Twelve Propositions on Diversity in Higher Education

Codling, Andrew; Meek, Lynn

doi:10.1787/hemp-v18-art17-en

Cited by 52 publications

(70 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In short, the three cases presented here provide fresh evidence of the importance attributed to key factors such as the environment, policy, funding, and competition/cooperation (Codling and Meek 2006) when it comes to institutional differentiation and systemic diversity. In addition, we found support for the notion that not only is there a natural tendency for convergence in HE (of forms and structures), but policy does play a critical role either in mitigating (Australia) or stimulating (Norway and Canada) such a process.…”

Section: Taking Stock Of the Cross-country Findingsmentioning

confidence: 84%

“…Traditionally, in most countries, regional provision of HE was the primary task of nonuniversity providers like colleges, universities with a more regional character or applied nature, and/or local branches of comprehensive universities located in more central locations (Codling and Meek 2006). In Western Europe this has basically meant the rise of dual or binary HE systems (Kyvik 2009: 8-10).…”

Section: Diversity and Differentiationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Five factors are thought to determine the degree of diversity/convergence within a given national system (table 1). Codling and Meek (2006) reflect upon the relationship between drift tendencies, in either direction, or the degree of diversity/convergence within the system (figure 1). There is evidence suggesting that, in the last two decades or so, HE institutions across the globe have been imitating each other's structures and programs, thus reinforcing the notion that system diversity is on the decline (Edwards and Miller 2008;Jaquette 2013).…”

Section: Diversity and Differentiationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Drift tendencies in both directions (Codling and Meek 2006) have dissipated the existing differences, resulting in the erosion of the binary divide and the rise of hybrid organizational forms (Battilana and Dorado 2010). Similarly, in Canada, the situation can also be characterised by the blurring of boundaries (Garrod and Macfarlane 2009) amongst previously distinct sub-sectors of HE.…”

Section: Taking Stock Of the Cross-country Findingsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Equity, institutional diversity and regional development: a cross-country comparison

2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper investigates historical and current developments regarding governmental policies aimed at enhancing spatial equity (access) or decentralization of higher education provision in three countries -Australia, Canada and Norway. We then shed light on the links or interrelations between policy objectives and initiatives and in institutional diversity and regional development more broadly. We found evidence of convergence trends in Norway and Canada resulting in the rise of hybrid organisational forms, as well as the critical importance of policy frameworks in either maintaining or eroding the traditional binary divide. The cross-country data suggest a rather mixed or nuanced picture when it comes to regional development. Finally, the paper identifies a number of key challenges facing the systems, suggests possible ways of tackling them, and sheds light on avenues for future research.

show abstract

Section: Taking Stock Of the Cross-country Findingsmentioning

confidence: 84%

Section: Diversity and Differentiationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Diversity and Differentiationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Taking Stock Of the Cross-country Findingsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Equity, institutional diversity and regional development: a cross-country comparison

2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Differences may exist within institutions or between them; indeed, different units of an HEI may operate in different ways depending upon the discipline, orientation, (Codling and Meek 2006). A difficulty with these approaches is that the level of granularity is insufficient to fully appreciate the extent to which differentiation exists.…”

Section: Defining Diversitymentioning

confidence: 99%

“Everyone Wants to Be Like Harvard” – Or Do They? Cherishing All Missions Equally

Hazelkorn¹

2012

European Higher Education at the Crossroads

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

2013

ASHE Higher Education Report

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Research studies most frequently consider systemic diversity, and these concepts infl uence many other institutional diversity aspects identifi ed later. Th e Carnegie Classifi cations, the most widely referenced classifi cation scheme in higher education, creates a typology using six primary criteria: undergraduate instruction, graduate instruction, enrollment profi le, undergraduate profi le, size, and setting. Since the fi rst iteration in 1970, the Carnegie Classifi cations have undergone subtle and more dramatic changes in an attempt to refl ect the changes among higher education institutions. Despite the changes, the infl uence of the classifi cations remains substantial and results in the importance often being placed on systemic diff erences. Furthermore, the aspects of systemic diversity may appear separately but frequently occur together. For example, many small colleges are private institutions, while larger universities tend to be under public control. Research universities off er more graduate programs and typically enroll a larger student body with more full-time students. Th e relationship among the various characteristics of systemic diversity allows a categorizing of institutions that provides an easy shorthand for describing colleges and universities. As an example, if told to imagine what a private liberal arts college looks like, one might think of a small school, located in a rural or suburban area, with a collegial culture and a focus on teaching and student-faculty interactions. Although this would certainly not describe all private liberal arts colleges in the nation, the typical characteristics enable generalizations useful for daily practice. Programmatic: Diversity of Degree Level, Comprehensiveness, and Range of Disciplines Off eredProgrammatic diversity includes fi ve components: degree level, degree area, comprehensiveness, mission, and emphasis. Defi ning institutions based on their highest degree awarded (associate's, bachelor's, master's, or doctorate) remains one of the most common ways to diff erentiate among various higher education institutions. By evaluating an institution based on the highest degree awarded, researchers make broad generalizations about an institution and stereotype the characteristics of the school. For example, observers readily recognize an institution where the associate's degree represents the highest 6 degree awarded as a community college with programs such as college transfer courses and vocational education to serve a sizable adult and part-time student population. A doctoral-granting institution would lead one to expect an institution with a research emphasis, a broader array of academic off erings, faculty who emphasize research and tenure, and graduate education programs. Certainly, a great variety exists among institutions that off er an associate's degree or those that off er doctorates as their highest off ering. However, the use of the highest degree level off ered provides a frequently used variable to diff erentiate and categorize institutio...

show abstract

Twelve Propositions on Diversity in Higher Education

Cited by 52 publications

References 12 publications

Equity, institutional diversity and regional development: a cross-country comparison

Equity, institutional diversity and regional development: a cross-country comparison

“Everyone Wants to Be Like Harvard” – Or Do They? Cherishing All Missions Equally

Table of Contents

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About