Governance: A Community of Self-Governing Scholars?

  • Ted TapperEmail author
  • David Palfreyman
Part of the Higher Education Dynamics book series (HEDY, volume 34)


Although the collegial tradition is composed of a range of variables at its very core is the idea of a community of self-governing scholars. While collegial institutions may lack financial resources (brotherhoods of poor scholars) or may not be devoted to the pursuit of learning (committed to saving souls rather than expanding knowledge), the essence of their collegial identity is the ability to determine their own fates, that they are self-governing institutions. The historical evidence demonstrates both the longevity of this idea and its perpetual internal tensions.


Executive Committee Direct Democracy Collegial Tradition Committee Membership Quality Assurance Agency 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Annan, N. (1990). Our age: Portrait of a generation. London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson.Google Scholar
  2. Baty, P. (1999, 22 January). Oxbridge rows over modernisation. The Times Higher Education Supplement, 60.Google Scholar
  3. Baty, P. (1999, January 29). Dons prepare for contracts battle. The Times Higher Education Supplement, 60.Google Scholar
  4. Baty, P. (1999, 19 March). Cambridge hit by cut to fee incomes. The Times Higher Education Supplement, 3.Google Scholar
  5. Cross, C. (1986). Oxford and the Tudor state from the accession of Henry VIII to the death of Mary. In J. McConica (Ed.), The history of the University of Oxford: Volume III: The collegiate university (pp. 117–149). Oxford: The Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
  6. Cunningham, V. (1994, December 9). Contract terminated. The Times Higher Education Supplement, 15.Google Scholar
  7. Dover, K. (1994). Marginal comment: A memoir. London: Duckworth.Google Scholar
  8. Evans, G. R. (1999b). Sharing in decisions. Oxford Magazine, 162, 6–7.Google Scholar
  9. Evans, G. R. (2010). The University of Oxford: A new history. London: I.B. Tauris.Google Scholar
  10. Flather, P. (1986, December 5). The defence of Oxford disunited. The Times Higher Education Supplement, 11.Google Scholar
  11. Gordon, G. (2010). Introduction. In G. Gordon & C. Whitchurch (Eds.), Academic and professional identities in higher education: The challenges of a diversifying workforce (pp. 71–75). New York: Routledge, Taylor and Francis.Google Scholar
  12. Halsey, A. H. (1995). The decline of donnish dominion. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
  13. Halsey, A. H. (2008). The idea of a college. Lecture delivered at Nuffield College, Oxford.Google Scholar
  14. Harrison, B. (1994, December 23). The Kenneth Dover I. Knew. Times Higher Education Supplement, 16–17.Google Scholar
  15. Higher Education Funding Council for England. (2007, July 18th). Evaluation of the university’s risk, management, control and governance, Final Report. Bristol: HEFCEGoogle Scholar
  16. Horder, T. (1999). How many super-boards? Oxford Magazine, 161, 7–9.Google Scholar
  17. Kenny, A. (1997, May 16). Congregation says its prayers. Times Higher Education Supplement, 18.Google Scholar
  18. Lowe, J. (1998). The warden: A portrait of John Sparrow. London: Harper-Collins.Google Scholar
  19. Lucas, C. (1998, June 26). Letter. The Times Higher Education Supplement, 15.Google Scholar
  20. Lucas, C. (2006). Thirteen years. Oxford Magazine, 256, 5–6.Google Scholar
  21. McConica, J. (1986). The Rise of the Undergraduate College. In J. McConica (Ed.), The history of the University of Oxford, Volume III: The collegiate university. Oxford: Clarendon Press, (pp. 1–68).Google Scholar
  22. Reed, S. (2005, December 5th). Shaking up Oxford. Business Week, 20–24.Google Scholar
  23. Ryan, A. (2005a). An extended footnote to Vines on fixing Oxford. Oxford Magazine, 240, 16–18.Google Scholar
  24. Ryan, A. (2005b). Alternatives on governance. Oxford Magazine, 238, 12–13.Google Scholar
  25. Smith, A. (1998, 26 June). Letter. The Times Higher Education Supplement, 15.Google Scholar
  26. Tapper, T. (2007). The governance of British higher education: The struggle for policy control (pp. 225–238). Dordrecht: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Tapper, T., & Palfreyman, D. (2010). The collegial tradition in the age of mass higher education. Dordrecht: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. University of Cambridge. (1989, 19 May 19). Reporter, Wass Syndicate.Google Scholar
  29. University of Oxford. (1965). Commission of inquiry: Evidence, Franks Commission. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
  30. University of Oxford. (1997a). Commission of inquiry: Report, North Commission. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  31. University of Oxford. (2006, November 2nd). In defence of democratic governance: Amendments for 14 November. Gazette, 4786.Google Scholar
  32. University of Oxford. (2008, May 30th). An endowment fund for college contributions: The future of the college contributions scheme. Oxford: College Contributions Committee.Google Scholar
  33. University of Oxford. (2009, January). Governance report to council. Oxford: Audit and Scrutiny Committee.Google Scholar
  34. University of Oxford. (2009, February 11th). Duties of academics, and related issues: Consultation document from the task force on academic employment. Gazette, 4870(Suppl. 2).Google Scholar
  35. University of Oxford. (2010). Governance report to council. Oxford: College Contributions Committee. Accessed January 9th, 2010.
  36. University of Oxford. (2010). Governance report. Oxford: Council. Accessed January 9th, 2010.
  37. Vines, D. (2005). Why this university really needs John Hood’s reforms. Oxford Magazine, 240, 11–16.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.OtterbourneUK
  2. 2.Oxford Centre for Higher Education Policy Studies, New CollegeOxfordUK

Personalised recommendations