Exploring higher education governance in Poland and Romania: Re-convergence after divergence?

Abstract

This analysis focuses on changes in higher education governance in Poland and Romania in the post-communist era. The author applies a theoretical framework based on institutional isomorphism and historical institutionalism and maps the policy trajectories of both systems on the basis of three governance ideal-types. The public higher education systems of both countries initially took a markedly different reform path after 1989. Polish higher education by and large returned to its historical model of ‘academic self-rule’ and has resisted pressures for stronger marketization, even during the Bologna Process, while Romania has been characterized by an early and strong isomorphic orientation towards higher education models primarily of Anglo-American inspiration. The main argument of the paper is that – after a period of marked divergence – both systems are visibly ‘re-converging’ towards a new hybrid governance model. The new governance model aims to (re-)embed the research mission of universities to foster homegrown research and innovations. These new hybrid constellations enable both countries to simultaneously deal with global pressures for change and liberate themselves from economic dependence on the West, while not throwing historical institutions entirely overboard.

Faculty perception of shared governance at Vietnamese private universities

“…al, 2017;Dao, 2015). As all post-Communist Eastern European countries moved away from the Soviet model after the overarching political regime collapsed in 1989 (Dobbins, 2017), this literature reviews the changes in university governance in Hungary, Romania and Poland.…”

“…After the collapse of the Communist regime in 1989, Hungary, Romania and Poland reversed the legacy of communism to adopt a new governance which facilitates university self-governance and created positive developments in the system (Dobbins, 2017;Kovats et. al, 2017;Morgan & Bergerson, 2000;Reisz, 2006).…”

“…Indeed, major changes occurred in Hungarian, Romanian and Polish higher education in the 1990s. In particular, these three countries initiated a higher education reform program which offered the higher education institutions protection from state dominance in academic matters (Dobbins, 2017;Kovats et. al, 2017;Reisz, 2006).…”

“…Accordingly, more institutional autonomy was granted to universities; for instance, universities were given the right to recruit and to define the terms for employment and advancement of faculty, to elect their own rectors and other officers, and to promulgate their policies and regulations for governance (Dobbins, 2017;Kovats et al, 2012;Reisz, 2006). In both Hungary and Romania, the role of the Ministry of Education (MOE) was decentralized and limited to a passive legal supervisory role toward higher education institutions (Kovats et.…”

“…This power was redefined and diminished in the parliamentary provisions (Morgan & Bergerson, 2000). In Poland, structural decentralization enabled higher education institutions to embrace the Humboldtian ideal of faculty governance with the prevention of the involvement of the state and outside stakeholders (Dobbins, 2017). The reverse of the legacy of communism in these countries can be considered as a correction of the overcentralized Soviet as well as the adaptation of a new model of distributing authority in higher education (Kovats et al, 2012).…”