Dynamics in higher education politics: a theoretical model

Abstract

This article presents a model for analysing dynamics in higher education politics (DHEP). Theoretically the model draws on the conceptual history of political contingency, agenda-setting theories and previous research on higher education dynamics. According to the model, sociohistorical complexity can best be analysed along two dimensions: the political situation and political possibilities. Politics as a situation connotes the idea of an opportune moment when politics can be changed, and political possibilities concern the different alternatives the actors see in different situations. Depending on whether the situation is favourable or unfavourable to change, and on whether the possibilities are politicised or settled, the DHEP model introduces four types of dynamic: reform, gridlock, consensual change and friction. On the empirical level the model has been tested and developed in the context of Finnish higher education by means of interviews and documentary material. It was found, in the Finnish context, that four policy threads functioned according to each of the dynamics. It appears from the empirical findings that dynamics in higher education politics are strongly related to changes that are external to the higher education political system, the changing positions of the actors in different policy threads and the unexpected nature of the dynamics. The DHEP can also be used to shed light on the effects of the silent, settled possibilities that may enable or disable other policy threads within a higher education system.

Higher education policy architecture and policy-making in the Sultanate of Oman: towards a critical understanding

“…Clearly, this shows that HE policy-making is now a fast growing field of study. Conducting an extensive literature search, I discovered that there were a number of studies carried out with the aim of debating some HE policy and policy-making issues (see Cook, 1998;Kauko, 2013;Lane, 2007;Marginson & Mollis, 2001;Martinez, 2002;Mills, 2007;Lowry, 2001;Richardson et al, 1999;Saarinen & Ursin, 2012). The focus of these studies has been varied and these apply the study of public policy and political science to HE.…”

“…Overall, these studies (American and European) have used several different frameworks and methods which fit with their cases and contexts. Some of the issues and themes covered in these studies are the national politics of HE (Cook, 1998), how the structure of HE systems affects HE policies (Lowry, 2001), political actors and the governance of HE (Richardson et al, 1999), policy development and state governance structures (Leslie & Novak, 2003;Martinez, 2002), the use of political frameworks in analysing policymaking in HE (Kauko, 2013;Lane, 2007;Mills, 2007), the viewpoints of policymakers, and legislators on HE policy (Bastedo, 2006), the analysis of power relations in comparison between HE systems in Australia and Argentina (Marginson & Mollis, 2001) and approaches to study HE policy (Saarinen & Ursin, 2012). These studies informed the selection of an appropriate theoretical framework for this study, as will be shown in the following chapter.…”

“…These frameworks differ from one study to another, depending on the nature and focus of the study and the specific issues being addressed (Bastedo, 2007;Kauko, 2013;McLendon, 2003a). Bastedo (2007) has examined some frameworks used in HE policy literature and has argued that only some of these frameworks have been found to be useful for application in analysing HE policy-making problems.…”

“…The seminal work done by Bastedo (2007), Kauko (2013), McLendon (2003a) and Saarinen and Ursin (2012) is very helpful in choosing a theoretical framework, as they traverse some of these frameworks and give examples of their usage. Overall, these frameworks are found to be theorydriven approaches, meaning that they are based on theories used in a deductive manner in research.…”

“…Indeed, this issue was also raised by Kauko (2013), pointing to the confusion between usage of these terms. For my research, I am going to speak of the framework of the study.…”