No abstract

If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information. About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.comEmerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and services.Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive preservation. AbstractPurpose -The aims of this paper are twofold: first, to engage with the definition of quality as "excellence" and to show why this could be regarded as unhelpful and misleading; and, second, to suggest some factors which contribute to a "cultural divide" between quality assurance specialists in universities and their colleagues who are full-time academics. In both cases the paper seeks to raise and explore these issues because their resolution may suggest ways forward for quality assurance in higher education. Design/methodology/approach -The paper is generally based on consideration and critical evaluation of published work relevant to the two issues mentioned previously. However, other forms of evidence are drawn into the argument. Notably, lexical data from the British National Corpus are examined in order to substantiate points about the semantics of the word "quality". Findings -The paper finds, on the grounds of both lexical semantics and consideration of scholarly literature on quality assurance in higher education, that it is unhelpful to understand the term "quality" as equivalent to "excellence". It also identifies possible reasons why a "cultural divide" exists between university lecturers and quality assurance specialists. Originality/value -The paper should be of interest to both quality assurance specialists and lecturers in universities. It offers logical, language-based reasons why "quality" should not be regarded as "excellence" and goes on to relate this to the notion of "quality enhancement". Preliminary suggestions are also made about means through which the "cultural divide" between academics and quality assurance specialists might be narrowed, to the potential benefit of universities seen as both complex entrepreneurial organizations, and academic communities.

Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) is an established interdisciplinary approach to texts in terms of their wider social and political significance, and owes its prominence, in part, to one of its most influential practitioners, Norman Fairclough. This paper examines the theoretical foundations of Fairclough's CDA and its ways of working with texts. It summarizes and evaluates arguments put by critics of CDA, including Widdowson and Stubbs. It also shows that a political perspective antithetical to Fairclough's can be supported by a mode of textual commentary similar to his own. Overall, the paper argues that Fairclough focuses largely on neo‐liberal discourses; draws on linguistics merely for its metalinguistic terminology; and offers linguistic descriptions subservient to political motivations and judgments. L'Analyse de Discours Critique (CDA) est une approche interdisciplinaire aux textes en termes de signification sociale et politique. L'influence de CDA provient, en partie, d'un de ses praticiens les plus influents, Norman Fairclough (Fairclough 1989; 1995; 2003). Cet article examine les fondations théoriques de CDA de Fairclough et ses façons de travail avec les textes. Il récapitule et évalue des arguments mis de côté par les critiques de CDA, en incluant Widdowson (1998; 2004) et Stubbs (1997). Il montre aussi qu'une perspective politique antithétique à Fairclough peut être soutenue par une mode de commentaire textuel semblable à celle de Fairclough soi‐même. En général l'article soutient que Fairclough se concentre en grande partie sur des discours néo‐libéraux; qu'il emploie comme source la linguistique simplement pour sa terminologie metalinguistique; et qu'il offre les descriptions linguistiques qui sont serviles aux motivations et jugements politiques.

Distinctive developments in an Arab sultanate. Relatively few people around the world react with instant recognition when the Sultanate of Oman is mentioned. This may however be changing as international news media focus ever more strongly on events in the Arab world and on the strategic significance of the Persian Gulf. There are many who misunderstand the spoken word ‘Oman’ as ‘Amman’ and therefore think erroneously of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan. Oman, however, is a beautiful and hospitable country possessing white sand beaches, rugged mountain ranges, breathtaking cave systems, a long and somewhat surprising history, and an English of its own.

The doctoral viva voce examination has existed in Britain since the PhD (or DPhil) was introduced at Oxford University almost a hundred years ago. However, despite some recent research studies, it seems that the viva remains somewhat under-researched and that viva voce examinations continue to take place according to largely unchanged and unchallenged procedures. This paper presents evidence collected via questionnaire and interview from a sample of UK academics working in education departments at 16 universities in England. It is shown that individuals within the sample hold contrasting views about the purpose, value, and degree of reliability associated with oral assessment at doctoral level. The paper critically examines eight aspects of the viva's design, purpose, conduct, and outcomes, under such headings as 'examiner judgement', 'examiner behaviour/attitudes' and 'the viva as opportunity'.The question of whether examiners should have the power to waive the viva under certain circumstances is also addressed. Rather than attempting to provide definitive answers to such questions, the paper highlights a series of inter-related issues which seem problematic. The author's intention is to spark further discussion in academia about the viva's current and possible future content, conduct, and purposes.