Student Engagement: Towards A Critical Policy Sociology

Abstract

This paper develops a critical policy analysis of the student engagement agenda, exploring its establishment as a key policy framework in HE and why it has developed such momentum.Based on a critical policy sociology approach, this article analyses the levels through which student engagement can be conceptualised: macro, meso and micro. At the macro level, the concept can be seen as partly aligned to the market-driven and massified institutional context and informed by New Public Management policy levers intended to enhance the performative value of contemporary universities. At the meso level, student engagement has been instituted by policies and practices evaluated by a range of performance measures that purportedly capture the efficacy of engagement practices. At a micro level, it presents issues around students' relationship with institutions in light of their changing role. If student engagement policy and practice is able to elevate students as active co-producers of self-directed learning, they may also potentially affirm their role as regulatory customers. Policy sociology; neoliberalism; performativity; engagement; studentship Introduction: problem and contextThe concept of student engagement has become firmly established in the lexicon of contemporary higher education (HE) policy and has informed much discussion on the 2 management of student experience (Kuh, 2010). However, it remains conceptually ambiguous, largely due to the multiple ways in which it can be conceived and the multiple contexts in which it is played out (Baron and Corbin, 2012). Student engagement has been defined broadly as the level of effort and investment students make towards their formal study, resulting from educationally purposeful provision that enriches their formal experiences. It is acknowledged that it is likely to have multiple components -for instance, Trowler (2010) has identified cognitive, emotional and behavioural dimensions, each of which are achieved through different facets of students' experiences. Much of the research and analysis has framed the issue in terms of the favourable institutional and pedagogic conditions that encourage students to make further cognitive investments in their higher education learning.A key concern preoccupying those involved in HE teaching and learning has been to develop institutional and pedagogic strategies that enhance student engagement (Coates, 2005). This is followed by endeavours to best capture how effective these are and how well they can be implemented and then measured. This tends to work from the premise that student engagement provision is inherently beneficial to students and that provision must be tailored to enrich its impact. Student engagement has therefore become viewed as a key lever towards the enhancement of institutional effectiveness and quality at a time when policy makers have emphasised the importance of maximising the formal benefits of participating in HE. This has also taken place during a period when, in many countries at least, the costs of participa...

Inequalities reinforced through online and distance education in the age of COVID-19: The case of higher education in Nepal

“… 9 Critical policy sociology refers to an approach of examining educational policies against how macro-level political-economic drivers shape meso-level (institutional) and micro-level policies, policy enactments, engagement and experiences (Tomlinson 2017 ; Regmi 2019 ). …”

Comparing Teachers’ and Students’ Perspectives of Student Engagement in Higher Education: Between Performativity and Invisibility

“…The author concludes that it is important to think about the meaning of engagement so that the measures used "are relevant to the processes and outcomes of learning that we are trying to encourage" (Wintrup, 2017, p. 95). Thus, equating meaningful learning to largely behavioural measures may fail to capture the quality of learning (Tomlinson, 2017). Would engagement-as-opposition (engagement outside the norms, protesting etc.)…”

“…Gourlay (2017) states that some students may have an independent style of engagement and collaborate less with peers, while others seem to be passive. The invisibility of solitary forms of student engagement such as reading, writing or enquiring on the content of the subject outside the class may be ignored by teachers (Gourlay, 2017;Padilla-Petry & Vadeboncoeur, 2020) and students who prefer more solitary or independent learning may feel alienated and even vilified in classes where participation is mandatory (Tomlinson, 2017).…”

Can the performance effect be ignored in the attendance policy discussion?

“…Against this backdrop, a debate about university attendance policies has been slowly unfolding in recent years. Some academics view attendance policies as a symptom of new public managerialism and the marketisation of Higher Education (De Vita & Case, ; Tomlinson, ). For example, in two recent papers, Macfarlane () offered an eloquent critique of such policies.…”