Wie reagieren Hochschulen auf die institutionelle Forderung, einer immer vielfältigeren Studierendenschaft gerecht zu werden? Aus einer organisationssoziologischen Perspektive untersucht Julia Mergner den hochschulpolitischen Diskurs zur Hochschulöffnung. Die Ergebnisse zeigen, wie unterschiedlich Hochschulen die Idee der studentischen Heterogenität in ihren lokalen Kontext übersetzen und Strategien, Strukturen und Praktiken für den Umgang legitimieren.

Table of Contents:
1 Frame of Study 1.1 Motivation 1.2 Problem Statement 1.3 Research Questions and Study Objectives 1.4 Approach 1.5 Structure of the Thesis 2 Widening Participation in the Context of German Higher Education 2.1 Definitions of Student Diversity, Heterogeneity and Widening Participation 2.2 Student Diversity in the German Higher Education Context 2.2.1 Access Routes to Higher Education 2.2.2 Socio-Demographic Characteristics 2.2.3 Living Situations 2.2.4 Individual Competences 2.3 The German Widening Participation Agenda: Policies to Deal with Student Diversity 2.3.1 Legal Framework for Widening Participation and Central Political Stakeholders 2.3.2 Policy Programs and Initiatives Aimed at Student Diversity 2.4 The German Widening Participation Agenda: Discourses on Widening Participation 2.4.1 Prior Research on Political Discourses on Widening Participation in Higher Education 2.4.2 Analysis of the German Political Discourse on Widening Participation 2.5 Summary 3 Theoretical Framework and Literature Review 3.1 Ontological and Epistemological Assumptions 3.2 Universities as a ‘Special’ Form of Organization 3.2.1 The ‘Special’ Structure(s) of Universities 3.2.2 The ‘Special’ Culture(s) of Universities 3.3 Explaining Universities’ Responses: Choosing an Institutional Perspective 3.4 Scandinavian Institutionalism 3.4.1 Translation and the Travel of Ideas 3.4.2 Editing Rules and the Role of Agency 3.4.3 Loose Coupling and Decoupling 3.4.4 Scandinavian Institutionalism in Higher Education Research 3.5 Research on Organizational Responses of Universities to Widening Participation 3.5.1 Organizational Responses to Widening Participation: The Strategy Level 3.5.2 Organizational Responses to Widening Participation: The Structure Level 3.5.3 Organizational Responses to Widening Participation: The Action Level 3.6 Explaining Local Variations in Organizational Responses to Student Diversity 3.6.1 Institutional Characteristics of (German) Universities 3.6.2 Diversity Paradigms and Ways of Dealing with Student Diversity 3.7 Conceptualization of the Idea of Student Diversity 3.8 Summary 4 Research Design and Methodology 4.1 Research Design 4.2 Case Study Design 4.3 Selection of Cases 4.4 Operationalization 4.5 Methods of Data Collection 4.6 Data Analysis 4.7 Quality Criteria in Interpretive Qualitative Research 4.7.1 Inter-Subject Comprehensibility 4.7.2 Triangulation 128 4.7.3 Reflection on the Role of the Researcher 4.8 Summary 5 Case studies 5.1 Case 1: The University of Hamburg 5.1.1 Student profile 5.1.2 QPL Initiative 5.1.3 Summary 5.2 Case 2: The University of Kassel 5.2.1 Student profile 5.2.2 QPL Initiative 5.2.3 Summary 5.3 Case 3: The HAW Hamburg 5.3.1 Student profile 5.3.2 QPL Initiative 5.3.3 Summary 6 Cross-case Findings: Organizational Responses of German Universities to Student Diversity 6.1 Editing Rules 6.1.1 Editing Rules of Context 6.1.2 Editing Rules of Formulation 6.1.3 Editing Rules of Logic 6.1.4 Summary 6.2 Retelling the Narrative of Student Diversity — The Importance of the Local Context 6.2.1 University of Hamburg 6.2.2 University of Kassel 6.2.3 HAW Hamburg 6.2.4 Summary 6.3 Definitions and Organizational Practices to Deal with Student Diversity 6.3.1 Prior Knowledge: Deficit Compensation 6.3.2 Individual Learner Personality: Learning Community 6.3.3 Special Target Groups: Starting Aid 6.3.4 Learner, Writer and Student Types: Practice Space 6.3.5 Individual Problems and Needs: Individual Assistance 6.3.6 Mismatch Between Student and Study Program: Orientation and Guidance 6.3.7 Performance of Students: Alternative Paths of Studying and Learning 6.3.8 Summary 7 Conclusion and Discussion 7.1 Answers to Research Questions 7.2 Main Contribution of the Study 7.3 Limitations 7.4 Avenues for Future Research 7.5 Implications for Policy and Practice