Advertisement

Higher Education Policy

, Volume 28, Issue 3, pp 277–293 | Cite as

Theory Development and Application in Higher Education Research: Tribes and Territories

  • Malcolm Tight
Article
First Online:

Abstract

This paper examines the idea of tribes and territories, as an example of a theory developed and applied within higher education research of relevance to higher education policy. It traces the origins and meaning of the term, reviews its application by higher education researchers and discusses the issues it raises and the critiques it has attracted. It is concluded that while, like all theoretical frameworks, tribes and territories has strengths and weaknesses, it remains of use for thinking about academics, disciplines, their relations and associated policy areas.

Keywords

tribes and territories theory development higher education research 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. Adams, J., Cochrane, M. and Dunne, L. (eds.) (2012) ‘Introduction’, in Applying Theory to Educational Research: An Introductory Approach with Case Studies, Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell, pp. 1–10.Google Scholar
  2. Adler, N., Hellstrom, T., Jacob, M. and Norrgren, F. (2000) ‘A Model for the Institutionalisation of University-Industry Partnerships: The Fenix Research Programme’, in M. Jacob and T. Hellstrom (eds.) The Future of Knowledge Production in the Academy, Buckingham: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Askling, B. (2001) ‘Higher education and academic staff in a period of policy and system change’, Higher Education 41 (2): 157–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bailey, F. (1977) Morality and Expediency: The Folklore of Academic Politics, Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
  5. Bamber, V. (2012) ‘Learning and Teaching in the Disciplines: Challenging Knowledge, Ubiquitous Change’, in P. Trowler, M. Saunders and V. Bamber (eds.) Tribes and Territories in the 21st Century: Rethinking the Significance of Disciplines in Higher Education, London: Routledge, pp. 99–106.Google Scholar
  6. Bath, D. and Smith, C. (2004) ‘Academic developers: an academic tribe claiming their territory in higher education’, International Journal for Academic Development 9 (1): 9–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Becher, T. (1981) ‘Towards a definition of disciplinary cultures’, Studies in Higher Education 6 (2): 109–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Becher, T. (1984) ‘The Cultural View’, in B. Clark (ed.) Perspectives on Higher Education: Eight Disciplinary and Comparative Views, Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, pp. 165–198.Google Scholar
  9. Becher, T. (1987) ‘The Disciplinary Shaping of the Profession’, in B. Clark (ed.) The Academic Profession: National, Disciplinary and Institutional Settings, Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, pp. 271–303.Google Scholar
  10. Becher, T. (1989a) Academic Tribes and Territories: Intellectual Enquiry and the Cultures of Disciplines, Milton Keynes: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  11. Becher, T. (1989b) ‘Historians on history’, Studies in Higher Education 14 (3): 263–278.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Becher, T. (1990a) ‘Physicists on physics’, Studies in Higher Education 15 (1): 3–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Becher, T. (1990b) ‘The counter-culture of specialisation’, European Journal of Education 25 (3): 333–346.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Becher, T. (1994) ‘The significance of disciplinary differences’, Studies in Higher Education 19 (2): 151–161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Becher, T. (1996) ‘The learning professions’, Studies in Higher Education 21 (1): 43–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Becher, T. (1999) Professional Practices: Commitment and Capability in a Changing Environment, New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction.Google Scholar
  17. Becher, T. and Trowler, P. (2001) Academic Tribes and Territories: Intellectual Enquiry and the Cultures of Disciplines, 2nd edn., Buckingham: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  18. Bessant, J. (2002) ‘Dawkins’ higher education reforms and how metaphors work in policy making’, Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management 24 (1): 87–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Biglan, A. (1973a) ‘The characteristics of subject matter in different academic disciplines’, Journal of Applied Psychology 57 (3): 195–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Biglan, A. (1973b) ‘Relationships between subject matter characteristics and the structure and output of university departments’, Journal of Applied Psychology 57 (3): 204–213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Bird, E. (2001) ‘Disciplining the interdisciplinary: radicalism and the academic curriculum’, British Journal of Sociology of Education 22 (4): 463–478.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Blackmore, P. (2007) ‘Developing tribes and territories’, Educational Developments 8 (2): 1–4, 10–11 14.Google Scholar
