Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Professional and Support Staff in Higher Education pp 1–18Cite as

Crossing Boundaries: Projects, Discourses, and Visibility in the Third Space

Part of the book series: University Development and Administration ((UDAA))

Abstract

Universities are large and complex organizations that comprise many groups. Traditionally, these groups account for academic and professional staff. However, the changing nature of work in universities has seen new roles, identities, groups, and relationships emerge, including a new group, third space professionals (Whitchurch 2013). These staff span organizational boundaries and work in blended capacities with academic colleagues.

Due to the rise in blended and online learning environments, many online resource development projects are interdisciplinary collaborations between third space professional and academic staff. This chapter explores how discourses, as artifacts of group boundaries, power relations, affective patterns, and parallel processes, affect visibility in a university and how these systemically privilege some groups and marginalize others. This makes it difficult for professional staff working with academics in the third space project domain to receive appropriate recognition and kudos for their work, including their contributions to student learning outcomes. Overall, the professional and vocational staff in the research felt that their discourses were undervalued and lacked status and visibility compared to those of their academic colleagues.

This chapter draws on a qualitative research study conducted at an Australian university that explored interdisciplinary collaboration between professional and academic working in the third space project domain. Understanding the changing nature of group relationships in universities, including in interdisciplinary project-based teams, can help to provide insights into enhancing collaboration and improving organizational and student educational outcomes.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

References

  • Alderfer, C.P. 1980. Consulting to underbounded systems. In Advances in experiential social processes, ed. C.P. Alderfer and C.L. Cooper, vol. 2, 267–295. London: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alderfer, C.P. 1987. An intergroup perspective on group dynamics. In Handbook of organizational behavior, ed. J.W. Lorsch, 190–222. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alderfer, C.P. 1994. A white man’s perspective on the unconscious processes within black–white relations in the United States. In Human diversity: Perspectives on people in context, ed. E.J. Trickett, R.J. Watts, and D. Birman, 201–229. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alderfer, C.P. 2011. The practice of organizational diagnosis: Theory and methods. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alderfer, C.P., and A.F. Simon. 2002. Nonresponse rates to organic questionnaire items as evidence of parallel processes during organizational diagnosis. Journal of Applied Behavior Science 38 (4): 416–435.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alderfer, C.P., and R.C. Tucker. 1996. A field experiment for studying race relations embedded in organizations. Journal of Organizational Behavior 17: 43–57. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-1379(199601)17:1<43::AID-JOB732>3.0.CO;2-#.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barley, S.R. 1996. Technicians in the workplace: Ethnographic evidence for bringing work into organization studies. Administrative Science Quarterly 41: 404–440.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Becher, T., and P.R. Trowler. 2001. Academic tribes and territories: Intellectual enquiry and the cultures of disciplines. Buckingham: SRHE and Open University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bess, J.L., and J.R. Dee. 2008. Understanding college and university organization: Dynamics of the system. Sterling: Stylus Publishing, LLC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blackmore, P., J. Chambers, L. Huxley, and B. Thackwray. 2010. Tribalism and territoriality in the staff and educational development world. Journal of Further and Higher Education 34 (1): 105–117.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Botterill, M. 2013. Behind the screen: Intergroup collaboration in developing university-based online learning resources. PhD, RMIT.

    Google Scholar 

  • Botterill, M., and B. de la Harpe. 2010. Working successfully in university interdisciplinary teams: Learning from embedded intergroup relations theory. In Interdisciplinary higher education: Perspectives and practicalities (International perspectives on higher education research), ed. M. Davies, M. Devlin, and M. Tight, vol. 5, 75–96. Bingley: Emerald Group Publishing Limited.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Coaldrake, P. 2000. Rethinking academic and university work. Higher Education Management 12: 7–30. https://doi.org/10.1787/hemp-v12-3-en.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coaldrake, P., and L. Stedman. 1999. Academic work in the twenty-first century: Changing roles and policies. Canberra: Department of Education, Training and Youth Affairs, Higher Education Division.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dobson, I. 2000. ‘Them and us’ – General and non-general staff in higher educations. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management 22: 203–210. https://doi.org/10.1080/713678142.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dobson, I., and M. Conway. 2003. Fear and loathing in university staffing: The case of Australian academic and general staff. Higher Education Management and Policy 15 (3): 123–133.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gee, J.P. 1992. The social mind: Language, ideology and social practice. New York: Bergin & Gravey.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gee, J.P. 2001. Reading as situated language: A sociocognitive perspective. Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy 44: 714–725.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gértrudix Barrio, M., M. Carmen Gálvez de la Cuesta, S. Álvarez García, and A. Valle. 2007. Design and development of digital educational content. In Computers and education, ed. B. Fernández-Manjón, J. Sánchez-Pérez, J. Gómez-Pulido, M. Vega-Rodríguez, and J. Bravo-Rodríguez, 67–76. Netherlands: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Gibbons, M., C. Limoges, H. Nowotny, S. Schwartzman, P. Scott, and M. Trow. 1994. The new production of knowledge: The dynamics of science and research in contemporary societies. London: SAGE.

    Google Scholar 

  • Graham, C. 2010. Hearing the voices of general staff: A Delphi study of the contributions of general staff to student outcomes. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management 32: 213–223. https://doi.org/10.1080/13600801003743315.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graham, C. 2012. Transforming spaces and identities: The contributions of professional staff to learning spaces in higher education. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management 34: 437–452. https://doi.org/10.1080/1360080X.2012.696326.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graham, C. 2013. Changing technologies, changing identities. Perspectives: Policy and Practice in Higher Education 17 (2): 62–70.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoare, D., G. Stanley, R. Kirkby, and P. Coaldrake. 1995. Higher education management review: Report of the committee of inquiry. Canberra: Australian Government Publishing Service.

    Google Scholar 

  • Janis, I.L. 1972. Victims of groupthink: A psychological study of foreign-policy decisions and fiascoes. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kirkwood, A.T., and L. Price. 2005. Learners and learning in the 21st century: What do we know about students’ attitudes and experiences of ICT that will help us design courses? Studies in Higher Education 30: 257–274. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075070500095689.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Larkins, F.P. 2012. Trends in non-academic staff for Australian universities 2000 to 2010. from http://www.lhmartininstitute.edu.au/userfiles/files/HE%20Trends%20-%20Uni%20Gen%20Staff%203_FLarkins_original_updated270612.pdf.

  • Lundholm, S.E., J. Rennstam, and M. Alvesson. 2012. Understanding hierarchy in contemporary work. In Reinventing hierarchy and bureaucracy – from the bureau to network organizations, Research in the sociology of organizations, ed. Thomas Diefenbach and Rune Todnem By, Vol. 35, 113–140. Bingley: Emerald Group Publishing Limited.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Macfarlane, B. 2011. The morphing of academic practice: Unbundling and the rise of the para-academic. Higher Education Quarterly 65 (1): 59–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marginson, S., and M. Considine. 2000. The enterprise university: Power, governance and reinvention in Australia. Cambridge/Melbourne: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • McInnis, C. 1998. Academics and professional administrators in Australian universities: Dissolving boundaries and new tensions. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management 20 (2): 161–173.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nespor, J. 2012. Devices for eductional change. In Researching education through actor-network theory, ed. T. Fenwick and R. Edwards, 1–22. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Olsen, R.K. 2006. A change from leadership (vertical powerstructure) to leadingship (horizontal powerstructure) at work. Retrieved 16 Oct 2012, from http://www.humiliationstudies.org/documents/OlsenLeadershipLeadingship.pdf.

  • Prencipe, A., and F. Tell. 2001. Inter-project learning: Processes and outcomes of knowledge codification in project-based firms. Research Policy 30: 1373–1394. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(01)00157-3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, J.A., and W.H. Newell. 2004. An interdisciplinary approah to web design. Issues in Integrative Studies 22: 112–140.

    Google Scholar 

  • Szekeres, J. 2004. The invisible workers. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management 26 (1): 7–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Szekeres, J. 2006. General staff experiences in the corporate university. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management 28 (2): 133–145.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Transportation Research Board. 2005. e-Transit: Electronic business strategies for public transportation. Volume 7: The successful adoption of web-based collaborative software, TCRP Report. Vol. 84. Washington, DC: Transportation Research Board.

    Google Scholar 

  • Whitchurch, C. 2006. Who do they think they are? The changing identities of professional administrators and managers in UK higher education. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management 28: 159–171. https://doi.org/10.1080/13600800600751002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Whitchurch, C. 2008. Shifting identities and blurring boundaries: The emergence of third space professionals in UK higher education. Higher Education Quarterly 62: 377–396. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2273.2008.00387.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Whitchurch, C. 2009. The rise of the “Blended Professional” in higher education: A comparison between the United Kingdom, Australia and the United States. Higher Education 58: 407–418. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-009-9202-4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Whitchurch, C. 2010. Optimising the potential of third space professionals in higher education. ZFHE 5: 9–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Whitchurch, C. 2012. Reconstructing identities in higher education: The rise of third space professionals. In Universität in Zeiten von Bologna: Zur Theorie und Praxis von Lehr-und Lernkulturen, ed. B. Kossek and C. Zwiauer, 317–340. Gottingen: V&R Unipress.

    Google Scholar 

  • Whitchurch, C. 2013. Reconstructing identities in higher education: The rise of Third Space professionals. Oxon: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. RMIT University, Melbourne, Australia

    Meaghan Botterill

Authors
  1. Meaghan Botterill
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Meaghan Botterill .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Tasmanian Institute of Learning and Teac, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Tasmania, Australia

    Carina Bossu

  2. Tasmanian Institute of Learning and Teac, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Tasmania, Australia

    Natalie Brown

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this entry

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this entry

Botterill, M. (2018). Crossing Boundaries: Projects, Discourses, and Visibility in the Third Space. In: Bossu, C., Brown, N. (eds) Professional and Support Staff in Higher Education. University Development and Administration. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-1607-3_17-1

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-1607-3_17-1

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore

  • Print ISBN: 978-981-10-1607-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-981-10-1607-3

  • eBook Packages: Springer Reference EducationReference Module Humanities and Social SciencesReference Module Education

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Chapter history

  1. Latest

    Crossing Boundaries: Projects, Discourses, and Visibility in the Third Space
    Published:
    25 October 2018

    DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-1607-3_17-4

  2. Crossing Boundaries: Projects, Discourses, and Visibility in the Third Space
    Published:
    25 July 2018

    DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-1607-3_17-3

  3. Crossing Boundaries: Projects, Discourses, and Visibility in the Third Space
    Published:
    02 July 2018

    DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-1607-3_17-2

  4. Original

    Crossing Boundaries: Projects, Discourses, and Visibility in the Third Space
    Published:
    03 November 2017

    DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-1607-3_17-1

Search

Navigation