Streeting, Wes

Wise, Graeme

English

Digital Education Resource Archive

Rethinking the values of higher education - consumption, partnership, community?By Wes Streeting, President, and Graeme Wise, Political Officer, National Union of StudentsForewordMany terms and phrases are used to describe the relationship between universities and students,such as 'consumers', 'active participants', 'co-producers', 'partners', 'community of learning' and'apprentices'; all are useful, but each has limitations and particular connotations. When the Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education (QAA) made the decision to includestudents as members of Institutional audit and review teams, consequently imbuing them withthe authority and responsibility that come with the role, we were asked questions about what this implied about the relationship between students and the higher education sector. Given thelevel of interest in this and the amount of times QAA was asked for an opinion, we felt it wasappropriate to commission some 'think pieces' from a range of leaders in the sector with different perspectives.Wes Streeting, President, and Graeme Wise, Political Officer, of the National Union of Students,have produced the following thoughtful piece entitled Rethinking the values of higher education -consumption, partnership, community? that sets out a positive vision of the relationship betweenstudent and institution. Following on from this, Dr Paul Taylor and Danny Wilding from theReinvention Centre for Undergraduate Research at the University of Warwick have produced apiece entitled Rethinking the values of higher education - the student as collaborator and producer?Undergraduate research as a case study.1Higher Ambitions, the Government's higher education framework, together with its impendingreview of variable fees in England, has placed the student experience and changing relationships between students, their institutions and their learning at the heart of currentdebates. These pieces are important contributions to that discussion and, together with others to follow, will be welcomed.Anthony McClaranChief Executive, QAANovember 20091 Available on the QAA website at www.qaa.ac.uk/students/studentengagement/undergraduate.pdfRethinking the values of higher education - consumption, partnership, community?By Wes Streeting, President, and Graeme Wise, Political Officer, National Union of StudentsThe character of higher education in Britain is rapidly changing. Any short glance at recentreports and commentary in the higher education press reveals a range of competing worries andfears. There are voices of concern for maintaining either 'quality' or 'standards', or both. There arethose who are fearful of the impact of a new level of student expectation on academicprofessionals. There are worries over the 'value for money' that students get for the fees they nowpay, about possible 'mis-selling' of university courses, and about the effect on the nature of studyitself. Underlying it all, we believe, is the trend - which has been developing for some time now - towards market approaches in the way higher education is organised. One of the mostimportant symptoms of this is the increasingly prevalent notion of the student 'as consumer'.This notion is situated within a much wider process of change in public services. In asophisticated but accessible analysis of an emerging 'marketplace democracy', CatherineNeedham defines the central issue:To claim that citizens are being treated as consumers is to say that the government-citizen relationship is replicating patterns of choice and power found in theprivate economy.... The government's agenda for public service reform is concentratedon an objective of maximising "customer satisfaction" and expanding individual choiceand competition. (Needham, 2003, pp 5-6)The aim of a 'students as consumers' model is to bring these principles to the higher educationenvironment. It invites students to navigate higher education as a market, making choices andjudgements about value for money as they go; it emphasises student satisfaction and calls forinstitutions to respond to both students' demands, as individual learners, and indeed studentdemand, in aggregate, in a constantly evolving market. We want to pursue an exploration of this issue and we want to do so explicitly from the student perspective.Let's begin by constructing a straw woman, Kate, who exhibits all the attitudes and behaviours of the 'consuming' student. Kate is concerned about value for money - she's getting into a lot of debt to do this course and she wants to be sure it's worth it. She's pretty desperate to get atleast a 2:1 because she fancies working for one of the accountancy giants. She thinks the coursematerials she's been given are of quite a poor standard, not very accessible, and she's quiteirritated that her lecturers won't put the slides up on the university intranet so she can downloadthem, even though she never misses a class. She can't believe the library isn't open 24 hours aday, and when she can get into the library it's far too busy and the core texts are always out.Nothing frustrates Kate more than when her lecturers can only see her at a fixed time, and only a couple of times a term, and only for 20 minutes.To contrast this, we construct a straw man, Joe, who represents all the attitudes and behavioursof the 'non-consuming' student. Joe would never sacrifice his own positions of principle to get abetter grade; he knows that the lecturers think he's usually way off the point, but he thinks hisfocus is much more important than they do - and actually he should get higher marks for hiscreativity and persistence. He rarely visits the library, preferring instead to refer to the 30 or sovolumes of great, canonical works that he has piled in his bedroom. He often misses class, andisn't too worried about it. Nothing frustrates Joe more than bumping into a couple of hislecturers in a local pub, only to find they don't want to engage him in a discussion about thelater works of Foucault.1Both of these students are in trouble. Joe is either very wealthy or absurdly cavalier, or otherwisehas decided to treat his studies as an exercise in style. Kate is worryingly focused on the materialaspects of the learning experience; so much so that she must find it hard to concentrate on the actual subject she's studying. Both are likely to panic in the second half of their final year, and not do as well as they could have. It is certain that neither is learning as much as they shouldbe learning.These are only caricatures, but because the concept of the student 'as consumer' is so hard to pin down, these sketches can potentially reveal more than trying to give an exhaustive definition.In particular, they help us to show that it is as unhelpful to students to become paramountconsumers as it is for them to become consciously avant-garde in their approach to their studies.What we should aim for is a healthy, balanced approach. Students should be able to challengethe quality of the learning environment and the support they are getting, and should also be able to take intellectual risks and sometimes pursue interests at a tangent to the main curriculum.It should be obvious that students can't really do any of these things unless they have beenreasonably diligent, attended most of the classes, done the background reading, and tried to seek out help and advice. It should be equally obvious that to do this, students need access towell-funded and well-managed resources, and the support of expert and helpful teachers. When all these things are happening in concert, the result is higher education imbued with what we might call 'quality'.We believe that when a discourse that calls for students to be seen 'as consumers' comes into themix, it throws the system off balance, and 'quality' suffers as a result. How does this happen?Alistair McCulloch has recently produced a critique of the 'student as consumer' model. He argues that this approach has at least eight weaknesses or problems, in that it:a) overemphasises one aspect of the student's role and of the university's missionb) suggests undue distance between the student and the educational process, thereby de-emphasising the student's role in learningc) encourages passivity on the part of the studentd) fails to encourage deep learninge) implies in the student a level of knowledge and information, and the possession of toolsto use them, that are unlikely to be presentf) serves to deprofessionalise the academic role and encourage the 'entertainment' model of teachingg) compartmentalises the educational experience as 'product' rather than 'process'h) reinforces individualism and competition at the expense of community.(McCulloch, 2009, p 177)There is insufficient space to summarise all these points here, and McCulloch expands each indetail in his paper. Suffice to say, however, that the values of consumption, when applied by anindividual to their learning, may cause a range of counterproductive effects - as in the case of thefictional (but all too real) example given above. McCulloch proposes an alternative model. He argues that viewing students as 'co-producers', not as 'consumers', might help to tackle and resolve these problems. In such a model, students are viewed as essential partners in theproduction of the knowledge and skills that form the intended learning outcomes of theirprogrammes. They are therefore given responsibility for some of the work involved, and are notpassive recipients of a service.2It is quite clear that students are invariably responsible for some of the effort involved at all levels of higher education - and arguably all education. Inherent in processes of learning is therequirement for some action on the part of the learner. So at the individual level, co-production is already happening all the time because new skills, knowledge and understanding are'produced' through a combination of student effort, pedagogy and the learning environment(facilities, resources, and so on). If taken further though, a model of co-production also impliesstudent involvement at the collective level. It suggests that institutions should bring students intothe decision-making process, ask students to help design the curriculum, and give studentscontrol of some parts of the learning environment. In addition, it emphasises the role of students' unions, course representatives, and so on, in influencing institutional policy by adding a student viewpoint in various contexts, or increasingly by running projects and services on the institution's behalf.A model of co-production could bring numerous benefits. The New Economics Foundation, forexample, suggests that a co-production approach could lead to increased learner satisfaction,reduced student anxiety and greater understanding of learner needs, increased satisfactionamongst academic staff, and improved educational outcomes. But the co-production model canalso be criticised on a number of grounds. At its heart is the intent to place more responsibility inthe hands of students. Those students are not, by definition, expert in their subject of study, andnor are they likely to be trained in the theory and practice of pedagogy, and this could makeinvolvement in shaping the curriculum quite difficult. Because they are used to navigatingmarkets and making consumer choices quite readily, a new expectation that they should nowshare responsibility for the management of services and facilities could be too challenging. The language of 'co-production' itself can appear overly technocratic and obscure and not readilyappealing to the many students who just want to follow their course and have a good time.Convincing such students that they should want to be 'co-producers' might be seen as thegreatest challenge.We wish to explore a further alternative approach. We refer primarily here to work done byProfessor Frank Coffield for the Learning and Skills Network, in which he develops the concept ofthe 'community of practice' in learning. In the 'community of practice' approach, the learningprocess is not seen as delivery or production, but as induction. It is the journey learners take ontheir way to becoming active participants and practitioners in a particular trade, profession,discipline or discourse. The emphasis is on building relationships - not only between teachers andstudents, but between students and other students, at the same and differing levels of study. It isan approach that calls for cross-disciplinary interaction to happen much more, and in ways thatinvolve students at every level of study. It requires open debate about the direction of policy andstrategy, in which all members of the educational community can participate and contribute. The difference between this participative approach and the product-acquisition approaches ofconsumerism and co-production can be quickly summarised in a table:Acquisition ParticipationGoal Individual enrichment Community buildingLearning Acquiring facts Becoming a participantStudent Recipient, customer Apprentice, peripheral participantTeacher Deliverer, provider Expert, dialogue partnerKnowledge Possession, commodity Aspect of practiceKnowing Having, possessing Belonging, participating(Coffield, 2008, p 7)3It can be seen how the 'community of practice' approach represents quite a radical departurefrom other models. It takes a naturally collectivist, flexible and organic view of the educationalprocess and asks us to think critically about how such an approach might be supported andstimulated. It is now incumbent on us to take the concept a little further, with a brief butrelatively practical indication of what this approach might mean for policymakers andpractitioners in higher education, outlining some of the ways a 'communities of practice' modelcould be developed. Many of these ideas are already being pursued in the sector so there aresome examples to follow, and where this is the case we indicate it - but perhaps what remains to be done is the purposeful coordination of all these ideas (and others like them) in an overallstrategy reflecting the 'community of practice' approach. Establishing more extensive student induction programmes, perhaps even on an accreditedbasis, which would address academic values, ethics and ways to expand the learningexperience (as in UCL's 'Transition' programme: www.ucl.ac.uk/transition). Supporting self-organising study and discussion groups for different subjects within theinstitution, and also crossing subject boundaries (schemes such as PASS at the University ofManchester: www.manchester.ac.uk/undergraduate/academiclife/supportservices/pass andPAL at Bournemouth University: http://pal.bournemouth.ac.uk). Creating networks for students in similar subject areas across several institutions where thereis a common interest either by geography or by mission, or other factors (currently beingexplored and developed in Scotland through the work of the Higher Education Academy(HEA) in Scotland and student participation in quality Scotland (sparqs) on subject networks). Increasing the frequency of student presentation of research and ideas, and for a greateraudience (as in Warwick University's Reinvention Centre:www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/sociology/rsw/undergrad/cetl). Concentrating effort on improving student feedback and follow-up from presentations andassessments, and making the sources of feedback more diverse (the NUS has recently done a great deal of work on feedback, as has the HEA).  Circulating student work amongst other students (with appropriate measures in place toensure this is done positively and to mitigate the risk of plagiarism). Organising regular, open discussions and debates about institutional policy and strategy, in which both students and staff (academic and administrative) could participate (as in theUniversity of Exeter's 'Students as Agents of Change' project:http://as.exeter.ac.uk/eeu/projects/studentprojects.shtml). Allowing some course content to be shaped by open discussion amongst participants aboutthe direction of programmes; so that participants gain a greater sense of the scope of thesubject and the many possible alternative directions that could be taken. Increasing the amount of joint work and joint assessments, especially in subject areas wherethis is not the norm. Using new social networking technologies to increase the exchange of ideas and viewsamongst students who may not naturally make contact with each other in the classroom.We believe this issue is ultimately about power, and in particular, who has the power todetermine action in the educational environment. In a model of consumerism, power is cleaved;consumers exert it through their market choices and their complaints to the provider, but theprovider makes its own decisions about how to respond to these pressures, through policy andmanagement practice. In co-production, power is shared; both students (as users) andinstitutions (managers and academics) each have joint responsibility for change in policy and 4for their own roles in practice. Both approaches are problematic because they are insensitive tothe reality of the world of higher education in all its complexity, and create differing but oftenunhelpful pressures for all concerned.In the approach we have briefly outlined, power is seen as relational, dynamic and ever-shiftingwithin communities of practice and within a wider educational community. There are momentswhen a student holds the power over action almost solely within his or her own hands - after all,it is the student's own work that represents the final outcome, and no-one else can do that workfor them. At other moments, it is the teacher who has the power to define the boundaries of thesubject, introduce the key critical concepts, act as the referee for arguments, and oversee thestudent's ongoing work while offering guidance along the way. In still other situations, the powerto initiate new action is found at the points where minds come together (students in debate witheach other, for example), shaping cognition and provoking new work.The most important aspect of this approach is that all participants, especially students,understand that they do have power - and that it can be exercised through their commitmentand contribution to their community of practice, as opposed to the exercise of power simplythrough choice-making, complaint or by responding to consultation. We consider that this mightbe a better route to strengthening the relationships and fostering the attitudes which mustunderpin improvements in quality.References and other readingAhier, J, Beck, J and Moore, R (2002) Graduate Citizens? Issues of citizenship and higher education,London: RoutledgeCoffield, F (2008) What if teaching and learning really were the priority? London: LSNClarke, J, Newman, J E, Smith, N and Vidler, E (2007) Creating Citizen-Consumers: ChangingPublics and Changing Public Services, London: SageFeatherstone, M (2007) Consumer Culture and Postmodernism, London: SageHughes, J, Jewson, N and Unwin, L (2006) Communities of Practice: Critical Perspectives, London: RoutledgeMcCulloch, A (2009) The student as co-producer: learning from public administration about thestudent university relationship, Studies in Higher Education, vol 34, no 2, pp 171-183Needham, C (2003) Citizen Consumers: New Labour's Marketplace Democracy, London: Catalyst Working PaperSlater, D (1998) Consumer Culture and Modernity, Cambridge: Polity PressWenger, E (1999) Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning, and Identity, Cambridge: CUP5© The Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education 2009ISBN 978 1 84979 045 1All QAA's publications are available on our website www.qaa.ac.uk The Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education Southgate HouseSouthgate StGloucester  GL1 1UBTel 01452 557000Fax 01452 557070Email comms@qaa.ac.ukWeb www.qaa.ac.ukRegistered charity numbers 1062746 and SC037786QAA 319 10/09

Rethinking the values of higher education - consumption, partnership, community?

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Digital Education Resource Archive