EduLinks

Edulinks – July 2011 – News

A lot can happen in a month. Let’s recap in a two-post monster.

News links abound in this post. In the other, I’ll treat you to some of the best student linkage.

In HE news, two big things happened. You know, BIG big.

White Paper Fun

First up, a government White Paper on higher education was published. Some people wanted it to go further. Others wondered why postgraduate issues weren’t addressed. A lot has been said since its publication.

I covered the White Paper on TheUniversityBlog the day it came out. So many others were quick to comment. Here’s just some of what’s out there…

Understandably, Times Higher Education had a lot of articles on the paper:

THE’s editor, Ann Mroz, naturally led on the White Paper too, saying it was big…you know, BIG big. But with no grand plan.

The Guardian said that while some will win, others will be ‘screwed’.

VC of Salford, Martin Hall, called the White Paper “Both bad and dangerous” and described the proposals as “pale and disappointing”.

Shortly after the paper’s publication, a range of campaign groups set out a not exactly glowing response to its content, producing an alternative to the White Paper.

Leicester’s Third University subsequently suggested an alternative to the alternative

Richard Hall took the White Paper’s title, “Putting students at the heart of the system” and suggested, “You are not been paying attention“.

More recently, more commentary has arrived. It’s unlikely to be the last!

Andrew McGettigan lists ten things everyone working in or studying art should know about the White Paper.

Patrick McGhee, VC of the University of East London, says we “need to challenge the fees model itself” if we are not to sleepwalk into problems similar to those in the US system.

NUS President, Liam Burns, writes in the Guardian, “Ministers must answer this question — does an identifiable fee put students off?”

OFFA the scale…

Okay, I’m guessing you’ve had enough White Paper linkage. What was the second BIG big thing to happen in the HE sector?

I’ll put you out of your misery. The other big development in July was the Office For Fair Access (OFFA) agreeing to fees set by the country’s universities.

Yes, higher fees have been confirmed throughout the land. I did a rough and ready calculation to work out average fees:

Estimated average fee = £8376
Average fee after waivers = £8136
Average fee after likely financial support = £7801

This is slightly different to the Times Higher Education information, which is available in an easy to browse spreadsheet, but it’s close enough, so I didn’t revisit the calculations. Give or take a few pounds won’t matter much, if we’re to believe that a huge rise in fees shouldn’t bother future students.

As you’d expect, the final fees agreements got a lot of media coverage:

The Independent published the full list of fees for 2012/13.

What does this mean for poor families? William Cullerne Bown looks at OFFA’s focus on “outcomes and targets

Phew!

If you’re looking for study-related links instead of this recent events malarkey, you’ve got all that to come in the next post. Oh, happy days!

EduLinks – Week ending 17 June 2011

Due to difficult personal circumstances, I’ve not been able to keep on top of current happenings as much as usual.

However, to make up for that, I’ve set up a ‘UKHigherEd‘ topic at Scoop.it.

Visit my UKHigherED topic for higher education news & links for students, academics, administrators and pretty much anyone involved in HE.

Already linked are stories on the facts on tuition fees, losing sight of the true meaning of education, prejudice against private universities, and lots more.

Want to know more about Scoop.it? This video should explain:

A few more quick news items, just to keep you sweet:

Why students don’t always win as consumers

With student satisfaction being touted as a big driver of HE in the future, how does the student experience come into play?

The term ‘student experience’ means a great many things. Each experience is unique, as well as each person’s definition.

Individual definitions are likely to change too. If I ask you what experience you are looking for as a Fresher, your answers then are bound to be different once you’re in your final year.

photo by Cesar Augusto Serna Sz

photo by Cesar Augusto Serna Sz

University of Hertfordshire vice-chancellor, Quintin McKellar, recently highlighted his concern that students don’t necessarily think of education when considering the ‘student experience’.

And after I read the book, “The Marketisation of Higher Education and the Student as Consumer“, a consumer model of HE is not as clear cut as putting students in charge and allowing the market to work wonderfully from it. This post features some of the key details I discovered in the book.

