The Current State of Research in State and Higher Education System Relationship
| Thesis title in Czech: | Současný stav výzkumu vztahů ve státním vysokoškolském vzdělávacím systému |
|---|---|
| Thesis title in English: | The Current State of Research in State and Higher Education System Relationship |
| Key words: | governance, higher education system, state, systemic governance, government |
| English key words: | governance, higher education system, state, systemic governance, government |
| Academic year of topic announcement: | 2021/2022 |
| Thesis type: | diploma thesis |
| Thesis language: | angličtina |
| Department: | Department of Political Science (23-KP) |
| Supervisor: | prof. Ing. Michal Plaček, Ph.D. |
| Author: | hidden - assigned by the advisor |
| Date of registration: | 05.12.2021 |
| Date of assignment: | 05.12.2021 |
| Date and time of defence: | 20.09.2022 10:15 |
| Venue of defence: | Pekařská 16, JPEK312, 312, Malá učebna, 3.patro |
| Date of electronic submission: | 30.07.2022 |
| Date of proceeded defence: | 20.09.2022 |
| Opponents: | Dr. Mgr. Aleš Vlk |
| URKUND check: | |
| Guidelines |
| According to the FSV UK standards |
| References |
| Chris Middleton (2000) Models of State and Market in the 'Modernisation' of Higher Education, British Journal of Sociology of Education, 21:4, 537-554, DOI: 10.1080/713655369
Maier, F., Meyer, M., & Steinbereithner, M. (2016). Nonprofit Organizations Becoming Business-Like : A Systematic Review. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 64-86. Pahlevan-Sharif, S., Mura, P., & Wijesinghe, S. N. (2019). A systematic review of systematic reviews in tourism. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management, 158-165. Pahlevan-Sharif, S., Mura, P., & Wijesinghe, S. N. (2019). Introducing the “PRISMA” Protocol to Tourism and Hospitality Scholars. In Quantitative Tourism Research in Asia (pp. 13-33). Singapore: Springer. Marek Kwiek (2014) Structural changes in the Polish higher education system (1990–2010): a synthetic view, European Journal of Higher Education, 4:3, 266-280, DOI: 10.1080/21568235.2014.905965 Hans N Weiler (2000) States, Markets and University Funding: New paradigms for the reform of higher education in Europe, Compare: A Journal of Comparative and International Education, 30:3, 333-339, DOI: 10.1080/713657469 |
| Preliminary scope of work |
| Topic characteristics / Research Question(s):
The purpose of the study is to fill the existing gap in the field of higher education governance. There is a lack of systematic and structured literature review of the peer-reviewed articles in periodicals in the area of higher education governance. To be concise, the authors have narrowed it down to systemic governance. The rationale behind focusing on systemic governance is the following – the authors’ objective is to analyze the relationship between state and higher education system. In other words, what is the role of government in the higher education system, how the government intervenes, what are the instruments used by the government to control the higher education sector? Following are the two research questions; 1. What are the different types of systemic governance models/ state governance models/ state-steering models in higher education? 2. What are the public policy instruments applied by the government to steer higher education institutions? Methodology: Through scoping study, the authors found that there has been no systematic literature review conducted before, thus, highlighting the research gap. Therefore, the methodology corresponding to my research questions is Systematic Literature Review (SLR). To conduct a systematic literature review, the authors reviewed the guidelines by Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) was adopted. The purpose of the protocol is to create pre-defined criteria for literature selection so that there is no bias from the authors’ end. Working hypotheses: The methodology adopted for the thesis does not allow for a hypothesis to be included in the research. This is to minimize or avoid the outcome reporting bias which the protocol of systematic literature review does not allow. The authors have not assumed anything about the models of state steering of higher education, or about the instruments applied by the government in the higher education sector. Therefore, there will be no outcome reporting bias in the research. However, for the technical requirements I will list down the hypothesis below. 1. Hypothesis #1: Null: There will be no different types of systemic governance models/ state governance models/ state-steering models in higher education across countries. Alterative: There will be different types of systemic governance models/ state governance models/ state-steering models in higher education across countries. 2. Hypothesis #2: Null: The public policy instruments applied by the government to steer higher education institutions will not differ across countries. Alternative: The public policy instruments applied by the government to steer higher education institutions will differ across countries. Outline: The thesis will start with background about higher education governance, the relationship between government and higher education sector - systemic governance. Consequently, the highlighting the research gap and ways to fill the research gap. Following that the authors will justify the adoption of SLR and the process of implementing SLR in the field of higher education. It will lead towards creating knowledge about different types of systemic governance models/ state governance models/ state-steering models in higher education and different public policy instruments applied by the government to steer higher education institutions. In the end, all the past literature reviewed will be acknowledged in the bibliography section. |
| Preliminary scope of work in English |
| Topic characteristics / Research Question(s):
The purpose of the study is to fill the existing gap in the field of higher education governance. There is a lack of systematic and structured literature review of the peer-reviewed articles in periodicals in the area of higher education governance. To be concise, the authors have narrowed it down to systemic governance. The rationale behind focusing on systemic governance is the following – the authors’ objective is to analyze the relationship between state and higher education system. In other words, what is the role of government in the higher education system, how the government intervenes, what are the instruments used by the government to control the higher education sector? Following are the two research questions; 1. What are the different types of systemic governance models/ state governance models/ state-steering models in higher education? 2. What are the public policy instruments applied by the government to steer higher education institutions? Methodology: Through scoping study, the authors found that there has been no systematic literature review conducted before, thus, highlighting the research gap. Therefore, the methodology corresponding to my research questions is Systematic Literature Review (SLR). To conduct a systematic literature review, the authors reviewed the guidelines by Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) was adopted. The purpose of the protocol is to create pre-defined criteria for literature selection so that there is no bias from the authors’ end. Working hypotheses: The methodology adopted for the thesis does not allow for a hypothesis to be included in the research. This is to minimize or avoid the outcome reporting bias which the protocol of systematic literature review does not allow. The authors have not assumed anything about the models of state steering of higher education, or about the instruments applied by the government in the higher education sector. Therefore, there will be no outcome reporting bias in the research. However, for the technical requirements I will list down the hypothesis below. 1. Hypothesis #1: Null: There will be no different types of systemic governance models/ state governance models/ state-steering models in higher education across countries. Alterative: There will be different types of systemic governance models/ state governance models/ state-steering models in higher education across countries. 2. Hypothesis #2: Null: The public policy instruments applied by the government to steer higher education institutions will not differ across countries. Alternative: The public policy instruments applied by the government to steer higher education institutions will differ across countries. Outline: The thesis will start with background about higher education governance, the relationship between government and higher education sector - systemic governance. Consequently, the highlighting the research gap and ways to fill the research gap. Following that the authors will justify the adoption of SLR and the process of implementing SLR in the field of higher education. It will lead towards creating knowledge about different types of systemic governance models/ state governance models/ state-steering models in higher education and different public policy instruments applied by the government to steer higher education institutions. In the end, all the past literature reviewed will be acknowledged in the bibliography section. |