set forth three foci: the content we teach, the training we need to teach effectively, and the con-texts in which we teach. Each topic became a task group that worked mightily to produce materials and offer workshops. It is the third topic that remains the least developed yet the most sociological. "To a significant-indeed crucial-degree, the teacher's performance, behavior and orientation are the products of contextual forces and conditions. Teacher performance and teaching process can be viewed as dependent variables, and the institutional, disciplinary, and societal forces as independent variables" (Mauksch and Howery 1986:73; see also Goldsmid and Wilson [1980] 1985and McGee 1971. More recently, Kuh and Hu (2001) find that "institutional context [has an effect on] learning productivity." Their study found that different types of institutions had different levels of "student quality of effort, engagement in good prac-This article focuses on how the institutional contexts of colleges and universities shape these "greedy institutions." We look at the current social, political, and economic trends affecting all postsecondary institutions, specifically the forces that encourage "greediness." We examine the literature on structural arenas that influence teaching in higher education, including type of institution and departmental level characteristics, considering how the varied structural features of institutions and departments shape the conditions of academic life and demands placed on faculty. We identify the features of the institutional context that can help faculty manage demands on their time and enhance teaching and learning. The article closes with identification of areas for future inquiry and a challenge to sociologists to contribute to an examination of the contextual forces that shape the work lives of faculty and students.

No abstract

Small class size is often used as an indicator of quality in higher education, and some research suggests that instructors in smaller classes more often use activities that are learner-centered and that involve physical and mental activity on the part of learners, such as group work, simulations, and case studies. However, we have little information on how instructors change their pedagogical practice when they teach in large-versus small-class settings. In this study, we examine alignment between intended and enacted teaching strategies, or initial plans and specific ways in which instructors reported altering their teaching in the context of a university policy shift to smaller classes. Furthermore, we examine instructional challenges in this shift to call attention to professional development needs of small-class teaching and to best leverage the benefits of such activities for student performance and retention.

No abstract

No abstract