Quality as Illusion? Considering Hidden Trade-Offs and Risks in Undergraduate Education Conceptualised as ‘Regulated Play’

IF 2.8 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
Deanna Meth
{"title":"Quality as Illusion? Considering Hidden Trade-Offs and Risks in Undergraduate Education Conceptualised as ‘Regulated Play’","authors":"Deanna Meth","doi":"10.1111/hequ.70028","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>In-depth interviews exploring academics' teaching practices and views on undergraduate education at one English university reveal concerning examples of educational trade-offs in delivering on national and institutional quality expectations. Evidence reveals the negative impacts on teaching and students' learning and achievements. Quality instruments reflect their neoliberal managerialist environment, its internal structures of power, organisation and monitoring and are viewed through Foucault's concept of governmentality. Academics' responses align with a post-Foucauldian construct reflecting their negotiating behaviours in this space. A new conceptual model extends on Docherty's construct of ‘contained’ play to capture ways in which institutional quality systems and structures might restrict learning. The questions, ‘what lies hidden from the gaze of traditional quality measures?’ and ‘where does the real risk to quality lie?’ are asked, revealing quality to be illusory in some instances. Findings reinforce the critical need to better understand teaching academics' experiences as key mediators in this area.</p>","PeriodicalId":51607,"journal":{"name":"HIGHER EDUCATION QUARTERLY","volume":"79 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/hequ.70028","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"HIGHER EDUCATION QUARTERLY","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/hequ.70028","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In-depth interviews exploring academics' teaching practices and views on undergraduate education at one English university reveal concerning examples of educational trade-offs in delivering on national and institutional quality expectations. Evidence reveals the negative impacts on teaching and students' learning and achievements. Quality instruments reflect their neoliberal managerialist environment, its internal structures of power, organisation and monitoring and are viewed through Foucault's concept of governmentality. Academics' responses align with a post-Foucauldian construct reflecting their negotiating behaviours in this space. A new conceptual model extends on Docherty's construct of ‘contained’ play to capture ways in which institutional quality systems and structures might restrict learning. The questions, ‘what lies hidden from the gaze of traditional quality measures?’ and ‘where does the real risk to quality lie?’ are asked, revealing quality to be illusory in some instances. Findings reinforce the critical need to better understand teaching academics' experiences as key mediators in this area.

Abstract Image

质量是幻觉?以“规范游戏”为概念的本科教育中的隐性权衡与风险思考
通过对一所英国大学的学者的教学实践和对本科教育的看法的深入访谈,揭示了在实现国家和机构质量期望方面教育权衡的一些例子。有证据表明,这对教学和学生的学习和成绩产生了负面影响。质量工具反映了他们的新自由主义管理主义环境,其内部的权力结构,组织和监督,并通过福柯的治理概念来看待。学者们的反应与反映他们在这个空间中的谈判行为的后福柯式结构相一致。一个新的概念模型扩展了Docherty的“包含”游戏结构,以捕捉机构质量系统和结构可能限制学习的方式。问题是,在传统的质量衡量标准的注视下隐藏着什么?和“质量的真正风险在哪里?”,在某些情况下,这表明品质是虚幻的。研究结果强调,迫切需要更好地了解教学学者作为这一领域关键调解人的经验。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
HIGHER EDUCATION QUARTERLY
HIGHER EDUCATION QUARTERLY EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
9.10%
发文量
42
期刊介绍: Higher Education Quarterly publishes articles concerned with policy, strategic management and ideas in higher education. A substantial part of its contents is concerned with reporting research findings in ways that bring out their relevance to senior managers and policy makers at institutional and national levels, and to academics who are not necessarily specialists in the academic study of higher education. Higher Education Quarterly also publishes papers that are not based on empirical research but give thoughtful academic analyses of significant policy, management or academic issues.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信