The ‘student as consumer’ mentality brings about instability, as Joanna Williams explains:

“With a diminished sense of their subjectivity, students may not have such a firm belief in themselves as resilient, capable actors and instead might see themselves as vulnerable, fragile and in need of support.” [p.178]

Student experience simply cannot be measured. You can attempt to weigh things up yourself, but it’s hard to describe those years to anyone else. And, as Jones-Devitt & Samiei suggest, “what cannot be easily measured is often valued as worthless.” [p.96]

But wait… The student experience is valued more than ever. Are the authors incorrect in their statement? No. There is still great discomfort when something cannot be quantified satisfactorily.

However, the desire to find a measure of student experience outweighs the thought that it is worthless. The thinking goes that we must be able to measure quality of experience, because it does hold worth.

Attempts to measure satisfaction exist, but they cannot provide a complete picture. For instance, the National Student Survey acts as a guide, not an unquestionable truth.

For an institution, learning must be key to student experience. Without learning as a scaffold to everything else, the term ‘higher education’ might as well be meaningless:

“Quality must not be jettisoned for other institutional priorities – since pedagogically speaking there can be no other greater priority for a university. Put another way, there is no point in growth, or in more ‘market share’ of applicants, or brighter cafeterias, or higher league table positions, unless such things transparently feed into enhancing this ‘Archimedean-like’ point.” [Scullion, Molesworth, Nixon – p.234]

Academic quality and student satisfaction are important regardless of consumer culture. A lovely, new coffee shop may be a great addition on campus, but it can’t hold all aspects of experience together. If the coffee shop gave you chocolate sprinkles without the drink underneath, you’d be confused. Similarly, higher education must go beyond chocolate sprinkles.

Quality isn’t the only issue, though. If a course is demanding and a great challenge to you as a student, institutions fear that satisfaction will drop. Students, understandably, seek out the easiest routes in their education.

But the ‘easiest route’ doesn’t equal the route where least work and learning takes place. These two ideas are easily confused. I’ve been guilty of it. Most of us are from time to time.

Of course we would prefer the least cumbersome route. Challenging, yes. But not a pointless slog or unreasonable shortcut.

Tuition fees do not ensure someone receives a degree as a matter of course. We frown on individuals who pay money for fake certificates and qualifications from non-existent universities. The route is easy, but it’s not valid.

Nevertheless, institutions are caught between a rock and a hard place. Give too much choice and learning suffers. Give too little choice and there’s uproar:

“[If universities] limit choice (as students claim to want), but in doing so aim for ‘compulsory’ challenge, complexity and difficulty, they are likely to see increased student dissatisfaction and, within the logic of the marketplace, find their customers going elsewhere. Attractive educational choice for students is choice that makes things easy or pleasant, but attractive choice for education is choice that requires reflection, complexity, challenge and therefore often the sort of dissonance and angst that good marketing usually works hard to eliminate.” [Nixon, Scullion, Molesworth – pp.206/7]

Long-term learning should be a joy, with some necessary chores thrown in. This would be a reasonable expectation. The mindset doesn’t come naturally though. Don’t think it’s your fault as a student, though. We are consumers, after all:

“Other consumerist thinking was evident in students’ descriptions of their experiences. Units where there was an expectation of reading, or seminar preparation were often rejected in favour of those that were perceived as allowing students to do ‘fun things’, where ‘fun’ often meant ‘things I can do easily’, or especially tasks that require little effort.” [Nixon, Scullion, Molesworth – p.204]

Consumer thinking goes beyond academia. When questioned about careers after university, “[students said] that it wasn’t really the elements of a job that were the basis for any fantasy of the future, but rather the lifestyle that a job might allow”. [Haywood, Jenkins, Molesworth – p.189]

We are sold dreams daily. There is nothing new about this. Why should this be any different in HE? Universities can play on students living a particular lifestyle by selling a dream institution. Look at the shiny prospectus. See the smiling faces, the colourful campus, the relaxed spaces for you to sit back and feel like you belong. You’ll fit in so well that you’ll never want to leave…

