Tímarit um menntarannsóknir - 01.01.2008, Blaðsíða 44

42
Tímarit um menntarannsóknir, 5. árgangur 2008
has been teaching and research, if any, has
been of an applied nature. Still, non-university
institutions have tended to become more like the
traditional universities than initially intended.
This tendency is referred to as academic
drift and institutional drift when referring
to institutions (Neave, 1979; Kyvik, 2004;
Jónasson, 2004a). Another type of academic
drift is system drift, a term referring to when
a system changes from being quite different
from the universities to a system that is closer
to a university system (Kyvik, 2004; Jónasson,
2004a). Institutional drift can be manifested
in two ways: 1) activities of non-university
institutions gradually become more like the
activities of universities and greater emphasis
is placed research and degree programs even
though this was not intended in the beginning
(Neave, 1979; Halsey, 1983); 2) former
vocational education offered at a non-university
institution is transferred to universities or new
degree programs are established. Further
examples of institutional drift are that teachers
of non-university institutions use university
titles and can be promoted to higher university
titles based on academic activities such as
academic publications (Gyða Jóhannsdóttir,
2006).
Research results from a Nordic comparative
study where I explored the development of
Nordic higher education systems show that
academic drift occurred in all countries, both
at the system and the institutional levels.
However, the drift occurred at different phases
in the different countries. The development
of Icelandic higher education differs from the
development of the other Nordic countries as
occupational and professional education is
either located within upper secondary education
or within universities. A binary system has not
been established formally, i.e. legally. The
other Nordic countries either currently have a
binary system or have had it in the past (Gyða
Jóhannsdóttir, 2006).
In this article the results of a study carried
out in 2007-2008 are presented. The apparent
lack of an Icelandic binary system was explored
more closely and the main question was
whether a binary system might be expected in
the future?
Method
Scott’s (1995) fivefold typology of the
systems of organization of higher education
in numerous countries was used to classify
the organization of Nordic higher education.
The types are university dominated systems,
dual systems, binary systems, unified systems
and stratified systems. It is presumed here
that Scott’s typology runs on two plans: 1) the
formal plan, referring to formal characteristics
of a system such as legalizations, regulations
and the localization of vocational education
within formal frameworks; and 2) the informal
plan, referring to more informal characteristics
of the systems. The informal plan spans cultural
characteristics and educational-political
differences between the countries.
Five criteria that reflect the main
characteristics of a university are used to
detect academic drift at the institutional
level: research, university degrees, university
titles, promotion systems and a matriculation
examination as a requirement for acceptance
for entrance.
Results
The main results showed that according to
the formal plan of Scott’s typology a formal
legal binary system has not and does not
exist in Iceland. There are secondary schools
and universities. It was not until 1997 that
comprehensive legislation on universities was
passed and eight institutions were granted
university status. All eight institutions adhered
to the legal framework but every institution also
had its own rules and regulations. The general
Act on Universities did not unanimously
stipulate that all institutions carry out research
(one of the main missions of a university)
as they were only supposed to do so if this
was stipulated in the special institutional law.
This has changed and now all universities are
required to carry out research.
Gyða Jóhannsdóttir