 |
| Me and Alparslan ACIKGENC |
Prof. Dr. Alparslan ACIKGENC
Director
34220Yildiz ISTANBUL
In order to develop a humanities and sciences curriculum in universities
of the Muslim world we need to analyze the nature of education, which can
broadly be understood as a “process of acquiring knowledge.” For in the actual
sense education consists of learning and teaching. The former is acquiring
knowledge which is learning and the
latter is imparting knowledge which is teaching.
In that case both learning and teaching are processes of knowledge. But since
the aim of education is learning then our attention must concentrate on this
aspect. Therefore, if we analyze the nature of learning as the process of
acquiring knowledge we may at the same time discover the real nature of
education. This way I am hoping at the same time to develop a more effective
method of developing a science and humanities curriculum.
The process of acquiring knowledge has two aspects: One is external,
the other is internal. What we mean by the internal aspect of the process of
acquiring knowledge is epistemology, which, as a branch of philosophy,
investigates the operations of our faculties employed while acquiring
knowledge. The external process of acquiring knowledge is on the other hand
what we call “learning” investigated in the discipline called “education”. External
process as education includes instructor, teaching methods, other means utilized
in teaching and above all the subject of discussion in this context curriculum. Therefore, I shall
concentrate in this paper on curriculum development in sciences and humanities
from our own perspective. For, it is perspective that changes an outlook and
gives the activity its own color, which is in this case Islamic.
Learning as an external process of acquiring knowledge can be in two
ways: One is natural learning, which is attaining knowledge mainly by the use
of our faculties of learning and senses. The most effective method in this kind
of learning is trial and error. The other kind of learning is systematic
knowledge acquisition. It is this second kind of learning that we should
consider as real education. Now we come to a point where we have to recognize
the role of epistemology in education because education as systematic learning
is an external process acquiring knowledge, which is based on the internal process
of acquiring knowledge. For, the internal process of acquiring knowledge as
learning is mainly the operations of our mind and other faculties of learning
while we try to acquire knowledge. This means if we know how our faculties of
learning operate then obviously we can teach the students more effectively. In
that case the internal process of acquiring knowledge can give us more
effective methods of teaching and thus we need to utilize it. But this aspect
is discussed in epistemology, so I will try only to assume a theory of
knowledge on the basis of which I shall attempt to develop a theory of education
that may guide us in determining the challenges we face today in higher
education.
Our explanation so far reveals that a theory of education consists of
the internal process of acquiring knowledge on the one hand; and the learning
subject (the human being), which represents the external process including
teaching on the other. The former includes an analysis of the internal
processes which take place in the mind and learning faculties of the learning
subject (the human being). The latter includes the efforts of systematic
learning and teaching. Let us then try to analyze these structures in order to
pinpoint the place of higher learning in education so that we can discover our
challenges and new prospects.[1]
I. THE INTERNAL
PROCESS OF LEARNING
The internal process of learning is the operations of our faculties
which we use in order to acquire knowledge. These operations begin at the level
of objects of knowledge and ends at the level where their complete concepts,
ideas and knowledge are transferred to the mind. In this context, when we say
“complete” we do not mean that in this process we exhaust the knowledge of that
object. What we mean is that for that specific process the complete idea,
concept and whatever is aimed at learning is achieved. This process can be
natural or systematic. We shall try to understand these processes that will
give us an effective method of teaching to be utilized in any education.
A. Natural Learning
The natural process of learning or of acquisition of knowledge is the
personal trial of an individual in acquiring knowledge. Usually this is the way
we first begin to learn things when we arrive to this world. The main method of
natural learning is trial and error. As a result of this process a worldview is
formed in the mind of the learning subject. Initially this worldview is simple
and as such has only two structures: Life Structure and World Structure. The
former starts to be formed as soon as we are born. In this first experience of
life it is extremely hard to determine what will be the first that we learn. In
other words, what is our first experience that is converted into a piece of
knowledge? We can, on the other hand, identify more or less what kind of
knowledge this mental content is; for example, it cannot be an abstract idea,
or a philosophical notion and the like. It will be a kind of knowledge that
pertains to our life at that time. Since we are naturally inclined to preserve
our life, most of our experiences will be related to the preservation of life,
such as finding and choosing certain food and developing habits of how to
attract the attention of others to make food available and so on.
Therefore, in our early ages we naturally
(fitratan)[2]
have such experiences available to our mental consciousness and it is these
experiences that are converted into knowledge. What we call Life Structure is the
knowledge that is available for us in this way and is primarily related to our biological
and daily life. In that case Life Structure in our worldview includes most of
our daily habits related to the preservation of our life. This Life Structure
becomes more refined and sophisticated as we add to it what we learn from our
social environment. In this way it begins to include many of our cultural
habits as well, such as habits of eating, our social culture, and the ways of
daily behavior, manners and customs. We call it ‘structure’
because our mind forms it according to its natural (fitrî) rules and principles explained in such disciplines as logic
and epistemology. For this reason, knowledge gathered in this structure is not
a hodgepodge gathering of experience in our mind; it is rather an orderly unity
according to certain rules and principles. Life Structure is, therefore, such a
coherent mental unity which makes up the total contents of our mind in our
earliest life onwards enriching itself until adulthood according to the natural
rules and principles of the mind through its social and physical surrounding.
It is this internal process that we call natural. When there is interference
from either us or our surrounding then learning becomes systematic.
I would like to illustrate the natural
internal process of learning with a concrete representation. We have a
digestive system which is totally biological. Yet, if our capacity to attain
knowledge is called “knowledge system” following our naming of the “digestive
system”, then it actually resembles our “knowledge system”. Our digestive
system too has internal and external processes, both of which also have
“natural” and “systematic” ways, although they may not be called as such in
anatomy. The former is the process which takes place after the food is put into
the mouth; and the latter is the process which takes place during the gathering
and preparing the food before it is eaten. Hence, the internal process of
digestion is like the internal process of learning or of acquiring knowledge,
namely the process that takes place after the “information” received from the
objects of knowledge is put into the mind.
The external process of digestion is a good illustration to the external
process of learning or of acquiring knowledge, namely the process that takes
place before the “information” received from the objects of knowledge is put
into the mind. It is clear that in
all these processes there are natural and systematic procedures.
B. Systematic Learning
As far as the internal process of
learning is concerned there is no difference in natural or systematic learning.
Here the difference comes because of the external applications of our learning
faculties and as a result in the mind a more systematic worldview is formed.
This makes a significant change in learning. For, as soon as we begin to form a
mental conception of a natural experience, which we had from babyhood onwards, we
will begin to act no longer out of the natural instincts alone, but also out of
the mental content that we have acquired which we have called ‘Life Structure’.
The more sophisticated the Life Structure is, the more conceptual becomes the
experience and thus the more we act out of our mental frameworks. This means we
are now acting on the basis of our knowledge which we have thus far acquired
and hence knowledge formed thereupon is more systematic. In such a conceptual Life
Structure we may be able to distinguish certain elements, which we call
‘mentality’. A mentality is actually an understanding or conception of certain
things, living types, and facts of life and of the world. As we grow these
mentalities are developed according to our personality, mental abilities and
the kind of education we receive. Each mentality begins to develop through the
education we receive into a structure and thus can be termed ‘sub-structure’.
These mentalities are so coherently related to each other that together they
form the totality of the Life Structure. Then, we begin to arrange our life
according to our own Life Structure, which is the totality of the contents of our
mind thus far in our life. Since, as a total unity, the mind reflects all the
ideas we have thus far formed in our mind, its contents as the Life Structure
will also reflect our attitude for life and understanding the universe in
general. Our worldview at this stage has only a Life Structure which reflects our
conception of the universe, such as the meaning of life, the origin of existence,
human destiny and so on. As such it includes our identity as well. Life
Structure and worldview are the same at this stage.
On the other hand, as we grow up,
gradually develops in our worldview certain conceptions concerning the world we
live in; first, certain fundamental questions arise in the mind, such as the
meaning of life, from where we have come and where we are going to. As we try
to answer, or find answers to these fundamental questions, a conception
concerning the world and things around us is formed. As this conception begins
to be more sophisticated through our education, it gradually forms a clearly
discernible structure in the mind, which can be distinguished from the Life
Structure. This new structure first forms a mentality within the Life
Structure. If however, the society has a good educational system endowed with
knowledge then these mentalities within the Life Structure will continue to
become more and more sophisticated. But if it can be fully developed it
provides well formed ideas, doctrines and even scientific opinion concerning
the world we live in; hence, it is apt to call it ‘World Structure’. As soon as
this new structure is established within the worldview, it begins to function
in conjunction with the life-structure and vice versa.
If there is a good education based
on knowledge and in fact more specifically scientific knowledge in the
community then the worldview in our mind develops further. Usually there are
certain concepts in our worldview that dominate our life. It is possible to
reduce these concepts into only five fundamental ones: life, world, knowledge,
human and value. A fundamental concept is one which forms a complicated
understanding and a mentality in our mind which directs us to a certain
behavior in life and society. As such these concepts can be characterized as
“doctrinal concepts” because each one of them may constitute a specific well
developed doctrine which determines our worldview. The development of these
concepts depends upon the type of education a person receives. We should be able
to see here that at least two doctrinal concepts grow into structures in our
worldview as a natural internal process of learning; Life and World Structures.
But if the education is scientific then the concept of knowledge can also
acquire a doctrinal characteristic and as such formed into a “Knowledge
Structure”. In the same way both human and value concepts can also develop into
doctrinal concepts and as a result form the structures of Man and Value. What
is important for an educational philosophy is the process in this development.
Two structures, namely, Life and World Structures develop as a result of the natural
internal process of learning or of acquiring knowledge. We must however realize
that no structure is perfect in relation to knowledge unless it is developed
through systematic process of learning. That is why the other three structures,
Knowledge, Human and Value, can develop only if there is a systematic process
of learning. Therefore, we shall build our educational philosophy on the system
of the development of a worldview. Before we do this however it is important to
clarify further our concepts of structures and the way they lead us to certain
behavior in life. In fact we need to prove that it is these concepts in our
worldview that guide us in our actions.
First of all, we need to show what
other concepts are restored in these structures. As we shall utilize the
Knowledge Structure in our model of science curriculum we must see that it
includes within itself the key scientific terminology and all other concepts of
technology which may be derived from these concepts. The network of the key
scientific terminology may be called “Scientific Conceptual Scheme”, which will
be dealt with briefly below. In the Value Structure we may find moral concepts,
ideas, doctrines, and depending on the kind of worldview, we may also have our
religious and legal conceptions. In the Human Structure, on the other hand, we
have our conceptions of ourselves, as well as of the society and the societal
organization. All structures of a worldview operate in relation to each other.
None of them can operate independently; hence, our treatment of them
independently is only a logical analysis of a worldview. Otherwise, it is not
intended to establish each structure independently.
Secondly we may give a concrete
example in order to illustrate the structures of a worldview on the basis of the
Islamic worldview. Since the Life Structure is grounded in human biology, it
will have the most common elements with all other worldviews, and as such the Life
Structure of the Islamic worldview is its aspect that is most dominant in the Muslim
local cultural activities. The World Structure is that aspect of the Islamic
worldview which includes the most fundamental elements, such as the idea of tawhîd, (God’s Being and Oneness),
prophethood, resurrection and the ideas of religion and the hereafter, akhirah. We do not mean that these are
the only fundamental concepts of the Islamic worldview because each structure
by itself represents a doctrinal element which includes within itself many
other fundamental Islamic key terminologies. But the extensions of these key
concepts and terminology constitute substructures; hence, there lie many
substructures within the basic structures of the Islamic worldview which may
not be so fundamental and as a result differences of opinion in those
substructural elements can be allowed. As an extension of the World Structure, Knowledge
Structure is also a fundamental doctrinal element, which is represented by the
umbrella term ‘ilm. This structure
includes within itself the key scientific terminology of Islamic science which
may be called ‘Islamic scientific conceptual scheme’. The Value Structure in
the Islamic worldview, on the other hand, includes moral, ethical and legal
practices. But since the concept of law; namely, al-fiqh, in the early Islamic worldview is closely linked with the World
Structure, it naturally included religious law, which cannot be devoid of moral
content. Hence, law, religion and morality are manifested as an integral part
of one structure. This conceptual understanding of law, religion and morality
never brought about a sharp distinction between these three sub structures.
Finally, the Human Structure is represented within the Islamic worldview by the
concepts of khalîfah and ummah. As such this structure manifests
the Islamic understanding of man and society, which is totally grounded in the World
Structure because, again, even these conceptions themselves are derived from
the concepts of tawhîd, prophethood,
religion and âkhirah.
Thirdly, each structure in a
worldview has a specific function in life and in human activities. This point
can be explained from another perspective as well; let us assume a worldview in
which the Knowledge Structure is not discernible as a manifest mentality. In
such a case, no scientific activity will ensue from the individual having such
a worldview. There will not be in that worldview any scientific concepts that
can form a scientific framework for the mind to work in. As a result, there
will be no scientific attitude, nor any scientific tradition that can support
such activities. In fact, if there is no Knowledge Structure within a
worldview, then that worldview can only be analyzed into its Life and World Structures.
For it is the scientific activity which manifests other structures as
analyzable units of a worldview; if there is no such activity those structures
cannot be developed to such an extent that they become manifest in their
respective worldviews. This does not mean that a worldview without a manifest Knowledge
Structure lacks a value system, or a Human Structure that acts as the ground of
social and political activities; on the contrary, all these activities will be
carried out and regulated by a World Structure that may acquire a degree of
sophistication within its respective worldview. But it cannot acquire the level
of sophistication manifested in such scientific worldviews that can adequately
be analyzed into their Knowledge, Value and Human Structures. This is where the
significance of what I am inclined to call “scientific worldviews” lies. For,
it is only these worldviews that can clearly be analyzed into their manifest
structures. Moreover, our university curricula must also be based on such an
analysis worldview; hence, it is very important to fully elaborate this also as
an epistemology because if we know how humans acquire knowledge then we can
teach them with more effective methods, since teaching primarily consists of “making
the student acquire knowledge”, i. e., ‘to learn’. We may moreover utilize this
exposition to establish a philosophy of education on the basis of which we can
erect our theory of education and the educational system. But in this paper I
would like to concentrate on our main issue and as such we shall be content
with presenting this epistemology on Table 1 which illustrates all the
processes of knowing.[3]
II. THE EXTERNAL
PROCESS OF LEARNING: PHILOSOPHY OF EDUCATION
The external process of learning is all the activities taking place
outside the learning subject when s/he is engaged in learning and hence, it is
education in the real sense. If we fully outline this process it will be in the
true sense our philosophy of education on the basis of which our educational
theory will be developed. We are not in a position to fully outline it in this
context because there are more concepts involved in it, such as the purpose of
education and the nature of the subjects to be educated. We shall therefore
concentrate on the main issues that will guide us through developing our
perspective out of which we can construct a curriculum for sciences and
humanities in our universities. Since the internal and external processes do
not work independently of each other during the actual activity of learning it
should also take place at two planes; natural and systematic.
A. Natural Learning
As we have pointed out, the natural process of learning or of acquiring
knowledge is the personal trial of an individual in acquiring knowledge.
Usually this is the way we first begin to learn things when we arrive to this
world but it continues after even we begin to learn systematically through our
regular school education. Everyone can develop his/her own method for this kind
of learning but in any case the main method of natural learning is trial and
error. Because of this individual character of natural learning no educational
theory can be established for it. The actual education involves when systematic
learning begins in a scientific way and we shall now examine this.
B. Systematic Learning
We have so far developed the basis of a philosophy of education. Now we
need to eradicate our philosophy on this basis. First of all, two processes of
learning, namely internal and external processes are parallel to each other and
therefore cannot be totally independent of each other. If so, then the natural internal
and external processes are also parallel as well as the systematic internal and
external processes. Since the natural processes are excluded from the
educational philosophy though they can be included within the theory of
education itself, then we need to use the systematic internal process to
develop the skeleton of our philosophy of education. The systematic internal
process of learning as we have seen gave us the concept of worldview with its
basic structures. Among these structures as we have seen the Life Structure is
developed within the natural process and thus cannot be included in the
systematic process. This does not mean that it should not be discussed in an
educational philosophy. On the contrary, the epistemological process at this
stage through which a worldview emerges should be discussed here. But it is not
significantly relevant for the challenges facing higher education today. Hence
we suffice by indicating that this is the initial process through which
worldview begins to be formed in the mind of an individual. If we thus exclude
this structure then we are left with two fundamental groups of structures: in
the first group we have the World Structure, as the fundamental outlook
representing the individual’s identity as well as his perception of the whole
world. In the second group we have the Knowledge structure as representing the
rest of the structures. We argue here that in the philosophy of education we
need to include the rest of the structures in the Knowledge Structure because
they are developed on the basis of knowledge and indeed through the scientific
knowledge acquired through one’s education. With this analysis we are left with
three structures: Life, World and Knowledge. As we have excluded the Life
Structure from the philosophy of education we are to utilize only World and
Knowledge Structures.
Since the Knowledge Structure regulates our scientific activities it
also includes within itself the network of our scientific terminology, which we
have called “Scientific Conceptual Scheme”. As this is a developed mentality it
must be included in the higher stages of education. It is therefore inevitable
to include the Scientific Conceptual Scheme in our philosophy of education.
This outline gives us three stages in education: 1. the Stage of the World
Structure and as such it constitutes the earliest systematic learning process.
Since at this stage the worldview of the individual is not fully developed to
be distinguished from his/her World Structure it is more apt to call this the
“Stage of Worldview”. 2. The Stage of the Knowledge Structure which constitutes
the middle stage and as such the basic terminology of sciences are given and
the Knowledge Structure of the worldview is fully inculcated into the minds of
individuals. 3. The Scientific Stage where attention is paid to develop in the
worldview of the individuals a scientific mentality. Since this represents the
final stage of education it must be the stage of higher education as
represented primarily by the university. We can add another stage to this
philosophy of education which is the Stage of Specialization. This stage
develops a more specific network of concepts in the minds of individuals called
the “Specific Scientific Conceptual Scheme” in which the nomenclature of
individual disciplines is harmonized. We thus need to develop curriculum at
both levels but first we need to formulate our theory of education.
We may derive an educational theory from this philosophy of education
as has been presented in a simple way. Our educational theory, as based on this
philosophy of education, reveals five stages of learning: 1. the early
education which has the Life Structure as the most important component and
starts from the birth of an individual before the formal schooling starts. But we
must add that this education should continue throughout one’s life because it
concerns the Life Structure which is also the initial worldview. 2. Elementary
Education which is concerned with the worldview of the individual; 3. Middle
Education is concerned with the Knowledge Structure within the worldview of the
individual; 4. Higher Education is concerned with developing the Scientific
Conceptual Scheme within the Knowledge Structure, and finally; 5. Graduate
Education aims at developing the Specific Scientific Conceptual Scheme and as
such it is the stage where more attention is paid for the specialization.
The last two stages concern us here as they deal with the higher
education. But we need to elaborate all the stages in order to clarify how one
comes to this stage because curriculum at any level cannot be independent of
each other. First of all in the early education the individual is prepared for
the early education and taught the cultural elements in which knowledge should
occupy a special place. This way every person knows that learning is
significant. At this stage the home environment and what the parents do is very
important. An individual with a good Life Structure in mind means one who has a
worldview that backs up knowledge tendency. I believe that it is at this stage
that the person is motivated to do what s/he wants to do later in life and as
such it determines for the most part the person’s tendency to develop though
somewhat unconsciously and naturally his/her leaning for a career in life. It
may play a role to develop the person’s inherent ability for whatever it may
be.
Secondly, the individual is ready for the Elementary Education when
s/he has a solid Life Structure in mind. Since this corresponds to the Stage of
Worldview at this stage of education only elements that make up the basic
structure of the individual’s worldview must be given. Special techniques
should be developed to the teaching of his/her worldview. The curriculum should
also be developed on the basis of that worldview. There is no need to teach
basic sciences at this stage as it is done today in the Muslim world. What is
needed is to teach our own worldview very effectively as it was done in
previous Islamic education. By saying this I do not mean to copy early Islamic
educational method and curriculum. What I mean is that whatever it was in early
Islamic education learning was very effective and scientific education was
based on solid ground at this elementary level and that is why many scientists
such as al-Ash’ari, al-Kindi, Khwarizmi, Ibn Sina, Ibn al-Haytham, al-Biruni,
al-Razi, Ibn al-Shatir, Ibn al-Nafis, etc. were brought up out of those
schools.
In the Third Stage the Knowledge Structure of the individual’s
worldview is given. We need to elaborate this because it is crucial for an
educational theory. Also it is this stage that prepares the student for university
education. In the Knowledge Structure of a worldview there are concepts that
provide a mentality to the individual. These concepts are held in unity under the
umbrella concept “knowledge” which thus acquires a doctrinal character. Other
related concepts in this unity are science, truth, falsehood, opinion, belief,
certainty, method, theory, understanding, doubt and so on. All these concepts
are well formed and harmonized together so well that their unity projects an
understanding called “knowledge mentality”. As such it projects one’s
understanding of knowledge, method and truth together with their significance.
The student learns with this mentality that knowledge is valuable and that one
needs knowledge in life. Also the student finds out that knowledge acquired
with special method is called “science”. The application of science is
technology and so on. Of course the way these propositions are put here may be
expressed in different ways in every worldview. There is just one common
characteristic in all worldviews here; they all have a specific Knowledge
Structure of their own. When this structure is well developed in the minds of
the students then they find out what to do with knowledge. Those who are still
interested in the same type of systematic knowledge will continue for higher
education where they will begin to learn all sciences in a general way. Hence,
we arrive at the Fourth Stage which is the stage of Higher Education. The
approach at this stage should be interdisciplinary so that the student learns
about all the sciences in a general way but in later years of this stage they
drift to a more particular area which will eventually become their area of expertise.
After the student graduates from this level which corresponds to what
we call today the bachelors degree s/he continues for deeper specialization in
graduate studies which represents the Fifth and final stage of our educational
theory.
We may now attempt to formulate our suggestion to develop a curriculum
for sciences and humanities based on our above exposition. We have already
tried to show the specific place of the university in an educational system. Our
approach does not take the higher education as a separate entity from the early
education and thus considers it as an integral part of and complimentary to it.
In the past the madrasa education was
not taken discretely, but as a whole from the beginning to the end of one’s
educational training. But today the university is not seen any more a part of
this general education but rather the training sanctuary for either
practitioners of science or for those who seek to get a job for livelihood. As
a result of this wrong understanding most students come to the university not
to acquire the scientific mentality of the age and above all to get knowledge
which leads to virtue. They rather come with a wrong attitude thinking that
they need to acquire the contemporary scientific knowledge. Above all most
students think that acquiring this knowledge will give them a better chance to
get a good job. They never think about how to be more successful after getting
the job because this requires further education which is not given in
scientific training. This attitude which I call “discrete approach” leads to
two more misunderstanding: The first one is the usual practice which sees the
university as an institution of teaching and thus only scientific knowledge is
conveyed to the student but scientific attitude is not taught. The second
misunderstanding is seeing the university as an institution of teaching only
and thus it is believed that only contemporary scientific knowledge is to be
taught to the student. This eventually leads to arrange the university
curriculum not according to an educational philosophy and a theory. We must
understand that theory is the plan of
an achievement. If there is no plan then the whole institution is simply copied
from an existing model. This is why the most developing nations copy a model of
the university from a Western country and try to develop it in their own
culture. They cannot develop because the university model in the West is based
on an educational philosophy which is foreign to the indigenous culture. Since
they do not know that philosophy they do not know how to cope with its problems
either. I would like to point out that this second problem is mainly depend on
the first one and thus can be solved on the basis of a scientific mentality
only. Let us elaborate this issue because of its significant relation to
curriculum development.
Scientific attitude is a skill
which is hard to acquire. But acquiring knowledge is not a skill and therefore,
knowledge can be acquired without even having such a scientific attitude which is
a skill that is projected with a mentality that develops in a scientific
tradition. A mentality is an understanding that is grounded in a structure of a
worldview. As such it controls our behaviour. It is in a sense the mental
framework or perspective out of which naturally
and/or actively follows a human
activity. Knowledge proceeds from a mental framework naturally, if it arises purely out of the capacities of our
knowledge faculties. Therefore, if an activity springs only naturally from a
mentality, then it depends totally on the internal process of knowledge. But
usually humans are not subjects that acquire knowledge passively; they are
rather active agents that contribute to the process of knowing and learning. In
this way knowledge will proceed from the knowledge acquired through both our
education and using the natural capacities of the mind. It is this kind of a
knowledge acquisition process that we call ‘active’. It is clear that
mentalities are more important in the active knowledge processes because it is
the mentality that controls the active participation in knowledge. In that case
the aim of university education is to develop a scientific mentality in the
mind and attitude of the student. For, without such a mentality it is not
possible to be actively engaged in scientific activities. The university is not
a place of giving knowledge to the student although the approach in classes and
studies will definitely lead the student to some knowledge in his/her area; but
above all it is the place where the student acquires the skills and know-how to
reach such knowledge through especially critical thinking which is an integral
part of scientific mentality. Since I am approaching the issue in a general
manner I cannot give a curriculum for each discipline but I can propose a
general plan of action for all subjects taught in universities using the
methodology as I attempted to develop in my philosophy of education and the
educational theory that may be based on that philosophy.
In that case when we decide on the subjects to be taught in Islamic
universities we should choose subjects very carefully. For instance, the
student may need at first general knowledge in his/her area as a result
depending on the subject at least three introductory level courses in his main
subject will be placed in the curriculum. The credit and hours of the courses
can be determined by the experts in that area. Since in the contemporary world
scientific knowledge is increased quite broadly there will be in every field
some sub-fields; for example in physics, general physics with all laboratory
experiments is taught and then a selection from the sub-fields of physics such
as solid state physics, mechanics, thermodynamics, molecular physics, nuclear
physics etc. may be taught. The student should be left besides these to elect
courses according to the scientific mentality which by now he begins to acquire
through the teaching and especially practice of his/her professors and his own
inclination which is determined by his aptitude. Under the circumstances two
things are crucial for determining the curriculum: The critical decision to
determine how many courses the student needs in his/her area in order to
acquire the scientific method of that subject; and the kind of courses that can
be given to the student in order to develop the critical attitude and thinking
which is an integral part of scientific mentality. This second critical
decision may require us to add courses that develop critical thinking but that
these courses may not be the integral part of what s/he studies. This fact is
usually neglected in the Muslim world and we try to over burden the student by forcing
him/her to take a huge load of courses unnecessarily. Actually if we examine
the curricula of many universities we can see that they put more credit than
needed for the bachelor’s degree in a field. We think that if the student takes
more courses then s/he can learn more. Yes, this is true but after s/he
graduates s/he will forget all of what s/he learnt during his/her studies.
We must know that it is not difficult to learn; but it is difficult to
develop a skill. Since scientific mentality is a skill it is very difficult to
acquire; it takes learning, practicing and long observations of the masters in
the area. A skill is therefore developed on the basis of master-disciple relationship. This requires longer contact hours
with professors. Therefore, it is important to determine the weekly hours of
each course at every level because as the student passes on to higher levels
the contact hours may be less. Moreover, since we would like our students to
acquire and even develop our own perspective we need to design courses in
Islamic scientific tradition. For this purpose we need in the first place our
students to get a good grounding in the history of Islamic scientific
tradition. The course to be given for this purpose is not a simple history of
science in Islamic civilization; it is rather a course which is designed to
teach the historical continuity of Islamic scientific tradition. Hence we call
this course “Scientific Process of Islamic scientific tradition”. This course
pays attention to the process through which Islamic scientific tradition
emerged, developed and reached our own time.[4]
Moreover, this course shall provide a good ground and basis for two other
courses that will teach the methodology and logic of Islamic scientific
tradition.
Furthermore, in contemporary world applied ethics in different fields
of sciences is becoming more and more significant; such as bioethics, medical
ethics and environmental ethics. If we take these as applied ethics and not
theoretical ethics then it would be expressed in the terminology of Islamic
scientific tradition as “adab”
literature. This approach used to be very common in the past which has been
neglected by Muslims. Recent attempts to recover this tradition fall into a
trap of Western scientific tradition. For, in Islamic scientific tradition
there is no theoretical ethics by which we mean philosophical ethics because
Islamic worldview does not allow such ethics as we have tried to show
elsewhere.[5]
There can be applied ethics on the basis of Islamic worldview which is thus
called “adab”. We may give as
examples all the books written with titles, such as adab al-atibbâ’, âdâb al-‘ilm,
âdâb al-qâdî and âdâb al-mulûk. For this reason there should be in the curriculum of
our universities a course on the adab
of Islamic scientific tradition. But in order to make this course plausible we
must design another course and thus make it required for all students on the
philosophy of Islamic scientific tradition.
