Decades have past since Futures Studies (FS) are being taught at many colleges and universities around the world. This has also begun in recent years at some of Iranian universities. Regardless of inherent benefits that these studies have in their own nature, a review on some of precipitant movements may help us in avoiding probable shortcomings and dysfunctions in the coming future. Firstly, it is necessary to remember that developing FS courses at PhD level before conducting such programs for BA and MA degrees, is a sign of reluctance and disregarding urgent infrastructure for FS in the Iranian higher education system. Fortunately, this negligence has been heeded by some other universities who began to arrange FS programs at BA and MA levels.
But there are some remaining questions. Doubtlessly every measured action requires well-developed foundations in order to reach its desired goals. Teaching FS especially at higher education system surely needs such foundations and it is advised that series of priorities and necessities be considered to develop FS foundations in Iran's higher education system.
Given that current higher education system has enough capacity and potential for nurturing FS experts, then we are faced with a serious question such as: "Which problems of the country are going to get solved by these professionals?" Should we not consider epistemological needs and knowledge prerequisites in developing FS courses, or have we not been dropped into scientific, formal and technical fashion traps?
One of the basic goals quested in teaching FS lessons is training and making a generation of informed futurists who will be capable enough of thinking about future problems in a creative way. What differentiates FS graduates from other graduates and academicians is their futuristic idea processing capability. If we rush to a great volume of FS information and knowledge without generating futuristic thoughts, then what are we going to gain from such academic programs?
What percentage of educational material is dedicated to theoretical and epistemological matters and how much thinking and research skills are imbued with these courses? Will the graduates be able to perform professional foresight activities, or just become good information providers for questions that are made around basic FS concepts? What percentage of FS graduates will be well-informed and familiar with FS methodologies? How many of them will be able to adapt new theories or perspectives on foresight issues? Which ones can be really engaged and employed in different foresight projects?
It is not only graduates who are under evaluation process, but also the professors and lecturers who are gaining experience in teaching FS lessons. Asking such questions may seem a little soon, but the graduates who are real products of FS programs will reflect the answers through their knowledge and skills in the near future. Until then, there is enough time for both the students and professors to review their objectives and activities once again.