Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Bounded Boards: a Commentary on the Limitations of Knowledge and Scope of Research on Boards of Higher Education

  • Published:
Innovative Higher Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Despite the emergence of new scholarship, public higher education boards in the United States remain relatively under-investigated. While the literature on higher education governance and boards, in particular, tends to profess these knowledge gaps repeatedly, few works have scratched the surface as to why our understanding of boards is so limited. In this paper, the authors move past the acknowledgment that boards are vastly understudied to reflect on why that is the case. Using a case study centered on interviews with governance scholars, the authors highlight findings of logistical, theoretical, methodological, and epistemological rationale that have prevented governing boards from being studied in a manner, depth, and scope on par with their import in higher education. The authors present the case that researchers must first recognize and then identify ways to address and overcome these challenges to innovate research in the field of governance, particularly in a higher education environment in which boards are more visible. Implications for future research are provided.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

Authors will maintain anonymized data; only researchers authorized via IRB will have access to the data.

Code Availability

Not Applicable.

Notes

  1. Like the Journal of Educational Administration, the Journal of Higher Education, Research in Higher Education

References

  • Adamu, A. Y. (2019). Selection and appointment of higher education leaders in Ethiopia: An assessment of implementation. Bahir Dar Journal of Education, 19(1), 1–19.

  • Association of Governing Boards of Universities and Colleges. (2014). Consequential Boards: Adding value where it matters most. Retrieved from http://agb.org/sites/default/files/legacy/2014_AGB_National_Commission.pdf

  • Baird, J. (2007). Taking it on board: Quality audit findings for higher education governance. Higher Education Research & Development, 26(1), 101–115. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360601166844

  • Baldridge, J. V. (1971). Power and conflict in the university: Research in the sociology of complex organizations. J. Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baldridge, J.V., Curtis, D.V., Ecker, G., & Riley, G.L. (1978). Policy making and effective leadership. Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barringer, S. N., & Riffe, K. A. (2018). Not just figureheads: Trustees as microfoundations of higher education institutions. Innovative Higher Education, 43(3), 155–170. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10755-018-9422-6

  • Barringer, S. N., & Slaughter, S. (2016). University trustees and the entrepreneurial university: Inner circles, interlocks, and exchanges. In Slaughter, S.& Taylor, B (Eds.), Higher Education, Stratification, and Workforce Development (pp. 151–171). Springer

  • Barringer, S. N., Taylor, B. J., & Slaughter, S. (2019). Trustees in turbulent times: External affiliations and stratification among US research universities, 1975–2015. The Journal of Higher Education, 90(6), 884–914. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221546.2019.1574695

  • Barringer, S. N., Taylor, B. J., Riffe, K. A., & Slaughter, S. (2020). How university leaders shape boundaries and behaviors: An empirical examination of trustee involvement at elite us research universities. Higher Education Policy, 1–31.

  • Bastedo, M. N. (2005). The making of an activist governing board. Review of Higher Education, 28(4), 551–570. https://doi.org/10.1353/rhe.2005.0034

  • Bastedo, M. N. (2007). Sociological frameworks for higher education policy research. In P. J. Gumport (Ed.), The sociology of higher education (pp. 295–316). Johns Hopkins University Press.

  • Bastedo, M. N. (2009a). Conflicts, commitments, and cliques in the university: Moral seduction as a threat to trustee independence. American Educational Research Journal, 46(2), 354–386. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831208329439

  • Bastedo, M. N. (2009b). Convergent institutional logics in public higher education: State policymaking and governing board activism. Review of Higher Education, 32(2), 209–234. https://doi.org/10.1353/rhe.0.0045

  • Bensimon, E. M. (1984). Selected aspects of governance: An ERIC review. Community College Review, 12(2), 54–61.

  • Beck, D.B. (2014). A socio-cultural learning approach to board practice. In C. Cornforth, & W.A. Brown (Eds.), The governance of public and nonprofit organizations: Innovative perspectives and approaches (pp.103–122). Routledge.

