Advertisement

Theorizing Research Policy: A Framework for Higher Education

  • Amy Scott Metcalfe
Part of the Handbook of Theory and Research book series (HATR, volume 23)

This work endeavors to provide a framework for the study of research policy from the perspective of the field of higher education, which considers institutional policies, as well as state, federal, and international policies. It requires contextualizing the study of research policy with an historical overview of the rise of academic research in the United States and its connections to the field of science policy studies. In addition, it is necessary to define the scope of research policy, which is done here through a typology that organizes the various strands of research policy into the thematic categories mission, support, management, and translation. Finally, to address this broad conceptualization of research policy, the macro-level theory of political economy is described, but with important re-conceptualizations recommended for the inclusion of meso-level and micro- level intersections between politics and the economy.

Keywords

research policy technology transfer political economy research science policy policy studies entrepreneurial universities innovation systems economic development intellectual property academic labor 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Aldrich, H. & Herker, D. (1977). Boundary spanning roles and organization structure. Academy of Management Review, 2, 217–230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Aper, J. P. & Fry, J. E. (2003). Post-tenure review at graduate institutions in the United States: Recommendations and reality. Journal of Higher Education, 74(3), 241–260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Ash, M. G. (2006). Bachelor of what? Master of whom? The Humboldt Myth and historical transformations of higher education in German-speaking Europe and the US. European Journal of Education, 41(2), 245–267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Baird, K. (2006). The political economy of college prepaid tuition plans. Review of Higher Education, 29(2), 141–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Banchoff, T. (2002). Institutions, inertia and European Union research policy. Journal of Common Market Studies, 40(1), 1–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Barrow, C. W. (1990). Universities and the capitalist state: Corporate liberalism and the reconstruction of American higher education, 1894–1928. Madison, WI: The University of Wisconsin Press.Google Scholar
  7. Barrow, C. W., Didou-Aupetit, S., & Mallea, J. (2003). Globalisation, trade liberalization, and higher education in North America: The emergence of a new market under NAFTA? Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.Google Scholar
  8. Becker, W. E. & Andrews, M. L. (Eds.) (2004). The scholarship of teaching and learning in higher education: Contributions of research universities. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
  9. Behrens, T. R. & Gray, D. O. (2001). Unintended consequences of cooperative research: Impact of industry sponsorship on climate for academic freedom and other graduate student outcome. Research Policy, 30, 179–199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bell, D. (1973). The coming of the post-industrial society: A venture in social forecasting. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  11. Bence, V. & Oppenheim, C. (2005). The evolution of the UK’s research assessment exercise: Publications, performance and perceptions. Journal of Educational Administration and History, 37(2), 137–155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Bergeron, S. (2001). Political economy discourses of globalization and feminist politics. Signs: Journal of Women and Culture in Society, 26(4), 983–1006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Blanpied, W. A. (1998). Inventing U.S. science policy. Physics Today, 51(2), 34 – 40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Bleiklie, I. & Høstaker, R. (2004). Modernizing research training: Education and science policy between profession, discipline and academic institution. Higher Education Policy, 17, 221–236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Bleiklie, I. & Powell, W. W. (2005). Universities and the production of knowledge—Introduction. Higher Education, 49, 1–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Bloland, H. G. (1989). Higher education and high anxiety: Objectivism, relativism, and irony. Journal of Higher Education, 60, 519 – 543.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Bloland, H. G. (1995). Postmodernism and higher education. Journal of Higher Education, 66, 521–559.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Bloland, H. G. (2005). Whatever happened to postmodernism in higher education? No requiem in the new millennium. Journal of Higher Education, 76(2), 122–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Blumenthal, D., Campbell, E., Anderson, M., Causino, N., & Louis, K. (1996). Withholding research results in academic lifescience: Evidence from a national survey of faculty. Journal of the American Medical Association, 277(15), 1224–1228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Bok, D. (2003). Universities in the marketplace: The commercialization of higher education. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  21. Boon, A., Flood, J., & Webb, J. (2005). Postmodern professions? The fragmentation of legal education and the legal profession. Journal of Law and Society, 32(3), 473 – 492.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Bradshaw, T. K., Kennedy, K. M., Davis, P. R., Lloyd, L. L., Gwebu, N., & Last, J. A. (2003). Science first: Contributions of a university-industry toxic substances research and teaching program to economic development. Journal of Higher Education, 74(3), 292–320.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Breneman, D. W., Pusser, B., & Turner, S. E. (Eds.) (2006). Earnings from learning: The rise of for-profit universities. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
  24. Brew, A. (1999). Research and teaching: Changing relationships in a changing context. Studies in Higher Education, 24, 291–301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Brint, S. (2005). Creating the future: “New directions” in American research universities. Minerva, 43, 23–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Bromley, D. A. (2002). Science, technology, and politics. Technology in Society, 24(1–2), 9–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Bush, V. (1945). Science: The endless frontier. Transactions of the Kansas Academy of Science, 48(3), 231–264.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Calvert, J. (2006). What’s special about basic research? Science, Technology and Human Values, 31(2), 199–220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Cameron, B. D. (2005). Trends in the usage of ISI bibliometric data: Uses, abuses, and implications. Portal: Libraries and the Academy, 5(1), 105 –125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Campbell, E. G., Clarridge, B. R., Gokhale, M., Birenbaum, L., Hilgarter, S., Holtzman, N. A., & Blumenthal, D. (2002). Data withholding in academic genetics. Journal of the American Medical Association, 287(4), 473–480.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Caporaso, J. A. & Levine, D. P. (1992). Theories of political economy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  32. Carey, W. D. (1985). Science and public policy. Science, Technology and Human Values, 10, 7–16.Google Scholar
  33. Castellacci, F., Grodal, S., Mendonca, S., & Wibe, M. (2005). Advances and challenges in innovation studies. Journal of Economic Issues, 39(1), 91–121.Google Scholar
  34. Castells, M. (2000). The rise of the network society (2nd ed.). Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  35. Clark, B. R. (1998). Creating entrepreneurial universities: Organizational pathways of transformation. Oxford: IAU.Google Scholar
  36. Clark, B. R. (1983). The higher education system: Academic organization in cross-national perspective. Los Angeles, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  37. Clark, W. (2006). Academic charisma and the origins of the research university. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  38. Clinton, W. J. & Gore, A. (1994). Science in the national interest. Washington, DC: National Science and Technology Council. Retrieved June 1, 2007 from http://clinton1.nara.gov/White_House/EOP/OSTP/Science/html/Sitni_Home.html.
  39. Cohen, W. M., Nelson, R. R., & Walsh, J. P. (2002). Special issue on university entrepreneurship and technology transfer. Management Science, 48(1), 1–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Coriat, B. & Orsi, F. (2002). Establishing a new intellectual property rights regime in the United States: Origins, content and problems. Research Policy, 31, 1491–1507.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Davies, J. L. (2001). The emergence of entrepreneurial cultures in European universities. Higher Education Management, 13(2), 25– 43.Google Scholar
  42. Delanty, G. (2001). Challenging knowledge: The university in the knowledge society. Buckingham, UK: Society for Research into Higher Education and Open University Press.Google Scholar
  43. Dill, D. D. (1995). University-industry entrepreneurship: The organization and management of American university technology transfer units. Higher Education, 29(4), 369–384.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Ehrenberg, R. G. (2000). Tuition rising: Why college costs so much. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  45. Enders, J. (2004). Higher education, internationalisation, and the nation-state: Recent developments and challenges to governance theory. Higher Education, 47, 361–382.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Etzkowitz, H. (1983). Entrepreneurial scientists and entrepreneurial universities in American academic science. Minerva, 21, 198–233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Fairweather, J. S. (1988). Entrepreneurship and higher education. Washington, DC: Association for the Study of Higher Education.Google Scholar