  23. Boffo, S. and Moscati, R. (1998) ‘Evaluation in the Italian higher education system: many tribes, many territories … many godfathers’, European Journal of Education 33 (3): 349–360.Google Scholar
  24. Braxton, J. and Hargens, L. (1996) ‘Variation Among Academic Disciplines: Analytical Frameworks and Research’, in J. Smart (ed.) Higher Education: Handbook of Theory and Research, Vol. 11, New York: Agathon Press, pp. 1–46.Google Scholar
  25. Brew, A. (2008) ‘Disciplinary and interdisciplinary affiliations of experienced researchers’, Higher Education 56 (4): 423–448.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Brint, S., Riddle, M., Turk-Bicakci, L. and Levy, C. (2005) ‘From the liberal to the practical arts in American colleges and universities: organizational analysis and curricular change’, Journal of Higher Education 76 (2): 151–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Carmichael, P. (2012) ‘Tribes, territories and threshold concepts: educational materialisms at work in higher education’, Educational Philosophy and Theory 44 (S1): 31–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Cashin, W. and Downey, R. (1995) ‘Disciplinary Differences in What is Taught and in Students’ Perceptions of What they Learn and of How They are Taught’, in N. Hativa and M. Marincovich (eds.) Disciplinary Differences in Teaching and Learning: Implications for Practice, San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, New Directions for Teaching and Learning, No. 64, pp. 81–92.Google Scholar
  29. Clifford, V. (2009) ‘Engaging the disciplines in internationalising the curriculum’, International Journal for Academic Development 14 (2): 133–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Creswell, J. and Bean, J. (1981a) ‘Research output, socialization and the Biglan model’, Research in Higher Education 15 (1): 69–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Creswell, J. and Bean, J. (1981b) ‘The Biglan studies of differences among academic areas’, Review of Higher Education 4 (3): 1–16.Google Scholar
  32. Davies, M., Devlin, M. and Tight, M. (eds.) (2010) Interdisciplinary Higher Education: Perspectives and Practicalities, Bingley: Emerald.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Donald, J. (1995) ‘Disciplinary Differences in Knowledge Validation’, in N. Hativa and M. Marincovich (eds.) Disciplinary Differences in Teaching and Learning: Implications for Practice, San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, New Directions for Teaching and Learning, No. 64, pp. 7–17.Google Scholar
  34. Entwistle, N. (2005) ‘Learning outcomes and ways of thinking across contrasting disciplines and settings in higher education’, Curriculum Journal 16 (1): 67–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Evans, C. (1988) Language People: The Experience of Teaching and Learning Modern Languages in British Universities, Milton Keynes: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  36. Evans, C. (1993) English People: The Experience of Teaching and Learning English in British Universities, Buckingham: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  37. Fejes, A., Johansson, K. and Dahlgren, M. (2005) ‘Learning to play the seminar game: students’ initial encounters with a basic working form in higher education’, Teaching in Higher Education 10 (1): 29–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Fuchs, S. (1992) The Professional Quest for Truth: A Social Theory of Science and Knowledge, Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
  39. Gibbons, M., Limoges, C., Nowotny, H., Schwartzman, S., Scott, P. and Trow, M. (1994) The New Production of Knowledge: The Dynamics of Science and Research in Contemporary Societies, London: Sage.Google Scholar
  40. Hagstrom, W. (1965) The Scientific Community, New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  41. Hughes, C. and Tight, M. (2013) ‘The metaphors we study by: the doctorate as a journey and/or as work’, Higher Education Research and Development 32 (5): 765–775.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Hyland, K. (2012) Disciplinary Identities: Individuality and Community in Academic Discourse, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  43. Johnston, R. (1996) ‘Academic tribes, disciplinary containers and the realpolitik of opening up the social sciences’, Environment and Planning A 28 (11): 1943–1947.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Kekäle, J. (1999) ‘‘Preferred’ patterns of academic leadership in different disciplinary (sub)cultures’, Higher Education 37 (3): 217–238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Kekäle, J. (2002) ‘Conceptions of quality in four different disciplines’, Tertiary Education and Management 8 (1): 65–80.Google Scholar
  46. Klein, J. (1996) Crossing Boundaries: Knowledge, Disciplinarities and Interdisciplinarities, Charlottesville, VA: University Press of Virginia.Google Scholar
