Abstract
The paper commences from the premise that the major paradigms of administration are not appropriate to higher education. Structural approaches place too great an emphasis on the organization and its mission, subjectivist approaches fail to acknowledge the constraints and enablements of structure and the role of continuity and radical change approaches fail to provide a positive basis for administration. The paper outlines an approach to educational administration which addresses these difficulties. It is based on structuration theory together with cooperative learning theory and group work. The paper reports an investigation of an attempt to apply this approach to the administration of a program of teaching awards in an Australian university. It reports some success and some limitations.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Beeman, A. (1981).Towards better teaching. Indianapolis: Lilly Endowment Inc.
Berger, P. & Luckmann, T. (1967).The social construction of reality. Harmondsworth: Penguin.
Cole, C.C. (1982). Improving instruction: issues and alternatives for higher education. American Association for Higher Education, Higher education research report, (4).
Donaldson, J. (1988). Exemplary instruction of adults.Journal of Continuing Higher Education, 36(2).
Giddens, A. (1984).The constitution of society: Outline of the theory of structuration, Cambridge: Polity Press.
Giddens, A. (1985).The nation state and violence. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Giddens, A. (1989).Sociology. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Giddens, A. (1991).The consequences of modernity. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Irby, D. & Kuramoto, A. (1986). Distinguished teaching awards.Journal of Staff, Program, and Organization Development, 4(1).
Kelly, N. & Kelly, B. (1982). Backgrounds, education, and teaching styles of award winning professors. Albuquerque: Rocky Mountain Educational Research Association.
Ling, L., Foster, L., & Ling, P. (in press).Educators as administrators. Melbourne: Longman Cheshire.
McNaught, C. & Anwyl, J. (1992). Awards for teaching excellence at Australian universities. Melbourne: Center for the Study of Higher Education, University of Melbourne.
Pusey, M. (1991).Economic rationalism in Canberra Melbourne: Cambridge University Press.
Schaffer, B. (1985). Administration. In A. Kuper & J. Kuper (Eds.),The social science encyclopedia. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
Uhlig, G. & Haberman, M. (1987). A study of faculty development practices in schools, colleges, and departments of education. Alabama: Research Report.
Van Schlaack, H. &, Glick, D. (1982).A Qualitative Study of Excellence in Teaching, National Institute of Education, Washington, DC.
Watkins, P. (1985).Agency and structure: Dialectics in the administration of education. Geelong: Deakin University Press.
Additional information
Peter Ling is engaged in education quality assurance and educational development at the Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology. He is the President of the Victorian Branch of the Higher Education Research and Development Society of Australia. Dr. Ling's current research is in faculty responses to educational development activities. He holds M.Ed, and Ph.D. degrees from the University of Melbourne. Lorraine Ling is Chair of the Teaching Center at LaTrobe University, Melbourne, Australia. The focus of her research and publication is analysis of administrative systems in education. She has wide experience in schools and in teacher education. She has engaged in educational consultancy, including faculty development, in Australia, Europe, and Asia. She holds an M.Ed, from Deakin University.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Ling, L., Ling, P. Administration for innovation in higher education. Innov High Educ 18, 221–236 (1994). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01191115
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01191115