Rethinking science from the university social studies and the transformation of doctoral education

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.15905774

Keywords:

organizational communication, public health, internal communication, structural barriers, institutional culture

Abstract

Internal communication in public health institutions is a key operational axis and an essential space for the production and circulation of organizational knowledge. This study, from a critical organizational perspective, diagnosed the internal communication dynamics within a Cuban healthcare institution, identifying strengths, weaknesses, and opportunities for structural improvement. Using a qualitative, non-experimental, and descriptive design, participant observation, semi-structured interviews, and document analysis were conducted, with thematic coding performed using Atlas.ti. A hierarchical structure was observed, characterized by limited feedback, strong reliance on informal channels, and a lack of strategic planning in communication management. These conditions hinder transparency, demotivate staff, and limit the institution’s responsiveness. However, spontaneous collaborative practices and a willingness for interpersonal dialogue were also noted, representing valuable resources for bottom-up institutional trans formation. It is necessary to professionalize internal communication, institutionalize protocols, and democratize information flows. Communication should be addressed as a transversal component of public management, constitutive of both power and organizational knowledge. The study provides conceptual and practical tools for rethinking the relationship between communication, institutional authority, and organizational epistemologies in the field of public health.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Angrosino, M. (2012). Recontextualizing observation: Ethnography, pedagogy, and the prospects for a progressive political agenda. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of qualitative research (pp. 531–550). SAGE.

Bland, C., Taylor, A. L., & Walsh, J. (2022). Faculty development for educational innovation. Journal of Higher Education Policy, 45(2), 201–219. https://doi.org/10.1080/1360080X.2022.2020556

Cutcliffe, S. H. (1990). Ideas, machines, and values: An introduction to science, technology, and society studies. Rowman & Littlefield.

Rowman & Littlefield. Harding, S. (2020). Sciences from below: Feminisms, post colonialities, and modernities. Duke University Press. https://www.dukeupress.edu/sciences-from-below

Harding, S. (2020). Whose science? Whose knowledge? Thinking from women’s lives. Cornell University Press. https://www.cornellpress.cornell.edu/book/9780801497469/whose-science-whose-knowledge

Jara, O. (2018). La sistematización en las experiencias formativas. ALBOAN. https://www.alboan.org/es/publicacion/11868/la-sistematizacion-en-las-experiencias-formativas

Jara, O. (2018). Para sistematizar experiencias. ALFORJA. https://www.alforja.or.cr/sistematizacion/OscarJara_ParaSistematizarExperiencias.pdf

Jasanoff, S. (2004). States of knowledge: The co-production of science and social order. Routledge. https://www.routledge.com/States-of-Knowledge-The-CoProduction-of-Science-and-Social-Order/Jasanoff/p/book/9780415403290

Kreimer, P. (2011). Producción de conocimiento y universidad en América Latina: Una perspectiva CTS. CLACSO. https://www.clacso.org.ar/libros/produccion/kreimer.pdf

Latour, B., & Woolgar, S. (2020). La vida en el laboratorio: La construcción de los hechos científicos. Editorial Gedisa.

Leach, M., Stirling, A., & Scoones, I. (2021). Post-pandemic transformations: How and why COVID-19 requires us to rethink development. World Development, 138, 105233. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2020.105233

Martín, M. (2022). La sistematización como práctica investigativa en educación superior. Revista de Educación y Humanidades, 9(2), 56–74. https://doi.org/10.5377/rehup.v9i2.15052

Medina, J. (2018). Epistemic justice: A Rawlsian perspective. Routledge. Ministerio de Educación Superior de Cuba. (2022). Linea mientos para el desarrollo de los programas de posgrado. MES. https://www.mes.gob.cu/es/documentos

Nowotny, H. (2022). In AI we trust: Power, illusion and control of predictive algorithms. Polity Press.

Núñez Jover, J. (2006). La ciencia y la tecnología como procesos sociales. Editorial Félix.

Varela. Sismondo, S. (2010). An introduction to science and technology studies (2nd ed.).Wiley-Blackwell. https://www.wiley.com/enus/An+Introduction+to+Science+and+Technology+Studies%2C+2nd+Edition-p-9781405187657

Snow, C. P. (1959). The two cultures and the scientific revolution. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511819940

Stilgoe, J., Owen, R., & Macnaghten, P. (2023). Responsible innovation: From concept to practice. Oxford University Press. https://global.oup.com/academic/product/responsible-innovation-9780192894569

Stilgoe, J., Owen, R., & Macnaghten, P. (2023). Responsible research and innovation: From science in society to science for society, with society. Science and Public Policy. https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/sct079

UNESCO. (2023). Reimagining our futures together: A new social contract for education. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000379707

Vessuri, H. (2015). Ciencia, tecnología y sociedad: El de safío de una mirada desde América Latina. Ediciones UNESCO. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000233199

Published

2025-07-31

Data Availability Statement

The datasets used and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Issue

Section

Systematization of professional practices

How to Cite

Castillo, . M. de los Ángeles, & Concepción, D. N. (2025). Rethinking science from the university social studies and the transformation of doctoral education. Journal of Law and Epistemic Studies, 3(2), 26-32. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.15905774

Similar Articles

1-10 of 29

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.