academic units

7/30/2019 Academic Units

1/23

The Organisation of Academic Knowledge: A Comparative PerspectiveAuthor(s): Tight MalcolmSource: Higher Education, Vol. 46, No. 4 (Dec., 2003), pp. 389-410Published by: SpringerStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3447568

Accessed: 13/09/2009 16:58

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available athttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless

you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you

may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.

Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=springer.

Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed

page of such transmission.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit organization founded in 1995 to build trusted digital archives for scholarship. We work with the

scholarly community to preserve their work and the materials they rely upon, and to build a common research platform that

promotes the discovery and use of these resources. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Springeris collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access toHigher Education.
http://www.jstor.org/stable/3447568?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=springerhttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=springerhttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/3447568?origin=JSTOR-pdf


2/23

HigherEducation 46: 389-410,2003. 389? 2003 KluwerAcademicPublishers. Printed n theNetherlands.

The organisation of academic knowledge: A comparativeperspectiveTIGHT MALCOLMDepartmentof ContinuingEducation,Universityof Warwick,CoventryCV47AL E-mail:m. [email protected])

Abstract. How is academicknowledge organized?Does this varyfrom countryto country,and, if so, how?This paper explores these questionsthroughan examinationof some of thedata ncluded n the CommonwealthUniversitiesYearbook 001. In particular, n analysis ispresentedof the differentnames given to basic academicunits (departments,chools and/orfaculties) nAustralia,Nigeriaandthe UnitedKingdom.Evidence s providedregardingormsof institutionalorganization,and of the varying strengthof differentdisciplinesor fields ofstudy.Keywords:academicunits,disciplines,diversity, ields of study,knowledgeforms,universityorganisation

IntroductionStandard models of the research process suggest a seamless and linearprogression from the development of research questions through literaturereview, methodological design, data collection, data analysis to writing upand dissemination (see, for example, the discussion in Blaxter, Hughes andTight 2001, pp. 6-9). In practice, of course, it rarely happens like that: socialresearch may start from, and finish at, any of these stages, may jump backand forwards between them, and will typically involve several activities beingprogressed contemporaneously.The piece of research reported in this article is a case in point. There wasno direct data collection involved, as it exploits an existing data set. Thestudy did not start from research questions, but rather from the feeling thata particularpublication, of which I had been vaguely aware for many years,might offer interesting data for analysis. And the data analysis was essentiallycompleted before any formal literature review was attempted, so that I wentto the literature looking for possible explanatory frameworks for what I hadfound.

This article does, however, relate to a general area of interest of mine:the nature of academic work, institutions and life (Blaxter, Hughes and Tight


3/23

MALCOLMIGHT1998a, 1998b;Tight2000). It offers an analysisof the contemporary rgan-isationof academicknowledgein universities n three countries Australia,Nigeria and the United Kingdom- as this is expressedthroughthe namesgiven to basic academicunits.The remainderof the article is organised nfour sections.First,thedataset andmethodologyusedare described.Thentheresultsof the analysisarepresented,andpossible interpretativerameworksfor thepatterns ound areexplored.Finallysome conclusionsanddirectionsfor further esearchof thiskind areoffered.

MethodologyEachyearthe Association of CommonwealthUniversitiespublishesa Year-book, 'a directory o the universitiesof the [British]Commonwealthand thehandbookof theirassociation'. This studymakesuse of the 2001 Yearbook(Associationof CommonwealthUniversities2001), the latestavailableat thetime of writing. It also seemed somewhat apposite to focus on the 2001edition, as representative f the state of highereducationat the end of thetwentiethcentury and/orthe start of the twenty-first(whicheverway youcalculateyourcalendar).The two volumes of the 2001 Yearbook otal 2464 pages in length.Theentriesfor Australia,Nigeria and the United Kingdomrespectivelytake up240, 74 and512 pages, 34%of the total in all. These entriesseek to providecomprehensive nformation on the organisationand staffing of all institu-tions of highereducation n thecountriesconcerned.Eachinstitution'sentrylists its 'academicunits'; thatis, its departments, chools, units or faculties(universities,of course, adopta varietyof forms of organisationand asso-ciatednomenclatures). n the remainderof this article,these are referred oas 'basic academicunits'. Details are given of all academicstaff of seniorlecturer evel or above,with informationalso providedon 'special [typicallyresearch]centres'.Forthis study,databaseswere created romthe listingsfor the threecoun-triesselected, tabulating he titles of all the basic academicunits, institutionby institution.This informationwas not availablefor a small minorityofuniversitiesor colleges, eitherbecause they were not members of the Asso-ciationof CommonwealthUniversities,and so did not makereturns or theYearbook,orbecausetheydid notprovidethefull detailsrequiredn timeforpublication.No attemptwasmadeto 'patch'thedatabaseby collectinginfor-mationon these institutionsdirectly:partlybecause this would compromisetheconsistencyof the data,butchieflybecauseit was not felt to be necessaryfor thepurposesof the study.

390


4/23

THEORGANISATIONOF ACADEMICKNOWLEDGEIn compilingthe databases,a numberof ruleswere followed. Only basic'academic'unitswere included.Units whose functionwas wholly research-focused, or which served wholly to supportacademicactivities across theinstitution(e.g., computercentres, languagecentres and staff developmentunits),were excluded: these were usuallyseparately isted in the Yearbook.Any listedbasic academicunitsthathad no staff- perhaps urprisinglyherewere a few - were also excluded. In the few cases where an institutionhadtwo basicacademicunits withthe sametitle- all eithermulti-site nstitutionsor ones thathadexperiencedrecentamalgamations only one was included.The introductory Notes to the User' included in the CommonwealthUniversitiesYearbook tress the care with which the informationt containsis compiled.A numberof checksagainst nformation ontainedon universityweb-sites confirmed ts accuracy.While the Yearbookmust include someerrors,these appear,therefore,to be relativelyfew and small in nature.Itmay also be the case, of course, that some institutionsdo not updatetheirinformationas promptlyor fully as they might,butthe effects of this on theanalysisshouldnot be significant.Similar reservationsmust be made with regardto the databasesI havecompiled from the Yearbook. While most errors have hopefully beencorrected hrough he variouscheckingprocedures undertook, ome will nothavebeenpickedup.However, t shouldbe stressed hat,giventhemagnitudeof thedatabase,anyremainingerrors,while they mightaffectthedetail of theanalysis,would almostcertainlyhaveno impacton its conclusions.

