Analysing Polity in Higher Education Politics

Author(s):

Jaakko Kauko

Conference:

ECER 2010

Network:

22. Research in Higher Education

Format:

Paper

Session Information

22 SES 03 A, Management and Governance in Higher Education

Paper Session

Time:

2010-08-25

14:00-15:30

Room:

M.B. SALI 14, Päärakennus / Main Building

Chair:

Jussi Välimaa

Contribution

In my study, I am seeking to broaden research focus in higher education from the perspective of a single policy to the higher education political system and from the perspective of the dichotomy of critique/development in the dynamics of change. I combine the perspectives of higher education research and political science. My research object is the higher education system in Finland. However, in my presentation I will concentrate on review of international literature and discuss the Finnish results in relation to European trends.

In analyzing the change and politics in the higher education system, I will use polity analysis, a methodological tool that I developed for this purpose. As I adopt a conflict perspective on politics, I understand the core defining factor of polity being the interface between conflict and non-conflict (Palonen 2005, 471). Politicization changes this borderline of conflict (Palonen 2003). The other aspect of the HE political system in which I am interested is change. Hence, with polity analysis, I study what has and what has not been politicized, and what is changing and what is not.

I ask, what are the basic dynamics of the Finnish HE system? Finally, and more relevant for the European context, I will discuss the general applicability of polity analysis in higher education research.

Polity analysis draws on the finding that higher education research has been policy-oriented (Baumgartner, Green-Pedersen & Jones 2006; Slaughter & Rhoades 2005; c.f. Jansen 2007). There has been little attention to view on politics as conflict. In addition, the analyzing change in higher education, has concentrated on different coordination powers or governance aspect (Clark 1983; de Boer, Enders & Schimank 2007; Braun & Merrien 1999). The change has been seen different whether it derives from inside or outside the academic community (Olsen 2007; Saarinen & Välimaa 2006).

I have raised four relevant themes from the interview data. These topics form the backbone of the literature review and the conclusions. In a general sense themes deal with regional politics, changes in governmental work, basic research and innovation politics and international influences.

The presentation is based on my on-going dissertation research Polity analysis of conflict and change in the Finnish higher education political system. The work is part of the project Power, Supranational Regimes and New University Management funded by the Academy of Finland.

Method

I study the HE political system with the help of elite interviews (see Mykkänen 2001; Ozga & Gewirz 1994). By “elite” I mean group of influential people in the HE system. The list consists of 25 key actors from different parts of Finnish HE system: four minister-level politicians, six university rectors, seven ministry officers and eight stakeholders (representing funders, students, industry and labour unions). I conducted the interviews during 2008 in co-operation with Risto Rinne (University of Turku) and Hannu Simola (University of Helsinki). Additional questions were asked by e-mail. The transcribed interviews amount to 663 pages. The theme interviews concentrated on the relations between different actors in the HE system, most important national and international reforms and processes according to the interviewee, and future perspectives. The interviews coincided with the latest process of reforming the university law, which brought the dynamics of the system into the forefront.

Expected Outcomes

Current results suggest that one prominent conflict is the change in the higher education system, connected to the balance between emphasis on innovation and basic research. Another conflict greatly affecting the polity is the stalemate in regional politics. As a whole, there seems to be little potential for politicization in the party structure owing to the construction of the polity. Thus there seems to be no need for political debate on the means, as the ends seem clear. My analysis of the Finnish HE polity shows that the ends are not under lively debate between parties nor are they prone to politicization. It seems that the means restrict the discussion of the ends in the Finnish higher educatoin system. This is due to stiffness in the polity, but also to past decisions concerning the higher education system. To put it another way, the Finnish higher education system is very efficient only in making budget decisions. The higher education system does not encourage discussion of the ends of higher education, and the polity is not ready to change this practise. However, my intention is to re-analyse the data before my presentation and present the final conclusions for discussion.

References

Baumgartner, F. R., Green-Pedersen, C. & Jones, B. D. (2006). Comparative studies of policy agendas. Journal of European Public Policy, 13 (7), 959–974. Braun, D. & Merrien F.-X. (1999) Governance of universities and modernisations of the state: Analytical aspects. In D. Braun & F.-X. Merrien (Eds.) Towards a New Model of Governance for Universities? A Comparative View. London & Philadelphia: Jessica Kingsley. Clark, B. R. (1983). The Higher Education system. Academic organization in cross-national perspective. Berkeley: University of California Press. De Boer, H., Enders, J. & Schimank, U. (2007). On the Way Towards New Public Management? The Governance of University Systems in England, the Netherlands, Austria and Germany. In D. Janssen (2007). Jansen, D. (2007). (Ed.) New Forms of Governance in Research Organizations. Dordrecht: Springer. Mykkänen, J. (2001) Eliittihaastattelu. Politiikka, 43 (2), 108–127. Olsen, J. P. (2007). The Institutional dynamics of the European University. In P. Maassen & J. P. Olsen (Eds.) University Dynamics and European Integration. Higher Education Dynamics 19. Dordrecht: Springer. Ozga, J. & Gewirz, S. (1994) Sex, Lies and Audiotape: Interviewing the Education Policy Elite. In D. Halpin & B. Troyna (1994) Researching Education Policy: Ethical and Methodological Issues. London: Falmer. Palonen, K. (2003). Four times of politics: Policy, polity, politicking, and politicization. Alternatives, 28 (2), 171–186. Palonen, K. (2005). Politiikka. In M. Hyvärinen, J. Kurunmäki, K. Palonen, T. Pulkkinen, & H. Stenius (Eds.). (2003). Käsitteet liikkeessä. Tampere: Vastapaino. Saarinen, T. & Välimaa, J. (2006). Muutos korkeakoulupolitiikan tutkimuksessa. In Ursin J. & Välimaa, J. (Eds). Korkeakoulutus teoriassa. Näkökulmia ja keskustelua. Jyväskylä: KTL, Jyväskylän yliopisto. Slaughter, S. & Rhoades, G. (2005). From “Endless Frontier” to “Basic Science for Use”: Social Contracts between Science and Society. Science, Technology & Human Values, 30 (4), 536–572.

Author Information

Jaakko Kauko

University of Helsinki

Institute of Behavioural Sciences