POLICY NETWORKS AND COMMUNITIES IN THREE WESTERN CANADA UNIVERSITIES: NEO-INSTITUTIONAL RESPONSES TO A PAN - INSTITUTIONAL ISSUE
Date
2003-04
Authors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
ORCID
Type
Degree Level
Doctoral
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to describe, analyze and provide and understanding of the
process of policy making on an ill-defined pan institutional issue (teaching and learning
technology) within three western Canadian universities in two western Canadian
provinces.
The conceptual framework informing this study was Coleman & Skogstad and Atkinson
& Colman's policy network and community model. More abstract organizational
theoretical frameworks provide the basis for a post hoc interpretation of the policy
findings, where post critical social organization models provide a basis for further
development of the framework capacity.
The study was conducted in and around three large universities or cases from a potential
sample of over 100,000 actors. The description, analysis and interpretation of the policy
making process in these cases was conducted at the actor (micro), institution or sector
(meso) and macro (policy environment) levels. The focus was on the changing
university policy leadership found within a disaggregated state, where a broad policy
development community was defined. Within that community, small, relatively closed
policy making networks were found. To create these networks, influential actors
coalesced from across university departments and colleges, from government agencies
and from the administration and faculty chambers. The emergent patterns and the
characteristics of these influential relationships among key policy makers, including
institutional and government actors, was described and interpreted to gain a greater
understanding of the autonomy and capacity of these networks as they responded to the
pressing issue of teaching and technology in today's changing university.
Analysis of these policy networks and communities suggests that the policy issue of
teaching and learning technology activated actors to form certain types of relationships.
In the Saskatchewan case, the network emerged because low capacity and low autonomy
actors believed that the institution needed to be seen to be keeping up with technology.
In the Alberta case, the networks emerged because the actors believed that the institution
had to increase its market share. In all cases, the networks discovered were small and
relatively closed to the policy community.
Further interpretation found that in the Saskatchewan case, stable policy networks
organized their interests objectively with the government in a weak and codependent
pressure pluralist network. In the Alberta case, policy networks were found to organize
their interests more subjectively, creating a tight concertation network positioned to
capture targeted government funding. A comparison of the types of policy networks and
policy environments found that, though university faculty members have autonomy by
Act and collective agreements, some networks chose to organize their interests
hierarchically and to become codependent, while other networks maintained high
autonomy and high capacity by exercising certain key policy development
characteristics.
In all cases, the policy development process was found to be leaderless. The significance
of the study is that this conceptual framework does provide university sector leadership
scholars with an understanding of ill defined, pressing pan-institutional issue
organization in large modern universities.
Description
Keywords
Citation
Degree
Doctor of Philosophy (Ph.D.)
Department
Educational Administration
Program
Education Administration