ResultsTable 1 gives basic informationon the size of the three national databasescreated.They rangein size fromNigeria,with 25 universitiesand931 basicacademic units, to the United Kingdom, with 104 universities and 3022basic academicunitsincluded.The meannumberof unitsperuniversitywassimilar,varyingfrom 29 in the United Kingdomto 37 in Nigeria, with asimilarrange n the threedatabases,rangingoverall froma minimumof 3 toa maximumof 114.

Amongthe trendsevidentwas the tendencyfor older universities o havelarger numbers of basic academic units, particularly hose with medicalschools. By contrast,neweruniversities end to have fewer basicacademicunits, in some cases using a broaderschool or faculty structure ather hanthe departmentaltructure vident in the majorityof the older universities.In these, and indeedothercases, of course, it may be thatsignificantorgan-isationalresponsibility s exercised at a lower level in the hierarchy han thebasic academicunit identified.

391


5/23

MALCOLMIGHTTable1. Numbersof universitiesand basic academicunitsby country

Country Universities Basic academicunits Mean units/university range)Australia 40 1309 33 (4-114)Nigeria 25 931 37 (7-85)UnitedKingdom 104 3022 29 (3-87)

Table2. Numbersof basic academic units andunittitlesAustralia Nigeria UnitedKingdom

No. basicacademic units 1309 931 3022No. unit titles 737 373 1399Mean units/title 1.8 2.5 2.2Rangein units/title 1-27 1-20 1-56%uniquetitles 75.7 59.2 75.3No. (%)titlescommonto 4 (0.5) 9(2.4) 1 (0.0)half or more universities

One findingwhich was immediatelystriking duringthe compilationofthe databases was the relatively large numberof different basic academicunit titles (see Table 2), ranging from 373 in Nigeria to 1399 in theUnited Kingdom. Indeed, the great majorityof basic academic unit titleswere uniquewithin their nationalsystem: from 59% in Nigeria to 76% inAustralia.These included such novelties as Akkadian,Chinese Medicine,EnglishLocal History,General andFoundationStudies, IndigenousHealthStudies, Keyboard,Marine Technology, Orthoptics,Quality Management,ShariaLaw, UrbanPlanning,Voice andWildlife & FisheriesManagement.Conversely,very few titles areto be found in half or more of the universitiesin any one system.There were a total of nine in the case of Nigeria- which,of the threecountriesexaminedhere,appears o have the most 'standardised'titles- but ust one in the case of the UnitedKingdom.

Table3, which lists the 39 basic academic unit titles beginningwith theletter 'G' in the United Kingdom database,shows how this works out inpractice.A series of less common titles aredisplayedalongside Geography(a titleusedby 34 institutions)andGerman foundin 15 institutions).An examinationof the databasessuggests that there are four immediateexplanations or the variability n the titles givento basic academicunits:

392


6/23

THEORGANISATIONFACADEMICNOWLEDGE 393Table3. Basicacademic unittitlesbeginningwiththeLetter G', UnitedKingdom

Basic academicunittitle Numberof unitsGastroenterology 2Gastroenterologyndhepatology 1Gastrointestinalurgery 1General inguistics 1Generalpractice 5Generalpracticeandprimary are 3Generalpracticeandprimaryhealthcare 1Generalpracticeandpublichealth 1General urgery 1Genetics 3Genito-Urinarymedicine 2Geographical nd environmental ciences 1Geographical ciences 2Geography 34Geographyandarchaeology 1Geographyand earthsciences 2Geographyand environment 1Geographyand environmental ciences 1Geographyandgeosciences 1Geographyandtopographic cience 1Geologicalsciences 4Geology 4Geology andgeophysics 1Geology andpetroleumgeology 1Geomaticengineering 1Geomatics 1Geriatricmedicine 8German 15German anguageandliterature 2German tudies 5Germanic tudies 1Gerontologicalandcontinuingcarenursing 1Gerontology 1Government 5Graphicdesign 1Greek 1Greekandlatin 1Greek anguageandliterature, yzantineandmodern 1Greek,romanandbyzantinestudies 1


7/23

MALCOLMIGHT* Alternative itles arepresent alongsidethe most common ones. Thus,as well as German,we haveGermanLanguageandLiterature,GermanStudies andGermanicStudies.* Many titles are combinations.Thus, as well as Geology, we haveGeology andGeophysicsandGeology and PetroleumGeology.Thesecombinationsmayreachacrossdisciplinaryboundaries, s in thecase,forexample,of GeographyandArchaeology.* Some titles include qualifying terms, as in the cases of 'General'Linguisticsand 'General'Surgery.* Othersidentify particular pecialisms within disciplines or fields ofstudy, including 'Gerontologicaland ContinuingCare' Nursing and'Genito-Urinary'Medicine.Clearly,however, ome basicacademicunittitlesaremuchmorepopular hanothers. Table4 lists the twenty most popularfor the threenationalsystemsstudied,andillustratesa numberof points:* Of the 34 titles included in the table, only 5 - biological sciences,chemistry,economics,historyandphysics - arecommonto all threesystems.* Another 16 titles, however - business, civil engineering, educa-tion, engineering,English, geography, aw, management,mechanicalengineering,medicine, music,obstetricsandgynaecology,philosophy,psychology, sociology, surgery- are common to two of the threesystemsstudied,and,in most cases, appearonly slightlyfurtherdownthepopularityistingfor the thirdsystem.* The lists for Australia and the United Kingdom are very similar,sharing 14 titles. Social science subjects featurestronglyin both ofthese lists.* The list for Nigeria, by contrast,shares only 8 titles with that forAustralia,and 9 with that for the United Kingdom. Medical andscientificsubjects eaturemorestrongly n the Nigerian ist.* Individual ists include what might be thoughtof as closely relatedor overlappingbasic academic unit titles. Thus, the AustralianandUnited Kingdomlists include both business and management,whilethe Australian ist also has separateentries for both accounting &financeandaccounting.

