Scientific Life in Indian and African Universities: A Comparative Study of Peripherality in Science.

Autor/in	Eiseman, Thomas Owen
Titel	Scientific Life in Indian and African Universities: A Comparative Study of Peripherality in Science.
Quelle	(1980), (35 Seiten)Verfügbarkeit
Sprache	englisch
Dokumenttyp	gedruckt; Monographie
Schlagwörter	Stellungnahme; African Culture; Comparative Education; Developing Nations; Educational Assessment; Educational Needs; Educational Objectives; Educational Trends; Faculty Development; Foreign Countries; Higher Education; Intellectual Disciplines; Job Satisfaction; Knowledge Level; Non Western Civilization; Professional Personnel; Science Education; Scientific Research; Scientists; Student Characteristics; Teaching Conditions; Universities; India; Kenya; Nigeria + Suchen Sie Ihr Suchwort? Africa; Culture; Afrika; Kultur; Vergleichende Erziehungswissenschaft; Developing country; Developing countries; Entwicklungsland; Education; assessment; Bewertungssystem; Educational need; Bildungsbedarf; Educational objective; Bildungsziel; Erziehungsziel; Bildungsentwicklung; Ausland; Hochschulbildung; Hochschulsystem; Hochschulwesen; Geisteswissenschaften; Labor; Labour; Satisfaction; Arbeit; Zufriedenheit; Wissensbasis; Personalbestand; Naturwissenschaftliche Bildung; Scientist; Wissenschaftler; Lehrbedingungen; Unterrichtsbedingungen; University; Universität; Indien; Kenia
Abstract	This paper examines how the careers and research activities of university scientists in India, Nigeria, and Kenya are influenced by factors related to practicing science in developing nations. Data are derived from interviews with engineers, physicists, mathematicians, and zoologists in Indian, Kenyan, and Nigerian universities. Estimates are that there are approximately 90,000 university scientists in India, 3,000 in Nigeria, and fewer than one thousand in Kenya. Science-related differences among the three nations include volume of scientific work, amount of scientific training available, date of modern scientific development, and effort to relate science planning to national development. In all these cases, India is the most developed. There are, however, many factors common to science teaching and research in these and other developing nations. Common factors include intellectual isolation, peripheral nature of production and circulation of scientific knowledge within the international scientific community, ill equipped and/or poorly maintained scientific facilities, inadequate research funding, and political interference. The conclusion is that scientists in universities in developing nations will contribute more to international scientific endeavors and will be more highly regarded within their own universities if they improve communications with research centers in scientifically developed nations, develop infrastructures for scientific work outside universities, concentrate on training scientific expertise, and award university science teachers with salary raises and promotions on the basis of merit rather than seniority. (DB)
Erfasst von	ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC