on the demands arising outside the university – for instance, from commercial corporations, and cultural and political demands – these needs do not determine the internal philosophy of universities. Whilst providing national benefits is one of the most important outcomes of university research, doing so does not mean that the time of adventurous travels of the universities across the ocean of opportunities is ended, with the fleet of research and university vessels berthed alongside commercial corporations. The function of the educational centers is very similar to the operation of a whale which creates a glorious waterfall with its natural act of breathing – and incidentally, this is regarded by tourists that their boat is near the whale. Now, do we organize the ocean in such a way that is the location of flaunting whales that create waterfalls suitable for the tastes of tourists? (Haynes, 2002: 103–104).
The fact is that an educational system does not do its vital task according to the taste and acceptance of its bystanders or addressees, if the educational system is limited by pre-constructed philosophical, ideological and political frameworks. It is a futile and irrational expectation of that educational system to play its true role and create revolution in society; or, in other words, the realization of an evolutionary educational system is not possible. What has become the dominant paradigm in the educational system in Iran during the four decades after the Islamic Revolution is no more than repeated and variable political, philosophical and ideological constitutions; constitutions and discourses that have resulted in change and evolution in education and not in an evolutionary educational system.
Another method is to refer to the function and interaction of the graduates, at all levels – the ‘outputs’, of the educational system. This can help us to achieve a more precise answer to the question of whether or not the educational system of Iran has played any role in the creation of an evolutionary system, after the Islamic Revolution.
The following questions have their own answers, and analyzing those answers can determine whether the educational system of Iran has had the role of an evolutionary system or not.
Have the outputs of the educational system are successful in observing the moral norms of the society, or not? What percentage of normal and people and those with special needs in the society belong to the outputs of the educational system? Are the outputs of the educational system ready to encounter a variable and challenging future, or not? Do they play an effective role in the development and evolution of society with regard to the political, economic, cultural and religious dimensions? To what extent are the outputs of the educational system loyal to the fundamental ideas of the Islamic Revolution, and what is the level and extent of their efforts in realizing the expected goals? Can the outputs of the educational system be regarded as successful citizens fully prepared for a challenging and unpredictable future? Do these outputs have sufficient and suitable skills for maintaining, changing, or improving the situation of society and its movement towards becoming a satisfactory and acceptable society?
It seems that the educational system of Iran has failed to play an evolutionary role in society due to the thorough domination of the political and ideological system: it also lacks independent management and planning.
The domination of the ‘change within the educational system’ paradigm on the discourses of the last four decades after the Islamic Revolution is the main obstacle to fundamental evolution in the educational system or the realization of an evolutionary educational system. This obstruction has two main causes: first, the ‘change within the educational system’ paradigm acts as a homology and increases its conservative, persistent reaction against any competitive paradigm which is intended to change the educational system or bypass the homology and, consequently, the possibility of any kind of actual change and evolution in educational system would be removed; and, second, the changes created by this paradigm are accidental and from the outside to the inside of the educational system and are thus not subjective changes.
Being an evolutionary educational system involves redefining the role and the relations between its main factors; that is, the teacher and student on one hand and, on the other, redefining the atmosphere and structure of education. We should change the educational system from a striate space – that is, a predetermined and limited space – to a nomadic/smooth, or unlimited, space (Deleuze and Guattari, 1987) and, equally, predispose the situation of ‘Becoming of Becoming’ of the students in real world (Semetsky, 2006). The student actually creates the domain, nature and content of the educational system by their efforts and real and continuous ‘Becoming’; and the educational system should predispose the situation of real ‘Becoming’.
In fact, education and training, by creating a nomadic/smooth environment for the Becoming of students, paves the way for its own development, because the educational system does not have a determined territory and it is the movement and effort of students and teachers that defines the territory of the system, just as a desert does not have a determined territory and it is the explorer who defines its territory by their moves. Only in such a case would the realization of an evolutionary system be possible. In fact the ‘change within the educational system’ paradigm, that has dominated the discourses of the four decades of evolution in the educational system of Iran, is the main barrier to endogenous evolution of Iran's educational system. Due to its external nature and the continuous production of limitations and territorialization, some gaps have appeared in the educational system: the existence of these gaps means lack of access to an evolutionary system. Some of those gaps include the following.
The gap in the field of educational practice. Generally, the ‘change within the educational system’ paradigm has characteristics such as being documentary, general, non-local and untimely; while the practical situation and the educational process is the field of vocal, particular, local and timely characteristics (Toulmin, 1988). Such a paradigm is not able to make a correct and suitable relationship between those fields. The gap or incompatibility between the theoretical patterns advocated and promoted by the paradigm of ‘change within the educational system’ and the theoretical patterns that belong to educational practitioners (teachers and students). Deepening of the gap between the real personality of the educational system and its legal personality. The paradigm of ‘change within the educational system’ will result in the predominance of the legal personality (its formal identity) over its real personality (its informal identity), due to excessive support from the political system. Gap in the field of conception. The paradigm of ‘change within the educational system’ is generally the consequence of the centralized conceptions of theorists, and this kind of conception is very different from those of the real actors and practitioners in the education field – that is, the teachers and the students. While the real conception belongs to the teachers, they should yield and accept a discourse which is full of external conceptions. In such a condition, referring to ‘a researcher teacher’, who has been mentioned many times in the Fundamental Evolution Document of Education and Training (approved in 2012) would be meaningless.
By scanning the effects of the four discourses on the evolution of the educational system, it can be readily perceived that the changes created in four decades of evolution in the educational system, and in the shadow of these discourses, have not only helped with the creation of an evolutionary system but also have, by creating the above gaps, prevented the educational system from playing any constructive and evolutionary role.
Those who ponder the paradigm of ‘change within the educational system’ are similar to lowlanders with a rope in their hands who want to rescue the crisis-affected ship of education from drowning and guide it to the beach, while in fact no more is needed than an oar in order for the boat to reach the beach. What has happened during the four decades of evolution in Iran's educational system has been rope-based and not oar-based changes. Although during the last four decades the ship of the educational system has witnessed huge waves, produced by lowlanders, with the subsiding of those waves it has returned to its first place. Therefore in order to create an evolutionary educational system, on the one hand it is necessary to revise fundamentally the quality and the level of the relationships between the government of Iran and the educational system, in order to decrease those relationships and interventions; and, on the other hand, to consider the creation of a suitable environment in the educational system in order to provide the independency and autonomy of the real practitioners of this system – the teachers and the students. When the outputs of an educational system have the necessary abilities for playing evolutionary roles in the society, such a system would be able to create changes and development in the society instead of being merely subjection to changes or being vicissitudinous; some of those abilities include the scholarship of discovery; application; integration; teaching; and social engagement (Boyer, 1990). It seems that there is a broad relationship between the quality and the quantity of those abilities and the relations between the educational system and the political system: certainly these relations need fundamental reconstruction, amendment and refining.