Policy, Perceptions, and Practice: A Study of Educational Leadership and Their Balancing of Expectations and Interests at Micro-level

As international and domestic policy initiatives continue to sweep over higher education, it is of utmost importance to study how those responsible for the implementation of the many initiatives taken perceive and respond to the many expectations about change and renewal. Through three different analytical perspectives — a managerial, a disciplinary, and a stakeholder perspective — the current article offers insights into how educational leaders responsible for the management of study programmes at micro-level interpret external expectations and how they prioritize between them. Based on data derived from a representative sample of Norwegian educational leaders, the current article finds — somewhat surprisingly — that the managerial perspective is less relevant for understanding the sense-making of educational leaders and how they prioritize between different tasks in their daily work. Disciplinary and the stakeholder perspectives are in this respect more relevant for explaining the practices related to programme management. The study provides indications of a (continued) gap between macro-level policy-making and its implementation at micro-level. In the conclusion, the findings are reflected upon and implications for policy and practice are outlined.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3

References

  1. Becher, T. and Trowler, P. (2001) Academic tribes and territories, Buckingham: Open University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Biggs, J. and Tang, C. (2011) Teaching for quality learning, Berkshire: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Blackmore, P. (2007) ‘Disciplinary differences in academic leadership and management and its development: a significant factor?’ Research in Post-Compulsory Education 12(12): 225–239.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Bleiklie, I. (2005) ‘Academic leadership and emerging knowledge regimes’, in I. Bleiklie and M. Henkel (eds.) Governing Knowledge. A Study of Continuity and Change in Higher Education, Dordrecht: Springer, pp. 189–211.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Bleiklie, I. and Frølich, N. (2014) ‘Styring og ledelse i politikk om høyere utdanning’, in N. Frølich, E. Hovdhaugen and L. I. Terum (eds.) Kvalitet, kapasitet og relevans: Utviklingstrekk i norsk høyere utdanning, Oslo: Cappelen Akademisk, pp. 40–58.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Bryman, A. (2007) ‘Effective leadership in higher education: a literature review’, Studies in Higher Education 32(32): 693–710.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Caspersen, J. and Frølich, N. (2014) ‘Læringsutbytte som styringsredskap for ledelsen i høyere utdanning’, in N. Frølich, E. Hovdhaugen and L. I. Terum (eds.) Kvalitet, Kapasitet og Relevans: Utviklingstrekk i Norsk Høyere Utdanning, Oslo: Cappelen Akademisk, pp. 58–80.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Caspersen, J. and Frølich, N. (2015) ‘Managing learning outcomes: Leadership practices and old modes of new governance in higher education’, in E. Reale and E. Primeri (eds.) Universities in Transition. Shifting Institutional and Organizational Boundaries, Rotterdam: Sense, pp. 187–203.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Caspersen, J., Frølich, N. and Muller, J. (2017) ‘Higher education learning outcomes – ambiguity and change in higher education’, European Journal of Education 52(1): 8–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Cohen, M. D. and March, J.D. (1974) Leadership and ambiguity: The American College President, New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Davies, J., Hides, M.T. and Casey, S. (2001) ‘Leadership in higher education’ Total Quality Management 12(7): 1025–1030.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. De Boer, H., File, J. Huisman, J., Seeber, M., Vukasovic, M. and Westerheijden, D. (2017) Policy analysis of structural reforms in higher education. Processes and outcomes. Cham: PalgraveMacmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Elken, M. (2016) ‘‘EU-on-demand’: developing national qualifications frameworks in a multi-level context’, European Educational Research Journal 15(6): 628–643.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Frølich, N., Gulbrandsen, M., Vabø, A., Wiers-Jenssen, J. and Aamodt, P.O. (2016) ‘Kvalitet og samspill i universitets- og høgskolesektoren’. Oslo, Norway: Nordic Institute for studies of Innovation, Research and Education. NIFU-report no. 2.