While higher education research has paid considerable attention to the impact of both ratings and rankings on universities, less attention has been devoted to how university subunits, such as Schools of Education, are affected by such performance measurements. Anchored in a neo-institutional approach, we analyze the formation of a competitive institutional environment in UK higher education in which ratings and rankings assume a central position in promoting competition among Schools of Education (SoE). We apply the concepts of “institutional environment” and “organizational strategic actors” to the SoE to demonstrate how such university subunits articulate their qualities and respond to the institutional environment in which they are embedded—by using ratings and rankings (R&R) to compete for material and symbolical resources as well as inter-organizational and intra-organizational legitimacy. Through findings from 22 in-depth expert interviews with members of the multidisciplinary field of education and a content analysis of websites (n = 75) of SoE that participated in REF 2014, we examine the stratified environment in which SoE are embedded (1). We uncover how R&R are applied by SoE within this competitive, marketized higher education system (2). Finally, we indicate the strategic behaviors that have been triggered by the rise of R&R in a country with a highly formalized and standardized research evaluation system (3). The results show both homogenization and differentiation among SoE in their use of organizational vocabulary and the applications of R&R while simultaneously revealing strategic behavior, ranging from changes in internal practices to changes in organizational structures.
Embedded in social worlds, education systems and research reflect distinct national trajectories. We compare two contrasting traditions of educational research (ER). Whereas British ER exhibits a multidisciplinary and pragmatic character, German ER reflects pedagogy and mainly humanities-based traditions. Yet, in both countries, policymakers’ growing demand for evidence in ER resulted in increased funding, specific research programs, and mandatory large-scale assessments. These have reshaped the field, suggesting more similar ER agendas. Based on a comprehensive original dataset of basic ER projects funded by the main grant-making agencies in both countries (2005–2015), we analyze five dimensions: levels, objects, disciplines, methodologies, and themes. We find epistemic drift, with partial convergence characterized by a multi-level focus, multidisciplinary approach, strongly empirical and quantitative methodology, and a premium on teaching and learning themes. The cases remain distinct in exploring systemic questions in a wider contextual frame (UK) or concentrating more narrowly on the individual learner (Germany).
Informed by multiple disciplines, theories, and methods, higher education scholars have developed a robust and diverse literature in many countries. Yet, some important (organizational) sociological perspectives, both more established and more recent, are insufficiently linked. In particular, we identify two theoretical strands – institutional and relational – that, when joined, help to explain contemporary developments in global higher education and yield new organizational insights. We review relevant literature from each perspective, both in their general formulations and with specific reference to contemporary higher education research. Within the broad institutional strand, we highlight strategic action fields, organizational actorhood, and associational memberships. Within the relational strand, we focus on ties and relationships that are especially crucial as science has entered an age of (inter)national research collaboration. Across these theories, we discuss linkages between concepts, objects, and levels of analysis. We explore the methodological approach of social network analysis as it offers great potential to connect these strands and, thus, to advance contemporary higher education research in a collaborative era.
This book examines contemporary educational research and its governance, addressing key questions via a multidisciplinary theoretical framework of comparative institutional analysis with original data and applying multiple methods. The authors explore and explain important changes in the governance of educational research and the contents of scholarship in education and related disciplines across Europe since the 1990s. This volume synthesizes findings from a multi-year comparative research project, including in-depth empirical case studies of three distinct educational research cultures evolving in Germany, Norway, and the United Kingdom. The authors reconstruct and compare changing conceptualizations of educational research, embedded in increasingly internationalized contexts of research, and examine shifts in its governance, including patterns of funding, publication, and evaluation. They examine the producers of European educational research and the distinct role of the European Union in constructing a European Educational Research Area, in establishing cross-border networks, and in (re)shaping educational research agendas. Through innovative empirical analysis of programs of research on various levels and education researchers' collaborations in scientific networks, they provide insights into (supra)national dynamics in education-related scholarship. Theory-guided content analysis of research projects funded by leading national funding agencies and by the most highly developed supranational research funding instrument - the EU Framework Programme - enables the authors to embed findings on Germany, the United Kingdom, and Norway in a broader European perspective.
Co-authored research articles in the disciplinarily heterogeneous field of higher education have dramatically increased in this century. As in other fields, rising international co-authorships reflect evolving international collaboration networks. We examine higher education research over two decades, applying automated bibliometric topic identification and social network analysis of 9067 papers in 13 core higher education journals (1998–2018). Remarkable expansion in the volume of papers and co-authorships has, surprisingly, not resulted in a more diverse network. Rather, existing co-authorship patterns are strengthened, with the dominance of scholars from a few Anglophone countries largely maintained. Researchers globally seek to co-author with leading scholars in these countries, especially the US, UK, and Australia—at least when publishing in the leading general higher education journals based there. Further, the two-mode social network analysis of countries and topics suggests that while Anglophone countries have led the development of higher education research, China and Germany, as leading research-producing countries, are increasingly influential within this world-spanning network. Topically, the vast majority of co-authored papers in higher education research focuses on individual-level phenomena, with organizational and system or country-level analysis constituting (much) smaller proportions, despite policymakers’ emphasis on cross-national comparisons and the growing importance of university actorhood. We discuss implications thereof for the future of the multidisciplinary field of higher education.
Blurring the boundaries. University actorhood and institutional change in global higher education
(2021)
Higher education (HE) scholarship often focuses on the so-called ‘entrepreneurial’ university as a consequence of new public management reforms. Simultaneously, the remarkable expansion of private HE is said to fragment, specialize, and diversify HE systems. Such diagnoses are misleading as they ignore wider environmental pressures and simultaneous changes in both public, non-profit and for-profit HE. We argue that putative diversity in HE operates as a ceremonial façade behind which large-scale isomorphic change across national HE systems, sectors, and organizational forms occurs. Multiple causes trigger such change originating in the increasingly global HE environment, including a burgeoning international HE regime, accounting and accountability practices, increased permeability of HE systems facilitated by open borders, education markets, and global science as well as (neo)liberal ideologies stressing human capital and human rights. As other organizations, those in HE become subject to these pressures turning universities into more rationalized, standardized, and strategic actors.
The Europeanization of higher education has gained considerable scope and momentum over the past quarter century. Whereas the coordinative Bologna process, with soft governance mechanisms, has facilitated standardization across countries, European Commission funding programs target universities more directly. The Erasmus Mundus Joint Degree Programme, as an incentive-based program, epitomizes the dynamics of such European funding management. Notably, it has established expanding university networks across Europe and unique new tertiary degrees that facilitate international student mobility. Applying social network analysis to 561 participating universities through several program cycles, we longitudinally examine three key patterns in the program’s development: the expansion of the program, the consolidation of pan-European networks, and the participation of and coordination by central universities in these Europeanization processes. Program participation increased considerably across cycles, even as established networks were consolidated, largely through re-accreditation of established programs. Moreover, we identify those universities that assume a central position in the inter-organizational structure of this international program. These universities actively facilitate the evolving Europeanization of higher education by strengthening inter-university networks via a signature EU program.
Higher education is typically viewed as offering the most assured pathways to secure careers and low unemployment rates. Yet, increasingly some groups, not least higher education graduates and their families paying ever-higher tuition fees, question the taken-for-granted contributions higher education makes to individuals and society. While participation rates have climbed worldwide, higher education systems continue to produce winners and losers. In the face of such challenges globally, which alternatives exist? A prominent possibility, pioneered in Germany, is ‘dual study’ programmes. These programmes fully integrate phases of higher education study and paid work in firms, illustrating how employer interests and investments are (re)shaping advanced skill formation. Co-developed and co-financed by employers, they could ameliorate the global trend towards saddling students with ever-higher education costs and student debt. Grounded in neo-institutional analysis, expert interviews, and document analysis, we analyse the genesis and rapid expansion of dual study programmes, emphasizing the role of employer interests and highlighting distributional conflicts in the new politics of advanced skill formation. Furthermore, we discuss lessons other countries might glean from a new form of work-based higher education in Germany. Reference: Graf, L./Powell, J.J.W. (2022) The Origins and Contemporary Development of Work-based Higher Education in Germany: Lessons for Anglophone Countries? In: Knight, E./Bathmaker, A-M./Moodie, G./Orr, K./Webb, S./Wheelahan, L. (Eds.) Equity and Access to High Skills through Higher Vocational Education. London, Palgrave, 125-144.
Integrating International Student Mobility in Work-based Higher Education: The Case of Germany
(2017)
Dual study programs are hybrid forms of work-based higher education that have expanded very rapidly in Germany—a country traditionally considered a key model in both higher education (HE) and vocational education and training (VET). The continued expansion of these hybrid programs increasingly raises questions if, how, and why they may be internationalized. Although comparative research suggests that this could be challenging due to the uniqueness of the German education and training system, strong forces support internationalization. This study examines the current state and the future prospects of internationalization of such innovative dual study programs by focusing on student mobility, a key dimension of internationalization. We find growing interest in but still relatively little mobility related to dual study programs, whether among German (outgoing) or international (incoming) students. Based on expert interviews and document analysis, we extend existing typologies of student mobility regarding specific features of work-based HE programs. Furthermore, we discuss opportunities—at home and abroad—for increasing student mobility in this rapidly expanding sector.
Proposing an alternative to the American model, intergovernmental reform initiatives in Europe have developed and promote a comprehensive European model of skill formation. What ideals, standards, and governance are proposed in this new pan-European model? This model responds to heightened global competition among “knowledge societies” as it challenges national systems to improve. The authors thus compare this emergent European model with the historically influential models of Germany, France, Great Britain, and the United States. To what extent does the European model resemble these traditionally influential national models? The authors report findings of a theory-guided content analysis of official European policy documents in higher education and vocational training from 1998 to 2010. They find that while the European model is a bricolage that integrates diverse characteristics of influential models, the ambitious goals and standards codified in the twin Bologna and Copenhagen processes in higher education and vocational training offer a new model to compete internationally. Dozens of countries now seek to implement these principles. This comparative analysis finds different visions for the future of skill formation on both sides of the Atlantic.
In Europe, the Bologna and Copenhagen Processes in higher education (HE) and vocational education and training (VET) are on the agenda, aiming to create a European educational area. Acknowledging important differences between countries, we compare the evolving relationship between HE and VET. We ask whether and how these two distinct organisational fields in France and Germany have changed in recent decades. Comparing institutional shifts, the article analyses whether long-standing differences in postsecondary education and training systems and the education/economy nexus in these two countries have remained stable. We argue that these countries’ skill formation systems have begun to converge, departing from their original institutionalisation paths. Thus, while the traditional typologies that contrast France and Germany have served as useful heuristic devices, they require revision to adequately represent incremental institutional change in these skill formation systems resulting from endogenous reforms and exogenous pressures due to Europeanisation.
Die USA, Deutschland, Frankreich und Grossbritannien stehen für jeweils unterschiedliche sowie international viel beachtete Modelle der Hochschul- und Berufsbildung. Es gibt keinen globalen Konsens darüber, welche Kriterien für den Erfolg nationaler Bildungssysteme gelten oder welchem Vorbild gefolgt werden soll. Gegenwärtige europäische Reformen, wie die Bologna- und der Kopenhagen-Prozesse, sollen die Wettbewerbsfähigkeit Europas im Vergleich zu den USA erhöhen. Doch auf welchen zentralen Vorstellungen basiert das in diesen Prozessen verbreitete, im Entstehen begriffene europäische Bildungsmodell? Mit einer Inhaltsanalyse europäischer Dokumente (Deklarationen und Kommuniqués) gehen wir der Frage nach, ob die Ideale, Ziele, Legitimationen und Standards dieses Modells eher auf eine Amerikanisierung oder auf eine bricolage verschiedener aus Europa stammender Modelle hindeuten.