Higher Education

, Volume 39, Issue 3, pp 339–362 | Cite as

Disciplinary cultures and the moral order of studying – A case-study of four Finnish university departments

  • Oili-Helena Ylijoki


Based on qualitative data gathered in one Finnishuniversity, the article examines disciplinary culturesof four study fields: computer science, libraryscience and informatics, public administration, andsociology and social psychology. It is suggested thatthe core of each discipline can be conceptualized asa moral order that defines the basic beliefs, valuesand norms of the local culture. Following this frameof reference, the analysis of students' accountsdemonstrates essential differences regarding how thevirtues and vices of studying are understood and whatkinds of social identities are constructed indifferent fields. The implications of the results forthe quality assessment and the development ofuniversity teaching are discussed.

academic tribes disciplinary culture identity moral order quality of teaching socialization study orientation university studies 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Aittola, T. (1992). Uuden opiskelijatyypin synty (The birth of new student type) Jyväskylä: Jyväskylä studies in education, psychology and social research 91.Google Scholar
  2. Alasuutari, P. (1995). Researching Culture: Qualitative Method and Cultural Studies. London: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  3. Bauer, H.H. (1990). 'Barriers against interdisciplinarity: Implications for studies of science, technology, and society (STS)', Science, Technology, & Human Values 15(1), 105–119.Google Scholar
  4. Becher, T. (1994). 'The significance of disciplinary differences', Studies in Higher Education 19(2), 333–346.Google Scholar
  5. Becher, T. (1989). Academic Tribes and Territories. Milton Keynes: The Society for Research into Higher Education & Open University Press.Google Scholar
  6. Becher, T. (1987). 'The disciplinary shaping of the profession', in Clark, B.R. (ed.), The Academic Profession. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  7. Becher, T. and Kogan, M. (1992). Process and Structure in Higher Education. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  8. Bergenhenegouwen, G. (1987). 'Hidden curriculum in the university', Higher Education 16(5), 535–543.Google Scholar
  9. Biglan, A. (1973a). 'The characteristics of subject matter in different academic areas', Journal of Applied Psychology 57(2), 195–203.Google Scholar
  10. Biglan, A. (1973b). 'Relationship between subject matter characteristics and the structure and output of university departments', Journal of Applied Psychology 57(3), 204–213.Google Scholar
  11. Boys, C.J., Brennan, J., Henkel, M., Kirkland, J., Kogan, M. and Youll, P. (1988). Higher Education and the Preparation for Work. London: Jessica Kingsley Publishers.Google Scholar
  12. Clark, B.R. (1998). Creating Entrepreneurial Universities. Guildford: IAU Press & Pergamon.Google Scholar
  13. Clark, B.R. (1987). The Academic Life. Princeton: The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching.Google Scholar
  14. Clark, B.R. (1986). The Higher Education System. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  15. Entwistle, N. and Tait, H. (1990). 'Approaches to learning, evaluations of teaching, and preferences for contrasting academic environments', Higher Education 19, 169–194.Google Scholar
  16. Eskola, A., Kihlström, A., Kivinen, D., Weckroth, K. and Ylijoki, O.-H. (1988). Blind Alleys in Social Psychology. Amsterdam: Elsevier Science Publishers.Google Scholar
  17. Evans, C. (1988). Language People. Milton Keynes: The Society for Research into Higher Education & Open University Press.Google Scholar
  18. Gellert, C. (1992). 'Faculty research', The Encyclopedia of Higher Education 3, 1634–1641.Google Scholar
  19. Gibbons, M., Limoges, C., Nowotny H., Schwartzman, S., Scott, P. and Trow, M. (1994). The New Production of Knowledge. London: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  20. Greenwood, J.D. (1994). Realism, Identity and Emotion. London: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  21. Harré, R. (1983a). 'Identity projects', in Breakwell, G. (ed.), Threatened Identities. NewYork: John Wiley & Sons ltd.Google Scholar
  22. Harré, R. (1983b). Personal Being. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
  23. Haselgrove, S. (Ed.) (1994). The Student Experience. Buckingham: The Society for Research into Higher Education & Open University Press.Google Scholar
  24. Huber, L. (1992). 'Editorial', European Journal of Education 27(3), 193–199.Google Scholar
  25. Huber, L. (1989). 'Teaching and learning-students and university teachers', European Journal of Education 24(3), 271–288.Google Scholar
  26. Kleinman, S. (1983). 'Collective matters as individual concerns. Peer culture among graduate students', Urban Life 12(2), 203–225.Google Scholar
  27. Knorr-Cetina, K. (1997). 'What scientists do', in Ibáñez, T. and Íñiguez, L. (eds.), Critical Social Psychology. London: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  28. Kolb, D.A. (1985). 'Learning styles and disciplinary differences', in Chickering, A. (ed.), The Modern American College. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.Google Scholar
  29. Macintyre, A (1987). After Virtue. A study in moral theory. London: Duckworth.Google Scholar
  30. Moses, I. (1990). 'Teaching, research and scholarship in different disciplines', Higher Education 19, 351–375.Google Scholar
  31. Sheppard, C. and Gilbert, J. (1991). 'Conceptions of teaching held by academic teachers', Higher Education 24, 93–111.Google Scholar
  32. Shotter, J. (1994). Conversational Realities. London: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  33. Slaughter, S. and Leslie, L. (1997). Academic Capitalism. Baltimore & London: The Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
  34. Squires, G. (1990). First Degree. Buckingham: The Society for Research into Higher Education & Open University Press.Google Scholar
  35. Taylor, C. (1992). Sources of the Self. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  36. Thomas, K. (1990). Gender and Subject in Higher Education. Buckingham: The Society for Research into Higher Education & Open University Press.Google Scholar
  37. Traweek, S. (1988). Beamtimes and Lifetimes. Cambridge & London: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  38. Vahala, M.E. and Winston, R.B. (1994). 'College classroom environments: disciplinary and institutional-type differences and effects on academic achievement in introductory courses', Innovative Higher Education 19(2), 99–121.Google Scholar
  39. Vroeijenstijn, T.I. and Acherman, H. (1990). 'Control oriented versus improvement oriented quality assesment', in Goedegebuure, L., Maassen, P. and Westerheijden, D. (eds.), Peer Review and Performance Indicators. Utrech: Lemma.Google Scholar
  40. Wittrock, B. (1985). 'Dinosaurs or dolphins? Rise and resurgence of the research-oriented university', in Wittrock, B. and Elzinga, A. (eds.), The University Research System. Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell International.Google Scholar
  41. Ylijoki, O.-H. (1998). Akateemiset heimokulttuurit ja noviisien sosialisaatio (Academic tribal cultures and the socialization of novices). Tampere: Vastapaino.Google Scholar
  42. Ziman, J. (1996). ' “Postacademic science”: constructing knowledge with networks and norms', Science Studies 9(1), 67–80.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2000

Authors and Affiliations

  • Oili-Helena Ylijoki
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Sociology and Social PsychologyUniversity of TampereTampereFinland

Personalised recommendations