Theory and Method in Higher Education Research,, 2021
Informed by multiple disciplines, theories, and methods, higher education scholars have developed... more Informed by multiple disciplines, theories, and methods, higher education scholars have developed a robust and diverse literature in many countries. Yet, some important (organizational) sociological perspectives, both more established and more recent, are insufficiently linked. In particular, we identify two theoretical strandsinstitutional and relationalthat, when joined, help to explain contemporary developments in global higher education and yield new organizational insights. We review relevant literature from each perspective, both in their general formulations and with specific reference to contemporary higher education research. Within the broad institutional strand, we highlight strategic action fields, organizational actorhood, and associational memberships. Within the relational strand, we focus on ties and relationships that are especially crucial as science has entered an age of (inter)national research collaboration. Across these theories, we discuss linkages between concepts, objects, and levels of analysis. We explore the methodological approach of social network analysis as it offers great potential to connect these strands and, thus, to advance contemporary higher education research in a collaborative era.
Contemporary science is marked by expanding and diverse forms of teamwork. Collaboration across o... more Contemporary science is marked by expanding and diverse forms of teamwork. Collaboration across organizational and cultural boundaries extends the possibilities of discovery. International collaborative research projects often provide findings beyond what one team could achieve alone. Motivated to maintain existing relationships and grow their scientific network, researchers increasingly collaborate, despite often unrecognized or underappreciated costs, since such projects are challenging to manage and carry out. Rarely studied in-depth and longitudinally, the perspectives of scientific team members are crucial to better understand the dynamics of durable collaboration networks. Thus, this retrospective case study of a sociology of science project applies the novel method of autoethnography to examine teamwork benefits, motivations, and challenges. Key challenges found include spatial distance and differences of culture, language, and career stage. This study, spanning North America, Europe, the Middle East, and East Asia, focused on col-laborators' characteristics and evolving perceptions of team dynamics over a decade.
Minerva. A Review of Science, Learning and Policy, 2020
The world’s third largest producer of scientific research, Germany, is the origin of the research... more The world’s third largest producer of scientific research, Germany, is the origin of the research university and the independent, extra-university research institute. Its dual-pillar research policy differentiates these organizational forms functionally: universities specialize in advanced research-based teaching; institutes specialize intensely on research. Over the past decades this policy affected each sec- tor differently: while universities suffered a lingering “legitimation crisis,” institutes enjoyed deepening “favored sponsorship”—financial and reputational advantages. Universities led the nation’s reestablishment of scientific prominence among the highly competitive European and global science systems after WWII. But secto- ral analysis of contributions to science, technology, engineering, mathematics, and medical and health journal publications (1950–2010) finds that Germany’s small to medium-sized independent research institutes have made significant, growing contributions, particularly in publishing in higher impact journals proportionally more than their size. Simultaneously—despite dual-pillar policy implications—the university sector continues to be absolutely and relatively successful; not eclipsed by the institutes. Universities have consistently produced two-thirds of the nation’s publications in the highest quality journals since at least 1980 and have increased publications at a logarithmic rate; higher than the international mean. Indeed, they led Germany into the global mega-science style of production. Contrary to assumed benefits of functional differentiation, our results indicate that relative to their size, each sector has produced approximately similar publication records. While institutes have succeeded, the larger university sector, despite much less funding growth, has remained fundamental to German science production. Considering these findings, we discuss the future utility of the dual-pillar policy.
Charting significant growth in science production over the 20th century in
four European Union me... more Charting significant growth in science production over the 20th century in four European Union member states, this neo-institutional analysis describes the development and current state of universities and research institutes that bolster Europe’s position as a key region in global science. On-going internationalization and Europeanization of higher education and science has been accompanied by increasing competition as well as collaboration. Despite the policy goals to foster innovation and further expand research capacity, in cross-national and historical comparison neither the level of R&D investments nor country size accounts completely for the differential growth of scientific productivity. Based on a comprehensive historical database from 1900 to 2010, this analysis uncovers both stable and dynamic patterns of production and productivity in Germany, France, Belgium, and Luxembourg. Measured in peer-reviewed research articles collected in Thomson Reuters’ Science Citation Index Expanded, which includes journals in the fields of Science, Technology, Engineering, Mathematics, and Health, we show the varying contributions of different organizational forms, especially research universities and research institutes. Comparing the institutionalization pathways that created the conditions necessary for continuous and strong growth in scientific productivity in the European center of global science emphasizes that the research university is the key organizational form across countries.
