The evolution of American scientific fields: Disciplinary differences versus institutional isomorphism

Cultural Perspectives on Higher Education

Volumn , Issue , 2008, Pages 197-212

  Fairweather, James S ^a   Paulson, Karen ^b  

^a MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b National Center for Higher Education Management Systems   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 80052894813     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.1007/978-1-4020-6604-7_13     Document Type: Chapter

References (21)

1. Alpert, D. (1985). Performance and paralysis: The organizational context of the American research university. Journal of Higher Education, 56, 241-281.
2. Baldridge, J. V., Curtis, D., Ecker, G., and Riley, G. (1978). Policy making and effective leadership. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
3. Becher, T. and Trowler, P. (2001). Academic tribes and territories: Intellectual inquiry and the culture of disciplines. Philadelphia, PA: Society for Research into Higher Education and Open University Press.
4. Belenky, M., Clinchy, B., Goldberger, N., and Tarule, J. (1986). Women's ways of knowing: The development of self, voice, and mind. New York: Basic Books.
5. Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching (1994). A classification of institutions of higher education. Princeton, NJ: Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching.
6. Center for Science, Mathematics, and Engineering Education, Committee on Undergraduate Science Education (1999). Transforming undergraduate education in science, mathematics, engineering, and technology. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
7. Clark, B. (1987). The academic life: Small worlds, different worlds. Princeton, NJ: Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching.
8. Fairweather, J. (1996). Faculty work and public trust: Restoring the value of teaching and public service in American academic life. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
9. Fairweather, J. S. (1997). The value of teaching, research, and service. In Wechsler, H. (ed.) The NEA 1997 Almanac of Higher Education. Washington, DC: National Education Association, pp. 43-62.
10. Fairweather, J. S. (1999). The highly productive faculty member: Confronting the mythologies of faculty work. In Tierney, W. G. (ed.) Faculty productivity: Facts, fictions, and issues. New York: Falmer Press, pp. 55-98.
11. Fulton, O. and Trow, M. (1974). Research activity in American higher education. Sociology of Education, 47, 29-73.
12. Gaff, G., Ratcliff, J., and Associates (1997). Handbook of the undergraduate curriculum: A comprehensive guide to purposes, structures, practices and change. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
13. Marsh, H. W. and Hattie, J. (2002). The relation between research productivity and teaching effectiveness. Journal of Higher Education, 73, 603-641.
14. Massy, W., Wilger, A., and Colbeck, C. (1994). Overcoming "hallowed" collegiality: Departmental cultures and teaching quality. Change, 26, 11-20.
15. Massy, W. and Zemsky, R. (1994). Faculty discretionary time: Departments and the "academic ratchet". Journal of Higher Education, 65, 1-22.
16. National Science Foundation (1996). Shaping the future: New expectations for undergraduate education in science, mathematics, engineering, and technology. Washington, DC: National Science Foundation.
17. Powell, W. and Di Maggio, P. (eds.) (1991). The new institutionalism in organizational analysis. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
18. Schwarz, S. and Westerheijden, D. (eds.) (2004). Accreditation and evaluation in European higher education area. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
19. Seymour, E. and Hewitt, N. (1997). Talking about leaving: Why undergraduates leave the sciences. Boulder, CO: Westview.
20. Wankat, P. (2002). The effective, efficient professor: Teaching scholarship and service. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
21. Weimer, M. (1996). Teaching on solid ground: Using scholarship to improve teaching. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.