Higher Education as a Field of Study and Research

Abstract

In this chapter we address four issues concerning HE as a field of study and research. We start off by discussing the typical characteristics of a field of study as opposed to a discipline, then we trace a number of moments in the development of HE studies and research internationally and locally. Next we try to suggest a way to 'map' the field in South Africa against the background of international mappings and finally we suggest a number of issues to consider for possible future research to extend and promote HE as a field of study and research -particularly in South Africa. INTRODUCTIONIt is widely agreed that higher education (HE) in its variety of forms contributes to social and economic development through at least four major missions: PART SIX • RESEARCH FRONTIERS AND AGENDASYet, while HE considers itself to be a universal sector of society, its research, structures, curricula, governance and organisation vary greatly and seem deeply rooted in national, cultural and policy contexts (Schwarz and Teichler 2000). It therefore appears most fitting to study HE as a phenomenon or research object from a range of angles and perspectives. As HE has expanded enormously during the past decade or two, research interest in the field has grown significantly and it is well known that this research matters, as the character and performance of HE systems and institutions have considerable implications for all members of society, whether they engage directly with them or not .Earlier, a typical approach to study the field of HE was to explore programmes that emphasised the field as a focus or study object (Dressel and Mayhew 1974) and later encyclopedic versions (Knowles 1977; Clark and Neave 1992), in-depth articles of topical issues in 'handbook' format (Smart 1985;2008) HIGHER EDUCATION: DISCIPLINE OR FIELD OF STUDY?With developments and progress in higher education studies and research over the past two decades questions might arise as to whether HE as an object of study has not reached disciplinary status. This is a legitimate question as many prominent works and methodologies have pointed in that direction (see for instance Kogan, Bauer, CHAPTER 17 • HIGHER EDUCATION AS A FIELD OF STUDY AND RESEARCH 371However, Dressel and Mayhew (1974) have outlined at least six criteria for a field to be termed a discipline: Firstly, a general body of knowledge should exist that can be forced into a reasonably logical taxonomy so that scholars could tell, at least quantitatively, where the knowledge gaps exist. Secondly, it should possess both a specialised vocabulary and a generally accepted basic literature that outlines its parameters. Thirdly, some generally accepted body of theory and some generally understood techniques for theory testing and revision should exist. This criterion is supplemented by the essential of a generally accepted body of consistently applied techniques for analysis or a generally agreed set of methodologies. The fourth criterion is that a recognised sequence of experiences for the preparatio...

Historical perspectives on research on higher education, institutional research and research utilisation

“…However, as illustrated in Figures 1.1 and 1.2, the process of massification is under way everywhere, making universities large and complex institutions requiring data gathering, investigation, interpretation and specialised knowledge for management and governance (Altbach, 2014;Blitzer & Wilkinson, 2009;Strydom, 2002;Varghese, 2017).…”

Philosophy’s rematch: A new conceptualization of the study of higher education

“…In recent years, Mayhew's claims appear just as relevant. There remains perpetual confusion on why higher education degree programs exist (Melendez, 2002), what their scholarship concerns (Brennan and Teichler, 2008;Terenzini, 1996;Tight, 2019Tight, , 2020, and what it means to educate students in higher education (Bitzer and Wilkinson, 2009;Card et al, 2016;Miller and Nelson, 1994;Weidman et al, 1984). Moreover, the purpose and academic legitimacy of higher education research has been sharply criticized (Layzell, 1990;Terenzini, 1996), spurring attempts to define its unique contribution (Brennan and Teichler, 2008;Cheng, 2009;Dressel and Mayhew, 1974;Teichler, 2014;Tight, 2004Tight, , 2014.…”

“…Appealing to interdisciplinary or multidisciplinary labels do not salvage the situation, either. Most empirical studies on higher education research suggest thatwhile borrowing from other disciplines-the study of higher education does not have unique theories and methods of its own (Daenekindt and Huisman, 2020;Tight, 2004Tight, , 2013Tight, , 2014Tight, , 2019Tight, , 2020, failing to fit the typical requirements characteristic of interdisciplinary fields (Bitzer and Wilkinson, 2009). And even if rightly considered multidisciplinary (Jensen and Freeman, 2019), these areas have been shown to lack coherence, display opaque epistemic contribution, and jeopardize the development of expertise and the training of graduate students (Graham, 2005;N� uñez et al, 2019).…”

Ensino Superior E Transformação Social: Decolonizar a Universidade Na Perspectiva Da Igualdade Racial

“…O ensino superior é considerado pela literatura da área como um setor universal da sociedade. No entanto, as estruturas, o desenvolvimento, os currículos e propósitos educacionais, a organização e governança do mesmo variam muito e estão profundamente ancoradas a contextos nacionais, culturais e políticos (SCHWARZ & TEICHLER, 2000;BITZER & WILKINSON, 2009). Esta afirmação mostra-se ainda mais verdadeira no âmbito das pesquisas empíricas do ensino superior, na medida em que fica evidente a existência de países [...] onde apenas algumas estatísticas básicas estão disponíveis, onde as visões do ensino superior são gerais e onde a base dos relatórios dos especialistas nem sempre é sólida.…”