Wie haben die Institutionen des deutschen Hochschul- und Wissenschaftssystems die Entwicklung wis... more Wie haben die Institutionen des deutschen Hochschul- und Wissenschaftssystems die Entwicklung wissenschaftlicher Produktivität beeinflusst? Jennifer Dusdal zeigt, welche Organisationen Wissenschaft produzieren und wie sich ihre Ziele, Aufgaben und Arten von Forschung unterscheiden. Sie hat Zeitschriftenartikel aus den Natur- und Technikwissenschaften sowie der Medizin untersucht, die zwischen 1900 und 2010 publiziert wurden. So wird deutlich, dass die Universität die wichtigste Wissenschaft produzierende Organisationsform geblieben ist und die wissenschaftliche Produktivität aufgrund gestiegener Forschungskooperationen exponentiell gewachsen ist. Für diese Arbeit erhielt die Autorin 2018 den Ulrich-Teichler-Preis für herausragende Dissertationen der Gesellschaft für Hochschulforschung.
The Century of Science: The Global Triumph of the Research University, Sep 2017
In The Century of Science — edited by Justin J.W. Powell, David P. Baker, and Frank Fernandez — a... more In The Century of Science — edited by Justin J.W. Powell, David P. Baker, and Frank Fernandez — a multicultural, international team of authors examines the global rise of scholarly research in science, technology, engineering, mathematics, and health (STEM+) fields. At the beginning of the 20th century, the global center-point of scientific productivity was about half way between Western Europe and the U.S., in the North Atlantic. Then, the center moved steadily westward and slightly southward—reflecting the burgeoning science capacity of the U.S. supported by America’s thriving public and private universities, technological innovation, and overall economic growth. After WWII, this began to change as the course of the world’s scientific center of gravity turned and for the next 70 years traveled eastward, the direction it still travels, especially due to the rise of China and other prolific East Asian countries, such as Japan, Taiwan, and South Korea. Europe continues to be the center of global science. Focusing on these developments, this volume provides historical and sociological understandings of the ways that higher education has become an institution that, more than ever before, shapes science and society. Case studies, supported by the most historically and spatially extensive database on STEM+ publications available, of selected countries in Europe, North America, East Asia, and the Middle East, emphasize recurring themes: the institutionalization and differentiation of higher education systems to the proliferation of university-based scientific research fostered by research policies that support continued university expansion leading to the knowledge society. Growing worldwide, research universities appear to be the most legitimate sites for knowledge production.
Countries like France, Germany, the United Kingdom, the United States, and Japan began the 20th century with prerequisites in place to realize the emerging model of university-based research. Over the past several decades, China, South Korea, and Taiwan, with different historical legacies and conflicts in education and research policy, have witnessed explosive growth, sustained by public and private funds. Qatar recently embarked on an ambitious government-driven effort to develop a world-class university sector and cultivate academic STEM+ research from scratch. These more recent entrants to the global scientific enterprise pose the question whether it is possible to leapfrog across decades, or even centuries, of cultivating university systems, to compete globally. Simultaneously with international and regional competition, world-leading science increasingly implies collaboration across cultural and political borders as global scientific production and networking continue to rise exponentially.
This volume’s case studies offer new insights into how countries develop the university-based knowledge thought fundamental to meeting social needs and economic demands. Despite repeated warnings that universities would lose in relevance to other organizational forms in the production of knowledge, our findings demonstrate incontrovertibly that universities have become more—not less—important actors in the world of knowledge. The past hundred years have seen the global triumph of the research university.
Eine erste Befragung in allen öffentlich geförderten Begabtenförderwerken 2008 zeigte, dass häufi... more Eine erste Befragung in allen öffentlich geförderten Begabtenförderwerken 2008 zeigte, dass häufig diejenigen Stipendien erhalten, deren Eltern bereits studiert haben. Das Anliegen der Hans-Böckler-Stiftung hingegen ist es, Chancengleichheit in der Bildung unabhängig von der sozialen Herkunft und den finanziellen Möglichkeiten zu schaffen. Um einen Einblick in die Studiensituation und soziale Lage der eigenen Stipendiatinnen und Stipendiaten zu erhalten, wurden im Wintersemester 2010/11 alle Geförderten befragt. Hierbei zeigt sich, dass in der Hans-Böckler-Stiftung besonders viele Stipendiatinnen und Stipendiaten gefördert werden, die keine akademische Vorerfahrung in der Familie haben. Gleichzeitig scheint sich die soziale Herkunft kaum auf die Bewertung der eigenen Studiensituation auszuwirken. Durch spezielle Aufnahmeverfahren und die primäre Förderung von (ehemaligen) Ar-beitnehmerinnen und Arbeitnehmern zeigen die Ergebnisse der Befragung, dass es möglich ist, Begabtenförderung und Bildungsaufstieg zu verbinden.
Rapport national sur l'éducation au Luxembourg 2018, 2018
Cette contribution compare le système d’enseignement supérieur et scientifique luxembourgeois ave... more Cette contribution compare le système d’enseignement supérieur et scientifique luxembourgeois avec celui de trois autres États membres de l’Union européenne : l’Allemagne, la France et la Belgique. La production scientifique est mesurée à l’aide d’articles de revues scientifiques à comité de lecture tirés du Web of Science Citation Index Expanded (SCIE) fourni par Thomson Reuters (aujourd’hui Clarivate Analytics).
Dieser Beitrag vergleicht das luxemburgische Hochschul- und Wissenschaftssystem mit drei weiteren... more Dieser Beitrag vergleicht das luxemburgische Hochschul- und Wissenschaftssystem mit drei weiteren Mitgliedsstaaten der Europäischen Union – Deutschland, Frankreich und Belgien. Gemessen wird der wissenschaftliche Output anhand wissenschaftlicher peer-reviewed Zeitschriftenbeiträge aus dem von Thomson Reuters (jetzt: Clarivate Analytics) bereitgestellten Web of Science Citation Index Expanded (SCIE).
The Century of Science: The Worldwide Triumph of the Research University, 2017
Purpose: Growth in scientific production and productivity over the 20th century resulted signific... more Purpose: Growth in scientific production and productivity over the 20th century resulted significantly from three major countries in European science France, Germany, and the United Kingdom. Charting the development of universities and research institutes that bolster Europe’s key position in global science, we uncover both stable and dynamic patterns of productivity in the fields of STEM, including health, over the 20th century. Ongoing international- ization of higher education and science has been accompanied by increasing competition and collaboration. Despite policy goals to foster innovation and expand research capacity, policies cannot fully account for the differential growth of scientific productivity we chart from 1975 to 2010.
Approach and Research Design: Our sociological neo-institutional framework facilitates explanation of differences in institutional settings, organizational forms, and organizations that produce the most European research. We measure growth of published peer-reviewed articles indexed in Thomson Reuters’ Science Citation Index Expanded (SCIE).
Findings: Organizational forms vary in their contributions, with universi- ties accounting for nearly half but rising in France; ultrastable in Germany at four-fifths, and growing at around two-thirds in the United Kingdom. Differing institutionalization pathways created the conditions necessary for continuous, but varying growth in scientific production and productivity in the European center of global science. The research university is key in all three countries, and we identify organizations leading in research output.
Originality/value: Few studies explicitly compare across time, space, and different levels of analysis. We show how important European science has been to overall global science production and productivity. In-depth compari- sons, especially the organizational fields and forms in which science is pro- duced, are crucial if policy is to support research and development.
Theory and Method in Higher Education Research,, 2021
Informed by multiple disciplines, theories, and methods, higher education scholars have developed... more Informed by multiple disciplines, theories, and methods, higher education scholars have developed a robust and diverse literature in many countries. Yet, some important (organizational) sociological perspectives, both more established and more recent, are insufficiently linked. In particular, we identify two theoretical strandsinstitutional and relationalthat, when joined, help to explain contemporary developments in global higher education and yield new organizational insights. We review relevant literature from each perspective, both in their general formulations and with specific reference to contemporary higher education research. Within the broad institutional strand, we highlight strategic action fields, organizational actorhood, and associational memberships. Within the relational strand, we focus on ties and relationships that are especially crucial as science has entered an age of (inter)national research collaboration. Across these theories, we discuss linkages between concepts, objects, and levels of analysis. We explore the methodological approach of social network analysis as it offers great potential to connect these strands and, thus, to advance contemporary higher education research in a collaborative era.
