الشيخ محمود بن بكر البخاري الكلاباذي: حياته وآثاره دراسة متخصّصة لكتابه ضوء السراج في علم الفرائض

Ashaykh Mahmūd bin Abī Bakr bin Abīulala bin Alī Al-bukhārī Al-kalābādhī is one of scholars of  Mirāth. He was born in 644 A.H. And died in 700 A.H. He was a man of eminence in Central Asia. He visited many metropolitan cities across the world to get knowledge. During his foreign visits, he contacted great scholars of Islamic sciences. Similarly, thousands of students used to attend his lectures. Allāmah Kalābādhī was a man of letters. He wrote many books. Famous of them are: Ḥall ul Frāi Fī Sharah Naẓm Assirājiyah, Ḍaw us Sirāj Fī Sharah Assirājiyah, Mushtabeh un Nasab Fī Asmā ur Rijāl, Mujamush Shuyūkh, Al Minhāj Al Muntakhab.

Students’ Perceptions of the Learning Environment and Their Approaches to Study: Analysis of Two Public Sector Universities in Lahore

This study aimed at exploring the learning experiences (perceptions of learning environment* learning preferences, motivation and approaches to study) of students at two universities. The study was conducted with the students who were taking honours degrees or Master’s degrees at the two universities. Sample consisted of 912 students from four subject areas: social sciences, science and technology, humanities and business and management. The students were sampled from all four years. There were 494 men and 418 women between 17 and 27 years age. The study drew upon quantitative and qualitative data. In addition to measures of students’ learning preferences and motivation, Course Experience Questionnaire and Approaches to Learning and Studying Inventory were used to measure the students’ perceptions of the teaming environment and their approaches to study, respectively, Interviews were conducted with the students to provide context to findings from the survey data. One of the objectives of the study was to examine how the Course Experience Questionnaire and the Approaches to learning and Studying Inventory work in higher educational context of Pakistan. The Approaches to Learning and Studying Inventory seemed to work well in the new context; its intended constituent structure was confirmed in factor analysis, and the identified scales (deep approach* organized studying, surface approach and monitoring studying) exhibited moderate to high reliability. However, the Course Experience Questionnaire worked slightly less well; its intended constituent structure was only partly confirmed in the new context. The results showed that the learning environment encouraged the desirable approaches (deep approach, organized studying and monitoring studying) more than the less desirable approaches (surface approach). The students who had positive perceptions of the learning environment were more likely to use the desirable approaches to study; they also tended to prefer courses, leaching and assessment that support understanding, and were engaged and reliable in their studies. On the other hand, the students who had negative perceptions of the learning environment, were more likely to use surface approach to study, and were also more likely to prefer the courses, teaching and assessment that support transmission of information. Students showed greater preference for the learning environment that supports understanding than the learning environment that supports transmission of information. Multivariate analysis of variance identified meaningful variations in the students’ perceptions of the learning environment, learning preferences, motivation and approaches to study, related to institution, subject area, year of study, timing of the programme, gender and age. Students in social sciences and humanities perceived their learning environment more positively and were more likely to use deep approach to study than students in science and technology. There were variations in students’ perceptions of the learning environment and in their learning preferences with age. Male and female students differed in their perceptions and motivation but not in their learning preferences and approaches to study. Students in morning and evening programmes showed variation in their perceptions and motivation but not in their preferences and approaches to study. Students in different years of study also differed in their perceptions but not in their preferences. motivations and approaches to study.