Leading undergraduate provision in further education colleges: the experiences of BA Education programme leaders

IF 1.9 Q2 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH London Review of Education Pub Date : 2023-03-15 DOI:10.14324/lre.21.1.09
Ross M Purves, Mark Pulsford, R. Morris
{"title":"Leading undergraduate provision in further education colleges: the experiences of BA Education programme leaders","authors":"Ross M Purves, Mark Pulsford, R. Morris","doi":"10.14324/lre.21.1.09","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article explores the experiences of those who lead undergraduate education-related programmes in further education (FE) colleges in England. Questionnaire and interview fieldwork with 14 further education-based programme leaders were supplemented by a comparison survey of equivalent professionals from higher education institutions (HEIs). Drawing on Hodgson and Spours’s four-level lifelong learning ecology and Nardi and O’Day’s keystone species concept, our analysis characterises the role of the undergraduate programme leader as distinctive and critical within the further education context. Extremely multifaceted and busy, this role is also poorly defined, often involving individuals relying on craft wisdom accrued within specific contexts. Three overall strands of responsibility emerged in participants’ view of their role: the administrative and organisational demands of colleges and the validation/franchising of higher education partners; the provision to learners of appropriate support in their studies; and the recognition of and response to pastoral needs of students. Tensions were identified between these, with one strand tending to preoccupy programme leaders at any time, obscuring their view of other important role objectives. As such, we introduce the concept of sightlines to capture the importance of enabling programme leaders to see through and beyond their institutional context and engage outwards, rather than turn inwards. Practical recommendations include the provision of time and licence to study for advanced qualifications, to undertake research and to help nurture distinctive cultures of higher education learning.","PeriodicalId":45980,"journal":{"name":"London Review of Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"London Review of Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14324/lre.21.1.09","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This article explores the experiences of those who lead undergraduate education-related programmes in further education (FE) colleges in England. Questionnaire and interview fieldwork with 14 further education-based programme leaders were supplemented by a comparison survey of equivalent professionals from higher education institutions (HEIs). Drawing on Hodgson and Spours’s four-level lifelong learning ecology and Nardi and O’Day’s keystone species concept, our analysis characterises the role of the undergraduate programme leader as distinctive and critical within the further education context. Extremely multifaceted and busy, this role is also poorly defined, often involving individuals relying on craft wisdom accrued within specific contexts. Three overall strands of responsibility emerged in participants’ view of their role: the administrative and organisational demands of colleges and the validation/franchising of higher education partners; the provision to learners of appropriate support in their studies; and the recognition of and response to pastoral needs of students. Tensions were identified between these, with one strand tending to preoccupy programme leaders at any time, obscuring their view of other important role objectives. As such, we introduce the concept of sightlines to capture the importance of enabling programme leaders to see through and beyond their institutional context and engage outwards, rather than turn inwards. Practical recommendations include the provision of time and licence to study for advanced qualifications, to undertake research and to help nurture distinctive cultures of higher education learning.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
继续教育学院领先的本科课程:学士学位教育项目领导者的经验
本文探讨了那些在英国继续教育学院(FE)领导本科教育相关课程的人的经历。对14名继续教育课程负责人进行问卷调查和实地访谈,并对来自高等教育机构的同等专业人员进行比较调查。借鉴Hodgson和Spours的四级终身学习生态学以及Nardi和O’day的关键物种概念,我们的分析将本科项目领导者的角色描述为在继续教育背景下独特而关键的角色。这个角色非常多面和忙碌,也没有明确的定义,通常涉及依赖于在特定环境中积累的工艺智慧的个人。参与者对自己角色的看法中出现了三种责任:大学的行政和组织要求以及高等教育合作伙伴的认可/特许经营;为学习者提供适当的学习支持;以及对学生教牧需求的认识和回应。两者之间存在紧张关系,其中一股倾向于随时占据方案领导人的注意力,模糊了他们对其他重要作用目标的看法。因此,我们引入了视线的概念,以捕捉使项目领导者能够看穿和超越其机构背景并向外参与的重要性,而不是转向内部。切实可行的建议包括提供时间和许可证,以获得高级资格,进行研究,并帮助培养独特的高等教育文化。
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 去求助
来源期刊
London Review of Education
London Review of Education EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
6.70%
发文量
39
审稿时长
48 weeks
期刊介绍: London Review of Education (LRE), an international peer-reviewed journal, aims to promote and disseminate high-quality analyses of important issues in contemporary education. As well as matters of public goals and policies, these issues include those of pedagogy, curriculum, organisation, resources, and institutional effectiveness. LRE wishes to report on these issues at all levels and in all types of education, and in national and transnational contexts. LRE wishes to show linkages between research and educational policy and practice, and to show how educational policy and practice are connected to other areas of social and economic policy.
期刊最新文献
Researcher developers: an emerging third space profession Decentring engineering education beyond the technical dimension: ethical skills framework Understanding international student experiences in Japanese higher education: belonging as an indicator of internationalisation success Critical thirding and third space collaboration: university professional staff and new type of knowledge production The third space, student and staff co-creation of gamified informal learning: an emerging model of co-design
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1