No abstract

No abstract

Across Europe, assumptions are often made within the academic literature and by some social commentators that students have come to understand the purpose of higher education (HE) in increasingly instrumental terms. This is often linked to processes of marketisation and neo-liberalisation across the Global North, in which the value of HE has come to be associated with economic reward and labour market participation and measured through a relatively narrow range of metrics. It is also associated with the establishment, in 2010, of the European Higher Education Area, which is argued to have brought about the refiguration of European universities around an Anglo-American model. Scholars have contended that students have become consumer-like in their behaviour and preoccupied by labour market outcomes rather than processes of learning and knowledge generation. Often, however, such claims are made on the basis of limited empirical evidence, or a focus on policies and structures rather than the perspectives of students themselves. In contrast, this paper draws on a series of 54 focus groups with 295 students conducted in six European countries (Denmark, England, Germany, Ireland, Poland and Spain). It shows how understandings of the purpose of HE are more nuanced than much of the extant literature suggests and vary, at least to some extent, by both nationstate and higher education institution. Alongside viewing the purpose of HE as preparing them for the labour market, students emphasised the importance of tertiary-level study for personal growth and enrichment, and societal development and progress. These findings have implications for policy and practice. In particular, the broader purposes of HE, as articulated by the students in this study, should be given greater recognition by policymakers, those teaching in HE, and the wider public instead of, as is often the case, positioning students as consumers, interested in only economic gain.

In this article we argue that despite methodological and analytical advancements in the field of social class research, these developments have not led to a wholehearted discussion about class positionality and situatedness in relation to interviewer–participant dynamics. Despite—or perhaps due to—this methodological gap, there remains an unspoken expectation that class matching, particularly when investigating working‐class groups and practices, is desirable as it engenders empathy on the part of the interviewer which allows for openness on the part of the participant. The team of four interviewers reflect upon their varying experiences of conducting interviews about class with a group of middle‐ and working‐class students at university, arguing that even if class matching between participant and researcher were possible, shared class position does not necessarily equate with similar life experiences, or enable a strong rapport nor a more ethical analysis or understanding of working‐class people's lives. We explore some of the complexities regarding the class‐related positions of the researchers and the participants and consequently advocate that class researchers engage in reflexive practices in order to explore the myriad ways in which the researcher's own class history and current class position both advantage and disadvantage the research process, often in unpredictable ways.

This article draws on data from six European countries (Denmark, England, Germany, Ireland, Poland and Spain) to explore the higher education timescapes inhabited by students. Despite arguments that degree-level study has become increasingly similar across Europe – because of global pressures and also specific initiatives such as the Bologna Process and the creation of a European Higher Education Area – it shows how such timescapes differed in important ways, largely by nation. These differences are then explained in terms of: the distinctive traditions of higher education still evident across the continent; the particular mechanisms through which degrees are funded; and the nature of recent national-level policy activity. The analysis thus speaks to debates about Europeanisation, as well as how we theorise the relationship between time and place.