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Gibbs, G., Knapper, C. and Piccinin, S., (eds) (2009) Departmental leadership of teaching in research-intensive universities. London: The Leadership Foundation for Higher Education.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Henkel, M. (2000) Academic identities and policy change in higher education. London: Jessica Kingsley Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Hovdhaugen, E., and Wiers-Jenssen, J. (2015) ‘Hvordan vurderer studenter og nyutdannede utdanningens kvalitet og relevans?’, in N. Frølich (ed.) Hva skjer i universiteter og høyskoler?, Oslo: Universitetsforlaget, pp. 51–65.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Irving, K. (2015) ‘Leading learning and teaching: an exploration of ‘local’ leadership in academic departments in the UK’, Tertiary Education and Management 21(3): 186–199.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Jungblut, J., Vukasovic, M., and Stensaker, B. (2015) ‘Student perspectives on quality in higher education’ European Journal of Higher Education 5(2): 157–180.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Karseth, B. and Sivesind, K. (2010) ‘Conceptualising curriculum knowledge within and beyond the national context’, European Journal of Education 45(1): 103–120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Kehm, B. M., Huisman, J. and Stensaker, B. (2009) The European higher education area: Perspectives on a moving target, Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Kehm, B. M., Michelsen, S. and Vabø, A. (2010) ‘Towards the two-cycle degree structure: Bologna, reform and path dependency in German and Norwegian universities’, Higher Education Policy 23(2): 227–245.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Marginson, S. (2011) ‘Higher education and public good’, Higher Education Quarterly 65(4): 411–433.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Maassen, P. and Stensaker, B. (2011) ‘The knowledge triangle, European higher education policy logics and policy implications’, Higher Education 61(6): 757–769.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Musselin, C. (2005) ‘Change or continuity in higher education governance?’ In Bleiklie, I. and Henkel, M. (eds.) Governing knowledge. Dordrecht: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Møthe, S., Ballangrud, B. and Stensaker, B. (2015) ‘The values and visions of the professional department head: Not so different from the past?’, The International Journal of Educational Management 29(3): 298–308.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Neave, G., and Veiga, A. (2013) ‘The Bologna Process: inception, ‘take up ‘and familiarity’, Higher education 66(1): 59–77.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Ravinet, P. (2008) ‘From voluntary participation to monitored coordination: Why European countries feel increasingly bound by their commitment to the Bologna Process’, European Journal of Education 43(3): 353–367.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Solbrekke, T.D. and Stensaker, B. (2016) ‘Utdanningsledelse. Stimulering av et felles engasjement for studieprogrammene?’, Uniped 39(2): 144–157.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Spooren, P., Brocks, B. and Mortelmans, D. (2013) ‘On the validity of student evaluation of teaching: The state of the art’, Review of Educational Research 83(4): 598–642.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Støren, L.A., Carlsten, T.C., Reiling, R.B., Olsen, D.S. and Arnesen, C. (2016) Arbeidsgivers vurdering av nyansatte med høyere utdanning og fagskoleutdanning: Underveisrapport, første delrapport. Oslo, Norway: Nordic Institute for studies in Innovation, Research and Education. NIFU-arbeidsnotat no. 16.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Vukasovic, M., Jungblut, J. and Elken, M. (2015) ‘Still the main show in town? Assessing political saliency of the Bologna Process across time and space’, Studies in Higher Education (4): 1–16.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Young, M. (2013) ‘Overcoming the crisis in cirriculum theory: a knowledge-based approach’, Journal of Curriculum Studies 45(2): 101–118.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nicoline Frølich.

Annex

Annex

See Tables 1, 2.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Stensaker, B., Frølich, N. & Aamodt, P.O. Policy, Perceptions, and Practice: A Study of Educational Leadership and Their Balancing of Expectations and Interests at Micro-level. High Educ Policy (2018). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41307-018-0115-7

Download citation

Keywords

  • Policy
  • educational leadership
  • quality
  • Norway