  • Beck, H. P. (1947). Men who control our universities: The economic and social composition of governing boards of thirty leading American universities. King’s Crown Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Birnbaum, R. (1988). How colleges work: The cybernetics of academic organization and leadership. Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burns, E. (2010). Developing email interview practices in qualitative research. Sociological Research Online, 15(4). Retrieved from http://www.socresonline.org.uk/15/4/8.html

  • Campaign for College Opportunity (2018). Left out: How exclusion in California’s colleges and universities hurts our values, our students, and our economy. https://documentcloud.adobe.com/link/track?uri=urn%3Aaaid%3Ascds%3AUS%3A050565f2-1ce9-485c-af4f-ec18cdfc8046#pageNum=1

  • Chait, R. P., Holland, T., & Taylor, B. E. (1991; 1996). Improving the performance of governing boards. American Council on Education/Oryx press series on higher education. The Oryx press.

  • Chun, E. B. (2017). Diversity and inclusion: The balancing act between governing boards and college or university administration. In Systemic Racism (pp. 79–109). Palgrave Macmillan

  • Clark, B. R. (1972). The organizational Saga in higher education. Administrative Science Quarterly, 17(2), 178–184.

  • Cohen, M. D., & March, J. G. (1974). Leadership and ambiguity: The American college president. McGraw-Hill.

  • Colucci, E. 2007. “Focus groups can be fun”: The use of activity-oriented questions in focus group discussions. Qualitative Health Research, 17(10): 1422–1433. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732307308129

  • Commodore, F. (2018). The tie that binds: Trusteeship, values, and the decision-making process at AME-affiliated HBCUs. The Journal of Higher Education, 89(4), 397–421.

  • Corson, J. J. (1960). Governance of colleges and universities. McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Daily, C. M., Dalton, D. R., & Cannella, A. A, Jr. (2003). Corporate governance: Decades of dialogue and data. Academy of Management Review, 28(3), 371–382.

  • Davis, G. (1997). Orientation and professional development of trustees. New Directions for Community Colleges, 1997(98), 21–31.

  • Dika, S. L., & Janosik, S. M. (2003). The role of selection, orientation and training in improving the quality of public college and university boards of trustees in the United States. Quality in Higher Education, 9(3), 273–285. https://doi.org/10.1080/1353832032000151139

  • DeSantis, J., & Dammann, S. (2020). Say goodbye to best practices in higher ed. The National Teaching & Learning Forum, 29(5), 6–7.

  • Dilley, P. (2004). Interviews and the philosophy of qualitative research. The Journal of Higher Education, 75(1), 127–132. https://doi.org/10.1353/jhe.2003.0049.

  • Dobbins, M., Knill, C., & Vögtle, E. M. (2011). An analytical framework for the cross-country comparison of higher education governance. Higher Education, 62(5), 665–683. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-011-9412-4

  • Dominguez, J. I. (1971). To reign or to rule: A choice for university boards of trustees. Connecticut Law Review, 3(3), 375–478.

  • Essex, G. L. & Ansbach, C. (1993) Fundraising in a changing economy: Notes for presidents and trustees. Foundation Development Abstracts, 3(2).

  • Floyd, C. E. (1995). Governing boards and trustees. The Review of Higher Education, 19(1), 93–110. https://doi.org/10.1353/rhe.1995.0004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Forbes, D. P., & Milliken, F. J. (1999). Cognition and corporate governance: Understanding boards of directors as strategic decision-making groups. Academy of Management Review, 24(3), 489–505. https://doi.org/10.2307/259138

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Freedman, J.O. (2005). Presidents and trustees. In R.G. Ehrenberg (Ed.), Governing academia (pp. 9–27). Cornell University Press.

  • Freeman, R. E. 1984. Strategic management: A stakeholder approach. Pitman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gándara, D. (2020). How the sausage is made: An examination of a state funding model design process. Journal of Higher Education, 91(2), 192–221. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221546.2019.1618782

  • Gerber, L. G. (1997). Reaffirming the value of shared governance. Academe, 83(5), 14–18. https://doi.org/10.2307/40251581

  • Geertz, C. (1973). The interpretation of cultures: Selected essays. Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gupta, P. P., Dirsmith, M. W., & Fogarty, T. J. (1994). Coordination and control in a government agency: Contingency and institutional theory perspectives on GAO audits. Administrative Science Quarterly, 39(2), 264–284. https://doi.org/10.2307/2393236

  • Hardy-Fanta, C., & Stewartson, D. (2007). A seat at the table? Racial/Ethnic & Gender Diversity on corporate, hospital, education, Cultural & State Boards. Center for Women in politics and public policy publications. Paper 6. http://scholarworks.umb.edu/cwppp_pubs/6

  • Hartnett, R. T. (1969). College and university trustees: Their backgrounds, roles, and educational attitudes. Educational Testing Service.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hartnett, R. T. (1970). The new college trustee: Some predictions for the 1970s. Educational Testing Service.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hearn, J. C., & McLendon, M. K. (2012). Governance research: From adolescence to maturity.In M. Bastedo (Ed.), The organization of higher education: Managing colleges for a new era (pp. 45-85). Johns Hopkins.

