Interdisciplinarity master programs in Greek universities: Οrganization and cognitive conditions


Published: Dec 21, 2018
Keywords:
University Masters interdisciplinarity organization cognitive conditions
Georgios Stamelos
Georgios Aggelopoulos
Abstract

This paper focuses on the development of interdisciplinarity
in the Master’s programs in Greek universities. For our analysis, we searched for tools from the Sociology of Organisations (Mayntz) and the Sociology of Science (Whitley). We argue that the University and its key
actors have adopted interdisciplinarity, firstly, as a means to increase institutional funding, and secondly, with care so as not to disturb the
internal institutional structure and the power relations between the key actors in the University. Indeed, on the one hand, universities, responding to the public calls for interdisciplinary programs, took advantage of the European support program for Greece in order to enrich their infrastructures. On the other hand, the new structures and functions (interdisciplinary Master’s programs) remain loose and weak. So the central role of the Department and laboratories remains intact. As a consequence, the internal relations of the institutional actors are protected. Thus, interdisciplinarity seems to be a low priority issue. However, it is interesting to consider that more than 10 years after the
end of European funding, the majority of these programs remains active.

Article Details
  • Section
  • Articles
Downloads
Download data is not yet available.
References
Apostoli S. (2006), The Master Programs in Greek Universities, Athens: ELIAMEP. http://www. eliamep.gr/wp-content/uploads/2008/07/metaptyxiaka_ch22.pdf last accessed 25 May 2015.
Bourdieu P. (1991), "The Peculiar History of Scientific Reason", Sociological Forum, 6(1), pp.3-26.
Braun D. (1998), "The role of funding agencies in the cognitive development of science’, Research Policy, 27, pp. 807-821.
Child, J., 1972, ‘Organization Structure and Strategies of control: A Replication of the Aston Study", Administrative Science Quarterly, 17(2), pp. 163-178.
Collins R. (1975), Conflict Sociology. Toward an Explanatory Science, New York: Academic Press.
Denzin N. (1994), "Triangulation", in Denzin N. & Lincoln Y.S. (eds) Handbook of Qualitative Research, California: Thousand Oaks.
DiMaggio P.J. & Powell W.W. (1983), "The Iron Cage Revisited: Institutional Isomorphism and Collective Rationality in Organizational Fields", American Sociological Review, vol. 48, pp.147-60.
Fuchs S. (1993), "A Sociological Theory of Scientific Change", Social Forces, 71(4), pp. 933-953.
Hagstrom W.O. (1974), "Competition in Science", American Sociological Review, vol. 39, pp. 1-18.
Hohn Hans-Willy. (1998), Kognitive Strukturen und Organisationsprobleme der Forshung.
Kernphysik und Informatik im Vergleich, Frankfurt am Main, New York: Campus.
Klein J.T. (1990), Interdisciplinarity. History, Theory & Practice, Michigan: Wayne State University Press.
Kuhn T. (1981), The structure of scientific revolutions,introduction-translation, V. Kalfas, Thessaloniki: Modern Issues.
Lengwiler M. (2006), "Between Charisma and Heuristics: Four Styles of interdisciplinarity", Science and Public Policy, 33(6), pp. 423-434.
Mayntz R. (1985), Forschungsmanagement-Steuerungsversuche zwischen Scylla und Charybdis: Probleme der Organisation und Leitung von hochschulfreien, oeffentlich finanzierten Forschungsinstituten, Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag.
Merton R. (1968), "The Matthew Effect in Science", Science, 159 (3810), pp. 56-63.
Sillince J.A.A. & Brown A.D. (2009), "Multiple Organizational Identities and Legitimacy: The Rhetoric of Police Websites", Human Relations, 62(12), pp. 1829-1856.
Schummer J. (2004), "Multidisciplinarity, Interdisciplinarity and Patterns of Research collaboration in Nanoscience and Nanotechnology", Scientometrics, 59(3), pp. 425-465.
Whitley R. (2006), The Intellectual and Social Organization of the Sciences, New York: Oxford University Press.
Most read articles by the same author(s)