Research in Higher Education

, Volume 2, Issue 4, pp 341–360 | Cite as

Who are we and where are we going?

An analysis of patterns of development in a new academic institution
  • William E. Alexander
  • Joseph P. Farrell


The first part of this paper introduces a method for identifying the major patterns or trends of an institution. This method rests upon the identification of concrete decisions which are perceived as highly significant by individuals representing various segments of an institution. In the second part of the paper the method is applied to a recently established graduate school and research and development center. Five major institutional patterns which have characterized the development of this institution are identified and discussed: 1) democratization, 2) centralization of decision-making over research and development funds, 3) legitimation of development and implementation activities, 4) growth, and 5) entrenchment.

Finally, the relevance of the findings is discussed in reference to all institutions of higher education; institutions which are faced with demands for broader participation on the one hand and increasing accountability on the other.


High Education Graduate School Education Research Implementation Activity Development Fund 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Blankenship, L. V. (1947). Community power and decision making: A comparative evaluation of measurement techniques. Social Forces 548–555.Google Scholar
  2. Bloomberg, W., Jr., and Sunshine, M. (1963). “Suburban Power Structures and Public Education: A Study of Values, Influence, and Tax Effort. The Economics and Politics of Public Education.” Vol. X. Syracuse, N. Y.: Syracuse University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Carr, E. H. (1967). “What is History?” Harmondsworth, Middlesex, England: Penguin Books Ltd.Google Scholar
  4. Dahl, R. A. (1961). “Who Governs? Democracy and Power in an American City.” New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  5. Dykes, A. R. (1968). “Faculty Participation in Academic Decision Making.” (report of a study.) Washington, D.C.: American Council on Education.Google Scholar
  6. Freeman, L. C. (1968). “Patterns of Local Community Leadership.” New York: Bobbs-Merrill.Google Scholar
  7. Gouldner, A. W. (1965). Anti-Minotaur: The myth of a value-free sociology. In: “The New Sociology,” Irving L. Horowitz, (Ed.). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  8. Keeton, M. (1971). “Shared Authority on Campus.” Washington, D. C.: American Association for Higher Education.Google Scholar
  9. Morison, R. S. (1970). “Students and Decision Making. Report of Chairman, Cornell Commission on Student Involvement in Decision Making.” Washington, D.C.: Public Affairs Press.Google Scholar
  10. —— (1969). “Policy Guidelines for Decision-Making in Academic Departments.” Toronto: OISE.Google Scholar
  11. —— (1969). “Report of the Special Committee of the Board of Governors.” Toronto: OISE.Google Scholar
  12. —— (1969). “Report of the Task Force: An Internal Report.” Toronto: OISE.Google Scholar
  13. —— (1971). “Report of the Joint Committee on Institute Structure.” Toronto: OISE.Google Scholar
  14. —— (1973). OISE Bulletin 1973/74, Toronto: OISE.Google Scholar
  15. Wiley, G. E. (1967). Issues and influentials: The decisional process in school district reorganization. Doctoral Dissertation, Illinois State University.Google Scholar
  16. Wolfinger, R. E. (1960). Reputation and reality in the study of ‘community power’.” American Sociological Review, 25:636–44.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© APS Publications, Inc. 1974

Authors and Affiliations

  • William E. Alexander
    • 1
  • Joseph P. Farrell
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Educational PlanningThe Ontario Institute for Studies in EducationToronto

Personalised recommendations