Wed, May 27, 2026
| فارسی
Volume 27, Issue 3 (Autumn 2025)
Advances in Cognitive Sciences 2025, 27(3): 90-106 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Mousavi S M. Developing a model of cognitive governance in educational institutions: A focus on cognitive policy-making. Advances in Cognitive Sciences 2025; 27 (3) :90-106
URL: http://icssjournal.ir/article-1-1807-en.html
URL: http://icssjournal.ir/article-1-1807-en.html
PhD in Educational Management, University of Tehran, University Lecturer, Tehran, Iran
Abstract: (751 Views)
Abstract
Introduction: Cognitive governance, as an interdisciplinary approach, seeks to align the decision-making, learning, and information-processing mechanisms in educational institutions with the findings of cognitive science.
Methods: The present study aimed to explore the categories and concepts of cognitive governance in educational institutions. This study was conducted within the framework of an interpretive paradigm, with a qualitative approach and a data-driven theory-method using the Glaserian approach. Data were collected through semi-structured interviews with 20 experts in the fields of governance, cognitive science, and education, using purposive and theoretical sampling. Data analysis was conducted in three stages: Open, axial, and theoretical coding, yielding 1,040 primary codes, 36 intermediate concepts, and 8 theoretical categories. Participants reviewed, peers reviewed, and a second researcher recoded to ensure the analysis’s validity. The agreement coefficient between the two coders was 0.79.
Results: The findings reveals that cognitive governance consists of 8 categories and 36 concepts. Cognitive ethics, cognitive justice, cognitive technology, cognitive self-organization, cognitive network governance, cognitive leadership and management, cognitive decision-making and problem solving, and cognitive policy-making constitute the categories of cognitive governance. In this model, cognitive policy-making, grounded cognitive ethics and justice, enables the design of technology-based, and self-organizing learning systems and leads to cognitive management and effective decision-making in educational institutions through network governance.
Conclusion: The final model presented provides a basis for redesigning educational policies in line with learners’ mental mechanisms.
Introduction: Cognitive governance, as an interdisciplinary approach, seeks to align the decision-making, learning, and information-processing mechanisms in educational institutions with the findings of cognitive science.
Methods: The present study aimed to explore the categories and concepts of cognitive governance in educational institutions. This study was conducted within the framework of an interpretive paradigm, with a qualitative approach and a data-driven theory-method using the Glaserian approach. Data were collected through semi-structured interviews with 20 experts in the fields of governance, cognitive science, and education, using purposive and theoretical sampling. Data analysis was conducted in three stages: Open, axial, and theoretical coding, yielding 1,040 primary codes, 36 intermediate concepts, and 8 theoretical categories. Participants reviewed, peers reviewed, and a second researcher recoded to ensure the analysis’s validity. The agreement coefficient between the two coders was 0.79.
Results: The findings reveals that cognitive governance consists of 8 categories and 36 concepts. Cognitive ethics, cognitive justice, cognitive technology, cognitive self-organization, cognitive network governance, cognitive leadership and management, cognitive decision-making and problem solving, and cognitive policy-making constitute the categories of cognitive governance. In this model, cognitive policy-making, grounded cognitive ethics and justice, enables the design of technology-based, and self-organizing learning systems and leads to cognitive management and effective decision-making in educational institutions through network governance.
Conclusion: The final model presented provides a basis for redesigning educational policies in line with learners’ mental mechanisms.
Keywords: Governance, Cognitive governance, Educational policy-making, Education, Educational institutions
Type of Study: Research |
Received: 2025/07/3 | Accepted: 2025/11/9 | Published: 2025/11/25
Received: 2025/07/3 | Accepted: 2025/11/9 | Published: 2025/11/25
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |
