IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/eurrev/v18y2010is1ps157-s179_99.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Diversifying Academic Profession?

Author

Listed:
  • Teichler, Ulrich

Abstract

Experts agree: higher education has to diversify continuously. Most prominently, Martin Trow had argued that ‘universal higher education’ and ‘mass higher education’ sectors had to serve the ‘new’ students while protecting ‘elite higher education’; Burton Clark pointed out that the university is functionally ‘overburdened’ if it does not become entrepreneurial in pursuing specific strategies. But the countervailing forces to diversification grow as well: ‘academic drift’ and initiative competition for being ranked among ‘world-class universities’ prevail, and intra-institutional diversity according to study programmes and departments has not gained popularity either. Do scholars themselves become key carriers of diversification? Substantial variety in research productivity is by no means new. Is inter-individual diversity within higher education a viable future of diversification? Do the data of the comparative studies on the academic profession suggest that strategic options of individual professors are salient?

Suggested Citation

  • Teichler, Ulrich, 2010. "The Diversifying Academic Profession?," European Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 18(S1), pages 157-179, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:cup:eurrev:v:18:y:2010:i:s1:p:s157-s179_99
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S1062798709990378/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Pablo D’Este & Irene Ramos-Vielba & Richard Woolley & Nabil Amara, 2018. "How do researchers generate scientific and societal impacts? Toward an analytical and operational framework," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 45(6), pages 752-763.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:eurrev:v:18:y:2010:i:s1:p:s157-s179_99. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/erw .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.