The Marketisation of Higher Education and the Student as Consumer

Molesworth, Mike; Scullion, Richard; Nixon, Elizabeth

doi:10.4324/9780203842829

Cited by 167 publications

(102 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

100

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The problems linked to conceiving higher education as a consumer service or product have been extensively discussed and challenged (see Molesworth et al 2010;Naidoo et al 2011). These range from critical pedagogic approaches to challenges around the specific meanings of the student-consumer and how effectively it may be applied to higher education.…”

Section: Value and Consumptionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Conceptions of the value of higher education in a measured market

Tomlinson

2017

High Educ

104

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A critical analysis is developed of the dominant meanings of value in marketised higher education. In policy terms, this has become informed by the logics of the measured market whereby value has become synonymous with economic return and institutional accountability. The notion of value is one which permeates many discussions on the purpose of higher education and the perceived benefits it confers onto individuals and society as a whole. This, however, remains largely implicit and unearthing the specific meaning of value (and values) clearly presents challenges. This article critically examines a variety of concepts relevant to discussion of the value of higher education, including the relationship between value and quality, consumerism, goods and performativity. In each case, it unpacks their meanings and implications for the relationship between students and institutions, particularly at a time when this is seen to be increasingly transactional. It then outlines an alternative value framing to the utilitarian 'value for money' so prevalent in much market-driven policy.

show abstract

Section: Value and Consumptionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Conceptions of the value of higher education in a measured market

Tomlinson

2017

High Educ

104

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…2 With consumerism changing students into customers (Molesworth, Scullion & Nixon, 2010;Woodall, Hiller & Resnick, 2014) and tutors into service providers (Guzmán-Valenzuela & Barnett, 2013), with ever-more vulnerable and naïve students being encouraged to enrol, competition rather than sector collaboration has become the higher education market's ethos. One consequence of such a change is that trust in the common good, once assumed of higher education (Giroux and Giroux, 2004;Carvalho and de Oliveira Mota, 2010) has been shaken by the uncertainty of the market and needs to be re-built.…”

Section: Do Heis Communicate Trust Well?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Do higher education institutes communicate trust well?

Gibbs

Dean

2015

Journal of Marketing for Higher Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The relationship between trust and information sources for new purchasers of higher education is discussed. A range of sources is evaluated by potential entrants into UK higher education, and indicates that universities tend to be regarded as the most trustworthy when information is directly associated with them and social networks, and friends and student-derived sources the least, along with KeyInformation Set (KIS) data. Keywords: higher education; communication, trust INTRODUCTIONMarketing in higher education has grown from information in a prospectus or year book into a range of communicative and relationship communication practices designed to attract students in the same way as consumers to cars, iPads and foreign holidays. The tangible benefits of fun and the economic promise of a university education have dominated higher education communications. Universities have promoted education, offering hedonistic gratification and routes to careers. to position education as their product or service as yet one more thing to be consumed (Lawlor, 2007). Furthermore, Klassen (2000) reports that in the USA the marketing of higher education institutional values and priorities is usually symbolised by the message 'that students will not need to change in order to be successful ' (2001: 21). In Europe state-controlled universities have introduced student fees and engaged in institutional marketing to distinguish themselves at a time when higher education provision has become available to increasing numbers of students. This seems beneficial and what one would expect from institutions that have internal trust and are trusted by the public (although questioned by Tierney, 2006, andStensaker & Harvey, 2011). Yet, in meeting this demand and securing their own financial futures as competition intensifies, institutions are 'engaging in professional marketing activities ' (Veloutsou, Paton & Lewis, 2005: 279) rather than, perhaps, enriching the educational and the common good. These activities run the risk of displaying overwhelming consumerism (Naidoo & Jamieson, 2005).The impact of these changes is summarised by Hassan, who observes: the commercialization of the university is primarily an economic and political process of transformation that has little if anything to do with education, knowledge production and the well-being of either staff or students. What is more, these changes are all being refracted through the prism of neo-liberal ideology. (2003: 77) DO HEIS COMMUNICATE TRUST WELL?2 With consumerism changing students into customers (Molesworth, Scullion & Nixon, 2010;Woodall, Hiller & Resnick, 2014) and tutors into service providers (Guzmán-Valenzuela & Barnett, 2013), with ever-more vulnerable and naïve students being encouraged to enrol, competition rather than sector collaboration has become the higher education market's ethos. One consequence of such a change is that trust in the common good, once assumed of higher education (Giroux and Giroux, 2004;Carvalho and de Oliveira Mota, 2010) has been shake...

show abstract

“…Although attendance is generally studied in relation to performance achievement (Arulampalam, Naylor & Smith, 2012;Chamberlain, 2012;Allen & Webber, 2010), this study aims to take a more critical approach, examining practices to improve attendance, their implications and possibilities and illuminating different ways of conceptualising the "problem of attendance" at lectures, seminars and other academic activities. Whilst there is a tendency to represent students as consumers (economic subjects), rather than being reflective or productive -(economic character) or individualistic (economic citizenship) (Brown, 2015;Molesworth, Scullion and Nixon, 2011), through this project on attendance, we also take a political standpoint by committing ourselves to uncover narratives that contribute to challenge that form of representation and contribute generating new ideas and positions.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%