When I first saw the fake advert above, I was amused. Watching it now, I can’t help thinking how prospective students could easily be led toward choices that won’t help in the long run. It’s a vicious circle:

“HEIs may find it easier to sell a lifestyle that students desire than to promote a desire to study a complex subject in depth or to undertake the sort of intellectual challenge that we might hope a degree represents.” [Haywood, Jenkins, Molesworth – p.193]

Clarity from the outset would benefit everyone. But that’s not easy. As I’ve already mentioned, institutions aren’t able to communicate the hard work required without expecting a dent in student satisfaction. Yet, to make the most of any experience, we need to challenge ourselves. We need to take responsibility for our actions. Having a laugh and having it easy cannot lead to any worthwhile progression, whatever your reason behind going to university.

Therefore, clarity requires honesty:

“…lecturers could communicate to students the expectation that studying for a degree will be challenging, require considerable effort and may (indeed should) lead to a questioning of assumptions and prior knowledge – rather than immediate satisfaction.” [Williams – p.181]

How can that be achieved effectively? And how far can it be taken? For instance, can guarantees be given that promise a solid student experience? Even after you cast aside the subjective nature of such an experience, there are flaws. When McCollough and Gremler (1999) issued a written guarantee to half the students on a course and gave no such guarantee to the other half, students without the guarantee ended up reporting higher satisfaction! Maringe explains further:

“This may have been because those who received guarantees had higher expectations of the course than those who did not receive any written guarantees. In addition, both groups reported that high quality instruction was the most important expectation for a productive HE experience. There is thus a sense in which contracts in their known right do not deliver quality per se.” [pp.148/9]

An effective way to create honest enthusiasm is to give students further involvement, even in research terms. With the right mindset, it’s possible to foster commitment and encourage the desire to do more work than is necessary. The longer the mindset remains stuck at one of necessary study before the world of work, the longer the false idea of the ‘easiest route’ remains.

The ‘student as consumer’ model is far from clear cut. If you want to get a lowdown on the ups and downs, I recommend you grab a copy of “The Marketisation of Higher Education and the Student as Consumer“.

Consumer culture is growing. It cannot be ignored, neither should it be celebrated without further exploration. For the sake of staff, students, graduates, prospective students, and even the wider community, it is crucial to take on board the advantages and pitfalls of this model in order to create a stronger future for not only HE, but also the people it serves.

Edulinks – week ending 03 June 2011

Dismissed as ‘speculation’, the Telegraph reports on rumours that the government is considering a plan to guarantee university places to students with at least two As and a B in their A-levels.

Look to Europe for ideas on improving HE, rather than America, says Buckingham’s Anthony Glees. According to Glees:

“Affordability, the cost to students of access to research-led teaching, is the most important single factor in working out value for money in universities. Once this is understood, it’s obvious that US higher education can be seen as very bad value compared with higher education in every single European Union member state.”

At the same time, Times Higher Education reports that for-profit education providers could be in for a rough ride in the UK:

“A financial report filed earlier this year by BPP’s parent company Apollo Group shows that $220 million (£134 million) was taken off the value of the UK’s only for-profit degree-awarding institution due to pessimism about the market’s prospects.”

It’s not just commercial providers that promote the feeling that students are increasingly seen as customers. Speaking at the Hay Festival, Professor John Sutherland said that the study of English Literature is in a ‘ruinous’ state. He explained, “Instead of saying ‘You must read Alexander Pope’, you say ‘Who would you like to read?'”

As for academics, Sutherland argued that “it’s now almost a disqualification to be well read, because it’s seen as indicative of thinness or lack of focus”.

I’ll leave you today with a short lecture about the way in which people are social animals. David Brooks gave this talk recently for RSA. RSA have a load of great talks, billing themselves as “an enlightenment organisation committed to finding innovative practical solutions to today’s social challenges”. I definitely recommend their animated series of lectures.

For now, enjoy hearing about how interesting you are from David Brooks: