Journal of Iranian Cultural Research

Journal of Iranian Cultural Research

University and Everyday Culture of Cities; Aesthetic Interaction and Voluntary Services of Planning Departments

Document Type : Scientific Research Manuscript

Authors
F. Samanpour 1
N. Barakpour 2
M. Farasatkhah 3
1 PhD Candidate of Urban Planning, Faculty of Architecture and Urban Planning, University of Art, Tehran, Iran
2 Professor of Urban Planning, Faculty of Architecture and Urban Planning, University of Art, Tehran, Iran
3 Associate professor of higher education planning, Institute for Research and Planning in Higher Education, Tehran, Iran
10.22035/jicr.2019.1898.2486
Abstract
In recent decades universities are pushed to provide services to commercial or governmental stakeholders rather than the civil society. In Iran, even, the commercial services have not developed satisfactorily. In this situation a strategy for promoting the position of universities is to provide voluntary social services within the educational and research activities. This article is part of an attempt to introduce such services to the urban planning postgraduate programs of two schools in Tehran. Although, this attempt was successful in some aspects, it could not satisfy the participating professors. To find the reasons, the pragmatic foundation of academic services has been reviewed and the review showed that provision of civil services necessitates holistic cultural communication with people. An interdisciplinary workshop was held for examining the quality of the cultural communication of the faculty; and some interviews were conducted with some of the attended lecturers and professors. A narrative analysis of speeches, interviews and communications was then conducted by using a framework devised for the assessment of universities’ public communication on the basis of Habermas’ theory of communicative rationality. It identified that the organizational culture of the faculty has paid little attention to the aesthetic aspects of communication; also while the school has critical attitudes, theoretically, it is practically confined to formal structures and has little competence in critical action. The article suggests a framework for a substitute organizational narrative that may promote the aesthetic interaction, and suggests that other disciplines evaluate their social relations aesthetically, too.
Keywords
service
pragmatism
cultural communication
aesthetic communication
organizational narrative
Subjects
Abbasi, B., Gholipour, B., Delavar, A., & Jafari, P. (2010). Tahqiq-e Keyfi pirāmun-e t’sir-e ruykard-e tejāri-sāzi bar arzešha-ye sonnati-e dānešgah [A Qualitative Research about the Effect of Commercialization Approach on the Traditional Academic Values]. Journal of Science and Technology Policy, 2(2):73-76. DOI: 10.22034/jstp.2010.2.2.535097
Baum, H (2015). Planning with half a Mind: Why planners resist emotion. Planning Theory & Practice 16(4): 498–516. doi: 10.1080/14649357.2015.1071870
Boje, D. M. (2001). Narrative Methods for Organizational and Communicative Research, London: Sage.
Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (1990). Grounded theory research: procedures, canons, and evaluative criteria. Qualitative Sociology 13(1), 3-21. doi.org/10.1007/BF00988593
Creswell, J. W. (1998). Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Dewey, J. (1937). Democracy and Educational Administration, reprinted in: Boydston J. A. (ed.) John Dewey: the Later Works, Vol. 11, Carbondale & Edwardsville: Southern Illinois University Press.
Dewey, J. (2008). Art as experience. in S.M. Chan, & A. Meskin (Eds.). Aesthetic; A Comparative Anthology. Oxford: Blackwell.
Duvenage, P. (2003). Habermas and Aesthetics; the Limits of Communicative Reason. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Farasatkhah M (1396/2017) Gāh-o bigāhi-e dānešgāh dar Irān [Timeliness and untimliness of universities in iran]. Tehran: Āgāh. 
Farasatkhah M (2016). Dar jost-o-ju-ye fazāhā-ye sāzmāni va farhang-e monāseb barāy-e ejtema’at-e yadgiri [Seeking organizational spaces and appropriate culture for learning communities]. The 3rd National Conference on Human Capital Education and Development, Tehran, Iran, Milad Tower.
Farasatkhah, M. (2015). Naqš-e āmuzeš-e āli va dānešgahha dar pažuhešhā-ye ejtemā’I va farhangi [The role of higher education and universities in social and cultural enquiries]. The 3rd National Conference on Social and Cultural Enquiries. Iranian Association of Sociology, Tehran, Iran.
Fisher, R., Fabricant, M., & Simons, L. (2004). Understanding contemporary university-community connections. Journal of Community Practice. 12(3-4), 13-34. doi: 10.1300/J125v12n03_02.
Flyvbjerg, B. (2012). Why mass media matter to planning research. Planning Education and Research, 32(2), 169–181. doi: 10.1177/0739456X12441950.
Freire, P. (1968). Pedagogy of the Oppressed. New York: Continuum.
Friedmann, J. (1987). Planning in the public domain; from knowledge to action. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Giddens, A. (1984). The Constitution of Society. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Gunder, M., & Hillier, J. (2009). Planning in Ten Words or Less. Farnham: Ashgate.
Haberams, J. (1967, rep. 1987). The university in a democracy-democratization of the university. In J. Habermas,, Toward a Rational Society. (J. Shapiro,  Trans.). Cambridge & Oxford: Polity Press.
Hatch, M. J. (2011). Organizations: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford & New York: Oxford University Press.
Healey, P. (2009). The pragmatic tradition in planning thought. Planning Education and Research 28(3), 277-292.  doi: 10.1177/0739456X08325175
Herr, K., & Anderson, D. (2005). The Action Research Dissertation: A Guide for Students and Faculty. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Iran’s Ministry of Science, Research & Technology (2013 July, 14). Barnāme-ye darsi-ye maqt’-e kāršenasi-ye arshad-e barnāme-rizi-ye šahri [Master of urban planning Course program]. Reterived from http://hes.msrt.ir/uploads/T_Education/Educ_7038_0.pdf
Iran’s Ministry of Sience, Research & Technology (2017, Sep. 18). Kontorol-e ravand-e puli šodan-e dānešgahha rāhbord-e asli-e nezam-e āmuzeš-e āli ast [Controlling the process of monetarism in universities is the main strategy of the higher education system]
Keynia M (1976). Moqarrarāt-e danešgah (University Regulation V.I). Tehran University: Tehran.
Landry, C. (2006). The Art of city making. London & Sterling, VA: Earthscan.
Langley, R. J. )1970(. The Writing of C.G. Jung. New York: Monarch Press.
Langsdorf, L (2002). Reconstructing the fourth dimension: A Deweyan critique of Habermas`s conception of communicative action. in: Aboulafia, M; Bookman, M; & Kemp, C. Habermas and Pragmatism. London & New York: Routledge.
Legal Vice-Presidency (2017). Qānun-e Barnāme-ye panj-sale-ye šešom-e tows’e-ye eqtesādi, Ejtema’I va farhangi-e Jomhuri-e eslāmi-e Irān [The act for the sixth five-year economic sovial and cultural development of the Islamic Republic of Iran]. Iran’s Planning and Budget Organization. Retrived from http://mporg.ir on 2017, Nov. 15.
Levin, M., & Greeenwood, D. (2008). The future of universities: action research and the transformation of higher education. In P. Reason, & H. Bradbury (eds.).  The SAGE Handbook of Action Research. London: Sage.
Levin, M., & Greenwood, D. (2011). Revitalizing universities by reinventing the social sciences: bildung and action research. In N.K. Denzin, & Y.S. Lincoln, The Sage handbook of Qualitative Research. Sage: Thousand Oaks, Ca.
Libliech, A., Tuval-Mashiach, R., & Zilber, T. (1998). Narrative Research, Reading, Analysis and Interpretation. Sage: Thousand Oaks.
Marullo, S., & Edwards, B. (2000). Editors' introduction: service-learning pedagogy as universities' response to troubled times, American Behavioral Scientist, 43(5), 746-755.  doi: 10.1177/00027640021955568
Menand, L. (1997). Pragmatism; a Reader. New York: Vintage Books.
Metzger, J. (2011). Strange spaces: A rationale for bringing art and artists into the planning process. Planning Theory, 10(3), 213–238. doi: 10.1177/1473095210389653
Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative Data Analysis (2nd. ed.). Sage: Thousand Oaks.
Milley, P. (2004). The social and educational implications of university cooperative education: A habermasian perspective (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Victoria: University of Victoria.
Milley, P. (2006). Aesthetic experience as resistance to the ‘iron cage’ of dominative administrative rationality. In E.A. Samier, & R.J. Bates, Aesthetic Dimensions of Educational Administration and Leadership. London & New York: Routledge.
Miraftab, F. (2009). Insurgent planning: Situating radical planning in the global south. Planning Theory 8(1), 32–50.  doi: 10.1177/1473095208099297.
Mozafari G (2011) Tarrāhi va E’tebāryabi-e olgui-e pasoxguyi-e dānešgāh dar moqābel-e zi-naf’an [Devising and verifying the model of university’s responsibility to stakeholders] (Unpublished doctoraldissertation). University of Shahid Beheshti, Tehran, Iran.
Pardakhtchi M H, Bazargan A, Arasteh H, Mozafari G (1391/2012) Šekaf-e pāsoxguyi-e biruni-e Danešgahha a did-e jame’e-ye elmi [Academic society's perceptions on university external accountability gap]. IRPHE, 63: 91-112.
Polkinghorne, D. E. (1988). Narrative knowing and the human sciences. Albany: State University of New York Press.
Purcell, M. (2016). For democracy: Planning and publics without the state. Planning Theory, 15(4), 386–401.  doi: 10.1177/1473095215620827
Reason, P., & Bradbury, H. (2008). Introduction. In P. Reason & H. Bradbury (eds.). The Sage Handbook of Action Research, London: Sage.
Samanpour F, & Barakpour N (1394/2015, Dec.) Be suy-e kargah-e madany: Erae-ye ārubi nazari baray-e ejray-e behine-ye xedmat-amuzi dar kargahhay-e šahrsazi [Towards a civil workshop; a theoretical framework for promotion of service-learning in urban planning studios]. The First National Conference on Urban Plannign Education. Tehran. Iran.
Samier, E. A., Bates, R. J., & Stanley, A. (2006). Foundations and history of the social aesthetics. In Samier, A. E. & R.J. Bates, Aesthetic Dimensions of Educational Administration and Leadership. London and New York: Routledge.
Samier, E.A. (2006). Imagination, taste, the sublime, and genius in administration; A Kantian critique of organisational aesthetic. In A. Samier, Eugenie, & J. Richard Bates. Aesthetic Dimensions of Educational Administration and Leadership. London and New York: Routledge.
Sandercock, L (2003b). Cosmopolis II: Mongrel Cities in the 21st Century. London & New York: Continuum.
Sarāvaki, E. (1973). Danešgahha va madāres-e āli [Universities and higher education]. Tehran, Iran: Entešarat-e Bu-Ali.
Stevenson, D. (2003). Cities and Urban Culture. Maidenhead and Philadelphia: Open University Press.
Strati, A. (1999). Organization and aesthetics. London: Sage.
Supreme Council of Cultural Reevolution (1389/2010) Naqše-ye jeme’-e elmi-e keshvar [Master scientific plan of the Iran]. Retirved from htto://msrt.ir, in 2014 Jan.
Supreme Council of Cultural Reevolution (2016, July. 27) A’inname-ye erteqa-ye martabe-ye a’za-ye hei’at-e elmi-e mo’asseseha-ye āmuzeš-e āli, pažuheši va fannāvari-e dolati va gheir-e dolati [promotion codes for faculty members of public and non-public higher education, research and technology institutions]
Watson, D., Hollister, R. M., Stroud, S. E, & Babcock, E. (2011). The Engaged University. Oxon & New York: Routledge.
Watson, V. (2012). Planning and the “stubborn realities” of global south-east cities: some emerging ideas. Planning Theory, 12(1), 81–100. doi: 10.1177/1473095212446301
Young, G. (2008). The culturization of planning. Planning Theory, 7(1), 71-91.  doi: 10.1177/1473095207082035
 
Send comment about this article
Enter Name.
Enter a valid email address.
Enter a vaid affiliation.
Enter comments (At leaset 10 words)
CAPTCHA Image
Enter Security Code Correctly.

  • Receive Date 18 April 2018
  • Revise Date 09 August 2018
  • Accept Date 08 January 2019