Greedy Institutions: The Importance of Institutional Context for Teaching in Higher Education

Abstract

set forth three foci: the content we teach, the training we need to teach effectively, and the con-texts in which we teach. Each topic became a task group that worked mightily to produce materials and offer workshops. It is the third topic that remains the least developed yet the most sociological. "To a significant-indeed crucial-degree, the teacher's performance, behavior and orientation are the products of contextual forces and conditions. Teacher performance and teaching process can be viewed as dependent variables, and the institutional, disciplinary, and societal forces as independent variables" (Mauksch and Howery 1986:73; see also Goldsmid and Wilson [1980] 1985and McGee 1971. More recently, Kuh and Hu (2001) find that "institutional context [has an effect on] learning productivity." Their study found that different types of institutions had different levels of "student quality of effort, engagement in good prac-This article focuses on how the institutional contexts of colleges and universities shape these "greedy institutions." We look at the current social, political, and economic trends affecting all postsecondary institutions, specifically the forces that encourage "greediness." We examine the literature on structural arenas that influence teaching in higher education, including type of institution and departmental level characteristics, considering how the varied structural features of institutions and departments shape the conditions of academic life and demands placed on faculty. We identify the features of the institutional context that can help faculty manage demands on their time and enhance teaching and learning. The article closes with identification of areas for future inquiry and a challenge to sociologists to contribute to an examination of the contextual forces that shape the work lives of faculty and students.

Tying down global to lobal: identifying the influential factors affecting the progress and outcomes of accreditation processes in Dutch-Caribbean universities

“…Most available contributions mainly address accreditation from the demands and requirements attached to accreditation processes taking place in resource-full, large universities located in the developed part of the world. Alderman and Brown (2005), Gouws and Waghid (2006), Uvalic-Trumbic (2007) and Wright et al (2004) contend that while the attainment of internationally accepted quality standards is of paramount importance for higher education institutions located in less developed countries, there are too few resources available to assist the academic staff to improve the quality of their teaching. In addition, generally, the higher education institutions in these countries still need to build up a quality culture and mostly do not have the infrastructure to sustain the realization of their goals.…”

“…The functions of higher education include preparing a knowledgeable cadre of individuals at tertiary level to work in a global, knowledge economy as well as to deliver highly skilled professionals who can contribute to further sustainable socioeconomic development at national level (Baldridge, 2001;Birnbaum, 1989;Dill, 1999;Pertrides et al, 2004;Wright et al, 2004). These functions directly relate to the literature analysis done in chapter 2 and underpin the role of higher education as a contributor to the creation of the emerging knowledge societies.…”

“…As stated in several studies, higher education institutions are facing a period of unprecedented change as they struggle to respond to more external pressure (international and national) and also internal modifications (Dent and Goldberg, 1999;Jacobi, 2007;Gumport, 2000;Kezar, 2001;Minor, 2006;Torraco and Hoover, 2005;Wright et al, 2004). A wide variety of factors contribute to these external and internal developments, such as more funding regulations, the emerging national emphasis on expected quality level related to the accountability responsibility, mass education due to expansion of students' population, diversity in students' background and increased possibilities of distance learning.…”

“…In the literature there are discussions on the forces that influence the change processes and responses in higher education institutions (van Ameijde et al, 2009;Baer et al, 2008;Bryman, 2007;Gumport, 2000;Kezar, 2001;Kezar and Eckel, 2002;Kondakci and Van den Broek, 2009;Viara, 2004;Wright et al, 2004;Zajac and Kraatz, 1993). These authors indicate that the transformation process causes unexpected consequences at different levels of the organization.…”

“…As a result investments in higher education at the national level have become a widely discussed issue (Badrawi, 2001;Birnbaum, 1989;Miller, 2002;Van Vught et al, 2002;Wright et al, 2004). More and more nations, regardless of their developmental stage, are realizing that they need to invest in higher education, not only to create new knowledge, but also to keep up with worldwide developments in all fields.…”