Abstract
The paper is based on a book(written by the author and his colleague MarkkuLehikoinen) dealing with definitions of qualityand views on the applicability of differentmethods of quality assessment to four differentdisciplinary fields: physics, biology,sociology and history. The paper focuses onconceptions and definitions of quality voicedby scholars representing the differentdisciplines. The study involved semi-structuredin depth interviews with 33 experiencedscholars. The disciplines under study werechosen to represent diverse disciplinarycultures, with the aim of finding out about thepotential impact of (social and cognitive)cultural characteristics of the disciplines onconceptions of quality. The findings show bothcommon views across disciplinary fields anddisciplinary differences.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
REFERENCES
Allardt, E. (1997). Tieteellisen työskentelyn muutokset ja nykyisen tiedepolitiikan vaarat [Changes in Knowledge Production and the Dangers of Current Science Policy]. Esitelmä Tutkaksen ja Edistyksellisen tiedeliiton seminaarissa 3.12.1997.
Andersen, H. (1999). The Modes in Danish Social Sciences. A paper presented in Seminar “Ideals and Practices of University Research: Theoretical and Methodological Issues and Emprical Results in Micro-Level Science Studies.” A Nordic Workshop, Univeristy of Tampere, 16–17 April 1999.
Barblan, A. (1998). The CRE Perspective on Quality Assurance. In J.P. Scheele, P.A.M. Maassen and D.F. Westerhejden (eds), To Be Continued... Follow-up of Quality Assurance in Higher Education. Elsevier/De Tijdstroom, Maarssen.
Barnett, R. (1995). Improving Higher Education. Total Quality Care. Bury St. Edmunds, Suffolk: SHRE & Open University Press.
Bauer, M. and Kogan, M. (1997). Evaluation Systems in the UK and Sweden: Success and Difficulties, European Journal of Higher Education 32(2), 129–143.
Becher, T. (1989). Academic Tribes and Territories. Intellectual Enquiry and the Cultres of Disciplines. Bury St. Edmunds, Suffolk: The Society for Research into Higher Eduction & Open University Press.
Becher, T. (1991). The Disciplinary Context for Quality Judgements. In R.O. Berdahl, J. Moodie & I.J. Spitzberg (eds), Quality and Assessment in Higher Education. Milton Keynes: Open Univeristy Press.
Becher, T. (1999a). Quality Assurance and Disciplinary Differences, Australian University Review 37(1), 1–7.
Becher, T. (1999b). Quality in the Professions, Studies in Higher Education 24(2), 225–235.
Becher, T & Huber, L. (1990). Editorial (Special Issue on Disciplinary Cultures), European Journal of Education 25(3), 235–240.
Brennan, J. (1996). Quality Assessment, Authority and Change. In P.A.M. Maassen & F. Van Vught (eds), Inside Academia. New Challenges for the Academic Profession. Management and Policy in Higher Education 25. De Tijdsroom, Utrecht.
Clark, B.R. (1983). The Higher Education System. Academic Organization in Cross-National Perspective. Los Angeles: University of California Press.
Gibbons, M., Limoges, C, Nowotny, H. Schwartman, S. Scott, P. & Trow, M. (1994). The New Production of Knowledge. The Dynamics of Science and Research in Contemporary Societies. Guildford: Sage.
Frazer, M. (1995). Quality in Higher Education: An International Perspective. In D. Green (ed.), What is Quality in Higher Education? Bury St. Edmunds, Suffolk: The Society for Research into Higher Education & Open University Press.
Harvey, L. & D. Green (1993). Defining Quality. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 18(1), 9–34.
Hemlin, S. (1991). Scientific Quality in the Eyes of the Scientists. A Questionnaire Study. Göteborg Psychological Reports 21(3).
Keinonen, J. & Stark, J. (1997). Fysiikan tutkimus. [Research in Physics]. In Suomen tieteen tila ja taso. Luonnontieteiden ja tekniikan tutkimus 2. Suomen Akatemian julkaisuja10/97. Edita, Helsinki.
Kekäle, J. (1991). Keskusteluilmapiirit Joensuun yliopiston kolmella opintosuunnalla – Laadullinen tutkimus opiskelijakulttuureista. [The Climates of Discussion Within Three Fields of Study at the University of Joensuu. A Qualitative Study on Student Cultures.] Psychological Reports No: 11. University of Joensuu, Faculty of Social Sciences. (English Summary).
Kekäle, J. (1993a). Yliopiston ainelaitoksen organisaatiokulttuurit. [Organizational Cultures of a University Department.] Unpublished Licentiate Thesis. University of Joensuu, Department of Psychology. (English Summary).
Kekäle, J. (1995). Organizational and Leadership Cultures within University Departments. Administrative Studies / Hallinnon tutkimus 14(2), 100–111.
Kekäle, J. (1997). Leadership Cultures in Academic Departments. Publications in Social Sciences No: 23, University of Joensuu. 254 pp.
Kekäle, J. (1998a). Quality Management in Diverse Disciplinary Settings. Higher Education 40(4), 465–488.
Kekäle, J. (1998b). The Field of Possibilities of Academic Leaders. The International Journal of Educational Leadership 1(3), 237–255.
Kekäle, J. (2001). Academic Leadership. New York: Nova Science Publishers.
Kekäle, J. and Lehikoinen, M. (2000). Laatu ja laadun arviointi eri tieteenaloilla. [Quality and Quality Assessment in Different Disciplines]. University of Joensuu, Faculty of Social Sciences. Psychological Reports 21.
Kleinman, S. (1983). Collective Matters as Individual Concerns. Peer Culture Among Graduate Students. Urban Life 12(2), 203–225.
Morgan, G. (1997). Images of Organization. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
State of the World (2000). Worldwatch Institute, Washington D.C.
Traweek, S. (1988). Beamtimes and Lifetimes. The World of High Energy Physicists. Cambridge: Harward University Press.
Vroeijenstijn, A.I. (1995). Improvement and Accountability: Navigating Between Scylla and Charybdis. Guide for External Quality Assessment in Higher Education. Higher Education Policy Series 30. Jessica Kingsley, London.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Kekäle, J. Conceptions of Quality in Four Different Disciplines. Tertiary Education and Management 8, 65–80 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1017947005085
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1017947005085