Search

This article considers questions of ‘employability’, a notion foregrounded in the Green and White Papers on the Teaching Excellence Framework (TEF). The paper first questions government imperatives concerning employability and suggests a series of mismatches that are evident in the rhetorics in this area. This summary opens up elements of what I am calling the first ‘folly’ in the field. The second section of the paper considers recent research with individual academics engaged in employability activity. This research suggests another series of mismatches in the aims and outcomes of ‘employability initiatives’ and opens up a further series of ‘follies’ in the day-to-day practices of academics and students’ responses to them. The third section of the paper turns to academics’ reports of student behaviour in relation to the outcomes of their degree. This section develops an argument that relates to the final ‘folly’ associated with the current focus on employability. I argue that students’ focus on outcomes (which at face value suggests they have internalized the importance of employment) is contributing to the production of graduates who do not have the dispositions that employers – when interviewed – say that they want. The highly performative culture of higher education, encouraged by the same metrics that will be extended through the TEF, is implicated then innotpreparing students for the workplace. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

This paper addresses a particular gap in the further education (FE) literature offering an analysis of Incorporation within a theory of social change developed by Fligstein and McAdam, in their work ‘A Theory of Fields’. The authors argue that FE was subjected to the introduction of a quasi-market in advance of wider neoliberal reforms in the English public sector. The paper analyses the development of Incorporation arguing the marketisation of the sector developed a logic of its own which the authors term the ‘logic of Incorporation’. This logic overdeveloped areas of ‘market’ interest while neglecting other crucial areas such as teaching and learning, professionalism and the curriculum. These neglected areas are explained using the concept of ‘unorganised social space’ (taken from an undeveloped concept in Fligstein and McAdam’s work) which remain unstable and unresolved because the very logic of Incorporation blocks the discussion of other logics, discourses or alternatives. The paper concludes that the logic of Incorporation leaves many important areas underdeveloped including the strategic place or purpose of FE itself. It proposes that FE has yet to find the stability of a ‘strategic action field’ needed to maintain itself and should be returned to some form of local or regional government ownership and control. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

This article focuses on theBuilding Colleges for the Future(BCF) initiative (2008) which saw a wave of new-build Further Education (FE) colleges spring up across England in the final years of the New Labour government. It draws on qualitative data from a research study focusing on four new-build colleges in the West Midlands of England to theorise the BCF initiative. Using theory derived primarily from Lefebvre, the paper contextualises BCF within a frame of neoliberalisation and discusses the impact of the ‘production of space’ represented by the initiative with a research focus on two areas: pedagogy and ideology. The main findings are that these new-build colleges can be interpreted as spatial expressions of policy-makers and others’ perceptions of teaching and learning; in ideological terms, they also trumpet a ‘new lifestyle’ and a ‘new art of living’ for FE staff and students that is however, in tension with residual pedagogical practices and values. The article concludes that despite being an expression of neoliberal abstract space, these new-builds can still be seen as providing a frame for alternative individual and collective encounters with education which may subvert and outlast the processes of neoliberalisation that they appear to embody. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In the United Kingdom (UK), Higher Education Institutions share with other educational providers the duty to provide reasonable adjustments for students who disclose disabilities. The role of academic administrators in the operationalisation of legislation-driven policy related to disability within the university context is overlooked within empirical and theoretical literature, and explicit recognition of the administrative role is often reduced to descriptions of bureaucratic processes and training requirements. This paper makes an empirical and theoretical contribution by explicitly recognising the unique operational and personal practices of educational administrators as they undertake disability-related work. Drawing upon a larger ethnographic study that employed observation, in-depth qualitative interviews and discourse analysis, the findings start to reveal the subtle interactional practices that administrators undertake during their everyday work with people disclosing of a disability; these revelations offer indicators for future staff training and development. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper begins by providing an overview of the UK's national key skills agenda, with a view to placing in context the subsequent description of the formulation and implementation of a skills policy by a traditional, research led university, namely Queen's University Belfast. The paper is written from the perspective of two members of academic staff who spent two years on part-time secondment as Skills Development Officers. We outline how a number of small-scale investigative projects informed our thoughts and decisions, how aspects of management and internal politics influenced the formulation or a university skills policy, and how a series of initiatives evolved that were aimed at supporting staff and students in implementation of that policy. We conclude that while external pressures to explicitly develop students' key skills within higher education are intense, restitutions need to reflect more on the implications of any policies and strategies for implementation they impose upon their staff. Within traditional institutions progress can be slow, with the pace of change influenced not only by the level off support and drive from senior management, but also dependent upon the knowledge, experience, energy and enthusiasm of academic 'champions' who have a balanced view' of the skills agenda. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