  48. Fairweather, J. S. (2002). The mythologies of faculty productivity: Implications for institutional policy and decision making. Journal of Higher Education, 73(1) 26 – 48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Fairweather, J. L. & Beach, A. L. (2002). Variations in faculty work at research universities: Implications for state and institutional policy. Review of Higher Education, 26(1), 97–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Feldman, M., Feller, I., Bercovitz, J., & Burton, R. (2002). Equity and the technology transfer strategies of American research universities. Management Science, 48(1), 105–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Fisher, D. & Atkinson-Grosjean, J. (2002). Brokers on the boundary: Academy-industry liaison in Canadian universities. Higher Education, 44(3–4), 449–467.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Fisher, D., Atkinson-Grosjean, J., & House, D. (2001). Changes in academy/industry/state relations in Canada: The creation and development of the networks of centres of excellence. Minerva, 39, 299–325.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Gale, T. (2006). Towards a theory and practice of policy engagement: Higher education research policy in the making. The Australian Educational Researcher, 33(2), 1–14.Google Scholar
  54. Garfield, E. (1955). Citation indexes for science: A new dimension in documentation through association of ideas. Science, 122, 108 –111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Geiger, R. L. (2004). Research and relevant knowledge: American research universities since World War II (2nd ed.). Piscataway, NJ: Transaction.Google Scholar
  56. Geiger, R. L. (2006). The quest for ‘economic relevance’ by U. S. research universities. Higher Education Policy, 19(4), 411– 431.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Geiger, R. L. & Sa, C. (2005). Beyond technology transfer: U.S. state policies to harness university research for economic development. Minerva, 43, 1–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Gibbons, M. (1999). Science’s new social contract with society. Nature, 402(6761), C81–C84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Gibbons, M., Limoges, C., Nowotny, H., Schwartzman, S., Scott, P., & Trow, M. (1994). The new production of knowledge: The dynamics of science and research in contemporary societies. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  60. Gieryn, T. F. (1983). Boundary-work and the demarcation of science from non-science: Strains and interests in professional ideologies of scientists. American Sociological Review, 48(6), 781–795.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Goldfarb, B. & Henrekson, M. (2002). Bottom-up versus top-down policies towards the commercialization of university intellectual property. Research Policy, 32, 639 – 658.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Gould, E. (2003). The university in a corporate culture. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  63. Gradstein, M. & Schiff, M. (2006). The political economy of social exclusion, with implications for immigration policy. Journal of Population Economics, 19(2), 327–344.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Greener, I. & Perriton, L. (2005). The political economy of networked learning communities in higher education. Studies in Higher Education, 30(1), 67–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Guston, D. H. (1996). Principal-agent theory and the structure of science policy. Science & Public Policy, 23(4), 229–240.Google Scholar
  66. Guston, D. H. (1997). Critical appraisal in science and technology policy analysis: The example of Science, the Endless Frontier. Policy Sciences, 30(4), 233–255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Guston, D. H. (1999). Stabilizing the boundary between US politics and science: The role of the Office of Technology Transfer as a boundary organization. Social Studies of Science, 29(1), 87–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Guston, D. H. (2000). Between politics and science: Assuring the integrity and productivity of research. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Guston, D. H. (2001). Boundary organizations in environmental policy and science: An introduction. Science, Technology & Human Values, 26(4), 399–408.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Hall, P. (2005). Brain drains and brain gains: Causes, consequences, policy. International Journal of Social Economics, 32(11), 939–950.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Harmon, G. (2000). Allocating research infrastructure grants in post-binary higher education systems: British and Australian approaches. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 22(2), 111–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Harper, J. C. & Georghiou, L. (2005). Foresight in innovation policy: Shared visions for a science park and business-university links in a city region. Technology Analysis and Strategic Management, 17(2), 147–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Heller, D. E. (Ed.) (2003). The states and public higher education policy: Affordability, access, and accountability. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
  74. Hellström, T. & Jacob, M. (2003). Boundary organisations in science: From discourse to construction. Science and Public Policy, 30(4), 235–238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Hess, J., Nero, K. L., & Burton, M. L. (2001). Creating options: Forming a Marshallese community in Orange County, California. Contemporary Pacific, 13(1), 89 –121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Huff, T. (2003). The rise of early modern science: Islam, China, and the West. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  77. Jasanoff, S. (1990). The fifth branch: Science advisors as policymakers. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  78. Jenkins, A. (2003). Reshaping teaching in higher education: Linking teaching with research. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  79. Kerr, C. (1963). The uses of the university. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  80. Kim, M. M., Rhoades, G., & Woodard, D. B. (2003). Sponsored research versus graduating students? Intervening variables and unanticipated findings in public research universities. Research in Higher Education, 44(1), 51–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Kirp, D. L. (2003). Shakespeare, Einstein, and the bottom line: The marketing of higher education. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  82. Kleinman, D. L. (1994). Layers of interests, layers of influence: Business and the genesis of the National Science Foundation. Science, Technology and Human Values, 7(19), 259–282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Kleinman, D. L. (1998). Untangling context: Understanding a university laboratory in the commercial world. Science, Technology and Human Values, 23(3), 285–314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Kraemer, S. (2006). Science and technology policy in the United States: Open systems in action. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.Google Scholar
  85. Leifner, I. (2003). Funding, resource allocation, and performance in higher education systems. Higher Education, 46, 469–489.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Leslie, S. W. (1993). The cold war and American science: The military-industrial-academic complex at MIT and Stanford. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  87. Levin, J. S. (2006). Faculty work: Tensions between educational and economic values. Journal of Higher Education, 77(1), 62–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. Louis, K. S., Blumenthal, D., Gluck, M. E., & Stoto, M.A. (1989). Entrepreneurs in academe: An exploration of behaviors among life scientists. Administrative Science Quarterly, 34, 110–131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. Lowen, R. S. (1997). Creating the cold war university: The transformation of Stanford. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  90. Marginson, S. & Rhoades, G. (2002). Beyond national states, markets, and systems of higher education: A glonacal agency heuristic. Higher Education, 43, 281–309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. Marsh, H. W. & Hattie, J. (2002). The relation between research productivity and teaching effectiveness. Journal of Higher Education, 73(5), 603 – 641.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. Marsh, H. W., Rowe, K. J., & Martin, A. (2002). Ph.D. students’ evaluations of research supervision. Journal of Higher Education, 73(3), 313–348.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. McLendon, M. (2003). The politics of higher education: Toward an expanded research agenda. Educational Policy, 17(1), 165–191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. Mendoza, P. (2007). Academic capitalism and doctoral student socialization: A case study. Journal of Higher Education, 78(1), 71–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. Merton, R. K. (1942). The sociology of science: Theoretical and empirical investigations. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  96. Metcalfe, A. S. (2005). Towards a theory of “intermediating organizations”: Agency between the university, industry, and government. Book of abstracts of the Triple Helix 5, the capitalization of knowledge: Cognitive, economic, social & cultural aspects (pp. A049–A050). Turin, IT: Fondazione Rosselli.Google Scholar
  97. Metcalfe, A. S. (2006). The political economy of knowledge management in higher education. In A. S. Metcalfe (Ed.), Knowledge management and higher education: A critical analysis (pp. 1–20). Hershey, PA: Information Science Publishing.Google Scholar
  98. Meyer, M. (2006). Academic inventiveness and entrepreneurship: On the importance of start-up companies in commercializing academic patents. Journal of Technology Transfer, 31(4), 501–510.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  99. Michael, S. O. & Holdaway, E. A. (1992). Entrepreneurial activities in postsecondary education. The Canadian Journal of Higher Education, 22(2), 15–40.Google Scholar
  100. Mill, J. S. (2004). Principles of political economy, with some of their applications to social philosophy. Amherst, NY: Prometheus Books (Originally published in 1848).Google Scholar
  101. Moe, T. M. (2005). Political control and the power of the agent. The Journal of Law, Economics and Organization, 22(1), 1–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  102. Moodie, G. (2006). Vocational education institutions’ role in national innovation. Research in Post-Compulsory Education, 11(2), 131–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  103. Morgan, D. R., Kickham, K., & LaPlant, J. T. (2001). State support for higher education: A political economy approach. Policy Studies Journal, 29(3), 359–371.Google Scholar
  104. Morley, L. (2005a). Gender equity in commonwealth higher education. Women’s Studies International Forum, 28, 209–221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  105. Morley, L. (2005b). Opportunity or exploitation? Women and quality assurance in higher education. Gender and Education, 17(4), 411– 429.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  106. Morris, N. (2003). Academic researchers as ‘agents’ of science policy. Science and Public Policy, 30(5), 359–370.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  107. Morrison, K. (2006). Marx, Durkheim, Weber: Formations of modern social thought. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  108. Morrow, R. A. (2006). Critical theory, globalization, and higher education: Political economy and the cul-de-sac of the postmodern cultural turn. In R. A. Rhoads & C. A. Torres (Eds.), The university, state, and market: The political economy of globalization in the Americas (pp. xvii–xxxiii). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  109. Mowery, D. C. & Sampat, B. N. (2001a). Patenting and licensing university inventions: Lessons from the history of the Research Corporation. Industrial and Corporate Change, 10, 317–355.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  110. Mowery, D. C. & Sampat, B. N. (2001b). University patents, patent policies and patent policy debates, 1925–1980. Industrial and Corporate Change, 10, 781–814.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  111. Mowery, D. C. & Sampat, B. N. (2004). The Bayh-Dole Act of 1980 and university-industry technology transfer: A model for other OECD governments? Journal of Technology Transfer, 30(1–2), 115 –127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  112. Mowery, D. C., Nelson, R. R., Sampat, B. N., & Ziedonis, A. A. (2001). The growth of patenting and licensing by U.S. universities: An assessment of the effects of the Bayh–Dole act of 1980. Research Policy, 30(1), 99 –119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  113. Mowery, D. C., Nelson, R. R., Sampat, B. N., & Ziedonis, A. A. (2004). Ivory tower and industrial innovation: University industry technology transfer before and after Bayh-Dole. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  114. Nelson, R. R. & Winter, S. G. (1977). In search of useful theory of innovation. Research Policy, 6(1), 36–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  115. Neumann, R. (1992). Perceptions of the teaching-research nexus: A framework for analysis. Higher Education, 23, 159–171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  116. Ntshoe, I. M. (2003). The political economy of access and equitable allocation of resources to higher education. International Journal of Educational Development, 23(4), 381–398.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  117. Ordorika, I. (2003). Power and politics in university governance: Organization and change at the Universidad Nacional Autonoma de Mexico. New York: Routledge Falmer.Google Scholar
  118. Owen-Smith, J. & Powell, W. W. (2003). The expanding role of university patenting in the life sciences: Assessing the importance of experience and connectivity. Research Policy, 32(9), 1695–1711.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  119. Ozga, J. (2007). Knowledge and policy: Research and knowledge transfer. Critical Studies in Education, 48(1), 63–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  120. Ozga, J. & Jones, R. (2006). Travelling and embedded policy: The case of knowledge transfer. Journal of Education Policy, 21(1), 1–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  121. Parascondola, L. (2005). Crossing the remedial bridge: Political economy, contingent labor, and differentiation strategies in higher education. Minnesota Review, 63–64, 203–210.Google Scholar
  122. Payne, A. A. (2003). The role of politically motivated subsidies on university research activities. Educational Policy, 17(1), 12–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  123. Perry, B. (2006). Science, society and the university: A paradox of values. Social Epistemology, 20(3–4), 201–219.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  124. Polanyi, M. (1962). The Republic of Science: Its political and economic theory. Minerva, 1, 54 –73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  125. Powers, J. B. (2003). Commercializing academic research: Resource effects on performance of university technology transfer. Journal of Higher Education, 74(1), 26–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  126. Powers, J. B. (2004). R&D funding sources and university technology transfer: What is stimulating universities to be more entrepreneurial? Research in Higher Education, 45(1), 1–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  127. Pusser, B. (2003). Beyond Baldridge: Extending the political model of higher education governance. Educational Policy, 17(1).Google Scholar
  128. Pusser, B. & Doane, D. J. (2001). Public purpose and private enterprise: The contemporary organization of postsecondary education. Change, 33(5), 18–22.Google Scholar
  129. Readings, B. (1996). The university in ruins. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  130. Rhoades, G. (1998). Managed professionals: Unionized faculty and restructuring academic labor. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
  131. Rhoades, G. & Smart, D. (1996). The political economy of entrepreneurial culture in higher education: Policies towards foreign students in Australia and the United States. In K. Kemper & W. Tierney (Eds.), Comparative perspectives on the social role of higher education (pp. 125–160). New York: Garland.Google Scholar
  132. Rhoads, R. A. & Rhoades, G. (2005). Graduate employee unionization as symbol of and challenge to the corporatization of U.S. research universities. Journal of Higher Education, 76(3), 243–275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  133. Rhoads, R. A. &. Torres, C. A (Eds.) (2006). The university, state, and market: The political economy of globalization in the Americas. Stanford, CA: Stanford University PressGoogle Scholar
  134. Rip, A. (2004). Strategic research, post-modern universities and research training. Higher Education Policy, 17, 153–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  135. Rogers, E. M., Hall, B. J., & Hashimoto, M. (1999). Technology transfer from university-based research centers: The University of New Mexico experience. Journal of Higher Education, 70(6), 687–705.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  136. Sax, L. J., Hagedorn, L. S., Arredondo, M., & Dicrisi, III, F. A. (2002). Faculty research productivity: Exploring the role of gender and family-related factors. Research in Higher Education, 43(4), 423– 446.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  137. Schumpeter, J. (1934). The theory of economic development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  138. Schuster, J. H. & Finkelstein, M. J. (2006). The American faculty: The restructuring of academic work and careers. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
  139. Scott, J. C. (2006). The mission of the university: Medieval to postmodern transformations. Journal of Higher Education, 77(1), 1–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  140. Scott, P. (2004). Ethical and moral dimensions for higher education and science in Europe: Ethics ‘in’ and ‘for’ higher education. Higher Education in Europe, 29(4), 439–450.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  141. Seashore, K. S., Holdsworth, J. M., Anderson, M. S., & Campbell, E. G. (2007). Becoming a scientist: The effects of work-group size and organizational climate. Journal of Higher Education, 78(3), 311–336.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  142. Serrow, R. C. (2004). Policy as symbol: Title II of the 1944 G.I. Bill. Review of Higher Education, 27(4), 481–499.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  143. Shumar, W. (2004). Making strangers at home: Anthropologists studying higher education. Journal of Higher Education, 75(1), 23– 41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  144. Singh, V. P. & Allen, T. (2006). Institutional contexts for scientific innovation and economic transformation. European Planning Studies, 14(5), 665– 679.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  145. Slaughter, S. (1993). Beyond basic science: Research university presidents’ narratives of science policy. Science, Technology & Human Values, 18(3), 278– 302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  146. Slaughter, S. (2001). Problems in comparative higher education: Political economy, political sociology, postmodernism. Higher Education, 41, 389– 412.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  147. Slaughter, S. & Leslie. L. (1997). Academic capitalism: Politics, policies, and the entrepreneurial university. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