  • Henderson, A. D. (1967). The role of the governing board. Association of Governing Boards of universities and colleges.

  • Hendrickson, R. M., Lane, J. E., Harris, J. T., & Dorman, R. H. (2013). Academic leadership and governance of higher education: A guide for trustees, leaders, and aspiring leaders of two-and four-year institutions. Stylus Publishing, LLC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hermalin, B. E. (2004). Higher education boards of trustees. Governing Academia: Who is in charge at the modern university. Cornell University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holland, T. P., Chait, R. P., & Taylor, B. E. (1989). Board effectiveness: Identifying and measuring trustee competencies. Research in Higher Education, 30(4), 435–453. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00992565

  • Ingram, R. T., & Weary, W. A. (2000). Presidential & board assessment in higher education: Purposes, policies & strategies. Association of Governing Boards of Universities and Colleges.

  • Janis, I. L. (1971). Groupthink. Psychology Today, 5(6), 43–46.

  • Johnson, L. (2012). Law and the history of corporate responsibilities: Corporate governance. University of St. Thomas Law Journal, 10(4), 974.

  • Jones, W. A. (2011). Faculty involvement in institutional governance: A literature review. Journal of the Professoriate, 6(1), 118–135.

  • Katz, D., & Kahn R. L. (1978). The social psychology of organizations. Wiley

    Google Scholar 

  • Kerr, C., & Gade, M. (1989). The guardians: Boards of trustees of American colleges and universities: What they do and how they do it. Association of Governing Boards of Colleges and Universities.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kevern, J., & Webb, C. (2001). Focus groups as a tool for critical social research in nurse education. Nurse Education Today, 21(4), 323–333. https://doi.org/10.1054/nedt.2001.0563

  • Kezar, A. (2004). What is more important to effective governance: Relationships, trust, and leadership, or structures and formal processes? New Directions for Higher Education, 127:35–46.

  • Kezar, A. (2005). Consequences of radical change in governance: A grounded theory approach. The Journal of Higher Education, 76(6), 634–668. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221546.2005.11772303

  • Kezar, A. J. (2006). Rethinking higher education governing boards performance: Results of a national study of governing boards in the United States. The Journal of Higher Education, 77(6), 968–1008. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221546.2006.11778953

  • Kezar, A., & Eckel, P. D. (2004). Meeting today’s governance challenges: A synthesis of the literature and examination of a future agenda for scholarship. The Journal of Higher Education, 75(4), 371–399. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221546.2004.11772264

  • Kitzinger, J. (1995). Qualitative research: Introducing focus groups. British Medical Journal, 311(7000), 299–302. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.311.7000.299

  • Kivistö, J., & Zalyevska, I. (2015). Agency theory as a framework for higher education governance. In The Palgrave international handbook of higher education policy and governance (pp. 132–151). Palgrave Macmillan.

  • Kohn, P. F., & Mortimer, K. P. (1983). The National Commission on college and university trustee selection: Selecting effective trustees. Change, 15(5), 30–37.

  • Kooli, C. (2019). Governing and managing higher education institutions: The quality audit contributions. Evaluation and program planning, 77(2019), article 101713. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2019.101713

  • Krueger, R., & Casey, M. (2015). Focus groups: A practical guide for applied research (5th ed.). Sage.

  • Lane, J. E., & Kivistö, J. A. (2008). Interests, information, and incentives in higher education: Principal-agent theory and its potential applications to the study of higher education governance. In J. C. Smart (Ed.), Higher education (pp. 141–179). Springer

  • Leblanc, R., & Schwartz, M. S. (2007). The black box of board process: Gaining access to a difficult subject. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 15(5), 843–851. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8683.2007.00617.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lewis, W. S. (1952). The trustees of the privately Endowed University. The American Scholar, 22(1), 17–27.

  • Lowry, R. C. (2001). Governmental structure, trustee selection, and public university prices and spending: Multiple means to similar ends. American Journal of Political Science, 45(4), 845–861. https://doi.org/10.2307/2669328

  • Lozano, J. (2016). The rise of student trusteeship in the United States: A case study at Indiana University. American Educational History Journal, 43(1/2), 93.

