Stratified University Strategies: The Shaping of Institutional Legitimacy in a Global Perspective
Name:
JHE Stratified University ...
Size:
284.1Kb
Format:
PDF
Description:
Final Accepted Manuscript
Author
Stensaker, BjørnLee, Jenny J.
Rhoades, Gary
Ghosh, Sowmya
Castiello-Gutiérrez, Santiago
Vance, Hillary
Çalıkoğlu, Alper
Kramer, Vannessa
Liu, Shuiyun
Marei, Mahmoud Sayed
O’Toole, Leslie
Pavlyutkin, Ivan
Peel, Cassandra
Affiliation
Univ Arizona, Ctr Study Higher EducIssue Date
2019
Metadata
Show full item recordPublisher
ROUTLEDGE JOURNALS, TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTDCitation
Stensaker, B., Lee, J. J., Rhoades, G., Ghosh, S., Castiello-Gutiérrez, S., Vance, H., ... & O’Toole, L. (2018). Stratified university strategies: The shaping of institutional legitimacy in a global perspective. The Journal of Higher Education, 1-24.Journal
JOURNAL OF HIGHER EDUCATIONRights
© 2019 The Ohio State University.Collection Information
This item from the UA Faculty Publications collection is made available by the University of Arizona with support from the University of Arizona Libraries. If you have questions, please contact us at repository@u.library.arizona.edu.Abstract
Globalizing forces have both transformed the higher education sector and made it increasingly homogenous. Growing similarities among universities have been attributed to isomorphic pressures to ensure and/or enhance legitimacy by imitating higher education institutions that are perceived as successful internationally, particularly universities that are highly ranked globally (Cantwell & Kauppinen, 2014; DiMaggio and Powell, 1983). In this study, we compared the strategic plans of 78 high-ranked, low-ranked, and unranked universities in 33 countries in 9 regions of the world. In analyzing the plans of these 78 universities, the study explored patterns of similarity and difference in universities' strategic positioning according to Suchman's (1995) 3 types of legitimacy: cognitive, pragmatic, and moral. We found evidence of stratified university strategies in a global higher education landscape that varied by institutional status. In offering a corrective to neoinstitutional theory, we suggest that patterns of globalization are mediated by status-based differences in aspirational behavior (Riesman, 1958) and "old institutional" forces (Stinchcombe, 1997) that contribute to differently situated universities pursuing new paths in seeking to build external legitimacy.Note
18 month embargo; published online: 13 Sep 2018ISSN
0022-1546EISSN
1538-4640Version
Final accepted manuscriptae974a485f413a2113503eed53cd6c53
10.1080/00221546.2018.1513306