但它是精英大学吗?组织地位、边界以及打造精英大学和旗舰大学

IF 2.9 3区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Review of Higher Education Pub Date : 2024-04-18 DOI:10.1353/rhe.0.a925681
W. Carson Byrd, Brendan Cantwell, Sanzhar Baizhanov
{"title":"但它是精英大学吗?组织地位、边界以及打造精英大学和旗舰大学","authors":"W. Carson Byrd, Brendan Cantwell, Sanzhar Baizhanov","doi":"10.1353/rhe.0.a925681","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>“Elite” and “flagship” are two influential groupings used to conceptualize differences among higher education institutions, but rarely defined. We derive common features attributed to these groupings from a content analysis of 40 years of higher education literature. Next, we explore the relationship of these features to other institutional characteristics with multiple regression analyses of organizational-level data. We uncover “organizational tautology,” a self-reinforcing manifestation of status beliefs and boundary work. Elite and flagship categories represent stylized facts used to legitimate groupings based on organizational status, reinforcing exclusionary beliefs by higher education insiders and their positions within an unequal higher education system.</p>","PeriodicalId":47732,"journal":{"name":"Review of Higher Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"But is it Elite? Organizational Status, Boundaries, and Crafting Elite and Flagship Universities\",\"authors\":\"W. Carson Byrd, Brendan Cantwell, Sanzhar Baizhanov\",\"doi\":\"10.1353/rhe.0.a925681\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>“Elite” and “flagship” are two influential groupings used to conceptualize differences among higher education institutions, but rarely defined. We derive common features attributed to these groupings from a content analysis of 40 years of higher education literature. Next, we explore the relationship of these features to other institutional characteristics with multiple regression analyses of organizational-level data. We uncover “organizational tautology,” a self-reinforcing manifestation of status beliefs and boundary work. Elite and flagship categories represent stylized facts used to legitimate groupings based on organizational status, reinforcing exclusionary beliefs by higher education insiders and their positions within an unequal higher education system.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47732,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Review of Higher Education\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Review of Higher Education\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"95\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1353/rhe.0.a925681\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"教育学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Review of Higher Education","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1353/rhe.0.a925681","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

"精英 "和 "旗舰 "是两个有影响力的组别,用来概括高等教育机构之间的差异,但很少有定义。我们通过对 40 年高等教育文献的内容分析,得出了这些分组的共同特征。接下来,我们通过对组织层面数据的多元回归分析,探讨了这些特征与其他机构特征之间的关系。我们发现了 "组织同义反复",这是地位信念和边界工作的自我强化表现。精英和旗舰类别代表了一种风格化的事实,用于使基于组织地位的分组合法化,强化了高等教育内部人士的排斥性信念及其在不平等的高等教育体系中的地位。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
But is it Elite? Organizational Status, Boundaries, and Crafting Elite and Flagship Universities

“Elite” and “flagship” are two influential groupings used to conceptualize differences among higher education institutions, but rarely defined. We derive common features attributed to these groupings from a content analysis of 40 years of higher education literature. Next, we explore the relationship of these features to other institutional characteristics with multiple regression analyses of organizational-level data. We uncover “organizational tautology,” a self-reinforcing manifestation of status beliefs and boundary work. Elite and flagship categories represent stylized facts used to legitimate groupings based on organizational status, reinforcing exclusionary beliefs by higher education insiders and their positions within an unequal higher education system.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Review of Higher Education
Review of Higher Education EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: The official journal of the Association for the Study of Higher Education (ASHE), The Review of Higher Education provides a forum for discussion of issues affecting higher education. The journal advances the study of college and university issues by publishing peer-reviewed articles, essays, reviews, and research findings. Its broad approach emphasizes systematic inquiry and practical implications. Considered one of the leading research journals in the field, The Review keeps scholars, academic leaders, and public policymakers abreast of critical issues facing higher education today.
期刊最新文献
Hoped-For Selves: Using Possible Selves to Explore the Career and College-Going Aspirations for Gang-Involved Latino Boys Tenure Bans: An Exploratory Study of State Legislation Proposing to Eliminate Faculty Tenure, 2012-2022 Black Taxes: African-American Doctoral Students Experiencing Tokenism at a Predominantly White Institution "It's an Old White Boys' Club:" Faculty of Color's Perceptions of Policy Engagement Language and Postsecondary Trajectories: How "Ever-English Learner" Status Predicts College Student Pathways and Outcomes
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1