IntroductionThis paper takes as its main point of concern relationship between regional universities within contemporary Australian tertiary sector and what we can call imperatives and values associated with idea of university. It is divided into three sections: first provides an overview of theoretical concepts and approaches used to contextualise and analyse cultural field of tertiary education; second considers how this field has been transformed - not just within a regional context - since advent of massification of university education, a phenomenon which can be roughly dated in Australia to late 1980s; third discusses ramifications of these changes within context of what we call 'the idea of university'.Cultural Field and HabitusThe approach taken here is largely predicated on theories of French sociologist Pierre Bourdieu and in particular his concepts of cultural field, cultural capital and habitus. A cultural field can be defined as a series of institutions, rules, rituals, conventions, categories, designations, appointments and titles which constitute an objective hierarchy and which produce and authorise certain discourses and activities. But it is also constituted by or out of conflict that is involved when groups or individuals attempt to determine what field really is or what its logics and values are, what constitutes capital within that field and how that capital is to be distributed. Bourdieu understands concept of cultural field to refer to fluid and dynamic, rather than static, entities. Cultural fields are made up not simply of institutions and rules but also of interactions among institutions, rules and practices.A cultural field can be said to have come into being when it fulfils at least two criteria. First, it is able to articulate and manifest itself simultaneously as a singularity and as a differentiated but cognate group of entities joined together by, and recognisable in terms of, certain core imperatives, values, functions, rules, categories and characteristics. Second and equally importantly, it must be recognised and accepted by, integrated into and function in compliance with regard to network of valorised fields that comprise wider sociocultural terrain. In order to do this, a field must have means and techniques to imagine itself into existence and then to represent, manifest and valorise itself in a consistent manner to its own members and to other fields. The viability of sport as a cultural field is necessarily predicated, then, on some degree of bureaucratisation of people, activities and events within a regime that is specific and universal, changeable and timeless, but above all else iterable.Institutions, bureaucracies, titles, rules and categories are, however, only objective manifestation of a cultural field: it is both a piece of anti-logic and an escapable truism that every field is simultaneously constituted from and constitutive of a habitus, understood as an ethos and set of dispositions which are embodied by its members, animate and justify its practices and speak (through and for) field as a discourseas- belief. Bourdieu defines habitus, in Outline of a Theory of Practice (1991), as the durably installed generative principle of regulated improvisations (p. 78). A change to habitus produces a different set of experiences of same types of activities (for example, research or teaching) that continues to be productive in that it feeds back into and modifies and/or elaborates upon logics and dispositions that set it in train, including any understanding of what constitutes essence of that field.Cultural fields reproduce themselves through what Bourdieu refers to as strategies of misrecognition, symbolic violence, illusio and universalisation. Bourdieu (2000) understands misrecognition as a of forgetting that agents are caught up in and produced by:The agent engaged in practice knows worldtoo well, without objectifying distance, takes it for granted, precisely because he is caught up in it, bound up with it; he inhabits it like a garmenthe feels at home in world because world is also in him, in form of habitus. …