The last point suggests a furtherdirectionfor analysis,namelyto grouptogethercognatebasic academic unit titles so as to producea shorter ist ofthe most common subjects (I will use the term 'subjects' in preferenceto'disciplines'or 'fieldsof study'for theremainder f this section,recognisingthat the latterare contestedterms).This was done by groupingalternative,qualifyingand specialisttitles togetherunderthe most commontitles, with

394


8/23

Table4. The most popularbasicacademicunittitlesAustralia Nigeria UnitedKingdommanagement 27)law (25)education(22)psychology (22)economics(17)nursing 17)business(15)philosophy(14)chemistry 12)music (11)accounting& finance(10)English(10)history(10)publichealth(10)accounting 9)biological sciences (9)marketing 9)medicine(9)surgery 9)civil engineering(8)engineering 8)physics (8)

physics(20)chemistry 18)biochemistry 16)civil engineering 16)economics(15)history (15)mechanicalengineering 15)politicalscience (14)sociology (13)anatomy 12)medicine(12)obstetrics& gynaecology (12)surgery 12)biologicalsciences (11)physiology(11)animalscience (10)geography 10)agriculturalconomics & ext. (9)geology (9)pharmacology 9)

law (56)psychology (44)economics (42)education 40)chemistry 37)music (36)geography 34)business(33)history(33)philosophy(29)mathematics 28)engineering 27)English(26)biological sciencephysics (25)computer ciencemanagement 23)sociology (23)mechanicalenginobstetrics& gyna

1.2.3.4.5.6.7.8.9.

10.11.12.13.14.15.16.17.18.19.20.


9/23

MALCOLMIGHTcombination itles allocatedto whatwas interpreted s the dominantelementof the combination.Forexample,to go back to Table3, the titles GeneralPractice& PrimaryCare, General Practice & PrimaryHealth Care, and General Practice &Public Healthwere all initiallygroupedwith GeneralPractice.Amalgama-tionscontinueduntilno subjectcontained ewer than 10 basicacademicunits,andeach systemhad the samenumberof subjects.Subjecttitles were stand-ardisedbetweenthe threesystems;thus,in the case of Nigeria,for example,political science was re-labelledas politics, the title more commonly usedin Australiaand the United Kingdom.The details of the allocationprocessmight,of course,be the subjectof somedebate,butthis wouldbe unlikelytochangethe overall results much.Six faculties were recognisedalongsidethe subjects- arts,engineering,languages& areastudies,medicine,science and social sciences - to accom-modatebothgenericbasicacademicunit titles andminorspecialisttitles thatcould not be combined with other subjects. Thus, to take examples fromTable 3 again, General Practice was eventuallyamalgamated nto anothersubjectcalled PrimaryCare;whereas Genetics became part of the facultygroupingMedicine.Table5 providesfour examplesof the subjectamalgamationsproduced,for the United Kingdomdatabase,and illustratesa numberof the groupingprocesses involved. Thus, Pharmacologyand Pharmacy,which might beseen as separatesubjects,were so closely connectedin the namingof basicacademic units thattheyhadto be amalgamated ogetheras one. Philosophy,by contrast, s an exampleof a fairly coherentsubject,at least in termsofunittitles, withvariants,specialismsandcombinationsrelativelyuncommon(88% of the units includedhave the title 'Philosophy').Physics, as a largesubject, has absorbed what might be seen as a separate,though smaller,subject,Astronomy.Politics is a subject hat s rife withalternative, pecialistandcombinatory itles (only 35% of theunits havethe title 'Politics').Of course, the details of Table5 might be the subjectof debate. Somemight wish to put certainspecialismsinto other subject groupings.Othersmight argue that the subjects identified are too few or many in number.Iam not here concerned,however,with the fine detail - and I am certainlynot seeking to produce,as if such a thingwere possible, a definitivemapofacademicknowledge- but with the overallpatterns.

The overallresultsof thegroupingexercise aredisplayed n Table6, whichlists the leading 34 subjects and the faculty groups identified in terms ofpopularity or each of the threesystems. A comparisonbetween this tableandTable4 revealsboth similaritiesanddifferences.Many subjectsappearhigh up in bothtables, includingeducation, aw and business. Others such

396


10/23

THEORGANISATIONFACADEMICNOWLEDGETable5. Examplesof SubjectsandComponentBasic Academic Unit Titles: UnitedKingdom

PharmacologyandPharmacy 31):ClinicalPharmacology 3); ClinicalPharmacologyandTherapeutics 1); Pharma-ceuticalandBiological Chemistry 1); Pharmaceutical ciences (3); Pharmaceutics(1); PharmacologicalSciences (1); PharmacologicalSciences andToxicology (1);Pharmacology(7); Pharmacologyand Clinical Pharmacology 1); PharmacologyandNeurosciences(1); PharmacologyandTherapeutics1); Pharmacology,Thera-peuticsandToxicology (1); Pharmacy 5); PharmacyandChemistry 1); Pharmacyand PharmaceuticalScience (1); Pharmacyand Pharmacology(1); Pharmacy,BiomedicalandPhysicalSciences (1).

Philosophy(33):Logic and Metaphysics (1); Moral Philosophy (1); Philosophical Studies (1);Philosophy(29); Philosophy,Logic and Scientific Method(1).

Physics (53):Astronomy(2); AstronomyandSpace Physics (1); Astrophysics 1); Atmospheric,Oceanic andPlanetaryPhysics(1); Atomic andLaserPhysics (1); ClinicalPhysics(1); CondensedMatterPhysics (1); ExperimentalPhysics(1); ParticleandNuclearPhysics (1); PhysicalSciences (3); Physics (25); Physics andAppliedPhysics (1);Physics and Astronomy(11); Space and ClimatePhysics (1); TheoreticalPhysics(2).

Politics (49):Government(5); International 1); InternationalPolitics (1); InternationalRela-tions (2); InternationalRelations and Politics (2); International tudies (1); LocalGovernmentStudies (1); Policy Studies (2); Policy Studies and Criminology(1);Politics and Social Research(1); Political Science and InternationalStudies (1);Political Studies(2);PoliticalTheoryandGovernment1); Politics(17); PoliticsandAsian Studies (1); Politics and CommunicationStudies (1); Politics and Contem-poraryHistory(1);Politics andInternationalRelations 3); PoliticsandInternationalStudies (2); Politics and Philosophy (1); Politics and Sociology (1); Politics,InternationalRelationsand theEnvironment1).

(figures n parenthesesndicate he numberof basic academicunit titlesinvolved).

as chemistry,historyandpsychology- still appear,but have slippeddownthe table. Still others,such as healthsciences and art & design - which arecombinationsof largenumberof relatedacademicunits withdifferent itles-now appear or the first timehighup Table 6. Andothers,suchas biologicalsciences andmanagementhavemovedup the table.Once again, there are similarities and differences between the threenational ists included n Table6, thoughthere arenow moreof the formerasa resultof thegroupingprocessundertaken.Thus:With 34 subjects listed for each system, there are 52 different subjectsidentified in all, of which 18 - accounting & finance, biologicalsciences, business, chemistry,civil engineering,economics, educa-

397


11/23

Table6. The Most PopularSubjectandFacultyTitles(afteramalgamation)Australia Nigeria UnitedKingdom

(a) Subjects1. education(62)2. business(47)3. healthsciences (46)4. art& design(41)5. law (36)6. accounting& finance(35)7. agriculture 35)8. mathematics 34)9. music (34)10. biological sciences (33)11. economics (31)12. management 30)13. nursing(30)14. psychology (30)15. computerscience (27)16. communication& media(24)17. information ystems (22)18. history(21)19. leisure,sport& tourism 21)20. electrical& electronicengineering 19)21. architecture18)22. marketing 18)23. chemistry(17)24. English(16)25. mechanicalengineering 16)

education 59)law (40)agriculture37)cropscience/forestry 33)pharmacology& pharmacy 32)biologicalsciences (30)business(28)mathematics 26)animalscience (23)physics (23)chemistry 22)healthsciences (20)accounting& finance(19)politics(19)biochemistry 18)geography 18)history(18)sociology (18)veterinarymedicine(18)civil engineering 17)economics(17)electrical & electronicengineering 17)geology (17)anatomy 16)mechanicalengineering(16)

healthsciences (117)education(98)management 81)computer cience (80)mathematics 79)business(74)art & design (73)biological sciences (71)psychology (65)history(64)law (63)economics (61)chemistry(57)physics (53)English(52)music (52)electronic& electricalenpolitics (49)nursing 48)geography(44)surgery 42)dentistry 41)mechanicalengineering(publichealth(38)accounting& finance(35

Tablecontinuedon nextpage.


12/23

Table6. Continued26. philosophy(16) surgery 16) builtenvironment 35)27. physics(16) English(13) philosophy(33)28. civil engineering 15) obstetrics& gynaecology (12) sociology (33)29. politics (15) physiology(12) pharmacology& pharma30. publichealth(15) microbiology(11) civil engineering(29)31. pharmacology& pharmacy 14) pathology 11) communication& media(32. Asian studies(13) religiousstudies(11) religiousstudies(27)33. geography 13) chemicalpathology(10) architecture26)34. biomedicalsciences (12) paediatrics 10) continuingeducation(26)Australia Nigeria UnitedKingdom(b) Facultiesmedicine(s, 113) engineering s, 53) medicine(s, 422)science (s, 61) medicine(s, 51) languages/area tudies(s,social sciences (s, 58) arts(s, 27) social sciences (s, 131)engineering(s, 49) social sciences (s, 23) engineering(s, 100)languages/area tudies(s, 40) medicine(g, 21) science (s, 93)arts(s, 27) languages/areatudies(s, 19) arts(s, 89)arts(g, 21) other(12) medicine(g, 51)languages/area tudies(g, 19) languages/areatudies(g, 9) languages/area tudies(g,engineering g, 13) science(s, 5) engineering(g, 38)science (g, 12) engineering g, 2) social sciences (g, 37)medicine(g, 10) arts(g, 1) science (g, 22)social sciences (g, 9) science(g,l) arts(g, 15)other(5) other(7)

(figuresin bracketsndicatethe numberof unitsincluded n eachsubject).(the abbreviationss' and 'g' indicatespecialistandgeneric titles).


13/23

MALCOLMIGHTtion, electrical & electronicengineering,English, geography,healthsciences, history, law, mathematics,mechanical engineering,phar-macology & pharmacy,physics, politics - are common to all threesystems.* As withtheanalysisof basic academicunittitles,ananalysisof Table6shows that the Australianand British systems are the most similar,with28 outof 34 subjects n common.By contrast, he AustralianandNigeriansystemshaveonly 19 subjects n common,while theNigerianandUnitedKingdom systemshave21 in common.* 20 of the 52 subjects istedareunique o one of thethreesystems:12toNigeria (anatomy,animalscience, biochemistry,chemicalpathology,crop science/forestry,geology, microbiology,obstetrics & gynaeco-logy, paediatrics, pathology,physiology, veterinarymedicine), 5 toAustralia(Asian studies, biomedical sciences, informationsystems,leisure, sport & tourism,marketing)and 3 to the United Kingdom(builtenvironment, ontinuingeducation,dentistry).This is notto say,of course,thatthese subjectsdo not exist in the othersystems,butthatthey arerelatively ess commonthere,and havebeen amalgamatednother subjector faculty groupingsin Table 6. The greateremphasison appliedsciences and medical specialitiesin the Nigeriansystemisparticularly vident.* Note, however, he largenumberof titles thathavebeen amalgamatedinto faculty groupingsrather hansubjects.This is particularly o inthe case of medicine,and for languages& areastudiesin the UnitedKingdomcase, whichaccommodatea huge numberof relativelysmallspecialisms.If the numberof units included in each of the subjectsgroupings isted inTable 6 is divided by the numberof units having the most popularbasicacademic unit title within that grouping,a measureof the relativecoher-ence of subjecttitles may be produced.Forexample,in the UnitedKingdomlisting, thereare 56 basicacademicunitswith the title 'law', and63 units aregroupedunder hatsubjecttitle in Table6, giving a measure orcoherenceof63/56 = 1.13. Table7 providesdetails of these calculations or the 18 subjectscommon to all threesystems.An examinationof Table7 revealsa numberof trends:

* Some popularsubjectsappearhigh in coherencein all threesystems.Thus, chemistry,civil engineering and economics departmentsarealmost always called just that, whether in Australia,Nigeria or theUnitedKingdom.* Other popular subjects appear less coherent in all three systems.Thus, biological sciences, electrical& electronicengineering,health

400


14/23

Table7. The Most andLeastCoherentSubjectTitlesAustralia Nigeria UnitedKingdomchemistry(1.42)law (1.44)English(1.60)economics (1.82)civil engineering(1.88)physics (2.00)history(2.10)mechanicalengineering 2.67)education(2.82)business(3.13)accounting& finance(3.50)pharmacology& pharmacy 3.50)biological sciences (3.67)politics (3.75)geography 4.33)mathematics 4.86)electrical & electronicengineering 6.33)healthsciences (7.67)

civil engineering 1.06)mechanicalengineering 1.07)economics(1.13)physics(1.15)history(1.20)chemistry 1.22)politics (1.36)English(1.63)geography 1.80)biologicalsciences (2.73)accounting& finance(3.17)mathematics 3.25)electrical & electronicengineering 3.40)business(4.00)healthsciences (4.00)pharmacology& pharmacy 6.40)law (8.00)education(11.80)

law (1.13)geography 1.29)economics (1.45)chemistry 1.54)civil engineering 1.93)history(1.94)mechanicalengineering(1.English(2.00)physics (2.12)business(2.24)education(2.45)mathematics 2.82)biological sciences (2.84)politics (2.88)accounting& finance(2.92electrical& electronicengipharmacology& pharmachealthsciences (7.31)


15/23

MALCOLMIGHTsciencesandpharmacology&pharmacy ppearundera varietyof titles(as, indeed,the pluralityor combinationevident in theirsubjecttitleswouldsuggest).Perhapsmost interesting,however,are the subjecttitles which appearcoherent n some systemlists but not in others.Thus,while geographydepartments reusuallycalledjust that n bothNigeriaand the UnitedKingdom,they appearundera wide rangeof titles in Australia typi-cally geographyandsomethingelse). Similarly,while lawdepartmentsarealmostalwayscalled ust that n AustraliaandtheUnitedKingdom,they go under a varietyof titles in Nigeria (typicallymore specialist,as in the cases of business, commercial,industrial,Islamic, private,propertyand/orpubliclaw).How,then,mightwe further nterpret his data andanalysis?

Possible nterpretativerameworksWithin hecorpusof researchandwritingonhighereducation, herearemanydisparatebut nterwoven trands hatrelateto the issuebeing consideredhere,the organisationof academicknowledge,thoughthere s little thataddressesthe issues raisedspecifically.Several of these strandswill be identifiedandbrieflyexploredfor whatthey might suggest about the interpretation f thepatterns eportedabove.First,the literatureon the historyof highereducation s useful in tracingthe development of academic structures,their relative status and inter-relationshipswithin universities e.g., de Ridder-Symoens1992, 1996).Thisliteraturealso suggests that the diversity n basic academicunit titles foundat the presenttime is nothingnew, butpartof a continuinghistorical trend.Thus,Vergercomments:

Thereis little pointat this stage in the argumentn lingeringany longerover this question of the structures and internal subdivisions of themedievaluniversities.Therewas analmost limitless variationas regardsmattersof detail;they developedover thecenturies. 1992, p. 40)Indeed, one obvious extensionto the analysis presentedhere would be toexamineearliereditionsof theCommonwealthUniversitiesYearbook,and tochart he rise andfall of basicacademicunit titles overthe years.

Second, studies of the contemporaryorganisationof higher educationhave much to tell us about the functions,operationandpositioningof basicacademicunits.Thus,Becher andKoganhavepresenteda four level 'modelof highereducation',with what they term the basic unit lying between theindividualacademicand the institution(theirfourthlevel is, of course, thecentralauthority).They define 'basic unit' in the following terms:

402


16/23

THE ORGANISATIONOFACADEMICKNOWLEDGE

By basic units we mean the smallest componentelementswhich havea corporate ife of their own. Their identifying characteristicswouldnormally include an administrativeexistence (a designated head orchairman sic], a separatelyaccountedbudget);a physicalexistence (anidentifiable et of premises);and anacademicexistence(arangeof under-graduaterainingprogrammes,usuallysome provisionforgraduateworkandsometimesa collective researchactivity).(1992, p. 86)They go on to note someof thevariations nthe natureof basic units:

In traditionaluniversity tructures,he basic unitwouldusuallybe takenas the individualsubject department,ratherthan the faculty bringingtogethera numberof cognatedepartments.However,this is not a hard-and-fast rule, since some long-established universities use the term'faculty'whereothers would use 'department'.Some morerecent unitshave developedalternative tructures,n which the constituentelementsaremorebroadlybased 'schools of study', 'courseteams' and the like.(ibid)

As indicated, he databasesanalysedhere includeexamplesof each of thesetypesof organisation.Third, studies of disciplinarycultures help to explain how academicknowledge develops and is disseminated within universities(e.g., Becher1989, 1999,BecherandTrowler2001;BraxtonandHargens1996;Neumann2001). As well as emphasising he primacyof the disciplinein the workinglives of academics,suchstudies also foreground he importance f change:Whileit is convenient n some contexts to representdisciplinesas clearlydistinguishable ndreasonablystableentities,it has to be acknowledgedthat they are subjectto both historical and geographicalvariation.Thechangingnatureof knowledge domains over time... has its impactontheidentitiesandcultural haracteristics f disciplines.(Becher1989,pp.20-21)No one is about to find a way to stop the division of knowledgeinacademicsociety.(Clark1983,p. 16)

A varietyof termshave beencoined to describeandexplaintheseprocesses,includingreductionismPeacocke1985)and finalisation Fuller2000).Fourth,analysesof the diversityof academic nstitutionsandsystems- afeaturewhich 'is generallyagreedto be a desirable hing' (HigherEducationFundingCouncilforEngland2000, p. 3) - suggestsome of theprocessesbywhichsuchdisciplinarydevelopments akeplace.Thus,Huisman,nhis study

403


17/23

MALCOLMTIGHTof highereducationprogrammes n the Netherlandsover a 20 year period,1974-1993, found that:

... decreasingor fluctuating irst-year tudentnumbersencourage studyprogrammeactors to establish new specializations in existing studyprogrammes and to establish new study programmes ... the 'softer' thediscipline,themoreprocessesof differentiationookplace... thenumberof processesof differentiationhrough imeincreased.(1995,p. 199)

Itwould notbe difficult o imaginemechanismsby which suchdifferentiationat thestudy programmeevel could be translatedo basic academicunits.Fifth, university ypologies offer evidenceof institutionalvariety,andofthe influenceof basic academicunit diversityupon this. For example, in amultivariate nalysisof institutionaldata or 1992/93publishedby theHigherEducationFundingCouncil forEngland, identified 16major ypesof highereducation nstitution Tight1996).Muchof this differentiationwasexplainedby measureseitherof institutional ize (studentrecruitment, nnual ncome),or of institutionalspecialisation,in terms of subject area (with a focus onarts,educationormedicinemost common),level (i.e. undergraduaterpost-graduate)or mode of study (i.e. full-time or part-time).Since thattime, thenumber of relativelysmall, specialist arts or educationcolleges has beenreducedthrough amalgamation,but the significanceof the medical schoolin universitystatusremainsstrong.Sixth,studies of the transitionromelite to masssystemsof highereduca-tion suggest that this is having an impacton the organisationof academicknowledge.ThusScotthas argued hat:The tendencyfor broadlybased faculties to be brokendown, effectivelyif not constitutionally,ntoreductionistdepartments as beenreversedasmore and more universities have developed looser academicstructuresbased on schools, often built around hemecategoriessuch as Europeanstudies or environmental ciences. Morerecently,as modularandcreditsystemshavebecome morepopular,some institutionshavegone further,establishingstill looserframeworkswhichembraceschools, departmentsandindividualacademicprogrammes.1995, p. 159)

Massification,in Scott's view, has had two main impacts on institutionsthemselves:First,they havehadto developtheirown distinctivemissions... Second,institutionshavebecome much morecomplex, in size as the system hasexpanded, and in scope as it has become more heterogeneous. (ibid,p. 170)

404


18/23

THEORGANISATIONOFACADEMICKNOWLEDGESuch trendscouldreadily ead to an increasednumberanddiversityof basicacademicunitswithin institutions.Seventh,and finally for presentpurposes,there is the literatureon thechangingnatureof knowledgeandtheplaceof theuniversity n society (e.g.,Barnett2000;Delanty2001;Nowotny,Scott andGibbons2001). Muchhasbeenmade in this literature f thedevelopmentof 'mode 2' knowledge:

By contrast with traditionalknowledge, which we will call Mode 1,generatedwithin a disciplinary,primarilycognitive, context, Mode 2knowledge is created in broader, ransdisciplinaryocial and economiccontexts... The emergence of Mode 2 ... is profound and calls intoquestion the adequacy of familiar knowledge producing institutions,whetheruniversities,governmentresearchestablishments,or corporatelaboratories.Gibbonset al. 1994,p. 1)

The implicationsof these developmentswould include, for example, thedevelopmentof newformsof basic academicunits under heinfluenceof, andinco-operationwith,institutions xternal o theuniversity.However,Askling,Henkel and Kehm, in their examinationof the impactof lifelong learningpolicies on concepts of knowledge and universityorganisation,concludedthat:At most universities, he role of disciplinesand the relatedstructureoffaculties and departments,as well as the disciplinaryorganisationofcurricula,are still strong. Typicalfor most institutions ncluded in oursample was lifelong learningpolicy in which initiativesand activitieswere either left to individual academicstaff membersor concentratedin mostly smaller,sometimesbigger,butoften isolated,centralunitsforcontinuingeducation. 2001,pp. 348-349)

ConclusionsThe dataanalysispresented n this articleposes, at least for me, threebasicquestions:1. Why does thereappear o be so much diversityin the namingof basicacademicunits?2. Whydoes this diversityappear o varyso much betweensubjects?3. Whydoes it varybetween countries?The excursion ust madeamongsta rangeof potentially lluminatinghighereducation iteraturesuggestsa fourthquestion:4. Howdoesthe dataanalysissupportorquestion hearguments utforwardin the literature?In this sectionI will address hesequestions n turn.