  • Lozano, J. (2020). Bridging the divide: Exploring the connections between student governments and higher education governing boards. Studies in Higher Education, 45(9), 1878–1891.

  • Lozano, J., & Hughes, R. (2017). Representation and conflict of interest among students on higher education governing boards. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 39(6), 607–624.

  • MacTaggart, T. J. (2004). The ambiguous future of public higher education systems. In W.G.Tierney (Ed.). Competing conceptions of academic governance: Negotiating the perfectstorm, (pp.104–136). The Johns Hopkins University Press.

  • Mason, J. (2002). Qualitative researching. Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mathies, C., & Slaughter, S. (2013). University trustees as channels between academe and industry: Toward an understanding of the executive science network. Research Policy, 42(6–7), 1286–1300. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2013.03.003

  • Maxey, D. B. (2015). Making sense of trusteeship: Examining the construction of roles among public higher education governing boards (Doctoral dissertation, University of Southern California).

    Google Scholar 

  • McGrath, C., Palmgren, P. J., & Liljedahl, M. (2019). Twelve tips for conducting qualitative research interviews. Medical Teacher, 41(9), 1002–1006. https://doi.org/10.1080/0142159X.2018.1497149

  • McGuinness, Aims C., Jr. (1997). The functions and evolution of state coordination and governance in postsecondary education. State postsecondary education structures sourcebook, 1–48. Education Commission of the States.

    Google Scholar 

  • McLendon, M. K. (2003). Setting the governmental agenda for state decentralization of higher education. The Journal of Higher Education, 74(5), 479–515. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221546.2003.11778887

  • McLendon, M. K., & Hearn, J. C. (2006). Mandated openness in public higher education: A field study of state sunshine laws and institutional governance. The Journal of Higher Education, 77(4), 645–683. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221546.2006.11772310

  • Merriam, S.B., & Tisdell, E.J. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation (4th ed.). Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Michael, S.O., Schwartz, M. & Hamilton, A. (1997). Trustee selection/appointment and orientation: A comparative analysis of higher education sectors in Ohio. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 19(2), 111–128. https://doi.org/10.1080/1360080970190203

  • Michael, S. O., & Schwartz, M. (1999). Perceived role of trustees: A study of higher education institutions in Ohio. Journal of Educational Administration, 37(2), 165–183. https://doi.org/10.1108/09578239910263042

  • Michael, S. O., Schwartz, M., Cook, D. M., & Winston, P. L. (1999). Trustees’ level of satisfaction and strategies for improving satisfaction: A comparative analysis of higher education sectors. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 21(2), 173–191. https://doi.org/10.1080/1360080990210205

  • Millett, J. D. (1962). The academic community: An essay on organization. McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Minor, J.T. (2006). A case of complex governance: A structural analysis of university decision-making. Journal of the Professoriate, 1(2), 22–37.

  • Morgan, D.L., LePeau, L.A. & Commodore, F. (2021). Observable evidence and partnership possibilities for governing board involvement in diversity, equity, and inclusion: A content analysis. Research in Higher Education. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-021-09651-x

  • Morgan, D.L., Rall, R.M., & Commodore, F. (2021). Hiding in plain sight: Uncovering the role of state-level governing boards & political discourse in the higher education policymaking process. Journal of Higher Education, 92(4), 570–595.

  • Mortimer, K. (1971). The dilemmas in new campus governance structures. Journal of Higher Education, 42, 467–483. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221546.1971.11774875

  • Nason, J. W. (1982). The nature of trusteeship: The role and responsibilities of college and university boards. The Association of Governing Boards of Universities and Colleges.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ness, E. C., Tandberg, D. A., & McLendon, M. K. (2015). Interest groups and state policy for higher education: New conceptual understandings and future research directions. In M. B. Paulsen (Ed.), Higher education: Handbook of theory and research (30th ed., pp. 151–186).

  • Neumann, A., & Bensimon, E. M. (1990). Constructing the presidency: College presidents’ images of their leadership roles, a comparative study. The Journal of Higher Education, 61(6), 678–701. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221546.1990.11775116

  • Nicholson-Crotty, J., & Meier, K. J. (2003). Politics, structure, and public policy: The case of higher education. Educational Policy, 17(1), 80–97. https://doi.org/10.1177/0895904802239287

  • Owen, G. T. (2014). Qualitative methods in higher education policy analysis: Using interviews and document analysis. The Qualitative Report, 19(26), 1–19.

  • Paltridge, J. G., Hurst, J., & Morgan, A. (1973). Boards of trustees: Their decision patterns. Report on Research.

  • Patton, L. D. (2016). Disrupting postsecondary prose: Toward a critical race theory of higher education. Urban Education, 51(3), 315–342. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042085915602542

  • Peterson, M. W. (1985). Emerging developments in post-secondary organization theory and research: Fragmentation and integration. In M. W. Peterson (ed.), Organization and governance in higher education. Ginn Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Posselt, J. R. (2016). Inside graduate admissions: Merit, diversity, and faculty gatekeeping. Harvard University Press.

  • Prusak, B. G. (2018). Independent boards of trustees at Catholic colleges and universities, fifty years later-findings and reflections from six holy cross schools. Journal of Catholic Higher Education, 37(1), 3–27.

  • Pusser, B., Slaughter, S., & Thomas, S. (2006). Playing the board game: An empirical analysis of university trustee and corporate board interlocks. The Journal of Higher Education, 77(5), 747–775. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221546.2006.11778943

  • Rall, R.M. (2021). Modeling equity-minded leadership amid crises: The call for higher education governing boards to lead the way. Journal of Higher Education Management, 36(1), 25–31.

  • Rall, R.M., & Maxey, D. (2020). A Steeper Hill to Climb: The role and experience of student trustees in 21st century higher education. Journal of Power, Politics & Governance, 8(2), 12–27.

  • Rall, R.M., Morgan, D.L., & Commodore, F. (2020). Toward culturally sustaining governance: Best practices of theory, research, and practice. The Journal of Education Human Resources, 38(1), 139–164.

  • Rall, R. M., Morgan, D. L., & Commodore, F. (2019). Invisible injustice: Higher education boards and issues of diversity, equity, and inclusivity. In R. Jeffries (Ed.), Diversity, Equity, and Inclusivity in Contemporary Higher Education (pp. 261–277). Hershey, PA: IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-5225-5724-1.ch016

  • Rall, R.M., Mogan, D.L., & Commodore. F., Fischer, R.A., & Bernstein, S. (forthcoming). Introducing Boards to the Equity Conversation: State-Level governing boards and discourses of social justice.

  • Rall, R.M., & Orué, V. (2020). I, too, am a lead(her): The power and possibilities of women of color on governing boards of higher education in California. Journal of Higher Education Management, 35(1), 32–39.

  • Renn, K. A. (2020). Reimagining the study of higher education: Generous thinking, chaos, and order in a low consensus field. The Review of Higher Education, 43(4), 917–934. https://doi.org/10.1353/rhe.2020.0025

  • Richardson Jr, R. C. (1974). Governance theory: A comparison of approaches. The Journal of Higher Education, 45(5), 344–354. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221546.1974.11776966

  • Roth, W. M., & Lee, Y. J. (2007). “Vygotsky’s neglected legacy”: Cultural-historical activity theory. Review of Educational Research, 77(2), 186–232. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654306298273

  • Rubin, P. G., Ciarimboli, E. B., & Coco, L. B. (2020). Governing boards and their relationship to gender issues in higher education. The Wiley handbook of gender equity in higher education, 91–104.

  • Rutherford, A., & Lozano, J. (2018). Top management turnover: The role of governing board structures. Public Administration Review, 78(1), 104–115. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.12838

  • Sacristán, I. O. (2014). Governance and change in higher education: The debate between classical political sociology, new institutionalism and critical theories. Bordón. Revista de Pedagogía, 66(1), 107–122.

  • Saldaña, J. (2016). The coding manual for qualitative researchers. Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sav, G. T. (1986). The politics of race in higher education: Governing boards and constituents. Public Choice, 48(2), 147–155. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00179728

  • Scott, H. I. R. (2018). Ascending: An exploration of women’s leadership advancement in the role of board of trustee chair. Administrative Sciences, 8(1), 7. https://doi.org/10.3390/admsci8010007

  • Sharpe, N. F. (2010). The cosmetic independence of corporate boards. Seattle University Law Review, 34(4), 1435–1456.

