This paper constructs a culturally appropriate model for Muslim women’s empowerment in management and leadership positions that addresses sustainability goals of quality education, gender equality, economic growth and reducing inequalities, as well as national and cultural differences from Western women’s empowerment models. The approach to model building begins with two sources of evidence for women’s empowerment—first, the empowerment of women recognised in the Qur’an and Sunnah, and in the historical-biographical record, particularly in the early Islamic period that draws to some extent on hermeneutics. This is followed by identifying four approaches that can be used in constructing a comprehensive model of Muslim women’s empowerment: Bourdieu’s social, cultural and intellectual capital theory; multiple modernities theory that recognises societal diversity; cultural security arguments for the preservation of cultures; and postcolonial critiques that argue for diversity through decolonising. The main argument of this paper is that sustainability goals cannot be achieved without a model appropriate to the valuational, cultural and societal context in which women are educated and work. The final section of this paper proposes a multidimensional and multilevel model that can be used as a guidance for empowering Muslim women in management and leadership positions. The model construction is based partly on Côté and Levine’s psychosocial cultural model that identifies multiple levels and dimensions of identity, role and social institution construction. This article contributes to the current literature by proposing a theoretical foundation and a multidimensional model that can inform and shape the empowerment of Muslim women in management and leadership positions in different societies.

This chapter provides a critical and comprehensive review of internationalisation models and strategies in higher education and offers a conceptual model for internationalising the curriculum, taking educational administration and leadership as an example of its implementation. The chapter starts with an introduction and overview of globalisation and how higher education institutions respond to its increasing effects by adopting different internationalisation strategies. This is followed by a discussion on the different forces and rationales involved and the various models and strategies adopted by higher education institutions as well as the many challenges and obstacles they encounter when implementing these strategies. The third section focuses on ways of internationising the curriculum and how it is a complex, dynamic and developmental process that requires the implementation of most internationalisation strategies. The chapter concludes with a discussion of the IHEC model which is created for internationalising the higher education curriculum, focusing on educational administration and leadership as an example. The IHEC model aims to provide students with a universal and holistic learning experience that prepares them for the increasingly competitive and diversified working environment. It also attempts to overcome the Westernisation indigenisation debate by adopting a holistic approach to knowledge and cultural practices that appreciates and integrates different perspectives, knowledge traditions and work practices into the curriculum.

GenAI is now capable of producing journal articles that look like human work, raising the question of whether the scholarly credibility might be misinterpreted as evidentiary validity. This research investigates AI-generated scholarship by shifting attention from the detection of AI-generated content to its critical appraisal and evaluation. To achieve this, a split-paper audit procedure was applied to a fully AI-generated mixed-methods manuscript that was independently reviewed by three university faculty members. Findings indicate that the model can simulate academic style and coherence with a high degree of surface plausibility; however, this superficial rigor was combined with ungrounded content, unsupported contextualization, selective reporting, and inconsistent methodological details. Reviewers’ comments also highlighted the formulaic language and narratives that confirmed their prior expectations, and questioned whether prompt structures may be channeling outputs towards pre-existing assumptions and masking areas where evidence is scant. The study defines synthetic scholarship as an epistemic condition where plausibility may supplant verification, and suggests a transparent audit process to facilitate the assessment of AI-mediated scholarship. It argues that ensuring research integrity in the era of generative AI will rely on more than just disclosure of generative AI use; it will also require auditable trails to assist in examining, verifying, and substantiating claims.