Theory and Method in Higher Education Research: Volume 3

The methodological discourse of mixed-methods research offers general procedures to combine quantitative and qualitative methods for investigating complex fields of research such as higher education. However, integrating different methods still poses considerable challenges. To move beyond general recommendations for mixed-methods research, this chapter proposes to discuss methodological issues with respect to a particular research domain. Taking current studies on the transition to higher education as an example, the authors first provide an overview of the potentials and limitations of quantitative and qualitative methods in the research domain. Second, they show the need for a conceptual framework grounded in the theory of the research object to guide the integration of different methods and findings. Finally, an example study that investigates transition with regard to the interplay of the individual student and the institutional context serves to illustrate the guiding role of theory. The framework integrates different theoretical perspectives on transition, informs the selection of the research methods, and defines the nexus of the two strands that constitute the mixed-methods design. As the interplay of individual and context is of concern for teaching and learning in general, the example presented may be fruitful for the wider field of higher education research.

This chapter discusses the implications of New Public Management (NPM) and of alternative theories on the higher education sector. Three clusters of alternative concepts and theories are identified, positioned in relation to NPM, and discussed. The chapter concludes that the different theoretical approaches: (1) cannot always be distinguished easily, (2) entail a risk of normativity due to the position of higher education in society, and (3) demonstrate that higher education policy and research are in need of a multi-theoretical approach that is able to put higher education back into its social, political, and economic context. By formulating research questions on the role of higher education and on the impact of former reforms, it is suggested that policy and research look further than the current concepts and theoretical approaches to build a new agenda for future.

Decisions which are based on formally organized evaluation processes are widespread in the academic world. In order to develop a theoretical framework which can be used to systematically analyze various evaluation-based decision-making procedures, this chapter focuses on the example of appointment procedures for professorships in German universities. Drawing on systems theory, we start with theorizing universities as formal organizations in order to explain how organizational structures generally affect decision-making procedures. Then three dimensions of academic decision-making are introduced – temporal, social, and matter-of-fact – which are the main cornerstones of our analytical framework. By applying this framework to appointment procedures for professorships, different phases can be distinguished (temporal), participants and their interests as well as their influence potentials come into view (social), and different types of criteria for assessing the candidates can be identified (matter-of-fact). The exemplary application of the framework shows its analytical advantages as an adaptable means of investigating a broader array of (academic) evaluation-based decision-making procedures.

In recent years, the academic profession has received increased interest as an object of study. Higher education systems all over the world have submitted to deep and structural changes with implications for this professional group. Two relevant international projects have been developed to analyze changes in the academic profession in a comparative way: “The Changing Academic Profession” (CAP) and “Academic Profession in Europe: Responses to Societal Challenges” (EUROAC). The aim of this chapter is to analyze the major results of these projects, reflecting on the way they have incorporated theories in the field of sociology of professions, and, simultaneously, to reflect on the contributions the empirical results of these studies have brought to the theoretical framework in this specific field of study. Data analysis reveals that, even if academics do not engage in an in-depth discussion about academics as a professional group, it is possible to classify them as the ‘producers of producers’, or as a meta-profession. Simultaneously, analysis of current changes in the academic profession demonstrates the existence of an increasing internal diversification and fragmentation (based on such dimensions as changes in academics’ roles, employment and working conditions, internationalization processes, autonomy, gender, and age). These results suggest the need to include professional internal diversity in the current debates on changes in professions in contemporaneous societies.

This chapter presents the major components in framing a developmental model of wise organizing in the field of higher education that proceeds along an increasingly more just and responsible path. Our argument considers individual student development theories that lead one to greater competence for wise and socially responsible interactions and engagement in society, and aligns these individual processes with the organizational scholarship emphasizing how organizations enhance their capacities for wise and socially responsible conduct. After reviewing these arguments, we frame a set of research topics required for empirically identifying how universities can cultivate wisdom.

Organizational identity provides an increasingly large number of researchers with a theoretical lens for examining current transformations of the university. The primary objective of this chapter is to report an extensive, systematic overview of the literature published on the subject between 1972 and 2014. The analysis of 120 empirical studies reveals a literature which is rich but dispersed, in theoretical, epistemological, and methodological terms. Thriving since the 2000s, it is mainly American but increasingly globalized. After identifying six main research categories according to the distinctions found in the organizational identity literature, we propose a series of avenues for discussion bearing on the status of identity as an indicator of changes at work in the university, their level and depth.

This chapter provides an alternative conception of universities and the higher education systems in which they operate in an attempt to comprehend the ways in which such institutions and systems adapt and maintain themselves over time. Conceptually, it builds on complex systems theory, most notably critical insights from the study of complexity. We base our empirical analysis on developments across the European continent in the light of recent efforts to modernize university systems in the context of rising competition and pressures toward vertical and horizontal differentiation. We contrast two models of the university – strategic versus resilient – and critically reflect on the implications their differences have for the development of systems and universities and future research work in the area.

