Policy Analysis of the Scientific and Discursive Identity of Sociology Programs from Theory to Practice in Iranian Higher Education

Document Type : Research Paper

Author

Faculty of Culture and Communications, Imam Sadiq University, Tehran, Iran

Abstract

Extended Abstract
 
Introduction and Objectives: Analyzing approved sociology programs from the perspective of their connection with scientific and discursive identity in relation to macro-scientific policies and upstream documents related to Iranian higher education is important, because the expansion of the social sciences without considering the goals stated in policies imposes various undesirable intellectual and material consequences on higher education and society. A review of the history of the social sciences and sociology in Iran shows their epistemological and theoretical connection to the discourses and values of numerous actors at the levels of policymaking, planning, and implementation.
If we accept that macro-scientific policies act as a plumb line for bestowing scientific and discursive identity upon Iranian higher education, their violation or deviation in programs and disciplines indicates a strategic challenge. In policy research, the conventional values of society are taken into account. The social sciences, and sociology in particular, are among the modern sciences that have been used mainly for cultural-political purposes since their inception. In this sense, sociology was a tool for political purposes during the Pahlavi era, rather than an epistemological domain whose historical roots in terms of identity corresponded to the native context and life of Iranian society. It is as if sociology oscillated like a pendulum along the vector of liberalism and socialism—a science determined by political discourse.
After the end of the Cultural Revolution (1983), sociology was characterized as “secular” more than any other discipline in the humanities and social sciences. However, during the 2000s and 2010s, the gradual establishment of the idea of Islamizing the sciences and subsequently the transformation of the humanities turned conventional humanities and social sciences into an opportunity. The theoretical framework includes policy studies and Wallersteinian genealogy.
Method: This paper employs the methods of policy analysis (PA) and policy research (PR) using the documentary research method (DRM). Policy analysis requires attention to what shapes the big picture—namely, the frameworks, theories, underlying assumptions, and practical approaches for assessing and influencing political feasibility. Its practical considerations include: identifying relevant actors, understanding their motivations and beliefs, assessing available resources, and identifying the arena or level at which rules affect the policy-making process. Examples of policy documents include administrative reports, minutes, maps, and curricula.
In policy research, the following questions are answered with regard to the background of the problem: Have the objectives changed over time? Are the objectives symbolic or intended to create real change? What are the values and assumptions underlying the policy? To what extent have the policies been successful? Who are the audiences, actors, and policymakers? Which organizations and committees have participated in its implementation? By what means have the programs been consolidated or implemented?
The focus of policy analysis is influenced by the conceptual framework of the analysis. In this study, social science curricula, with an emphasis on the field of sociology, are considered as the final product, which should be considered in their broader discursive domain, namely the macro-policies of science in Iranian higher education. For this purpose, the approved curricula were taken from the curriculum website and analyzed according to the method of policy analysis and the principles of policy research. The statistical population was all disciplines and fields of study in the social sciences and sociology, and the sampling was consistent with the entire population (full-sample).
 
Results: The findings were analyzed in three layers: “normative and prescriptive,” “descriptive and situational,” and “discursive and in-depth exploration.” The results indicate a plurality of meanings in terms of content, function, and expectations of sociology among Iranian universities. In addition to examining the current status of the field of sociology in its historical and political context, a pathology analysis was conducted regarding the up-to-dateness, applicability, effectiveness, and implementation method of the curricula in accordance with the country’s major scientific documents and policies.
By moving away from the center of the sociology discipline to the outer layers of the social sciences family, at least seven areas of expansion of the social sciences in Iranian higher education can be identified: social planning, policy-making and governance, development and Iranian-Islamic pišraft (progress), demography, philosophy of science, social work and services, anthropology, and specific social studies. In these disciplines, discursive confrontations such as “development” (tawsiʿah) and “Iranian-Islamic pišraft” (progress) are evident in the titles of the disciplines.
Referring to the content layer of the proposed curricula of the universities, it becomes clear that some trends are still pursuing mainstream (Western) social sciences and sociology. Some universities have even become intellectual bases of liberal ideology or other Western “isms.” The refinement and restorative approach to sociology has had a slow movement. Of course, foundational and productive approaches have also been pursued in intellectual bases connected to the discourse of the Islamic Revolution. The followers of mainstream (Western) sociology in Iran have not been very mindful of the connection between this science and the history and native context of their society. One of the most fundamental issues in the depth and discursive layer of sociology in Iranian higher education is the relationship between sociology and value. Believers in mainstream (Western) sociology in Iran still consider sociology to be a neutral, impartial, and objective science.
Discussion and Conclusions: The gap between the goals stated in the policies and the current situation is evident. If we analyze the trajectory of sociology in Iran, the scientific identity of the approved programs of the discipline and trends of sociology has been neither entirely convergent nor entirely divergent with the epistemological and cultural discourse after the Islamic Revolution. Some programs (such as the field of historical sociology) have assumed that the path of “studying” modern social science is separate from the path of “applying” it and have reduced “modern social science” to the “history of modern social science” (equivalent to the history of other sciences). Another group of programs (such as Social Science Research and the Sociology of Iranian Social Problems) have distanced themselves from the ontological, epistemological, and anthropological aspects of modern social science and use sociology merely as a technique and tool for surveys and social research.
In these programs, where pragmatist motivations have prevailed, it is inevitable and, where necessary, justified to resort to some mainstream (Western) sociological theories because those theories are supposed to shape the application and theoretical framework of research and studies. Most of what is going on in Iranian higher education in the social sciences stems from the debates of previous decades of Western civilization. Some critical attitudes toward that civilization and the revisions that Western thinkers have made concerning certain key positions and issues (regarding the relationship between science, society, and religion) have either not found their way into the Iranian academic community or have done so to a lesser extent.
In terms of the interdisciplinary aspect, sociology has had little success in updating itself in relation to psychology, cognitive sciences, policy-making, media, and new technologies, including artificial intelligence (AI). The lack of an evaluation system for the proper formulation and implementation of scientific policies is a serious gap.
Acknowledgement: Not mentioned.
Conflict of Interests: There has been no conflict of interest.

Keywords

References

منابع
 آرون، رمون (1402). جامعه‎شناسی تمدن مدرن، ترجمۀ پیروز ایزدی. تهران: فرهنگ جاوید.
اسلامی، روح‎اله، و خوش‎بین، ملیحه (1403). چرخۀ سیاست‌گذاری آموزش‌عالی در ایران: روندها، فرایندها و چالش‌ها. توسعۀ علوم انسانی، 10، 71-104. https://doi.org/10.22047/hsd.2024.447890.1009
اسمیت، جیمز (1401). چگونه سکولار نباشیم؟ تقریری از اندیشۀ چارلز تیلور، ترجمۀ حامد قدیری. تهران: ترجمان علوم انسانی.
اسمیت، فیلیپ، و رایلی، الگزندر (1394). نظریۀ فرهنگی، ترجمۀ محسن ثلاثی. تهران: علمی.
اشتریان، کیومرث (1391). روش سیاست‎گذاری فرهنگی. تهران: آشنا.
افروغ، عماد (1386). محتواگرایی و تولید علم. تهران: سورۀ مهر.
افروغ، عماد (1396). ارزیابی انتقادی نهاد علم در ایران. تهران: پژوهشکدۀ مطالعات فرهنگی و اجتماعی.
الدمدو، کنت (1403). سنت‎گرایی: دین در پرتو فلسفۀ جاویدان، ترجمۀ رضا بهشتی. تهران: حکمت.
برگر، پیتر (1402). سایبان مقدس: عناصر نظریۀ جامعه‎شناختی دین، ترجمۀ ابوالفضل مرشدی. تهران: ثالث.
بلاوت، جیمز موریس (1401). غرب چگونه غرب شد، ترجمۀ مرتضی مداحی. تهران: سروش.
بودن، ریمون (1389). مطالعاتی در آثار جامعه‎شناسان کلاسیک، جلد 2، ترجمۀ باقر پرهام. تهران: مرکز.
بهامبرا، گرمیندر (1401). بازاندیشی در معنای مدرنیته: پسااستعمارگرایی و تخیل جامعه‎شناسانه، ترجمۀ شهاب تقی‎پور. تهران: پژوهشکدۀ فرهنگ و هنر اسلامی.
پر، رنو، و پله، ژیل (1396). جامعه‎شناسی-تاریخ اقدام عمومی، ترجمۀ مجید وحید. تهران: مرکز.
تریگ، راجر (1400). فهم علم اجتماعی، ترجمۀ شهناز مسمی‎پرست. تهران: گل آذین.
خشکاب، شهربانو (1403). شناسایی و اولویت‌بندی مؤلفه‌های اصلی مبانی سیاسی-اجتماعی آموزش ‌عالی ایران؛ با تأکید بر انتظارات دولت. مجلس و راهبرد، 117، 445-495. https://doi.org/10.22034/mr.2022.5402.5163
ریتزر، جرج (1389). مبانی نظریۀ جامعه‎شناختی معاصر و ریشه‎های کلاسیک آن، ترجمۀ شهناز مسمی‎پرست. تهران: ثالث.
ژیرو، کلود (1395). تاریخ جامعه‎شناسی، ترجمۀ گیتی خرسند. تهران: نگاه معاصر.
شیربگی، ناصر، و عبداله‎زاده، نسیم (1399). تحلیل گفتمان سیاست‎گذاری آموزشی در نظام آموزش عالی ایران. سیاست‎گذاری عمومی، 6(2)، 179-200. https://doi.org/10.22059/jppolicy.2020.77619
عرفان‎منش، ایمان (1400). ارزیابی وضعیت حکمرانی پایدار در شورای تحول علوم انسانی در چارچوب بیانیۀ گام دوم انقلاب اسلامی. مطالعات الگوی پیشرفت اسلامی ایرانی، 17، 9-38. DOR: 20.1001.1.23295599.1400.9.1.1.8
عرفان‎منش، ایمان (1401). فرهنگ علم و فناوری و خلقیات ایرانی: تحلیلی راهبردی از گونه‎شناسی مشکلات و راهکارها بر مبنای نظر نخبگان. راهبرد، 103، 253-286. https://doi.org/10.22034/rahbord.2023.378069.1524
عرفان‎منش، ایمان (1402). تمدن-جامعه‎شناسی: رویکردی انتقادی و تحولی از دریچۀ فلسفۀ تاریخ و تمدن. تهران: دانشگاه امام صادقj.
عرفان‎منش، ایمان (1404الف). بن‎مایه‎های الهیات تمدنی علم اجتماعی مدرن. تهران: سروش.
عرفان‎منش، ایمان (1404ب). مطالعۀ تطبیقی انگارۀ الهیات تمدنی در رویکرد و اسناد راهبردی کلان در ایران معاصر. راهبرد اجتماعی فرهنگی، 56، 497-536. https://doi.org/10.22034/scs.2025.513091.1676
علی‎پور، مهدی (1403). انتظارات اسناد بالادستی از نظام آموزش عالی کشور. پژوهش و برنامه‎ریزی در آموزش عالی، 112، 1-15. 10.61838/KMAN.IRPHE.30.2.1
فوکو، میشل (1400). مراقبت و تنبیه، ترجمۀ نیکو سرخوش و افشین جهان‎دیده. تهران: نشر نی.
فی، براین (1402). فلسفۀ امروزین علوم اجتماعی: با نگرش چندفرهنگی، ترجمۀ خشایار دیهیمی. تهران: نشر نو.