During its time in office, the UK’s Labour government gave a strong message that having caring responsibilities for a young child should not be seen as a barrier to engaging in education and training. Its widening participation strategy included a specific commitment to increasing the number of mature students in higher education (HE) – students who are more likely than their younger peers to have caring responsibilities for dependent children. Furthermore, considerable resources were devoted to encouraging teenage mothers to return to education and training soon after the birth of their child. Nevertheless, despite this policy focus, there have been relatively few studies of the experiences of ‘student-parents’ within HE. This paper draws on findings from a cross-national study (funded by the Nuffield Foundation) to explore the support currently offered by UK universities to students who have parental responsibilities for one or more children under the age of 16. It compares this support to that offered by Danish institutions, to assess whether differences in ‘welfare regime’, the structure of the HE system and pervasive assumptions about gender relations have any discernible impact on the way in which student-parents are both constructed within institutional cultures and assisted by institutional practices. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

What constitutes graduate employability is discursively framed. In this paper we argue that whilst universities in the UK have long had an involvement in producing useful and productive citizens, the ongoing neoliberalisation of higher education has engendered a discursive shift in definitions of employability. Traditionally, universities regarded graduate employment as an aspect of institutions' relationship with the labour market, and one where they enjoyed a significant degree of discretion. Now, employability is a performative function of universities, shaped and directed by the state, which is seeking to supplant labour markets. We argue that this has three profound implications. First, state intervention in labour markets adjusts power balances in favour of employers. Second, contrary to the legitimising rationale of enhancing social justice, pursuit of employability agendas may well be creating two tiers of universities - those that produce docile employees and those that produce employers/leaders. And third, employability discourses may be adversely affecting pedagogies and curricula, to the disbenefit of students, institutions, employers, social justice and civil society. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The recent UK government Green Paper proposes reform for the supply side of 14-19 education, establishing four key goals. This article focuses on the first of these goals: meeting needs and improving choice. The article draws on research on sixth form colleges, general further education colleges and schools. It argues that employers, one of the two groups highlighted in the Green Paper, are a relatively weak force in shaping provision. The second group, young people, are more powerful due to current funding incentives, it presents evidence which suggests that colleges and schools perceive both practical and attitudinal difficulties in collaborating to meet needs by offering flexible routes and a distinctive range of choices. A long history of intervention in the supply side has not achieved widening participation nor equity amongst the choices offered. A more radical approach to influencing the demand side may be needed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper considers the nature of the university as an institution in a time of great change in the function of the university. Lifelong Learning as a concept is highly politicized and its desired ends are not clear – possibilities are discussed. The debates herein are related to the position of the universities and their (potential and current) role in recruiting adult learners. Consideration is given to the ways in which the university must change if it is to become a fit place in which for adults to learn; continued and increased adult participation being crucial if lifelong learning is to become a reality. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper explores the organizational and management consequences of the changing policy environment facing public sector education in England and Wales over the past 10 years. In particular it considers how far arguments about the replacement of older ‘bureau-professional' forms of organizational order by more ‘managerialist' forms in the public sector in general can be applied to the specific case of education. The paper begins by reviewing the major policy changes that have affected schools and colleges since 1988. Drawing on published studies from these sectors, it then considers a number of themes: changing roles of senior and middle managers; changes in managerial and organizational culture; and changes in specific aspects of management. Emphasizing the tentative nature of the evidence, the paper identifies some common trends which imply a movement towards managerialism in many institutions. However, it also identifies areas where the position is less clear and suggests a number of factors which may explain differences of experience. It emphasizes the importance of not reifying a previous ‘golden age' of collegiality and concludes that what is being experienced is a complex and dynamic process of adjustment between old and new organizational and managerial forms. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Term-time employment among Britain's undergraduates is a growing phenomenon but it has received scant attention from government and policy makers. Although there are numerous studies on the subject, few have explored the impact of term-time employment on students' actual attainment and those that have are limited. This article attempts to fill that gap. Using data derived from 1000 students in six UK universities, it quantifies the impact of students' paid work on their actual marks and degree results, while controlling for their academic attainment on entry to higher education and other factors including their hours of work. It shows that irrespective of the university students attended, term-time working had a detrimental effect on both their final year marks and their degree results. The more hours students worked, the greater the negative effect. Consequently, students working the average number of hours a week were a third less likely to get a good degree than an identical non-working student. Some of the least qualified and poorest students are most adversely affected perpetuating existing inequalities in HE. The 2006/07 changes to student finances may help some of them, but term-time employment is likely to remain part of the HE landscape. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article examines the views of staff employed in UK higher education institutions (HEIs) about how those institutions are dealing with the impact of recent UK equality legislation and related European employment directives. Assumptions underlying current approaches to equality in UK HEIs are examined, particularly the notion of meritocracy, which advocates job selection and promotion based on normatively and culturally neutral measures of merit. The article is based on a project funded by the Higher Education Funding Council for England, using qualitative case studies of six English, Welsh and Scottish HEIs. The project data suggest that equality policies for staff and students are in tension with each other, that staff policies may clash with other institutional policies, for example on research excellence or enhancing the student experience, and that the rhetoric of equality policies is not always matched by the day-to-day experience of staff. The article suggests that the case study UK HEIs, with their continued focus on meritocracy and excellence, have not yet adapted to the new climate of employee equality legislation and perhaps need to consider a different approach than the meritocratic one. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]