Confusion in UK education system
Toward a rational View of Society: 1 & 2
Let’s look at the confusion documented in the UK Higher Education system. The source is at bottom, my brief in the middle, and my proposition atop was presented to local groups of concerned citizens for discussion.
Proposition
Education is run today as a goods & service offering, casting students as consumers albeit dis-empowered ones. While stakeholders identify their lack of support or information, they offer little mitigation in response to that. Instead they isolate and direct students to make them ready for the workforce, rather than allow them to develop critical thinking and discern their own path. In other words ‘old systems’ of merit and family resist ‘liberal goals‘ of education per se.
Stakeholders in higher education are the government (thru policy & funding), universities & student unions (education itself and its environment), and business & graduate employers (government funders and the students’ future context). The transition in the past decades to this new system has been muddled for lack of concerted policies &/or programs.
It is important to restore all of: inclusive student environment, supportive government policies and realistic business expectations, to help the next generation move forward. And for that all stakeholders must be brought together to help them restore / maintain / build a rational and sustainable framework, which serves & integrates into society as a whole.
Brief on the source
The authors see in last few decades a “… re-positioning of higher education as an economic good, and the use of the ‘hard-working’ trope across other areas of social policy as a means of distinguishing between ‘deserving’ and ‘undeserving’ recipients of state support”. I see a catalogue of “isms” we address with tools to help improve the status-quo:
Students changed in Britain over the past few decades from recipients of education from unis. & grants from government to consumers of goods (student loans) and services (education they shop around for). This transition was messy as various stakeholders interpreted this transition differently. These stakeholders are government, university staff and student unions, and businesses and graduate employers. It is known that students are reflective not docile subjects, meaning self-determined & exploring options, rather than following trends and traditional paths. Plus socio-economic trends have also changed in that time period.
The pivot of this study is that the goal if of student stupefaction rather than education. Government view of students as consumers contrasts with youth’s vulnerability and lack of information & support: Adultism (student = children) creeps into government papers as well as union documents. Government and employers also view students as future workers, with early expectations on productivity rather than education. In other words ‘liberal goals’ of a) educating thinking & critical young adults, b) in a collective send of group empowerment have been lost, in favour of ‘hard working’ students as in ‘hard working families’ and ‘deserving of results’. Also classism and paternalism are also evident in union and business communications. Finally nationalism is portrayed in government documents that discount foreign visitors.
Source & abstract
The construction of higher education students in English policy documents
“This article investigates the ways in which students are constructed in contemporary English higher education policy. First, it contends that, contrary to assumptions made in the academic literature, students are not conceptualised as ‘empowered consumers’; instead their vulnerability is emphasised by both government and unions. Second, it identifies other dominant discourses, namely that of ‘future worker’ and ‘hard-worker’. These articulate with extant debates about both the repositioning of higher education as an economic good and the use of the ‘hard-working’ trope across other areas of social policy. Third, it shows that differences are drawn between groups of students. Contrasts are drawn, for example, between international students, juxtaposing the ‘brightest and best’ with those who are considered ‘sham’. Finally, the article argues that the figure of the ‘vulnerable’ student and ‘thwarted consumer’ feeds into broader government narratives about its policy trajectory, legitimising contemporary reforms and excusing the apparent failure of previous policies.”