کپوتو، ریچارد، کاترین، ماری، نتینگ، اف الن، کافی، آماندا، آمنتا، ادوین، و کلاسن، جوچن  (1400). درآمدی به تحلیل سیاست اجتماعی، ترجمۀ معصومه قاراخانی. تهران: کرگدن.
کریمی، جلیل (1401). تحلیل ساختاری آموزش عالی به‌مثابۀ نظام اجتماعی: پژوهشی کیفی. مطالعات دانشگاه، 1، 89-124. https://doi.org/10.22035/jous.2022.415
لیدمن، سون ‎اریک (1387). در سایۀ آینده: تاریخ اندیشۀ مدرنیته، ترجمۀ سعید مقدم. تهران: اختران.
مارتین، دیوید، میلز، جان ارم، و پیکرینگ، ویلیام (1398). جامعه‎شناسی و الهیات: پیوند و تعارض، ترجمۀ علی مرشدی‎زاده. تهران: ترجمان علوم انسانی.
ماژرزاک، آن (1398). پژوهش و سیاست‎گذاری، ترجمۀ هوشنگ نایبی. تهران: نی.
مرادی‎پور، حجت‎اله، حاجیانی، ابراهیم، و خلیفه، حشمت (1396). رهیافتی به پیامدهای سیاست‎گذاری علم و فناوری در ایران براساس تحلیل اسناد بالادستی. پژوهش در نظام‎های آموزشی، 37، 151-178. https://doi.org/10.22034/jiera.2017.57770
محبان، محمدجواد، قائدی، محمدرضا، دهشیری، محمدرضا، و کاوه، محمدکاظم (1403). ارزیابی چالش‌های نظام آموزش عالی ایران بعد از انقلاب در فرآیند سیاست‎گذاری و تصمیم‌سازی علمی و اجرایی. جامعه‎شناسی آموزش و پرورش، 10(2)، 284-294. https://www.doi.org/10.22034/ijes.2024.2021986.1534
والرشتاین، ایمانوئل (1400). علوم اجتماعی را بگشایید: گزارشی در باب ساختاربندی مجدد علوم اجتماعی، ترجمۀ مهدی معافی. تهران: روزگار نو.
همرسلی، مارتین (1400). مفهوم فرهنگ: تاریخچه و ارزیابی، ترجمۀ حجت‎اله خدری و ولی‎اله نصیری. تهران: نقد فرهنگ.
References
ʿĀbidīnī, M. R. (1399 H.sh./2020). Taḥaqquq-i khānavādih-ʾi wilāyīʾī bā majālis-i Ḥusaynī [Realizing the divinely-guided family through Ḥusaynī gatherings]. Tehran: Nashr-i Maʿārif. [In Persian]
Afrūgh, ʿI. (1386 H.sh./2007). Mihṭawāgarāyī wa tawlīd-i ʿilm [Contentism and the production of knowledge]. Tehran: Sūrih-ʾi Mihr. [In Persian]
Afrūgh, ʿI. (1396 H.sh./2017). Arzyābī-yi intiqādī-yi nihad-i ʿilm dar Īrān [A critical assessment of the institution of science in Iran]. Tehran: Pizhūhishkadih-ʾi Muṭāliʿāt-i Farhangī wa Ijtimāʿī. [In Persian]
Āl-Damdū, K. (1403 H.sh./2024). Sunnatgarāyī: Dīn dar purtuw-i falsafih-ʾi jāwidān [Traditionalism: Religion in the light of eternal philosophy] (R. Bihishtī, Trans.). Tehran: Ḥikmat. [In Persian]
ʿAlīpūr, M. (1403 H.sh./2024). Intiẓārāt-i asnād-i bālādashtī az niẓām-i āmūzish-i ʿālī-yi kishwar [Expectations of upstream documents from the country’s higher education system]. Pizhūhish wa BarnāmihRīzī dar Āmūzish-i ʿĀlī, 112, 1-15. doi: 10.61838/KMAN.IRPHE.30.2.1 [In Persian]
Ārūn, R. (1402 H.sh./2023). Jāmiʿahshināsī-yi tamaddun-i mudirn [Sociology of modern civilization] (P. Īzadī, Trans.). Tehran: Farhang-i Jāwid. [In Persian]
Ashtariyān, K. (1391 H.sh./2012). Ravish-i siyāsatguzārī-yi farhangī [Method of cultural policy]. Tehran: Āshnā. [In Persian]
Barker, E. (1976). Value systems generated by biologist. Contact, 55(1), 2-13. doi: 10.1080/13520806.1976
Bauman, Z. (1992). Intimations of postmodernity. London: Routledge.