The curriculum developed on the basis of these principles should be
logical and scientific; otherwise we may not be able to justify ourselves. I
have tried to provide this justification on basis of the simplified version of
my philosophy of education. With these principles then we may give the
following plan of action for the curriculum for our universities:
1.
Two or three courses at
introductory level;
2.
Two or three required courses in
sub-fields of the students;
3.
Two or three elective course in
the field of the student;
4.
Two courses in Islamic scientific
tradition;
5.
One or two courses in the
methodology and logic of Islamic scientific tradition;
6.
Two courses in the philosophy and adab of Islamic scientific tradition;
7.
The rest are elective courses.
We must know that the above curriculum may require some supporting
courses such as logic, and introductory courses in philosophy and sociology. A
student who takes the above curriculum in his/her area is already endowed with
Islamic worldview properly in the earlier education as outlined in our
philosophy of education. For, the university is not the place to teach Islamic
worldview but rather the place to examine any worldview critically and
scientifically. Therefore, if a student is not properly brought up with the
underlying courses s/he cannot acquire the desired result under the above
curriculum. Moreover, I am not giving the exact number of the credit hours a
student is required to take for the bachelor’s degree because this can be
determined individually in each university depending on the social and
educational context. But it is important not to load the student with
unnecessary burden of giving much knowledge. In the past students would stay in
the madrasa compounds, so he could
devote full time for his studies. But today circumstances are different and
unfortunately students devote very minimal time for knowledge activities. All
such conditions may be handled carefully to solve these problems.
A Concluding Remark
We should keep in mind that the moral purpose of Islamic education is
to develop oneself as a righteous person in the service of Allah. “I have only
created jinns and human beings that
they may serve Me.” (51/al-Dhâriyât, 56). This purpose of creation cannot be
put aside in education no matter at which level we teach. I, therefore,
consider the moral challenge to be the most outstanding danger facing the
higher education today. We may deal with other challenges as we can easily
recognize them since they are internal to education. But the moral problems
facing us are not directly related to education and as a result cannot easily
be diagnosed and as a result, the moral element is almost totally neglected in
analysis of scientific traditions. Since the university as an institution
represents scientific tradition, then the moral challenge for the higher
education can also be obtained within the analysis of the emergence of
scientific traditions and that is why the adab
of scientific attitude embedded in Islamic scientific traditions as the new
trend in higher education must be an integral part of the curriculum. I
emphasize this point because unfortunately it is neglected in the newly arising
so many universities especially in the Muslim world. Since the higher education
represents the scientific attitude reflected in a scientific tradition then
obviously the university is ought to assume this task. If we see that all these
factors are reduced to the moral struggle (ethical jihâd) then the scientists in the higher educational institutions
must realize where to start. It is for this reason that I am positing the
scientific attitude as the most dispensable trend today in the Muslim world for
the universities in any curricular effort.
[1] Parts of my presentation here is based on my paper “Challenges and New
Trends in Higher Education”, submitted to the “International Conference on Higher
Education in the Twenty-First Century: Issues and Challenges, 3-4 June 2007,
Ahlia University, Bahrain; published in Higher
Education in the Twenty-First Century: Issues and Challenges, ed. Abd ulla Y. Al-Hawa j,
Wajeeh Elali and E. H. Twizell (Boca Raton, London, New York: CRC Press, Taylor
& Francis Group, 2008), 29-46.
[2] Whenever I use the term “nature” or “natural” I mean the concept of
our scientific tradition “fitrah.
[3] For a somewhat fuller exposition see my book Scientific Thought and its Burdens (Istanbul: Fatih University
Press, 2000), Chapter 1.
[4] In order to get an idea about this course I would recommend my book to
be published soon by IKIM, Kuala Lumpur with the title Islamic Scientific Ttradition in History.
[5] See Scientific Thought, op.
cit., 143-4.
