[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"doc-seo-595350-105":3,"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":81,"doc-detail-595350-en":130},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"ok",{"site_id":7,"language":8,"slug":9,"title":10,"keywords":11,"description":12,"schema_data":13,"social_meta":74,"head_meta":76,"extra_data":78,"updated_unix":80},105,"en","australian-universities-review-feature-the-future-of-work-in-higher-education","Australian Universities’ Review - Feature: The Future of Work in Higher Education","","This paper describes “ideal types” or models of academic work and connects them to evolving conceptions of universities’ roles. It analyzes how institutional change in Australia—moving from a binary system to a unified national system and then to a looser marketised/privatised quasi-system—reshapes residual, dominant, and emergent discourses and practices. Impacts vary by university and discipline, and the study argues no single model can claim hegemony.",{"@graph":14,"@context":73},[15,34,56],{"@type":16,"itemListElement":17},"BreadcrumbList",[18,23,27,31],{"item":19,"name":20,"@type":21,"position":22},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",1,{"item":24,"name":25,"@type":21,"position":26},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/","Document",2,{"item":28,"name":29,"@type":21,"position":30},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/research-report/","Research & Report",3,{"item":32,"name":10,"@type":21,"position":33},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/australian-universities-review-feature-the-future-of-work-in-higher-education/595350/",4,{"url":32,"name":10,"@type":35,"image":36,"author":41,"headline":10,"publisher":44,"fileFormat":47,"inLanguage":8,"description":12,"dateModified":48,"datePublished":49,"encodingFormat":47,"isAccessibleForFree":50,"interactionStatistic":51},"DigitalDocument",{"url":37,"@type":38,"width":39,"height":40},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/australian-universities-review-feature-the-future-of-work-in-higher-education/595350.png","ImageObject",300,407,{"name":42,"@type":43},"Blitz","Person",{"url":19,"name":45,"@type":46},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-10-30","2026-10-15",true,{"@type":52,"interactionType":53,"userInteractionCount":55},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":54},"ViewAction",7,{"@type":57,"mainEntity":58},"FAQPage",[59,65,69],{"name":60,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":62},"What does the paper aim to do with “ideal types” of academic work?","Question",{"text":63,"@type":64},"It describes several ideal types or models of academic work and links each model to changing understandings of universities’ roles.","Answer",{"name":66,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":67},"How has higher education in Australia changed in the paper’s account?",{"text":68,"@type":64},"The paper highlights the shift from a binary system to a unified national system, followed by a move toward a more marketised and privatised quasi-autonomous university system.",{"name":70,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":71},"Why does the paper argue that no single model can claim hegemony?",{"text":72,"@type":64},"Because universities no longer embody only one set of meanings; instead they contain plural but compatible uses and starkly different representations that cannot be integrated satisfactorily.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":32,"og:type":75,"og:title":10,"og:site_name":45,"og:description":12},"article",{"robots":77,"canonical":32},"index,follow",{"doc_id":79,"site_id":7},595350,1792192690,{"code":4,"msg":82,"data":83},"success",[84,88,92,96,101,106,110,114,119,122,126],{"id":22,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":85,"show_sort_weight":86,"slug":87},"Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":26,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":89,"show_sort_weight":90,"slug":91},"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":33,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":93,"show_sort_weight":94,"slug":95},"Exam",70,"exam",{"id":97,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":98,"show_sort_weight":99,"slug":100},5,"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":102,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":103,"show_sort_weight":104,"slug":105},6,"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":55,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":107,"show_sort_weight":108,"slug":109},"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":111,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":29,"show_sort_weight":112,"slug":113},8,30,"research-report",{"id":115,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":116,"show_sort_weight":117,"slug":118},9,"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":117,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":120,"show_sort_weight":117,"slug":121},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":123,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":124,"show_sort_weight":123,"slug":125},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":127,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":128,"show_sort_weight":97,"slug":129},19,"General","general",{"code":4,"msg":82,"data":131},{"doc_id":79,"user_id":132,"nickname":42,"user_avatar":133,"doc_module":4,"category_id":111,"category_name":29,"doc_title":10,"doc_description":12,"doc_content":134,"file_id":135,"file_url":136,"file_type":137,"file_size":138,"view_count":55,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":22,"is_downloadable":22,"audit_status":22,"page_count":115,"language":139,"language_code":8,"site_id":7,"html_lang":8,"table_of_contents":140,"faqs":141,"seo_title":142,"seo_description":12,"update_tm":143,"read_time":144,"preview_page_count":4},24464137899374,"https://us-avatar.wpscdn.com/davatar_3d24733baf745e90a7e4bdd5f77d97b2","A U S T R A L I A N U N I V E R S I T I E S ’ R E V I E W  \nFeature: The future of work in higher education  \nChanging discourses and practices of  \nacademic work 1  \nJOHN MC COLLOW AND BOB LINGARD  \nThe University of Queensland  \nAbstract  \nThis paper describes a number of“ideal types” or models of academic work and makes links between these models and changing conceptions of the roles of universities. Given that institutional change has been a significant feature of higher education in Australia (and elsewhere), an attempt is made to analyse the models in terms of Raymond Williams’notions of‘residual’,‘dominant’and‘emergent’ discoursesand practices. Thereal and potential impacts of changes on the nature of academic work varied considerably across universities and across discipline areas/faculties within universities as higher educationin Australia moved from a binary system, toa unified national system, then to a looser “system” of quasiautonomous marketised/privatised institutions. It is argued that it is no longer possible for any one model of academic work to stake a claim for hegemony as universities ‘no longer embody plural, but compatible, uses but starkly different representations, or meanings, which cannot be integrated satisfactorily’ (Scott, 1995, p.3). Despite this situation, it will be argued the academic as sui generis still holds considerable sway as discourse. The paper concludes by briefly speculating on the forms of academic work which are likely to be associated with various sites in universities in the short to medium term. It suggests that continuing differentiation within the academic profession will see a variety of discourses and practices operating throughout internally disparate institutions within a diverse “system”.  \nIntroduction  \nInstitutional change has been a significant feature of higher education in Australia for at least the last decade. Most notable in this regard was the abolition of the binary system of colleges of advanced education (CAEs) and universities and the establishment of a “unified national system”(UNS) consisting of thirty-six large institutions all having university status. In addition to the structural  \nchanges, such as amalgamations, which this transition entailed, there were also changes in the ways in which universities were financed, governed and managed anda change in research funding towards amore competitive model. The creation of the UNS consolidated the move towards mass higher education in Australia, but in a context of increased reluctance of governments to fully fund public activities and instead to move towards user pays models and to encourage the institutions to raise monies from other, private sources. Most recently, the 1996 Commonwealth Budget of the new Coalition Government increased (again) the costs of higher education for students and expanded (again) the need and ability of universities to raise funds from non-government sources. It is not sufficient therefore to depict these developments as simply a move from an elite to mass system-though it is surely that in the size of the age cohort now participating in higher education-they are more accurately depicted as a reconstituting of elite and mass features within and across the institutions comprising the quasi-privatised UNS (cf Scott, 1995) .  \nBoth the earlier and recent changes called into question more traditional understandings of the roles of higher education and the nature of academic work (O’Brien, 1992) . As such, they generated a number of critiques ( e.g. Harman and Meek, 1988; Junor and O’Brien, 1989; Penington, 1990; Hunter et al. , 1991; Smyth, 1995a), many of which expressed concern about the potentially deleterious effects of the changes.  \nIn this paper a number of “ideal types” of academic work are identified, namely academic sui generis, academic as professional (state, market and corporate), and academic as worker. 2 The discourses (ideological dimensions) and practices (empirical ","cbCaiex2NffPS7A3","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCaiex2NffPS7A3","pdf",50636,"English","# Abstract\n# Introduction\n## Institutional change and system restructuring\n## Critiques of changing academic work\n## Ideal types of academic work and analytic framework\n# The academic sui generis","[{\"question\":\"What does the paper aim to do with “ideal types” of academic work?\",\"answer\":\"It describes several ideal types or models of academic work and links each model to changing understandings of universities’ roles.\"},{\"question\":\"How has higher education in Australia changed in the paper’s account?\",\"answer\":\"The paper highlights the shift from a binary system to a unified national system, followed by a move toward a more marketised and privatised quasi-autonomous university system.\"},{\"question\":\"Why does the paper argue that no single model can claim hegemony?\",\"answer\":\"Because universities no longer embody only one set of meanings; instead they contain plural but compatible uses and starkly different representations that cannot be integrated satisfactorily.\"}]","Australian Universities’ Review - Feature: The Future of Work in Higher Education | PDF",1792080966,23]