In the light of recent debates on the possible issues in curriculum studies, formulated particularly in the field of sociology of education, this chapter discusses the role and the importance of curriculum theories in higher education. Focusing on the historical and the conceptual roots of curriculum theory approaches, the argument is that the dispute and the separation between normative and critical roles of curriculum theories are important to overcome in today’s competency-based and outcome-focused context of higher education. Basil Bernstein’s ideas on the vital role of knowledge are discussed in relation to the origins of the so-called crisis in curriculum theories. It is suggested that in the debate between normative and critical curriculum approaches, a danger is that the focus on the educational importance of curricula may be neglected and silenced in the midst of the pressure to renew curricula in higher education.

This chapter presents a new conceptual framework of institutional research (IR). The framework refines previously studied dimensions of IR and integrates them into the higher order concept of knowledge management. Previously studied dimensions of IR include the institution’s organizational sectors (e.g., academic, human resources), the functions for which information is used (e.g., operations, strategic management), and the resources supporting IR (e.g., technology, funding). The framework innovates by specifying what competencies are required to carry out IR activities and how to assign a level of development to each competency. This operationalization permits the creation of an assessment tool enabling us to move from general and intuitive statements about development to specific and behavioral levels which are actionable. The framework formulation was validated with a group of IR experts in Chile. The framework can be used to assess one institution, to compare an institution to a peer group, or to compare groups of institutions at the regional, national, or international levels.

In this chapter, I analyze universities’ present context of commodification by suggesting a typology of market universities based on Levín’s three types of capital enterprises: the simple purpose, technological, and enhanced universities. The simple purpose university mainly commodifies teaching. On the contrary, the technological and enhanced universities, even if they may also commodify teaching, are focused on the commodification of research. The main difference between the technological and the enhanced universities is the capacity of the latter to enjoy the profits of its commodified research activity, while the former exchanges research results and sells its research capacity in a subordinated way, losing (at least part of) those benefits. These three proposed types also differ regarding financial autonomy and academic freedom.

Due to its relatively embryonic status as a research methodology, virtual ethnography has not yet become a prominent methodology in higher education research. Considering the overwhelming popularity of social media among college students and its increasing use in the higher education community as marketing and communication tools, this methodology warrants further exploration in the higher education field. As modern technology and the prevalence of the internet have transformed daily life, virtual ethnography has recently emerged as a new frontier in qualitative research. With the aim of introducing virtual ethnography as a methodological lens, this chapter discusses logistical and ethical issues associated with it in the context of a research project that examined the interactions between a group of newly admitted students at a private university within a university-operated Facebook group. The chapter begins with the definition of virtual ethnography, and briefly reviews its emergence and use in the existing literature. Then it discusses the implementation of the methodology, with a focus on methodological difficulties in the higher education research setting. Finally, it offers the lessons learned from the research project and provides suggestions for future use of the methodology in the higher education research field.

The goal of this chapter is to introduce the network paradigm for analyzing relational phenomena and organizing knowledge in higher education research. This introduction is presented by example: it analyzes knowledge on inter-organizational relationships of higher education institutions. The formation, maintenance, and impact of relationships are implicitly relational, although they have largely been understood as a consequence of institutional practices. Through the network paradigm, we show that focusing on relations we can develop new and more precise models to understand the antecedents, consequences, and characteristics of these networks.

Disability is a multivalent, fluid concept that encompasses a broad set of phenomena that shape the experiences of individuals as they interact with others; social systems and processes; and legal structures. A disability identity also encompasses a range of different diagnoses and levels of visibility, which serve to influence whether others perceive a person to have a disability. Recognizing the multivalent nature of disability-as-identity makes it possible to understand more fully the experiences of students with disabilities in higher education institutions. Since there is no single theoretical framework that can account for the multivalent nature of disability identity, we utilize the concept of theoretical borderlands (Anzaldúa, 1987) – spaces where ideas come into conflict with one another – to bring crip theory (Kafer, 2013; McRuer, 2006) and critical queer theory (Muñoz, 1999; Wilchins, 2014) into conversation with each other to explore disability identity. We explore the medical, legal, diagnostic, environmental, social, and cultural dimensions of disability identity, concluding with a call to consider the intersectional nature of disability. We also consider the implications for higher education research and practice.

Questionnaires have been devised to investigate informal learning in the workplace based on an analogy with approaches to studying in higher education. This chapter focuses attention on issues of theory by critically evaluating different models of the relationship between employees’ approaches to workplace learning and their perceptions of the workplace context. In addition, this chapter focuses attention on issues of method by critically evaluating two particular instruments that have been devised in order to measure employees’ approaches to workplace learning and their perceptions of the workplace context. We use data from an online survey in which the Approaches to Work Questionnaire and the Workplace Climate Questionnaire were administered to employees who were taking courses by distance learning with the UK Open University. Factor analyses confirmed that both questionnaires measured three distinct scales. Canonical correlation analysis showed that the employees’ scores on the two instruments shared 43% of their variance. Path analysis found evidence that variations in approaches to learning lead to variations in perceptions of the workplace climate but not for the converse relationship.