405


19/23

MALCOLMIGHTFirst, n answering he questionaboutthe diversityof basic academicunittitles, it could be arguedthatwhat I have described is at least as much anappearanceof diversityas diversity tself. As the groupingexercise demon-strated,much of the variationcould be removedthrougha simple processof bringingtogetheralternative,combination,qualifyingand specialistunittitles. After all, in practice, geographersshould be able to recognise eachotheracross institutions,regardless hatsome workin basic academicunitscalled Geography& EarthSciences or GeographicalSciences, or Environ-mentalSciences, or even Social Sciences,rather hansimply Geography.It may be, then, that the issue of diversityin basic academic unit titlesis a second ordermatter. But there is still a question, or rathera wholeseriesof smallerquestions,to answerhere.Why,for example,does Glasgow

University uniquely house a Departmentof Geographyand TopographicScience? Why are King's College London and UniversityCollege Londonalone in havingdepartments f Laws rather hanLaw?Whydo some highereducation nstitutionshave Departmentsof Business, some DepartmentsofManagement,some both of these, and some Departmentsof Business andManagement?The examplesI have given are all in the social sciences, thefacultywith which I am mostfamiliar,butsimilar ones could be identified nother fields.It has been argued hat:Disciplinaryboundariesare the result of history,vested interest,finan-cing, entrepreneurial pportunityor of academic coalitions.(Gibbonsetal. 1994,p. 148)

This statement suggests a number of possible reasons for the variationobserved n unittitles, and,indeed,these are reflected n theexamplesI havejust quoted. Thus, the Departmentof Geographyand TopographicScienceat Glasgow offers two separatefirstdegrees, one in Geographyand one inTopographicScience (whichturnsoutto be a mixtureof surveyingandcarto-graphy).This departments, thus, throughits name, advertising ts distinctmarketposition. The departments,actually Faculties, of Laws at King'sCollege andUniversityCollege Londonhark backto the early historyof theUniversityof London (Twining 1990). And the division between Businessand Managementappears,at least from my initial inquiriesof academicsworkingin these areas,to be about a mixture of post-waracademichistory,values andstatus.

My second question is perhapsmore interestingthan the first. Clearly,as Table 7 indicates, there is much more diversity in the titles given tobasic academicunits in some subjectareas than there is in others.I wouldadvance two relatedhypothesesin explanation,thoughthese do, of course,

406


20/23

THEORGANISATIONOF ACADEMICKNOWLEDGE

require urther xaminationandtesting.Onehasto do with the lengthof timefor which each subject has been established within the university system,the otherwith the distinctionbetween disciplinesand fields of study.Thus,we might expect long-establisheddisciplines, such as law, philosophyandchemistry, o exhibit less varietyin terms of basic academicunit titles. Onthe other hand,more recent and less well-establishedfields of study,suchas leisure, sport & tourism,communication& media and health sciences,mightbe expectedto be less sure abouttheir dentityandposition,andthusexhibita greatervarietyof basic academicunit titles.The longitudinal tudy,alreadysuggested,of changesin basic academicunit titles would be helpfulin exploringthesehypotheses,coupledwith anin-depthstudyof institutionalhistories.Turning o thethirdquestion,thoughthehighereducationsystemsin bothAustraliaand Nigeria have had a close historicalrelationwith that of theUnited Kingdom,it is clear thatthere are sufficientlocal factorsat play toensure that the organizationof academicknowledge varies to some extentbetween these countries.At least threeexplanationsmaybe suggested:* Some systems,such as Nigeria,appear o haveadopteda more standard-ised approacho thenamingof theirbasicacademic units.* Some systems, such as Nigeria, place a greater focus on particularvocational subjects, while others, including Australia and the UnitedKingdom,have a greaterdevelopmentof social science andartssubjects(in other words, the overall subject balances of these systems aredifferent).

* Local culturaldifferencesare apparentn, for example, the existence ofIslamic departments n Nigeria, and in the differentemphases placeduponparticularanguagesandareastudies.Fourthly, omeobservationsmaybe maderelating o thestrandsof thehighereducation iteraturedentified:

* History. The analysis presentedhere has been cross-sectionalratherthan longitudinal,so there is no direct evidence to comparewith theliterature.However, the databases do contain what may be viewedas more 'traditional'basic academic unit titles, such as Geography,GeologyandGerman,alongsidemorecontemporary-soundingitles suchas Geographical& Environmental ciences,GeomaticsandGerontology(see Table3), whichareat least suggestiveof changingfashions.* Organization.Therearemanyexamples n the databasesof bothdepart-mental forms of organizationand of more inter-disciplinaryor trans-disciplinaryschool or faculty arrangements, houghthe formerremainmost common.A caveathas to be repeatedhere, however,to the effectthatthe titlesgivento basic academicunitsmaynotbe an accurate eflec-

407


21/23

MALCOLMIGHTtion of how academicorganizationswork:more in-depth,observationalandinterview, tudieswithin units would be neededto address his issue.

* Disciplinary Cultures. The dataanalysisrevealsthecontinuing trengthof manylong-establisheddisciplines(see Tables4 and6). Morerecentlyestablishedfields of study,such as Business, Management,Communi-cation& Media,andLeisure,Sport& Tourismhavemadea substantialimpacton university tructures ndcurricula,butalongsiderather han nplaceof olderdepartmentsuch as Mathematics,Law and Economics.

* Diversity.As theanalysishasindicated,muchdiversity s apparentn thenamingof basicacademicunits, thoughthis may be moreapparent hanreal,and wouldappear o be moreprevalent n newerfieldsof studythanin longerestablisheddisciplines(see Table7).* Typologies.The databasesshow considerablevariationnotjust in formsof institutional rganization,but also in the areasof academicknowledgeincludedwithinspecificuniversities.No basic academicunittitle,orevensubjectarea,is to be found in every universitywithin any of the threesystems analyzed; ndeed, only a few are to be foundin the majorityofuniversities.* Massification. There is not much directevidence in the databases hattherecentexpansion n studentnumbershasled to a declinein thepreval-ence of 'reductionist'departments nda rise of more 'thematic' ormsof

organization.This is not to say thatthe latterdo not exist,butrather hatthey have so far had a relativelylimited impacton the namingof basicacademicunits.* Knowledge Forms. Similarly,thereis not much evidence in the namesgiven to basic academic units of changes in the forms of knowledge.There s, however,plentifulevidenceto illuminatea ratherolderformofthisdebate, hatbetweenliberalandvocationalformsof education Pring1993).Table 6 clearlyshows the dominanceof vocationalsubjects,suchas business,education,the various branchesof engineering,health,lawandmedicinein all threesystemsexamined.

Finally, I will offer two, to some extent contradictory,comments inclosing.First,theanalysispresentedhas providedevidenceof thecontinuingstrength at the level of thenamingof basic academicunits- of 'traditional'formsof departmental nddisciplinaryorganizationn theuniversity.Second- anddespitethe continuingcalls by policy-makers o ensurethe relevanceof the highereducationcurriculumo the worldof work- it seems clearthatbasic academicunits with a vocational focus are at least as prevalentwithinhighereducation nstitutionsas the 'pure' disciplines.The vocationalrole ofthe universityhas always,of course,been strong,andthese vocationalunits

408


22/23

THEORGANISATIONFACADEMICNOWLEDGE 409includesome of long-standing, uch as Law andMedicine,andothersof morerecentprovenance, uch as BusinessandNursing.Theorganization f academicknowledge,then,exhibits bothstabilityandflexibility.

ReferencesAskling,B., Henkel,M. andKehm,B. (2001). 'Conceptsof knowledgeandtheirorganisationin universities',EuropeanJournalof Education36(3), 341-350.Association of CommonwealthUniversities(2001). CommonwealthUniversities Yearbook2001: A Directoryto the Universitiesof the Commonwealth nd the Handbookof TheirAssociation.London:Associationof CommonwealthUniversities,TwoVolumes.Barnett,R. (2000). Realizingthe Universityn anAge of Supercomplexity. uckingham:OpenUniversityPress.Becher,T. (1989). AcademicTribesand Territories: ntellectualEnquiryand the CulturesofDisciplines.MiltonKeynes:OpenUniversityPress.Becher, T. (1999). Professional Practices: Commitmentand Capability in a ChangingEnvironment.New Brunswick,NJ:Transaction.Becher,T. andKogan,M. (1992). Process and Structure nHigherEducation,second edition.London:Routledge.Becher,T. andTrowler,P. (2001). Academic Tribesand Territories: ntellectualEnquiryandthe Cultureof Disciplines, secondedition.Buckingham:OpenUniversityPress.Blaxter,L., Hughes, C. and Tight,M. (1998a). 'Telling it how it is: Accounts of academiclife', HigherEducationQuarterly 2(3), 300-315.Blaxter, L., Hughes, C. and Tight, M. (1998b). 'Writingon academic careers',Studies inHigherEducation23(3), 281-295.Blaxter,L., Hughes,C. andTight,M. (2001). How to Research,second edition.Buckingham:Open UniversityPress.Braxton,J. andHargens,L. (1996). 'Variation mongacademicdisciplines:Analytical rame-works and research', in Smart,J. (ed.), Higher Education:Handbookof TheoryandResearch,VolumeXI. New York:Agathon,pp. 1-46.Clark,B. (1983). The HigherEducationSystem:Academic Organization n Cross-national

Perspective.Berkeley,CA:Universityof CaliforniaPress.Delanty, G. (2001). Challenging Knowledge: The University in the Knowledge Society.Buckingham:OpenUniversityPress.Fuller,S (2000). TheGovernanceof Science.Buckingham:OpenUniversityPress.Gibbons,M., Limoges,C., Nowotny,H., Schwartzman,S., Scott,P. andTrow,M. (1994). TheNewProductionof Knowledge:TheDynamicsof Scienceand Research n ContemporarySocieties.London:Sage.Higher Education Funding Council for England (2000). Diversity in Higher Education:

HEFCEPolicyStatement.Bristol:HEFCE.Huisman, J. (1995). Differentiation,Diversity and Dependency in Higher Education: ATheoreticaland EmpiricalAnalysis.Utrecht:Lemma.Neumann,R. (2001). 'Disciplinarydifferences and university teaching', Studies in HigherEducation26(2), 135-146.Nowotny, H., Scott, P. and Gibbons,M. (2001). Re-thinkingScience: Knowledgeand thePublic in anAge of Uncertainty.Cambridge:Polity Press.


23/23

MALCOLMIGHTPeacocke,A. (ed.) (1985). Reductionismn AcademicDisciplines. Guildford:NFER-Nelson.Pring,R. (1993). 'Liberaleducationand vocationalpreparation',n Barrow,R. andWhite,P.(eds.), BeyondLiberalEducation:Essays in Honour of Paul Hirst. London:Routledge,

pp. 49-78.de Ridder-Symoens,H. (ed.) (1992). A History of the University in Europe. VolumeI:Universities n the MiddleAges. Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress.de Ridder-Symoens,H. (ed.) (1996). A History of the University in Europe. VolumeII:Universitiesin Early Modem Europe (1500-1800). Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress.Scott, P. (1995). The Meanings of Mass Higher Education. Buckingham:Open UniversityPress.Tight,M. (1996). 'Universitytypologies re-examined',Higher EducationReview29(1), 57-77.Tight,M. (ed.) (2000). AcademicWork ndLife:What t Is to Be anAcademic,andHow ThisIs Changing.Oxford:ElsevierScience,pp. 406.Twining,W. (1990). 'Laws', in Thompson,F. (ed.), The Universityof Londonand the Worldof Learning1836-1986. London:HambledonPress,pp. 81-114.Verger,J. (1992). 'Patterns', n de Ridder-Symoens,H. (ed.), A Historyof the University nEurope. VolumeI: Universitiesin the Middle Ages. Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress,pp. 35-74.

410

academic units

Documents