Contemporary science is marked by expanding and diverse forms of teamwork. Collaboration across o... more Contemporary science is marked by expanding and diverse forms of teamwork. Collaboration across organizational and cultural boundaries extends the possibilities of discovery. International collaborative research projects often provide findings beyond what one team could achieve alone. Motivated to maintain existing relationships and grow their scientific network, researchers increasingly collaborate, despite often unrecognized or underappreciated costs, since such projects are challenging to manage and carry out. Rarely studied in-depth and longitudinally, the perspectives of scientific team members are crucial to better understand the dynamics of durable collaboration networks. Thus, this retrospective case study of a sociology of science project applies the novel method of autoethnography to examine teamwork benefits, motivations, and challenges. Key challenges found include spatial distance and differences of culture, language, and career stage. This study, spanning North America, Europe, the Middle East, and East Asia, focused on col-laborators' characteristics and evolving perceptions of team dynamics over a decade.
Minerva. A Review of Science, Learning and Policy, 2020
The world’s third largest producer of scientific research, Germany, is the origin of the research... more The world’s third largest producer of scientific research, Germany, is the origin of the research university and the independent, extra-university research institute. Its dual-pillar research policy differentiates these organizational forms functionally: universities specialize in advanced research-based teaching; institutes specialize intensely on research. Over the past decades this policy affected each sec- tor differently: while universities suffered a lingering “legitimation crisis,” institutes enjoyed deepening “favored sponsorship”—financial and reputational advantages. Universities led the nation’s reestablishment of scientific prominence among the highly competitive European and global science systems after WWII. But secto- ral analysis of contributions to science, technology, engineering, mathematics, and medical and health journal publications (1950–2010) finds that Germany’s small to medium-sized independent research institutes have made significant, growing contributions, particularly in publishing in higher impact journals proportionally more than their size. Simultaneously—despite dual-pillar policy implications—the university sector continues to be absolutely and relatively successful; not eclipsed by the institutes. Universities have consistently produced two-thirds of the nation’s publications in the highest quality journals since at least 1980 and have increased publications at a logarithmic rate; higher than the international mean. Indeed, they led Germany into the global mega-science style of production. Contrary to assumed benefits of functional differentiation, our results indicate that relative to their size, each sector has produced approximately similar publication records. While institutes have succeeded, the larger university sector, despite much less funding growth, has remained fundamental to German science production. Considering these findings, we discuss the future utility of the dual-pillar policy.
Charting significant growth in science production over the 20th century in
four European Union me... more Charting significant growth in science production over the 20th century in four European Union member states, this neo-institutional analysis describes the development and current state of universities and research institutes that bolster Europe’s position as a key region in global science. On-going internationalization and Europeanization of higher education and science has been accompanied by increasing competition as well as collaboration. Despite the policy goals to foster innovation and further expand research capacity, in cross-national and historical comparison neither the level of R&D investments nor country size accounts completely for the differential growth of scientific productivity. Based on a comprehensive historical database from 1900 to 2010, this analysis uncovers both stable and dynamic patterns of production and productivity in Germany, France, Belgium, and Luxembourg. Measured in peer-reviewed research articles collected in Thomson Reuters’ Science Citation Index Expanded, which includes journals in the fields of Science, Technology, Engineering, Mathematics, and Health, we show the varying contributions of different organizational forms, especially research universities and research institutes. Comparing the institutionalization pathways that created the conditions necessary for continuous and strong growth in scientific productivity in the European center of global science emphasizes that the research university is the key organizational form across countries.
Wie haben die Institutionen des deutschen Hochschul- und Wissenschaftssystems die Entwicklung wis... more Wie haben die Institutionen des deutschen Hochschul- und Wissenschaftssystems die Entwicklung wissenschaftlicher Produktivität beeinflusst? Jennifer Dusdal zeigt, welche Organisationen Wissenschaft produzieren und wie sich ihre Ziele, Aufgaben und Arten von Forschung unterscheiden. Sie hat Zeitschriftenartikel aus den Natur- und Technikwissenschaften sowie der Medizin untersucht, die zwischen 1900 und 2010 publiziert wurden. So wird deutlich, dass die Universität die wichtigste Wissenschaft produzierende Organisationsform geblieben ist und die wissenschaftliche Produktivität aufgrund gestiegener Forschungskooperationen exponentiell gewachsen ist. Für diese Arbeit erhielt die Autorin 2018 den Ulrich-Teichler-Preis für herausragende Dissertationen der Gesellschaft für Hochschulforschung.
The Century of Science: The Global Triumph of the Research University, Sep 2017
In The Century of Science — edited by Justin J.W. Powell, David P. Baker, and Frank Fernandez — a... more In The Century of Science — edited by Justin J.W. Powell, David P. Baker, and Frank Fernandez — a multicultural, international team of authors examines the global rise of scholarly research in science, technology, engineering, mathematics, and health (STEM+) fields. At the beginning of the 20th century, the global center-point of scientific productivity was about half way between Western Europe and the U.S., in the North Atlantic. Then, the center moved steadily westward and slightly southward—reflecting the burgeoning science capacity of the U.S. supported by America’s thriving public and private universities, technological innovation, and overall economic growth. After WWII, this began to change as the course of the world’s scientific center of gravity turned and for the next 70 years traveled eastward, the direction it still travels, especially due to the rise of China and other prolific East Asian countries, such as Japan, Taiwan, and South Korea. Europe continues to be the center of global science. Focusing on these developments, this volume provides historical and sociological understandings of the ways that higher education has become an institution that, more than ever before, shapes science and society. Case studies, supported by the most historically and spatially extensive database on STEM+ publications available, of selected countries in Europe, North America, East Asia, and the Middle East, emphasize recurring themes: the institutionalization and differentiation of higher education systems to the proliferation of university-based scientific research fostered by research policies that support continued university expansion leading to the knowledge society. Growing worldwide, research universities appear to be the most legitimate sites for knowledge production.
Countries like France, Germany, the United Kingdom, the United States, and Japan began the 20th century with prerequisites in place to realize the emerging model of university-based research. Over the past several decades, China, South Korea, and Taiwan, with different historical legacies and conflicts in education and research policy, have witnessed explosive growth, sustained by public and private funds. Qatar recently embarked on an ambitious government-driven effort to develop a world-class university sector and cultivate academic STEM+ research from scratch. These more recent entrants to the global scientific enterprise pose the question whether it is possible to leapfrog across decades, or even centuries, of cultivating university systems, to compete globally. Simultaneously with international and regional competition, world-leading science increasingly implies collaboration across cultural and political borders as global scientific production and networking continue to rise exponentially.
This volume’s case studies offer new insights into how countries develop the university-based knowledge thought fundamental to meeting social needs and economic demands. Despite repeated warnings that universities would lose in relevance to other organizational forms in the production of knowledge, our findings demonstrate incontrovertibly that universities have become more—not less—important actors in the world of knowledge. The past hundred years have seen the global triumph of the research university.
Eine erste Befragung in allen öffentlich geförderten Begabtenförderwerken 2008 zeigte, dass häufi... more Eine erste Befragung in allen öffentlich geförderten Begabtenförderwerken 2008 zeigte, dass häufig diejenigen Stipendien erhalten, deren Eltern bereits studiert haben. Das Anliegen der Hans-Böckler-Stiftung hingegen ist es, Chancengleichheit in der Bildung unabhängig von der sozialen Herkunft und den finanziellen Möglichkeiten zu schaffen. Um einen Einblick in die Studiensituation und soziale Lage der eigenen Stipendiatinnen und Stipendiaten zu erhalten, wurden im Wintersemester 2010/11 alle Geförderten befragt. Hierbei zeigt sich, dass in der Hans-Böckler-Stiftung besonders viele Stipendiatinnen und Stipendiaten gefördert werden, die keine akademische Vorerfahrung in der Familie haben. Gleichzeitig scheint sich die soziale Herkunft kaum auf die Bewertung der eigenen Studiensituation auszuwirken. Durch spezielle Aufnahmeverfahren und die primäre Förderung von (ehemaligen) Ar-beitnehmerinnen und Arbeitnehmern zeigen die Ergebnisse der Befragung, dass es möglich ist, Begabtenförderung und Bildungsaufstieg zu verbinden.
Rapport national sur l'éducation au Luxembourg 2018, 2018
Cette contribution compare le système d’enseignement supérieur et scientifique luxembourgeois ave... more Cette contribution compare le système d’enseignement supérieur et scientifique luxembourgeois avec celui de trois autres États membres de l’Union européenne : l’Allemagne, la France et la Belgique. La production scientifique est mesurée à l’aide d’articles de revues scientifiques à comité de lecture tirés du Web of Science Citation Index Expanded (SCIE) fourni par Thomson Reuters (aujourd’hui Clarivate Analytics).
Dieser Beitrag vergleicht das luxemburgische Hochschul- und Wissenschaftssystem mit drei weiteren... more Dieser Beitrag vergleicht das luxemburgische Hochschul- und Wissenschaftssystem mit drei weiteren Mitgliedsstaaten der Europäischen Union – Deutschland, Frankreich und Belgien. Gemessen wird der wissenschaftliche Output anhand wissenschaftlicher peer-reviewed Zeitschriftenbeiträge aus dem von Thomson Reuters (jetzt: Clarivate Analytics) bereitgestellten Web of Science Citation Index Expanded (SCIE).
The Century of Science: The Worldwide Triumph of the Research University, 2017
Purpose: Growth in scientific production and productivity over the 20th century resulted signific... more Purpose: Growth in scientific production and productivity over the 20th century resulted significantly from three major countries in European science France, Germany, and the United Kingdom. Charting the development of universities and research institutes that bolster Europe’s key position in global science, we uncover both stable and dynamic patterns of productivity in the fields of STEM, including health, over the 20th century. Ongoing international- ization of higher education and science has been accompanied by increasing competition and collaboration. Despite policy goals to foster innovation and expand research capacity, policies cannot fully account for the differential growth of scientific productivity we chart from 1975 to 2010.
Approach and Research Design: Our sociological neo-institutional framework facilitates explanation of differences in institutional settings, organizational forms, and organizations that produce the most European research. We measure growth of published peer-reviewed articles indexed in Thomson Reuters’ Science Citation Index Expanded (SCIE).
Findings: Organizational forms vary in their contributions, with universi- ties accounting for nearly half but rising in France; ultrastable in Germany at four-fifths, and growing at around two-thirds in the United Kingdom. Differing institutionalization pathways created the conditions necessary for continuous, but varying growth in scientific production and productivity in the European center of global science. The research university is key in all three countries, and we identify organizations leading in research output.
Originality/value: Few studies explicitly compare across time, space, and different levels of analysis. We show how important European science has been to overall global science production and productivity. In-depth compari- sons, especially the organizational fields and forms in which science is pro- duced, are crucial if policy is to support research and development.
This chapter provides an overview of the findings and chapters of a thematic volume in the Intern... more This chapter provides an overview of the findings and chapters of a thematic volume in the International Perspectives on Education and Society (IPES) series. It describes the common dataset and methods used by an international research team. The chapter synthesizes the results of a series of country-level case studies and cross-national and regional comparisons on the growth of scientific research from 1900 until 2011. Additionally, the chapter provides a quantitative analysis of global trends in scientific, peer-reviewed publishing over the same period.
Research universities have so far defied cuts to funding and competition from industry to maintai... more Research universities have so far defied cuts to funding and competition from industry to maintain their dominance in the production of scientific knowledge, but will that continue into the future? Justin Powell and Jennifer Dusdal were part of an award-winning project, of unprecedented scope, which set out to answer that question.
This research was supported by the Qatar National Research Fund. The findings are published as “The Century of Science: The Global Triumph of the Research University”, part of the International Perspectives in Education and Society series.
Komplexe Dynamiken globaler und lokaler Entwicklungen: Der Verhandlungsband des 39. Kongresses der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Soziologie vom 24.-28. September 2018 an der Georg-August-Universität Göttingen, 2019
Dieser Beitrag rekonstruiert den Einfluss der Hochschulentwicklung und der wissenschaftlichen Kap... more Dieser Beitrag rekonstruiert den Einfluss der Hochschulentwicklung und der wissenschaftlichen Kapazitätsbildung auf die wissenschaftliche Wissensproduktion in Deutschland, einem der weltweit stärksten Produzenten wissenschaftlichen Wissen seit 1900. Folgende Forschungsfragen sollen beantwortet werden: Wie haben institutionalisierte Strukturen, und darin verschiedene Organisationsformen, die langfristige Entwicklung wissenschaftlicher Produktivität beeinflusst und verändert? In welchen organisationalen Netzwerken entwickelt sich aktuell die Wissenschaft weiter? Die Annäherung an den Forschungsgegenstand erfolgt auf der Makroebene anhand von Indikatoren zur Erfassung der globalen Expansion, Kooperation und Produktion der Wissenschaft. Vor dem Hintergrund dieses Untersuchungsrahmens wird dann auf der Mesoebene das Zusammenspiel von Organisationsformen in Deutschland mittels netzwerkanalytischer Verfahren betrachtet. Ziel des Beitrags ist, die Orte und institutionellen Settings wissenschaftlicher Produktion zu identifizieren und anhand ihrer Aufgaben und Ziele voneinander abzugrenzen sowie ihre Beziehungen zueinander herauszuarbeiten. Als theoretische Basis werden neo-institutionalistische Ansätze zur Untersuchung und Erklärung der Expansion des Hochschulwesens und der Wissenschaft und zur Analyse von organisationalen Netzwerken herangezogen. Grundlage der empirischen Analyse bilden Publikationen in peer-reviewed Zeitschriften als Kennzeichen wissenschaftlicher Produktion.
Over the last century, we observe a steady and exponential growth of scientific publications glob... more Over the last century, we observe a steady and exponential growth of scientific publications globally. The overwhelming amount of available literature makes a holistic analysis of the research within a field and between fields based on manual inspection impossible. Automatic techniques to support the process of literature review are required to find the epistemic and social patterns that are embedded in scientific publications. In computer sciences, new tools have been developed to deal with large volumes of data. In particular, deep learning techniques open the possibility of automated end-to-end models to project observations to a new, low-dimensional space where the most relevant information of each observation is highlighted. Using deep learning to build new representations of scientific publications is a growing but still emerging field of research. The aim of this paper is to discuss the potential and limits of deep learning for gathering insights about scientific research articles. We focus on document-level embeddings based on the semantic and relational aspects of articles, using Natural Language Processing (NLP) and Graph Neural Networks (GNNs). We explore the different outcomes generated by those techniques. Our results show that using NLP we can encode a semantic space of articles, while GNN we enable us to build a relational space where the social practices of a research community are also encoded.
Uploads
four European Union member states, this neo-institutional analysis describes the development and current state of universities and research institutes that bolster Europe’s position as a key region in global science. On-going internationalization and Europeanization of higher education and science has been accompanied by increasing competition as well as collaboration. Despite the policy goals to foster innovation and further expand research capacity, in cross-national and historical comparison neither the level of R&D investments nor country size accounts completely
for the differential growth of scientific productivity. Based on a comprehensive historical database from 1900 to 2010, this analysis uncovers both stable and dynamic patterns of production and productivity in Germany, France, Belgium, and Luxembourg. Measured in peer-reviewed research articles collected in Thomson Reuters’ Science Citation Index Expanded, which includes journals in the fields of Science, Technology, Engineering, Mathematics, and Health, we show the varying contributions of different organizational forms, especially research universities and research institutes. Comparing the institutionalization pathways that created the conditions necessary for continuous and strong growth in scientific productivity in the European center of global science emphasizes that the research university is the key organizational form across countries.
produzieren und wie sich ihre Ziele, Aufgaben und Arten von Forschung unterscheiden. Sie hat Zeitschriftenartikel aus den Natur- und Technikwissenschaften sowie der Medizin untersucht, die zwischen 1900 und 2010 publiziert wurden. So wird deutlich, dass die Universität die wichtigste Wissenschaft produzierende Organisationsform geblieben ist und die wissenschaftliche Produktivität aufgrund gestiegener Forschungskooperationen exponentiell gewachsen ist.
Für diese Arbeit erhielt die Autorin 2018 den Ulrich-Teichler-Preis für herausragende Dissertationen der Gesellschaft für Hochschulforschung.
Countries like France, Germany, the United Kingdom, the United States, and Japan began the 20th century with prerequisites in place to realize the emerging model of university-based research. Over the past several decades, China, South Korea, and Taiwan, with different historical legacies and conflicts in education and research policy, have witnessed explosive growth, sustained by public and private funds. Qatar recently embarked on an ambitious government-driven effort to develop a world-class university sector and cultivate academic STEM+ research from scratch. These more recent entrants to the global scientific enterprise pose the question whether it is possible to leapfrog across decades, or even centuries, of cultivating university systems, to compete globally. Simultaneously with international and regional competition, world-leading science increasingly implies collaboration across cultural and political borders as global scientific production and networking continue to rise exponentially.
This volume’s case studies offer new insights into how countries develop the university-based knowledge thought fundamental to meeting social needs and economic demands. Despite repeated warnings that universities would lose in relevance to other organizational forms in the production of knowledge, our findings demonstrate incontrovertibly that universities have become more—not less—important actors in the world of knowledge. The past hundred years have seen the global triumph of the research university.
Approach and Research Design: Our sociological neo-institutional framework facilitates explanation of differences in institutional settings, organizational forms, and organizations that produce the most European research. We measure growth of published peer-reviewed articles indexed in Thomson Reuters’ Science Citation Index Expanded (SCIE).
Findings: Organizational forms vary in their contributions, with universi- ties accounting for nearly half but rising in France; ultrastable in Germany at four-fifths, and growing at around two-thirds in the United Kingdom. Differing institutionalization pathways created the conditions necessary for continuous, but varying growth in scientific production and productivity in the European center of global science. The research university is key in all three countries, and we identify organizations leading in research output.
Originality/value: Few studies explicitly compare across time, space, and different levels of analysis. We show how important European science has been to overall global science production and productivity. In-depth compari- sons, especially the organizational fields and forms in which science is pro- duced, are crucial if policy is to support research and development.
four European Union member states, this neo-institutional analysis describes the development and current state of universities and research institutes that bolster Europe’s position as a key region in global science. On-going internationalization and Europeanization of higher education and science has been accompanied by increasing competition as well as collaboration. Despite the policy goals to foster innovation and further expand research capacity, in cross-national and historical comparison neither the level of R&D investments nor country size accounts completely
for the differential growth of scientific productivity. Based on a comprehensive historical database from 1900 to 2010, this analysis uncovers both stable and dynamic patterns of production and productivity in Germany, France, Belgium, and Luxembourg. Measured in peer-reviewed research articles collected in Thomson Reuters’ Science Citation Index Expanded, which includes journals in the fields of Science, Technology, Engineering, Mathematics, and Health, we show the varying contributions of different organizational forms, especially research universities and research institutes. Comparing the institutionalization pathways that created the conditions necessary for continuous and strong growth in scientific productivity in the European center of global science emphasizes that the research university is the key organizational form across countries.
produzieren und wie sich ihre Ziele, Aufgaben und Arten von Forschung unterscheiden. Sie hat Zeitschriftenartikel aus den Natur- und Technikwissenschaften sowie der Medizin untersucht, die zwischen 1900 und 2010 publiziert wurden. So wird deutlich, dass die Universität die wichtigste Wissenschaft produzierende Organisationsform geblieben ist und die wissenschaftliche Produktivität aufgrund gestiegener Forschungskooperationen exponentiell gewachsen ist.
Für diese Arbeit erhielt die Autorin 2018 den Ulrich-Teichler-Preis für herausragende Dissertationen der Gesellschaft für Hochschulforschung.
Countries like France, Germany, the United Kingdom, the United States, and Japan began the 20th century with prerequisites in place to realize the emerging model of university-based research. Over the past several decades, China, South Korea, and Taiwan, with different historical legacies and conflicts in education and research policy, have witnessed explosive growth, sustained by public and private funds. Qatar recently embarked on an ambitious government-driven effort to develop a world-class university sector and cultivate academic STEM+ research from scratch. These more recent entrants to the global scientific enterprise pose the question whether it is possible to leapfrog across decades, or even centuries, of cultivating university systems, to compete globally. Simultaneously with international and regional competition, world-leading science increasingly implies collaboration across cultural and political borders as global scientific production and networking continue to rise exponentially.
This volume’s case studies offer new insights into how countries develop the university-based knowledge thought fundamental to meeting social needs and economic demands. Despite repeated warnings that universities would lose in relevance to other organizational forms in the production of knowledge, our findings demonstrate incontrovertibly that universities have become more—not less—important actors in the world of knowledge. The past hundred years have seen the global triumph of the research university.
Approach and Research Design: Our sociological neo-institutional framework facilitates explanation of differences in institutional settings, organizational forms, and organizations that produce the most European research. We measure growth of published peer-reviewed articles indexed in Thomson Reuters’ Science Citation Index Expanded (SCIE).
Findings: Organizational forms vary in their contributions, with universi- ties accounting for nearly half but rising in France; ultrastable in Germany at four-fifths, and growing at around two-thirds in the United Kingdom. Differing institutionalization pathways created the conditions necessary for continuous, but varying growth in scientific production and productivity in the European center of global science. The research university is key in all three countries, and we identify organizations leading in research output.
Originality/value: Few studies explicitly compare across time, space, and different levels of analysis. We show how important European science has been to overall global science production and productivity. In-depth compari- sons, especially the organizational fields and forms in which science is pro- duced, are crucial if policy is to support research and development.
This research was supported by the Qatar National Research Fund. The findings are published as “The Century of Science: The Global Triumph of the Research University”, part of the International Perspectives in Education and Society series.