Berger, P. (1402 H.sh./2023). Sāyibān-i muqaddas: ʿAnāṣir-i naẓariyyih-ʾi jāmiʿahshinākhtī-yi dīn [The sacred canopy: Elements of a sociological theory of religion] (A. Murshidī, Trans.). Tehran: S̱ālis̱. [In Persian]
Bhambra, G. (1401 H.sh./2022). Bāzandīshī dar maʿnā-yi mudirniyyih: Pasāistiʿmārgarāyī wa takhayyul-i jāmiʿahshinākhtī [Rethinking the meaning of modernity: Postcolonialism and the sociological imagination] (Sh. Taqīpūr, Trans.). Tehran: Pizhūhishkadih-ʾi Farhang wa Hunar-i Islāmī. [In Persian]
Blaut, J. M. (1401 H.sh./2022). Gharb chigūnih gharb shud [How the West became the West] (M. Madadḥī, Trans.). Tehran: Surūsh. [In Persian]
Boudon, R. (1389 H.sh./2010). Muṭāliʿātī dar ās̱ār-i jāmiʿahshināsān-i klāsīk [Studies in the works of classical sociologists] (Vol. 2) (B. Parhām, Trans.). Tehran: Markaz. [In Persian]
Bourdieu, P., & Wacquant, L. (1992). An invitation to reflexive sociology. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Caputo, R., et al. (1400 H.sh./2021). Darāmadī bar taḥlīl-i siyāsat-i ijtimāʿī [An introduction to social policy analysis] (M. Qarākhānī, Trans.). Tehran: Kargadān. [In Persian]
Erfanmanesh, I. (1400 H.sh./2021). Arzyābī-yi wizhagī-yi ḥukmrānī-yi pāydār dar Shawrā-yi Taḥawwul-i ʿUlūm-i Insānī dar chārchūb-i bayāniyyih-ʾi Gām-i Duvvum-i Inqilāb-i Islāmī [Evaluation of sustainable governance status in the Council for the Transformation of the Humanities within the framework of the Second Step of the Islamic Revolution statement]. Muṭāliʿāt-i Algow-yi Pišraft-i Islāmī-i Īrānī, 17, 9-38. DOR: 20.1001.1.23295599.1400.9.1.1.8 [In Persian]
Erfanmanesh, I. (1401 H.sh./2022). Farhang-i ʿilm wa fannāwarī wa khulqiyyāt-i Īrānī: Taḥlīlī rāhburdī az gūnihshināsī-yi mushkilāt wa rāhkārhā bar mabnā-yi naẓar-i nukhbagān [Culture of science and technology and Iranian character traits: A strategic analysis of the typology of problems and solutions based on elite opinions]. Rāhburd, 103, 253-286. doi: 10.22034/rahbord.2023.378069.1524 [In Persian]
Erfanmanesh, I. (1402 H.sh./2023). Tamaddun-Jāmiʿahshināsī: Rūykardī intiqādī wa taḥawwulī az dargah-ʾi falsafih-ʾi tārīkh wa tamaddun [Civilo-sociology: A critical and transformational approach from the perspective of the philosophy of history and civilization]. Tehran: Dānishgāh-i Imām Ṣādiq. [In Persian]
Erfanmanesh, I. (1404a H.sh./2025a). Binmāyihhā-yi īlāhiyyāt-i tamaddunī-yi ʿilm-i ijtimāʿī-yi mudirn [Motifs of civilizational theology of modern social science]. Tehran: Surūsh. [In Persian]
Erfanmanesh, I. (1404b H.sh./2025b). Muṭāliʿih-ʾi taṭbīqī-yi angārih-ʾi īlāhiyyāt-i tamaddunī dar rūykard wa asnād-i rāhburdī-yi kalān dar Īrān-i muʿāṣir [A comparative study of the idea of civilizational theology in the approach and macro-strategic documents in contemporary Iran]. Rāhburd-i Ijtimāʿī-Farhangī, 56, 497-536. doi: 10.22034/scs.2025.513091.1676 [In Persian]
Eslāmī, R., & Khwashbīn, M. (1403 H.sh./2024). Charkhih-ʾi siyāsatguzārī-yi āmūzish-i ʿālī dar Īrān: Rawandhā, farāyandhā wa chālīshhā [The higher education policy cycle in Iran: Trends, processes, and challenges]. Tawsiʿih-ʾi ʿUlūm-i Insānī, 10, 71-104. doi: 10.22047/hsd.2024.447890.1009 [In Persian]
Fayy, B. (1402 H.sh./2023). Falsafih-ʾi imrūzīn-i ʿulūm-i ijtimāʿī: Bā nigarish-i chandfarhangī [Contemporary philosophy of the social sciences: With a multicultural perspective] (Kh. Dayhīmī, Trans.). Tehran: Nashr-i Nū. [In Persian]
Foucault, M. (1400 H.sh./2021). Murāqabat wa tanbīh [Supervision and punishment] (N. Surkhwash & A. JahānDīdih, Trans.). Tehran: Nay. [In Persian]
Geertz, C. (1973). The interpretation of cultures. New York: Basic Books.
Giddens, A. (1995). Beyond left and right. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
Gilbert, N., & Terrell, P. (2010). Dimensions of social welfare policy. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Gīrū, Cl. (1395 H.sh./2016). Tārīkh-i jāmiʿahshināsī [History of sociology] (G. K͟hursand, Trans.). Tehran: Nigāh-i Muʿāṣir. [In Persian]
Guba, E. G. (1984). The effect of definitions of policy on the nature and outcomes of policy analysis. Educational Leadership, 42, 63-70.
Hamersley, M. (1400 H.sh./2021). Mafhūm-i farhang: Tārīkhchih wa arzyābī [The concept of culture: History and evaluation] (H. K͟hadrī & V. Naṣīrī, Trans.). Tehran: Naqd-i Farhang. [In Persian]
Karīmī, J. (1401 H.sh./2022). Taḥlīl-i sākhtārī-yi āmūzish-i ʿālī bihmas̱ābah-ʾi niẓām-i ijtimāʿī: Pizhūhishī kayfī [Structural analysis of higher education as a social system: A qualitative research]. Muṭāliʿāt-i Dānishgāh, 1, 89-124. doi: 10.22035/jous.2022.415 [In Persian]
Khwashkāb, Sh. (1403 H.sh./2024). Shināsāyī wa awlawiyatbandī-yi muʾallifihhā-yi aṣlī-yi mabānī-yi siyāsī-ijtimāʿī-yi āmūzish-i ʿālī-yi Īrān; bā taʾkīd bar intiẓārāt-i dawlat [Identifying and prioritizing the main components of the socio-political foundations of Iranian higher education; emphasizing the expectations of the government]. Majlis wa Rāhburd, 117, 445-495. doi: 10.22034/mr.2022.5402.5163 [In Persian]
Kraft, M. E., & Furlong, S. R. (2010). Public policy: Politics, analysis, and alternatives. Washington, DC: CQ Press (Sage).
Lidman, S.-E. (1387 H.sh./2008). Dar sāyih-ʾi āyandih: Tārīkh-i andīshih-ʾi mudirniyyih [In the shadow of the future: A history of modern thought] (S. Muqaddam, Trans.). Tehran: Akhtarān. [In Persian]
Lipsky, M. (2010). Street-level bureaucracy: Dilemmas of the individual in public service. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
MacIntyre, A. (1988). Whose justice? Which rationality? Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press.
Martin, D., Mills, J. O., & Pickering, W. S. F. (Eds.). (1398 H.sh./2019). Jāmiʿahshināsī wa īlāhiyyāt: Paywand wa taʿāruż [Sociology and theology: Connection and conflict] (A. Murshidīzād, Trans.). Tehran: Tarjumān-i ʿUlūm-i Insānī. [In Persian]
Māzarzāk, A. (1398 H.sh./2019). Pizhūhish wa siyāsatguzārī [Research and policy-making] (H. Nāyibī, Trans.). Tehran: Nay. [In Persian]
Miḥbān, M. J., Qāʾidī, M. R., Dihshīrī, M. R., & Kāwih, M. K. (1403 H.sh./2024). Arzyābī-yi chālīshhā-yi niẓām-i āmūzish-i ʿālī-yi Īrān baʿd az inqilāb dar farāyand-i siyāsatguzārī wa taṣmīmsāzī-yi ʿilmī wa ijrāʾī [Assessing the challenges of the Iranian higher education system after the revolution in the process of policy-making and scientific and executive decision-making]. Jāmiʿahshināsī-yi Āmūzish wa Parwarish, 10(2), 284-294. doi: 10.22034/ijes.2024.2021986.1534 [In Persian]
Mīrbābāpūr, S. M., & Sājidī, A. (1392 H.sh./2013). Dīn wa mudirniyyih: Barrasī-yi rūykard-i furūkāhishī bih dīn dar nisbat bā mudirniyyih [Religion and modernity: A reductive approach to religion in relation to modernity]. Maʿrifat-i Kalāmī, 1, 93-114. [In Persian]
Mīrkhandān, S. ʿA. (1401 H.sh./2022). Barrasī-yi kārkardhā-yi jāmiʿahshinākhtī-yi sargarmī bā rūykard-i Islāmī [Investigating the sociological functions of entertainment with an Islamic approach]. Islām wa ʿUlūm-i Ijtimāʿī, 27, 75-89. doi: 10.30471/soci.2022.8210.1742 [In Persian]
Muḥaqqiq Dāmād, S. M. (1393 H.sh./2014). Naẓariyyih-ʾi siyāsatī-yi Islām [Political theory of Islam]. Qom: Būstān-i Kitāb. [In Persian]
Murādīpūr, H., Ḥājiyānī, I., & Khalīfih, H. (1396 H.sh./2017). Rāhyāftī bih pāyāmadhā-yi siyāsatguzārī-yi ʿilm wa fannāwarī dar Īrān bar asās-i taḥlīl-i asnād-i bālādashtī [An approach to the consequences of science and technology policy-making in Iran based on the analysis of upstream documents]. Pizhūhish dar Niẓāmhā-yi Āmūzishī, 37, 151-178. doi: 10.22034/jiera.2017.57770 [In Persian]
Najafpūr, Sh. (1393 H.sh./2014). Akhlāq dar rasānih; chālīshhā-yi asāsī wa tawṣīyihhā-yi millī [Media ethics; key challenges and national recommendations]. Akhlāq dar ʿUlūm wa Fannāwarī, 2, 97-105. [In Persian]
O’Connor, M. K., & Netting, F. E. (2009). Organization practice: A guide to understanding human service organizations. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
Pithouse, A., & Williamson, H. (1997). Engaging the user in welfare services. Birmingham: Venture.
Pizhūhishkadih-ʾi Ḥawzih wa Dānishgāh. (1395 H.sh./2016). Jāmiʿahshināsī dar Īrān: Wāligīrīhā wa dīdgāhhā [Sociology in Iran: Impediments and perspectives]. Qom: Pizhūhishkadih-ʾi Ḥawzih wa Dānishgāh. [In Persian]
Rehner, J. (1994). Practical strategies for critical thinking. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Rein, M., & White, S. H. (1977). Can policy research help policy? The Public Interest, 49, 119-136.
Sabatier, P. A. (2007). Theories of the policy process. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
Sālimī Qumṣarī, M. (1386 H.sh./2007). Mawāniʿ-i farhangī-yi taḥazzub dar Īrān (dawrih-ʾi awwal-i taḥazzub, 1304-1288 H.sh.) [Cultural obstacles to party politics in Iran (the first period of party politics, 1909-1925)]. Faṣlnāmih-ʾi ʿUlūm-i Ijtimāʿī, (37), 39-71. [In Persian]
Sarvarī, M. R. (1398 H.sh./2019). Pīshfarżhā-yi jāmiʿahshināsī-yi dīn dar Īrān [Presuppositions of the sociology of religion in Iran]. Qom: Pizhūhishgāh-i ʿUlūm wa Farhang-i Islāmī. [In Persian]
Shīrbaygī, N., & ʿAbdullāhzādih, N. (1399 H.sh./2020). Taḥlīl-i guftumān-i siyāsatguzārī-yi āmūzishī dar niẓām-i āmūzish-i ʿālī-yi Īrān [Analysis of the discourse of educational policymaking in the Iranian higher education system]. Siyāsatguzārī-yi ʿUmūmī, 6(2), 179-200. doi: 10.22059/jppolicy.2020.77619 [In Persian]
Smith, J. (1401 H.sh./2022). Chigūnih sikūlār nabāshīm? Taqrīrī az andīshih-ʾi Chārlz Tāylūr [How not to be secular? An exposition of Charles Taylor’s thought] (Ḥ. Qadīrī, Trans.). Tehran: Tarjumān-i ʿUlūm-i Insānī. [In Persian]
Smith, P., & Riley, A. (1394 H.sh./2015). Naẓariyyih-ʾi farhangī [Cultural theory] (M. S̱alās̱ī, Trans.). Tehran: ʿIlmī. [In Persian]
Stone, D. (2002). Policy paradox: The art of political decision making. New York: Norton.
Trigg, R. (1400 H.sh./2021). Fahm-i ʿilm-i ijtimāʿī [Understanding social science] (Sh. Masmīparast, Trans.). Tehran: Gul Āzīn. [In Persian]
Vāʿiẓī, A. M. (1401 H.sh./2022). Barrasī-yi chālīshhā-yi Ṣidā wa Sīmā-yi Jumhūrī-yi Islāmī-yi Īrān wa mīkānīsmhā-yi taḥawwul [Investigating the challenges of the Islamic Republic of Iran Broadcasting and transformation mechanisms]. Retrieved from https://iranthinktanks.com [In Persian]
Wallerstein, I. (1400 H.sh./2021). ʿUlūm-i ijtimāʿī rā bígushāyīd: Guzārishī dar bāb-i sākhtārbindī-yi mujaddad-i ʿulūm-i ijtimāʿī [Open the social sciences: A report on the restructuring of the social sciences] (M. Muʿāfī, Trans.). Tehran: Rūzgār-i Nū. [In Persian]
Weimer, D. L., & Vining, A. R. (2011). Policy analysis. Boston: Longman.
Wildavsky, A. (1979). Speaking truth to power: The art and craft of policy analysis. Boston: Little, Brown.
Zirzas, A. (1389 H.sh./2010). Mabānī-i falsafī-yi ʿulūm-i ijtimāʿī [Philosophical foundations of the social sciences] (M. ʿImādat, Trans.). Tehran: Samt. [In Persian]
 

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics