• Walang Nahanap Na Mga Resulta



Academic year: 2023



Buong text

Hountondji (1990) has provided a detailed account of the outward orientation ('extraversion') of southern academia and knowledge production. Although these accounts are of immense value, there is still a dearth of theories that offer a comprehensive and detailed account of the mechanisms underlying academic addiction. It observes that data collection and reception of the finished research output takes place in the periphery (the global south), while theorizing and meta-theoretical activities are carried out in the core (the global north) (P.

However, most works lack a full account of the specific structures and mechanisms through which academic dependence leads to the coloniality of knowledge. Thus, while key aspects of the mechanisms of academic addiction have been theorized, there is a lack of comprehensive theories that integrate them and fill in the missing pieces. My theory of the mechanisms of academic dependency begins with its historical cause – colonialism – and the contemporary external factors that sustain it – global power relations (ie 'the coloniality of power') – and elaborates on how these factors created a stratified academy with a core periphery structure.


According to QS World University Rankings (2020), among the top 100 universities, 29 are in the USA. An analysis of the global highly ranked journals shows that among the top 100 journals of all disciplines, 63 are based in the US, 32 in the UK, and the remaining 5 are based in Continental Europe. When analyzing the top 1,000 top-ranked journals worldwide, 477 are based in the United States, 287 in the United Kingdom, 228 in Continental Europe (most of them in Western Europe), 5 in Asia, and the remaining 3 in Canada (Scimago 2020a), all subject categories, sorted by h-index, accessed November 2020).

Some Asian countries follow in the top 20, with India being the only underdeveloped country among them. Belonging to the academic core means having greater amounts of academic power and prestige, while being part of the academic periphery means having lower amounts of both. Such rankings, often determined by the academic core (Shahjahan and Morgan 2016), obscure political and ethical decisions underlying their construction that would otherwise be contested, conflating them into what appear to be objective and unambiguous measures of productivity. (Luyt 2009).

The stratified core-periphery structure of global academia also encourages 'brain drain' (Hountondji 1990; S. F. Alatas 2003), as intelligent and hard-working scholars from the academic periphery can often be attracted to the symbolic capital/prestige of the academic core and to the higher salaries. Being part of the academic core also means a geographic concentration of power and influence, while power and influence in the periphery is generally less and additionally geographically dispersed. This means that researchers based in the academic core need to invest less time and resources in attending important events or networking.

Conversely, scientists in the academic periphery often face significant time investments and huge expenses (Albayrak-Aydemir 2020). Academics based in the academic core are likely to have greater opportunities or frequencies to meet leading researchers in their field, exchange ideas with them and receive feedback from them (Kim 2012).


Peripherally trained academics may often lack the cultural knowledge necessary to expose their research to core academic settings. This can result in a disproportionate amount of academic work that is internationally perceived as being of a high standard and is widely read, being produced at the academic core. Even if research on the academic periphery / Global South is published, it is often published by scholars from the academic core, or by scholars from the academic periphery trained in the academic core and socialized to core views.

For example, editors of core academic journals often come from the academic core and regularly recruit core reviewers (e.g. Murray et al. 2019). Their symbolic capital as members of the academic core helps them to achieve high valuation and recognition at peripheral venues. The global academic core-periphery structure and stratification therefore places the globally highly valued venues and media of research dissemination in the hands of core academics.

Thus, it cuts off corrective feedback from the academic periphery, which might otherwise correct Eurocentric biases in core academic studies. In particular, the academic core containing the most globally prestigious universities causes a large number of the brightest and hardest working doctoral students from the academic periphery to receive their doctoral training in the academic core (Hountondji 1990). This means that the most competent academics from both the academic core and the academic periphery receive a substantial part of their academic socialization in the academic core.

Academic Periphery PhD students will regularly work with core academic supervisors, dissertation committees and mentors. In the US – the center of the academic core – it accelerates local and English-speaking students, while slowing down non-native speakers, especially those who have not had access to a high-quality English education and well-equipped resources. These factors combine to give a substantial advantage to academically core (and especially White) graduate students, while academically peripheral graduate students are disadvantaged.

There, a large proportion of them can initially pass on the Eurocentric version of the training they received in the academic core.