  148. Slaughter, S. & Rhoades, G. (1996). The emergence of a competitiveness research and development policy coalition and the commercialization of academic science and technology. Science, Technology and Human Values, 21(3), 303–339.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  149. Slaughter, S. & G. Rhoades. 2004. Academic capitalism and the new economy: Markets, State, and Higher Education. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
  150. Slaughter, S. & Rhoades, G. (2005). From “endless frontier” to “basic science for use: Social contracts between science and society. Science, Technology and Human Values, 30(4), 536 – 572.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  151. Slaughter, S., Archerd, C. J., & Campbell, T. I. D. (2004). Boundaries and quandaries: How professors negotiate market relations. Review of Higher Education, 28(1), 129 – 165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  152. Smeby, J. C. & Try, S. (2005). Departmental contexts and faculty research activity in Norway. Research in Higher Education, 46(6), 593–619.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  153. Smith, A. (1991). The wealth of nations. New York: Knopf (Originally published in 1776).Google Scholar
  154. Stack, S. (2003). Research productivity and student evaluation of teaching in social science classes: A research note. Research in Higher Education, 44(5), 539–556.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  155. Stankiewicz, R. (1986). Academics and entrepreneurs: Developing university-industry relations. London: Frances Pinter.Google Scholar
  156. Star, S. L. & Griesemer, J. R. (1989). Institutional ecology, ‘translation’ and boundary objects: Amateurs and professionals in Berkeley’s Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, 1907–1939. Social Studies of Science, 19, 387– 420.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  157. Stein, D. G. (2004). Buying in or selling out? The commercialization of the American research university. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.Google Scholar
  158. Stokes, D. E. (1997). Pasteur’s quadrant: Basic science and technological innovation. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.Google Scholar
  159. Thelin, J. R. (2000). Good sports? Historical perspective on the political economy of intercollegiate athletics in the era of Title IX, 1972–1997. Journal of Higher Education, 71(4), 391–410.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  160. Tierney, W. G. & Rhoads, R. A. (1993). Enhancing promotion, tenure, and beyond: Faculty socialization as a cultural process. Association for the Study of Higher Education-Higher Education Report. Washington, DC: Association for the Study of Higher Education.Google Scholar
  161. Tighe, T. J. (2003). Who’s in charge of America’s research universities? A blueprint for reform. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
  162. Torres, C. A. & Schugurensky, D. (2002). The political economy of higher education in the era of neoliberal globalization: Latin America in comparative perspective. Higher Education, 43, 429 – 455.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  163. Toutkoushian, R. K., Porter, S. R., Danielson, C., & Hollis, P. R. (2003). Using publication counts to measure an institution’s research productivity. Research in Higher Education, 44(2), 121–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  164. Tsang, J. C. (2002). How industry matters in balancing the federal research portfolio. Technology in Society, 24(1–2), 49– 61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  165. Tushman, M. L. & Scanlan, T. J. (1981). Characteristics and external orientations of boundary spanning individuals. Academy of Management Journal, 24, 83–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  166. Waterton, C. (2005). Scientists’ conceptions of the boundaries between their own research and policy. Science and Public Policy, 32(6), 435– 444.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  167. Weber, M. (1958). From Max Weber: Essays in sociology. Translated, edited, and with an introduction by H. H. Gerth and C. Wright Mills. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  168. White, G. D. & Hauck, F. C. (Eds.) (2000). Campus, inc.: Corporate power in the ivory tower. Amherst, NY: Prometheus Books.Google Scholar
  169. Yokoyama, K. (2006). The effect of the research assessment exercise on organisational culture in English universities: Collegiality versus managerialism. Tertiary Education Management, 12, 311– 322.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  170. Zucker, K. J. & Cantor, J. M. (2003). Editorial: The numbers game: The impact factor and all that jazz. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 32(1), 1573 – 2800.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science + Business Media B.V 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Amy Scott Metcalfe
    • 1
  1. 1.Higher Education in the Department of Educational StudiesUniversity of British ColumbiaColumbia

Personalised recommendations