Search

The quest continues to standardise quality assurance systems throughout the European Higher Education Area (EHEA) under the auspices of the Bologna Process and led by the European Network for Quality Assurance (ENQA). Mirroring its member organisation in England, the Quality Assurance Agency (QAA), ENQA identifies, as one of its core aims, the development of quality assurance processes as instruments for both "accountability" and "enhancement". However, the recent history of QAA appears to indicate that the balance between these core aims has been lost and the discourse of accountability and efficiency prevails. This paper presents a case study of a Business Faculty (BF) in a post-1992 English university based on interviews with academics and documentary data. Findings suggest that the BF's Quality Assurance Unit affirms the primacy of accountability and efficiency, resulting in, paradoxically, a distortion of academic professional practice. For example, undergraduate curriculum development is narrowly framed as an "administrative process" from which most academics feel "dissociated" and approaches to teaching appear to lack coherent organising principles beyond standardised learning outcomes expressed as "skills". The paper concludes by briefly considering the implications of the case study findings for the future direction of ENQA Standards and Guidelines for Quality Assurance.

This paper is based on a qualitative case study of undergraduate curriculum design and pedagogic practice in the new University Business School (UBS). Data were collected using semi-structured interviews with 24 academics from across a range of business sub-disciplines together with an extensive documentary review of materials relating to two undergraduate degree programmes. The case study found that the UBS curriculum had become recontextualised as a "business project" in which programmes were constructed as "products" for the higher education market. The associated pedagogy was largely confined to behaviourist problem--solution routines based on narrow projections of the "real world" of business. This paper contends that UBS undergraduate programmes were designed in a generic mode in response to the material and discursive influences of marketisation. As a consequence, "epistemic chaos" had arisen in which knowledge and pedagogy had become fragmented and amorphous.

Several authors posit the notion that universities have experienced "moral loss" over the last 15 years under the sustained influence of neoliberal education policies. However, whilst some consensus exists around the causes and effects of moral loss, there appears to be little agreement about how "moral reconstruction" can be enacted. This paper explores the academic discourse on moral loss and moral reconstruction. It concludes that action-based approaches to the moral reconstruction of universities such as recognition and reward policies are unlikely to alter the current utilitarian trend in higher education. In the context of the contemporary world, the restoration of an "academic community" founded on "higher moral purpose" appears to be a remote aspiration. This is because the university has evolved into an integral part of the wider socio-economic system, which itself has fractured under the same neoliberal influences.

Interviews with managers and lecturers at a British further education college that had experienced a change in governance found the rise of a "new managerialism." Lecturers opposed this style and its values, perceiving a threat to the professional culture of further education. (SK)