On the Problems of Asking for a Definition of Quality in Education

Wittek, Line; Kvernbekk, Tone

doi:10.1080/00313831.2011.594618

Cited by 83 publications

(64 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It is noteworthy that whilst moving away from a market-oriented discourse, this alternative did not give a sense of what is special about the knowledge that students are engaging with nor did it give a sense of the identities that they develop through this engagement. In the language of the literature on higher education quality (Harvey and Green 1993;Green 1994;Bowden and Marton 1998;Shields 1999;Morley 2003;Houston 2008;Cuthbert 2010;Wittek and Kvernbekk 2011;Barrett 2011), in the policy documents we analysed this discourse emphasised the transformation of students but it did not indicate how knowledge will transform them or what it will transform them into.Compared to the dominant market discourse, the actors arguing the alternative model were much more fractured and less coherent. Whilst groups from the official and economic fields were fairly consistent in emphasising the dominant model in relation to all of the four aspects of a good undergraduate education that we examined, the four aspects of the alternative model were not clearly articulated by any of the actors we examined.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This matters because what comes to be counted as a quality in relation to undergraduate education helps to shape the basis on which universities are judged and evaluated, and thereby frames their role in society. The literature on quality in higher education has indicated a struggle between a marketised, consumerised definition of the quality of higher education being about fitness for purpose and value for money and definitions of quality that are based on the transformation of students (for example, see Harvey and Green 1993;Green 1994;Bowden and Marton 1998;Shields 1999;Morley 2003;Houston 2008;Cuthbert 2010;Wittek and Kvernbekk 2011;Barrett 2011). Similarly, reviews of recent government policies have examined the way in which these policies have promoted particular marketised definitions of higher education (for example, see Brooks 2007; Boden and Nevada 2010;Collini 2011Collini , 2012Freedman 2011).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Representations of a high-quality system of undergraduate education in English higher education policy documents

Ashwin

Abbas

McLean

2013

Studies in Higher Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article examines the ways in which a high-quality system of undergraduate education is represented in recent policy documents from a range of actors interested in higher education. Drawing on Basil Bernstein's ideas, the authors conceptualise the policy documents as reflecting a struggle over competing views of quality that are expressed through pedagogic discourses. They identify two pedagogic discourses: a dominant market-oriented generic discourse and an alternative discourse that focuses on transformation. They argue that the marketoriented generic discourse is dominant because it is more coherent and more consistently presented than the alternative discourse, which is much more fractured. In conclusion, they argue that refocusing the alternative discourse of quality around students' relations to academic knowledge may offer a way in which to bring the different actors from the higher education field together in order to form a stronger, more cohesive voice.Keywords: higher education policy; pedagogic discourse; Quality; Basil Bernstein; undergraduate education Introduction: markets and quality Recent changes to the funding of undergraduate education in England have been argued to fundamentally challenge the historic role of universities as autonomous and critical institutions (for example, Doherty 2011;Holmwood 2011; Molesworth, Scullion, and Nixon 2011;Collini 2012). Changes in funding are seen as part of a wider set of changes that have for some time been argued to be leading to the 'marketisation' of undergraduate higher education in which universities have increasingly had to compete for students, who are positioned as consumers of higher education (see Dill 1997Dill , 2007Meek and Wood 1997;Williams 1997;Morley 2003; Bok 2006;Brown 2006Brown , 2011aMcCulloch 2009;Cuthbert 2010;Barrett 2011;Dodds 2011;Watson 2011). In the English context, the marketisation of undergraduate education has intensified with rises in student numbers and the introduction and increases in the fees that students pay for their tuition. This has led to a more intense focus on the 'quality' of higher education, as students as customers are seen to require reliable information about the quality of the product they are purchasing, and the competition for these students is seen as improving the quality of the product (Green 1994;Vidovich 2002;Morley 2003;Brown 2006Brown , 2011aBlackmur 2007;Blackmore 2009). Whilst marketisation has led to an increased focus on the quality of undergraduate education, it does not, as Young (2008) notes in relation to knowledge, define the meaning of quality because markets are reliant on definitions from elsewhere. This means that it is important to chart and understand the definitions of quality that are used both implicitly and explicitly in policy documents and the ways in which particular definitions appear to dominate. This matters because what comes to be counted as a quality in relation to undergraduate education helps to shape the basis on which universities are judged and evaluated, and ...

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Representations of a high-quality system of undergraduate education in English higher education policy documents

Ashwin

Abbas

McLean

2013

Studies in Higher Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Andre (se for eksempel Aamodt, Hovdhaugen, & Prøitz, 2014;Stensaker, 2013;Wittek & Kvernbekk, 2011) har drøftet ulike måter å forstå begrepet kvalitet, men det er ikke poenget her. I denne artikkelen bruker jeg begrepet kvalitet i tråd med Wittek og Kvernbekk (2011), som en beskrivelse av vesentlige egenskaper ved objekter, produkter og prosesser.…”

Section: Innledningunclassified

Hvordan utvikle og kontrollere prosesskvalitet?

Hatlevik¹

2016

Uniped

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Quality in higher education has been addressed from varying angles, for instance as exception, perfection, standardisation, adjustment for purpose, effectiveness and transformation (Aamodt, Hovdhaugen, & Prøitz, 2014;DahlerLarsen, 2013;Harvey & Green, 1993;Stensaker, 2013;Wittek & Kvernbekk, 2011). It has also been pointed out how tensions may exist between notions of quality, for instance between a result-oriented understanding among politicians and the process-oriented approach in academic institutions (Stensaker, 2013).…”

Section: Qualitymentioning

confidence: 99%