  47. Kogan, M. (2005) ‘Modes of knowledge and patterns of power’, Higher Education 49 (1): 9–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Kolb, D. (1984) ‘Learning Styles and Disciplinary Differences’, in A. Chickering (ed.) The Modern American College: Responding to the New Realities of Diverse Students and a Changing Society, San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, pp. 232–255.Google Scholar
  49. Kolsaker, A. (2008) ‘Academic professionalism in the managerialist era: a study of English universities’, Studies in Higher Education 33 (5): 513–525.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Kuhn, T. (1962) The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  51. Lakoff, G. and Johnson, M. (1980/2003) Metaphors We Live By, Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  52. Land, R. (2012) ‘Crossing Tribal Boundaries: Interdisciplinarity as a Threshold Concept’, in P. Trowler, M. Saunders and V. Bamber (eds.) Tribes and Territories in the 21st Century: Rethinking the Significance of Disciplines in Higher Education, London: Routledge, pp. 174–185.Google Scholar
  53. Lave, J. and Wenger, E. (1991) Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Lee, A. and Green, B. (2009) ‘Supervision as metaphor’, Studies in Higher Education 34 (6): 615–630.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Lindblom-Ylanne, S., Trigwell, K., Nevgi, A. and Ashwin, P. (2006) ‘How approaches to teaching are affected by discipline and teaching context’, Studies in Higher Education 31 (3): 285–298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Loads, D. (2010) ‘‘I’m a dancer’ and ‘I’ve got a saucepan stuck on my head’: metaphor in helping lecturers to develop being-for-uncertainty’, Teaching in Higher Education 15 (4): 409–421.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Lodahl, J. and Gordon, G. (1972) ‘The structure of scientific fields and the functioning of university graduate departments’, American Sociological Review 37 (1): 57–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Malaney, G. (1986) ‘Differentiation in graduate education’, Research in Higher Education 25 (1): 82–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Manathunga, C. and Brew, A. (2012) ‘Beyond Tribes and Territories: New Metaphors for New Times’, in P. Trowler, M. Saunders and V. Bamber (eds.) Tribes and Territories in the 21st Century: Rethinking the Significance of Disciplines in Higher Education, London: Routledge, pp. 44–56.Google Scholar
  60. McCulloch, A. (2013) ‘The quest for the PhD: a better metaphor for doctoral education’, International Journal for Researcher Development 4 (1): 55–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Menter, I. (2011) ‘Four ‘academic sub-tribes’, but one territory? Teacher educators and teacher education in Scotland’, Journal of Education for Teaching 37 (3): 293–308.Google Scholar
  62. Murray, J. and Kosnik, K. (2011) ‘Introduction: academic work and identities in teacher education’, Journal of Education for Teaching 37 (3): 243–246.Google Scholar
  63. Neumann, R. (2001) ‘Disciplinary differences and university teaching’, Studies in Higher Education 26 (2): 135–146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Neumann, R., Parry, S. and Becher, T. (2002) ‘Teaching and learning in their disciplinary contexts: a conceptual analysis’, Studies in Higher Education 27 (4): 405–417.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Nowotny, H., Scott, P. and Gibbons, M. (2001) Re-Thinking Science: Knowledge and the Public in An Age of Uncertainty, Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  66. Pantin, C. (1968) The Relations between the Sciences, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  67. Parker, J. (2002) ‘A new disciplinarity: communities of knowledge, learning and practice’, Teaching in Higher Education 7 (4): 373–386.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Parry, S. (2007) Disciplines and Doctorates, Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  69. Pinch, T. (1990) ‘The culture of scientists and disciplinary rhetoric’, European Journal of Education 25 (3): 295–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Pirrie, A. (1999) ‘Rocky mountains and tired Indians: on territories and tribes. Reflections on multidisciplinary education in the health professions’, British Educational Research Journal 25 (1): 113–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Shahjahan, R. and Kezar, A. (2013) ‘Beyond the ‘national container’: addressing methodological nationalism in higher education research’, Educational Researcher 42 (1): 20–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Silver, H. (2003) ‘Does a university have a culture?’ Studies in Higher Education 28 (2): 157–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Smeby, J.-C. (1996) ‘Disciplinary differences in university teaching’, Studies in Higher Education 21 (1): 69–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Snow, C. (1959) The Two Cultures and the Scientific Revolution, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  75. Snow, C. (1964) The Two Cultures: And a Second Look, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  76. Stanley, L. (ed.) (1997) Knowing Feminisms: On Academic Borders, Territories and Tribes, London: Sage.Google Scholar
