Search

Creating and disseminating knowledge through research and teaching has long been regarded as the hallmark of the modern university. However, new university business models have called into question the 'bundling' of teaching and research, and sustained research on the relationship between teaching and research has found little evidence of an insoluble connection between the two activities. In this article, we explore the relationship between teaching and research from the perspective of universities' institutional discourse. We use corpus‐assisted discourse analysis to examine the relationship between research and teaching as presented in two sets of institutional texts currently influential in UK Higher Education: Research Excellence Framework environment statements and Teaching Excellence Framework provider submissions (a total of 2143 documents and 12,492,071 words). Our findings show that, while universities emphasise the value of research to their teaching, they do not always emphasise (or sometimes even decry) the influence of teaching on their research. We empirically evidence that, according to what universities themselves write in institutional texts, teaching and research are not always in a mutually beneficial entanglement, but often rather a one‐way relationship in which research expertise and institutional prestige are used to bolster claims of teaching excellence. This has implications for the communication of both the vision and the purpose of a university in regulatory exercises and wider policy, but also speaks to the broader idea and practice of being a university in the twenty‐first century. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Teaching Excellence Framework (TEF) is an evaluation of teaching quality at UK universities. The aim of the TEF is to raise esteem for teaching in line with research and recognise teaching excellence. In 2017 all universities who took part in the TEF exercise were awarded ratings of gold, silver or bronze for teaching quality. These awards were based on a set of quantitative measures and a 15-page provider submission from each university to describe teaching at their institution. In this paper, we analyse the provider submissions that played a crucial role in universities' TEF rating. We conducted a corpus-assisted discourse analysis of all of the provider statements (232 statements; 1,742,438 words) submitted by participating institutions in order to un-earth the discourse of the TEF. We found that the themes driving success in the TEF are (1) employment, (2) employability (3) student outcomes and (4) research. Recognising what discourse is rewarded in the TEF has important implications for the accepted discourse of teaching excellence in UK higher education. It is anticipated that, in future, university discourse around teaching quality will continue to be dominated by employability discourse (rather than discourse around, for instance, social goods, personal development or equity). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Technology has dominated discourse on the future university and how digital technologies disrupting wider societal activities can be leveraged in higher education. To gain an insight into UK institutional perspective on technology adoption in teaching and learning and visions for the future, two corpora of text are analysed: Teaching Excellence Framework statements (n = 88) and university strategy documents (n = 88), totalling 1, 129, 736 words. Quantitative empirical analysis reveals that institutions write about how they 'use' technology for teaching and learning. Interpretative analysis found that technology is 'used' as an end in itself as well as a means for specific ends (such as assessment and feedback and flexible learning). Using concepts from science and technology studies and philosophy of technology, these perspectives are theorised as instrumentalist, substantivist and essentialist and problematised when viewing technology in education as apolitical, neutral and inevitable. Perceived neutrality ignores the many competing ideologies and interests at play. In this context, a dichotomy of 'pedagogy first' or 'technology-led' design is explored. Critical theory of technology is used to bridge these binary discourses which are described as reductive in a complex sociotechnical university assemblage. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article investigates how the considerations on higher education and research have been narratively represented in a public domain in the process of the United Kingdom's withdrawal from the European Union. Having adopted the general orientation of the discourse-historical approach to discourse analysis, the study surveys the narrative (re)presentation of research and higher education issues during three key phases of the Brexit process: 1) the pre-negotiation period; 2) the stage of Article 50 negotiation, and 3) the transition period. With the public domain restricted to higher education institutions (especially British universities) on the one hand, and the UK Government on the other, this inquiry helps us understand how the actors have employed specific narratives in order to create meaning and influence (and potentially change) the impact of Brexit on academia. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In UK universities, reflection is promoted not only for its intrinsic value but also for instrumental purposes, for students to gain and demonstrate skills and attributes which are valued by employers. In this paper, I examine reflective writing produced by students seeking an award offered by the careers department of one university. By looking at the evaluative language choices made by the student writers, I shed light on some of their practices regarding self-representation and their articulations of experience. I provide a critical account of what reflective writing looks like in this particular setting, and interpret this in the broader context of the goal to foster reflection among higher education students. I argue that the reflective writing engendered by this particular context and task is different in key respects from the reflection which is commonly advocated as an element of personal, professional or academic development. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Context In the UK, applications to medicine from those in lower socio-economic groups remain low despite significant investments of time, interest and resources in widening access ( WA) to medicine. This suggests that medical schools' core messages about WA may be working to embed or further reinforce marginalisation, rather than to combat this. Our objective was to investigate how the value of WA is communicated by UK medical schools through their websites, and how this may create expectations regarding who is 'suitable' for medicine. Methods We conducted a critical discourse analysis of the webpages of UK medical schools in relation to WA. Our conceptual framework was underpinned by a Foucauldian understanding of discourse. Analysis followed an adapted version of Hyatt's analytical framework. This involved contextualising the data by identifying drivers, levers and warrants for WA, before undertaking a systematic investigation of linguistic features to reveal the discourses in use, and their assumptions. Results Discourses of 'social mobility for the individual' justified WA as an initiative to support individuals with academic ability and commitment to medicine, but who were disadvantaged by their background in the application process. This meritocratic discourse communicated the benefits of WA as flowing one way, with medical schools providing opportunities to applicants. Conversely, discourses justifying WA as an initiative to benefit patient care were marginalised and largely excluded. Alternative strengths typically attributed to students from lower socio-economic groups were not mentioned, which implies that these were not valued. Conclusions Current discourses of WA on UK medical school websites do not present non-traditional applicants as bringing gains to medicine through their diversity. This may work as a barrier to attracting larger numbers of diverse applicants. Medical schools should reflect upon their website discourses, critically evaluate current approaches to encouraging applications from those in lower socio-economic groups, and consider avenues for positive change. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The lament that ‘students can’t write’ remains loud and defiant, even after years of research pointing to the myriad factors that make students’ writing challenging, particularly when they move into university. This paper reports on a longitudinal, ethnographic study which explored students’ writing ‘in transition’, from A-levels to university in the UK, through the critical lens offered by the academic literacies conceptual framing. This paper offers critical analysis of the ways that students, teachers and institutions position writing at A-level and university, exploring the assumptions and beliefs that underpin their understandings and practices using Ivanič’s framework of discourses of writing. The analysis proposes that the centrality of assessment in the treatment of language at both levels creates an ‘assessment discourse of writing’, which originates in school, and becomes a defining and restrictive frame for students’ writing as they move into higher education. The analysis further suggests that assessment is the principal cause for the students’ challenges with adapting to the writing requirements of university. Moreover, assessment is used as a metalanguage for discussing writing at A-levels, and can become an unhelpful ‘anchor of continuance’ for students as they move into university. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Massive Open Online Courses ( MOOCs) have been a prominent topic of recent educational discussion and debate. MOOCs are, in essence, university-affiliated courses offered to large groups of online learners for little or no cost and are seen by many as a bellwether for change and reform across higher education systems. This study uses content and discourse analysis methods to examine how understandings of MOOC-related 'change' were presented in US, UK and Australian newspapers. Drawing on detailed analysis of 457 newspaper articles published between 2011 and 2013, the findings point to a predominant portrayal of MOOCs in relation to the massification, marketization and monetization of higher education, rather than engaging in debate of either 'technological' or 'educational' issues such as online learning and pedagogy, instructional design or student experience. The article then considers the reasons underpinning this restricted framing of what many commentators have touted as a radical educational form-not least the apparently close association between MOOCs and the economics of higher education. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]