Citation/Abstract

This dissertation explains how new interdisciplinary areas of academic inquiry have become institutionalized in U.S. colleges and universities. It compares four theories of curricular change--which emphasize market forces, neoinstitutional forces and diffusion, faculty initiatives, and student movements, respectively--to determine how well each explains the emergence of women's studies, Asian American studies, and queer/LGBT studies over the past few decades. The dissertation uses a multi-methods strategy, including regression analysis, network analysis, fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis (fsQCA), and archival research of selected cases studies. The dissertation first tests market-based and diffusion (neoinstitutionalist) arguments, using regression analysis on an original dataset of sixty randomly selected colleges and universities. Data for this portion of the dissertation were collected from institutional websites, preexisting quantitative datasets, and surveys of college and university administrators. Second, the dissertation also tests neoinstitutionalist and diffusion-based arguments by using regression and network analysis of a larger dataset of over 500 colleges and universities. Third, returning to the smaller dataset, the dissertation uses fsQCA to determine whether institutional political context or other "internal" factors are necessary and/or sufficient for curricular change. Finally, the dissertation employs a series of case studies to analyze more closely the processes of student and faculty mobilization and counter-mobilization around curricular change. The findings of this research suggest that market forces are weak predictors of curricular change, at least for the type of interdisciplinary programs under consideration, but that neoinstitutional explanations may be useful in understanding the spread of more institutionalized forms of academic inquiry. On the other hand, pressure by students and faculty is usually necessary for the development of new curricular programs. The dissertation proposes a new model, the institutional mediation model, for understanding the ways in which students and faculty may work together to create institutional change.