The Socio-Political Construction of a European Census of Higher Education Institutions: Design, Methodological and Comparability Issues

This paper reports on an experiment concerning the social construction of statistical definitions, where the first census of Higher Education Institutions in Europe has been developed. It conceptualizes the construction of indicators as a social process of definitions and boundaries’ negotiation, involving value judgments, social and political opinions, as well as practical interests and power strategies of actors. The paper exemplifies this process on three issues, namely the social demand for establishing a census, the controversy concerning the definition of a perimeter as well as the selection of indicators, and the nature of comparability judgments. We first conclude that the socio-political dimension has to be explicitly taken into account when designing statistical systems; second, that social scientists involved in this process need to openly recognize the conflicts around the definition of indicators; third, that the objectified and taken for granted status of indicators makes them a powerful instrument to influence policy decisions and, that indicator designers need to make their own value judgments and interests fully transparent.

[1]  Susan Leigh Star,et al.  Sorting Things Out: Classification and Its Consequences , 1999 .

[2]  B. Clark,et al.  The higher education system : academic organization in cross-national perspective , 1984 .

[3]  L. Karpik.  L'économie des singularités , 2007 .

[4]  Henk F. Moed,et al.  Handbook of Quantitative Science and Technology Research , 2005 .

[5]  H. Simon.  Bounded Rationality and Organizational Learning , 1991 .

[6]  Cláudia S. Sarrico,et al.  The European university landscape: A micro characterization based on evidence from the Aquameth project , 2011 .

[7]  M. Ruef,et al.  The Emergence of Organizational Forms: A Community Ecology Approach1 , 2000, American Journal of Sociology.

[8]  Svein Kyvik,et al.  Research in the non-university higher education sector – tensions and dilemmas , 2003 .

[9]  M. McCloskey,et al.  Natural categories: Well defined or fuzzy sets? , 1978 .

[10]  Ewan Ferlie,et al.  The steering of higher education systems: a public management perspective , 2008 .

[11]  F. Vught.  Mapping the Higher Education Landscape; Towards a European Classification of Higher Education , 2009 .

[12]  Jochen Gläser,et al.  The Changing Governance of the Sciences , 2007 .

[13]  N. Azoulay.  Lucien Karpik, L’économie des singularités, Nrf – Gallimard, 2007. , 2008 .

[14]  Alexandre Mallard.  Compare, Standardize and Settle Agreement , 1998 .

[15]  Alan Dunnett,et al.  Tensions and Dilemmas , 2013 .

[16]  B. Jongbloed.  Creating Public-Private Dynamics in Higher Education Funding: A Discussion of Three Options , 2007, Public-Private Dynamics in Higher Education.

[17]  Benedetto Lepori,et al.  New public management, network governance and the university as a changing professional organization , 2011 .

[18]  Cinzia Daraio,et al.  Indicators on individual higher education institutions: addressing data problems and comparability issues , 2007 .

[19]  Linda Derksen,et al.  Towards a Sociology of Measurement: , 2000 .

[20]  Stefan Kuhlmann,et al.  Future governance of innovation policy in Europe — three scenarios , 2001 .

[21]  Benedetto Lepori,et al.  New perspectives and challenges for the design and production of S&T indicators , 2008 .

[22]  Petter Grytten Almklov.  Standardized Data and Singular Situations , 2008 .

[23]  Laurent Thévenot,et al.  Les catégories socioprofessionnelles , 1988 .

[24]  B. Lemoine.  Alain Desrosières, L'Argument statistique. Pour une sociologie historique de la quantification (tome I) et Gouverner par les nombres (tome II). Paris, Presses de l'école des Mines, 2008 , 2009 .

[25]  L. Thevenot,et al.  Organized Complexity , 2001 .

[26]  P. Weingart,et al.  Elite Through Rankings – The Emergence Of the Enterprising University , 2007 .

[27]  Benoait Godin,et al.  Measurement and statistics on science and technology , 2004 .

[28]  Kerstin Sahlin-Andersson,et al.  Constructing Organizations: The Example of Public Sector Reform , 2000 .

[29]  F. V. Vught.  Mapping the Higher Education Landscape , 2009 .

[30]  P. Weingart.  Scientific expertise and political accountability: paradoxes of science in politics , 1999 .

[31]  Svein Kyvik,et al.  Structural changes in higher education systems in Western Europe , 2004 .

[32]  Catherine Paradeise,et al.  University governance : Western European comparative perspectives , 2009 .

[33]  M. Stevens,et al.  COMMENSURATION AS A SOCIAL PROCESS , 1998 .

[34]  Rebecca H. Bryant,et al.  Discovery and Decision:: Exploring the Metaphysics and Epistemology of Scientific Classification , 2000 .

[35]  Y. Barzel,et al.  Measurement Cost and the Organization of Markets , 1982, The Journal of Law and Economics.

[36]  P. Berger,et al.  Social Construction of Reality , 1991, The SAGE International Encyclopedia of Mass Media and Society.

[37]  Alain Desrosières.  La politique des grands nombres , 2010 .

[38]  D. Medin,et al.  The role of theories in conceptual coherence. , 1985, Psychological review.

[39]  Richard Whitley,et al.  The Changing Governance of the Sciences : The Advent of Research Evaluation Systems , 2007 .

[40]  S. Jasanoff.  States of Knowledge: The Co-production of Science and the Social Order , 2004 .

[41]  B. Clark,et al.  The Higher Education System , 2023 .

[42]  H. White,et al.  Where do markets come from , 1981 .

[43]  Magnus Holmén,et al.  Learning to Compete in European Universities , 2009 .

[44]  Nils Brunsson,et al.  A World of Standards , 2000 .

[45]  John Dupré.  The Disorder of Things , 1993 .

[46]  B. Schutt.  Sorting things out. , 1970, The American journal of nursing.

[47]  Maureen McKelvey,et al.  What Does it Mean Conceptually that Universities Compete , 2009 .

[48]  B. Latour,et al.  Laboratory Life: The Construction of Scientific Facts , 1979 .

[49]  Alain Desrosières,et al.  Gouverner par les nombres : L’argument statistique II , 2008 .

[50]  R. Barré,et al.  S&T Indicators for Policy Making in a Changing Science-Society Relationship , 2004 .

[51]  S. Kyvik,et al.  Research in Higher Education Institutions Outside the University Sector , 2010 .

[52]  Alain Desrosières,et al.  Gouverner par les nombres , 2008 .

[53]  A. Desrosières.  La politique des grands nombres : histoire de la raison statistique , 2000 .

[54]  P. Bourdieu.  Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgement of Taste* , 2018, Food and Culture.

[55]  Benoît Godin,et al.  The emergence of S&T indicators: why did governments supplement statistics with indicators? , 2003 .

[56]  Grant Blank,et al.  Critics, Ratings, and Society: The Sociology of Reviews , 2006 .

[57]  Cinzia Daraio,et al.  The differentiation of the strategic profile of higher education institutions. New positioning indicators based on microdata , 2008, Scientometrics.

[58]  Rohit Parikh,et al.  States of Knowledge , 2002, WoLLIC.

[59]  Alexander C. McCormick,et al.  Rethinking and reframing the carnegie classification , 2005 .

[60]  B. Jongbloed,et al.  Markets in Higher Education. Rhetoric or Reality , 2004 .

[61]  Franciscus Kaiser,et al.  Markets in Higher Education , 1998 .