  77. Stoecker, J. (1993) ‘The Biglan classification revisited’, Research in Higher Education 34 (4): 451–464.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Storer, N. (1967) ‘The hard sciences and the soft: some sociological observations’, Bulletin of the Medical Library Association 55 (1): 75–84.Google Scholar
  79. Storer, N. (1972) ‘Relations among Scientific Disciplines’, in S. Nagi and R. Corwin (eds.) The Social Contexts of Research, New York: Wiley, pp. 229–268.Google Scholar
  80. Tight, M. (2007) ‘Bridging the divide: a comparative analysis of articles in higher education journals published inside and outside North America’, Higher Education 53 (2): 235–253.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Tight, M. (2008) ‘Higher education research as tribe, territory and/or community: a co-citation analysis’, Higher Education 55 (5): 593–605.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Tight, M. (2012) Researching Higher Education 2nd edn Maidenhead: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  83. Tight, M. (2013a) ‘Discipline and methodology in higher education research’, Higher Education Research and Development 32 (1): 136–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Tight, M. (2013b) ‘Students: customers, clients or pawns?’ Higher Education Policy 26 (3): 291–307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Tight, M. (2014a) ‘Discipline and theory in higher education research’, Research Papers in Education 29 (1): 93–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Tight, M. (2014b) ‘Theory Development and Application in Higher Education Research: The Case of Threshold Concepts’, in J. Huisman and M. Tight (eds.) Theory and Method in Higher Education Research, Vol. 2, Bingley: Emerald, forthcoming.Google Scholar
  87. Tight, M. (2014c) ‘Theory development and application in higher education research: the case of academic drift’, Journal of Educational Administration and History. Forthcoming.Google Scholar
  88. Tight, M. (forthcoming) ‘Working in separate silos? What citation patterns reveal about higher education research internationally’, Higher Education.Google Scholar
  89. Tranfield, D. (2002) ‘Formulating the nature of management research’, European Management Journal 20 (4): 378–382.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. Tribe, J. (1997) ‘The indiscipline of tourism’, Annals of Tourism Research 24 (3): 638–657.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. Tribe, J. (2010) ‘Tribes, territories and networks in the tourism academy’, Annals of Tourism Research 37 (1): 7–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. Trowler, P. (2009) ‘Beyond Epistemological Essentialism: Academic Tribes in the Twenty-First Century’, in C. Kreber (ed.) The University and its Disciplines: Teaching and Learning within and beyond Disciplinary Boundaries, London: Routledge, pp. 181–195.Google Scholar
  93. Trowler, P. (2012) ‘Disciplines and Interdisciplinarity’, in P. Trowler, M. Saunders and V. Bamber (eds.) Tribes and Territories in the 21st Century: Rethinking the Significance of Disciplines in Higher Education, London: Routledge, pp. 5–29.Google Scholar
  94. Trowler, P., Saunders, M. and Bamber, V. (eds.) (2012a) Tribes and Territories in the 21st Century: Rethinking the Significance of Disciplines in Higher Education, London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  95. Trowler, P., Saunders, M. and Bamber, V. (eds.) (2012b) ‘Conclusion: Academic Practices and the Disciplines in the 21st Century’, in Tribes and Territories in the 21st Century: Rethinking the Significance of Disciplines in Higher Education, London: Routledge, pp. 241–258.Google Scholar
  96. Välimaa, J. (1998) ‘Culture and identity in higher education research’, Higher Education 36 (2): 119–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  97. Warhurst, R. (2008) ‘‘Cigars on the flight-deck’: new lecturers’ participatory learning within workplace communities of practice’, Studies in Higher Education 33 (4): 453–467.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  98. Wenger, E. (1998) Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning and Identity, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  99. Whitley, R. (1984) The Intellectual and Social Organization of the Sciences, Oxford: Clarendon Press, Second edition published by Oxford University Press in 2000.Google Scholar
  100. Ylijoki, O.-H. (2000) ‘Disciplinary cultures and the moral order of studying: a case-study of four Finnish university departments’, Higher Education 39 (3): 339–362.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© International Association of Universities 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Malcolm Tight
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Educational ResearchLancaster UniversityLancasterUK

Personalised recommendations

Cite article

Buy options