2009
DOI: 10.1080/14681360902934392
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Student voice: theorising power and participation

Abstract: The paper considers theoretical notions of power in relation to student voice. As an action-oriented practice some aspects of student voice have received little theorisation as yet. This paper aims to contribute to a growing body of work on student voice which is addressing its current theoretical under-elaboration. It does so by concentrating on the dimension of power. The central argument is that power is a significant factor in shaping both the philosophical underpinnings of student voice work and the pract… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

2
84
0
7

Year Published

2013
2013
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 164 publications
(102 citation statements)
references
References 34 publications
2
84
0
7
Order By: Relevance
“…Grounded in critical research tradition and radical pedagogy (see Taylor and Robinson, 2009), student voice is defined as processes that enable students to be consulted on their education (Czerniawski, 2012) with the aim of increasing students' representation and participation in processes from which they have historically been excluded Robinson, 2009). McLeod (2011, p. 181) identifies four common overlapping uses of voice in educational discourse: 1) voiceas-strategy (to achieve empowerment, transformation, equality); 2) voice-as-participation (in learning, in democratic processes); 3) voice-as-right (to be heard, to have a say); and 4) voice-asdifference (to promote inclusion, respect diversity, indicate equity).…”
Section: Potential Of Student Voice For Educational Changementioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…Grounded in critical research tradition and radical pedagogy (see Taylor and Robinson, 2009), student voice is defined as processes that enable students to be consulted on their education (Czerniawski, 2012) with the aim of increasing students' representation and participation in processes from which they have historically been excluded Robinson, 2009). McLeod (2011, p. 181) identifies four common overlapping uses of voice in educational discourse: 1) voiceas-strategy (to achieve empowerment, transformation, equality); 2) voice-as-participation (in learning, in democratic processes); 3) voice-as-right (to be heard, to have a say); and 4) voice-asdifference (to promote inclusion, respect diversity, indicate equity).…”
Section: Potential Of Student Voice For Educational Changementioning
confidence: 99%
“…Taylor and Robinson (2009) argue for the importance of recognising plural and context-specific relations of power and participation. Similarly, Czerniawski (2012) emphasises the existence of different forms of professional trust in different national locations.…”
Section: Potential Of Student Voice For Educational Changementioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Learners have, for their part, been required to engage with learning outcomes, criteria and have a pro-active and independent role in learning and assessment. These student responsibilities come with new powers linked to student voice (Taylor & Robinson, 2009) and this is linked to gauging institutional excellence through, for example, the Course Experience Questionnaire (Australia) and the National Student Survey (UK). It is interesting to note that frequent least positive aspects of students' course experiences are related to assessment and feedback (Yorke, 2013).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Whilst student engagement in SoTL is seen as inherently transformative for the outcomes of SoTL (Manor et al, 2010), recent theorisation of student voice has significantly problematised the power dynamics of student agency within higher education enhancement (Taylor and Robinson, 2009). Recognising the inevitability of power discrepancies within the context of traditional higher education practices (Mann, 2008), conceptualising SoTL involving students as pedagogy calls for increased attention to the potentially normative functioning of a "hidden curriculum" (Portelli, 1993) that has been left unexposed in current theorisation of student engagement in SoTL.…”
Section: Sotl As Pedagogy: Making Explicit the "Hidden Curriculum" Ofmentioning
confidence: 99%