Volume 4, Issue 2 (JUNE ISSUE 2023)                   johepal 2023, 4(2): 92-105 | Back to browse issues page

XML Print

Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:

Witenstein M A, Abdallah J. (2023). Composite Storytelling Affiliated College Faculty Narratives in India to Propose Curriculum and Exam Policy Revisions. johepal. 4(2), 92-105. doi:10.61186/johepal.4.2.92
URL: http://johepal.com/article-1-355-en.html
Abstract:   (1053 Views)
Affiliated college academic staff members in India represent an abundance of frontline knowledges which hold great promise for impacting bottom-up policy. However, their knowledges are typically missing from the literature nor shared cross-institutionally. While it is common for them to express a lack of discretion, many find avenues for invoking high impact practices common to street-level bureaucrats. This study focuses on how they navigate university curriculum and exam policies through six emerging and high impact practices. This study highlights their high impact practices performed by illustrating meaningful mechanisms for coping and adapting to policies, and emerging insights regarding the role policymakers play in response to academics. We do this via composite storytelling, which merges participants’ perspectives into narratives. Findings suggest grounding (in part) street-level bureaucrats high impact practices when (re)developing policies and the channels through which policies flow, to support the ways frontline workers cope and adapt to their work.
Full-Text [PDF 1481 kb]   (413 Downloads)    
Type of Study: Research | Subject: Special
Received: 2023/01/6 | Accepted: 2023/06/2 | Published: 2023/06/30

1. Agarwal, P. (2009). Indian Higher Education: Envisioning the Future. SAGE Publications India Pvt Ltd. [DOI]
2. Altbach, P. G. (2009). One-third of the globe: The future of higher education in China and India. Prospects, 39(1), 11-31. [DOI]
3. Altbach, P. G. (2014). India’s higher educational challenges. Asia Pacific Education Review, 15(4), 503-510. [DOI]
4. Aminoff, R. (2011). The current themes of Indian higher education. Research Unit for the Sociology of Education (RUSE). University of Turku, Finland. [Article]
5. Bensimon, E. M. (2007). The underestimated significance of practitioner knowledge in the scholarship on student success. The Review of Higher Education, 30(4), 441-469. [DOI]
6. Creese, J., Byrne, J. P., Conway, E., Barrett, E., Prihodova, L., & Humphries, N. (2021). “We all really need to just take a breath”: Composite narratives of hospital doctors’ well-being during the COVID-19 pandemic. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18(4), 2051. [DOI]
7. Hubain, B. S., Allen, E. L., Harris, J. C., & Linder, C. (2016). Counter-stories as representations of the racialized experiences of students of color in higher education and student affairs graduate preparation programs. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 29(7), 946-963. [DOI]
8. Joshi, S., & Rao, V. (2018). Who should be at the top of bottom-up development? A case-study of the national rural livelihoods mission in Rajasthan, India. The Journal of Development Studies, 54(10), 1858-1877. [DOI]
9. Khelifi, S. (2019). Interplay between politics and institution in higher education reform. European Journal of Educational Research, 8(3), 671-681. [DOI]
10. Krathwohl, D. R. (2009). Methods of Educational and Social Science Research: The Logic of Methods (3rd ed.). Waveland Press.
11. Lipsky, M. (1971). Street-level bureaucracy and the analysis of urban reform. Urban Affairs Review, 6(4), 391-409. [DOI]
12. Lipsky, M. (2010). Street-Level Bureaucracy, 30th Ann. Ed.: Dilemmas of the Individual in Public Service. Russell Sage Foundation.
13. Kiyama, J. M. (2011). Family lessons and funds of knowledge: College-going paths in Mexican American families. Journal of Latinos and education, 10(1), 23-42. [DOI]
14. Sabatier, P. A. (1986). Top-down and bottom-up approaches to implementation research: A critical analysis and suggested synthesis. Journal of Public Policy, 6(1), 21-48. [DOI]
15. Singh, A. (2003). Academic standards in Indian universities: Ravages of affiliation. Economic and Political Weekly, 38(30), 3200-3208. [Article]
16. University Grants Commission. (2017). UGC annual report 2016/2017. University Grants Commission. New Delhi, India.
17. Willis, R. (2019). The use of composite narratives to present interview findings. Qualitative Research, 19(4), 471-480. [DOI]
18. Witenstein, M. A. (2015). Educational Value in Urban Colleges of Education in India (Doctoral dissertation, The Claremont Graduate University).
19. Witenstein, M. A., & Abdallah, J. (2022). Applying the street-level bureaucracy framework for education policy discernment to curriculum and exam policies in India. Prospects, 52(3-4), 437-452. [DOI]

Rights and permissions
Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

© 2024 CC BY-NC 4.0 | Journal of Higher Education Policy And Leadership Studies

Designed & Developed by : Yektaweb