  • Slaughter, S., Thomas, S. L., Johnson, D. R., & Barringer, S. N. (2014). Institutional conflict of interest: The role of interlocking directorates in the scientific relationships between universities and the corporate sector. The Journal of Higher Education, 85(1), 1–35. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221546.2014.11777317

  • Slaughter, S., & Leslie, L. L. (1997). Academic capitalism: Politics, policies, and the entrepreneurial university. Johns Hopkins University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, D. E. (1997). Comment on Hekman’s“ truth and method: Feminist standpoint theory revisited”. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 22(2), 392–398.

  • Smith, D. H. (1995). Entrusted: The moral responsibilities of trusteeship. Indiana University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research. Sage publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stripling, J., & Thomason (2021). Her ‘1619 project’ is a political lightning rod. It May Have Cost Her Tenure. Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved from https://www.chronicle.com/article/chapel-hill-celebrated-a-prominent-journalists-appointment-then-it-denied-her-tenure?cid2=gen_login_refresh&cid=gen_sign_in

  • Sweet, L. (2002). Telephone interviewing: Is it compatible with interpretive phenomenological research? Contemporary Nurse, 12(1), 58–63.

  • Tandberg, D. A. (2010). Interest groups and governmental institutions: The politics of state funding of public higher education. Educational Policy, 24(5), 735–778. https://doi.org/10.1177/0895904809339163

  • Tandberg, D. A. (2013). The conditioning role of state higher education governance structures. Journal of Higher Education, 84(4), 506–543. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221546.2013.11777300

  • Taylor, B. J., Cantwell, B., Watts, K., & Wood, O. (2020). Partisanship, white racial resentment, and state support for higher education. The Journal of Higher Education, 91(6), 858–887. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221546.2019.1706016

  • Taylor, J. S., & Machado, M. D. L. (2008). Governing boards in public higher education institutions: A perspective from the United States. Tertiary Education and Management, 14(3), 243–260. https://doi.org/10.1080/13583880802348824

  • Tierney, W.G. (ed.) (2006) Governance and the public good. SUNY Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tierney, W. G. (2008). The impact of culture on organizational decision making: Theory and practice in higher education. Stylus.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tierney, W. G., & Rall, R. M. (2018). Lessons not yet learned: Culture, governance, and the Jerry Sandusky Case. Journal of Higher Education Management, 33(2), 12–27.

  • Tracy, S. J. (2010). Qualitative quality: Eight “big-tent” criteria for excellent qualitative research. Qualitative Inquiry, 16(10), 837–851. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077800410383121

  • Vidovich, L., & Currie, J. (2011). Governance and trust in higher education. Studies in Higher Education, 36(1), 43–56. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075070903469580

  • Warren, H.G. (1914). Academic freedom. Atlantic Monthly, 114, p. 689–699.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiles, R., Charles, V., Crow, G., & Heath, S. (2006). Researching researchers: Lessons for research ethics. Qualitative Research, 6(3), 283–299. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794106065004

Download references

Funding

Research presented in this article was supported by the Spencer Foundation’s Conference Grant.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Education, University of California Riverside, Riverside, CA, USA

    Raquel M. Rall

  2. School of Education, Loyola University, Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA

    Demetri L. Morgan

  3. Darden College of Education & Professional Studies, Old Dominion University, Norfolk, VA, USA

    Felecia Commodore

Authors
  1. Raquel M. Rall
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Demetri L. Morgan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Felecia Commodore
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

All authors contributed to the study design. Raquel M. Rall came up with the concept for the piece and led the writing and data analysis. The material preparation and data collection were performed by Raquel M. Rall, Demetri L. Morgan and Felecia Commodore. Felecia Commodore created the interview protocol. The first draft of the manuscript was written by Raquel M. Rall and all authors helped review and edit previous versions of the manuscript. Demetri L. Morgan led the funding acquisition. All authors read, edited, and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Raquel M. Rall.

Ethics declarations

Ethics Approval

The study was approved by Old Dominion University’s IRB.

Consent to Participate

Informed consent was obtained from all study participants.

Consent for Publication

Patients signed informed consent regarding publishing their data.

Conflicts of Interest/Competing Interests

The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare that are relevant to the content of this article.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Rall, .M., Morgan, D.L. & Commodore, F. Bounded Boards: a Commentary on the Limitations of Knowledge and Scope of Research on Boards of Higher Education. Innov High Educ 47, 389–412 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10755-021-09582-6

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10755-021-09582-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation