A Case Study of Higher Education in Mongolia: Institutional Isomorphism
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Universities elsewhere have been changing its purposes, functions, roles, and pursuits in society. This study is a case study of Mongolian higher education in which institutional changes are taking place incrementally. The purpose of this study is to explore institutional isomorphism or homogenization of a case university in Mongolia in two different periods of which one is a university under the Soviet regime in the past, and the other is under the democracy in present. The research question was how a university in Mongolia has been changing isomorphically under the different environmental pressures. The study applied a single case study proposed by Yin (2003; 2009) to explore homogenization or isomorphic changes at one prestigious higher education institution in Mongolia. Interviews, reports, and other related documents were used for the analysis. The analytical procedure applied main elements of qualitative research methods. The findings are discussed in three major themes: coercive isomorphism of a university, isomorphic changes triggered by the faculty members: bottom-up process, and mimetic isomorphism modeling after American higher education. It is concluded that the institutional changes taken place in the university was first pressured by the coercion dictated by the political social circumstances, that is, Soviet regime; second, by the faculty members triggered by the professionalization; and third, by the mimicry modeling after successful higher education institution, an American higher education system.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".