In general, these mechanisms help core academic thinking to be articulated and received at its best, at low cost to core academics, while adding obstacles and costs to the articulation, dissemination and reception of academic periphery thinking. This one-sided flow of influence creates asymmetry in global knowledge production, an inward orientation of core academia and knowledge production (S. F. Alatas 2003; S. H. Alatas 2000), as well as an outward orientation of periphery academia and knowledge production (Hountondji 1990). The core-to-periphery asymmetry in flows of global academic influence means that the creative and metatheoretical work that receives global attention is almost exclusively done in the academic core (S. F. Alatas 2003; Hountondji 1990), while similar work in the academic periphery be done. are largely ignored or deemed irrelevant.

Specifically, the global setting of research agendas, selection of problems and research questions, conceptualization, theorization, creation and evaluation of methods, determination of methodological standards and definitions of what constitutes academic excellence (S. F. Alatas 2003; Patel 2014) are determined by the academic core , excluding the academic periphery. The Global South is widely used as a site for collecting raw data and as a market for selling finished products such as publications and teaching materials such as textbooks, curricula or curricula (Hountondji 1990; S. H. Alatas 2000). Peripheral academics end up being pushed towards applying core academic literature and theories to their own country and towards focusing mainly on doing empirical work (S. F. Alatas 2003).

Research in both the academic core and the academic periphery is directed towards a core academic audience (Hountondji 1990), which often leads to the neglect of local priorities and needs (Fouad 2018). The inner core of the academic core (currently the American academy) is inward-looking, self-sustaining, and able to grow and expand independently (S. F. Alatas 2003), while the outer layers of the academic core are either inward-focused or forward-looking toward the core. The lack of incentives to engage academic peripheral arenas and research dissemination media translates into habits of virtually only reading academic foundational theorists and merely reviewing the foundational literature, often underpinned by assumptions that academic peripheral literature is unimportant, of poor quality, or even "predatory". .”.

Such a mindset can take the form that S. 1) The non-Western world has a limited level of competence and creativity; (2) It needs the guiding hands of the West to develop this limited capability;. An intellectual imperialist mindset can also include patronizing views and beliefs that southern academics play (and are only fit for) secondary roles, and expectations that they unquestioningly conform to northern standards (S. H. Alatas 2000).


The pressure to use core academic theories, respond to concerns from the North and study the South through the lens of the North (Fouad 2008) leads to a fragmented and under-theorized study of local phenomena and a lack of South-South dialogue (Akiwowo 1980; Hountonji 1990). Research by scientists from the South is often published in English and is therefore often inaccessible to the majority of the population (Hountondji 1990). I explained how European colonialism created a globally stratified academic landscape and established parts of the Global North as an academic core.

5 A very thorough and extensive search by the author for comprehensive explanations on how to write journal articles yielded only Belcher (2009), Schimel (2012) and Silvia (2015). Also in sessions of highly regarded Global Northern conferences, it is not unusual to hear session organizers mention that one of the presenters is a PhD student, mentor or otherwise a close contact. Decolonizing the 'Global': The Coloniality of Method and the Problem of the Unity of Analysis." Cultural Sociology.

Academic Boundary Work in Non-Western Academies: A Comparative Analysis of the Discipline of Philosophy in Modern China and Japan. International Sociology. Black Reconstruction: An Essay Toward a History of the Part Played by the Black People in the Effort to Rebuild Democracy in America, 1860-1880. Transmodernity: Journal of Peripheral Cultural Production of the Luso-Hispanic World http://dialogoglobal.com/texts/grosfoguel/. Grosfoguel-Decolonizing-Pol-Econ-and-Postcolonial.pdf.

The Battle over Ideas and Labor Hierarchies in North-South Cooperative Research.” The European Journal of Development Research 32: 503–13. Stories from the Front of the Room: How Higher Education Faculty of Color Overcome Challenges and Thrive in the Academy. The department is too male, too white, too old, and too conservative': The operation of the hidden curriculum in graduate sociology departments. Harvard Educational Review.

Paper presented at Asia-Pacific Peace Research Association (APPRA) Conference, National Dong Hwa University, Shou-Feng, Hualien, Taiwan, Sept.

Mga Sanggunian


Sanchez* This study determined the teachers’ profile, the learning outcomes or academic performance in the six facets of understanding: explanation, interpretation, application,