{"title":"扩大参与、评估和绩效:运用批判性话语分析探讨英国高等教育准入和参与计划(2020-2025)、监管指导和随附文本中的绩效","authors":"Naomi Clements","doi":"10.5456/wpll.24.3.56","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In England, evidencing impact of higher education widening participation and access activities, such as mentoring programmes, summer schools and school-university partnerships, has become central to conditions of the newly established regulatory body, the Office for Students (OfS).\n However, evaluation evidence of these activities remains elusive across the higher education sector (Gorard, 2013; National Centre for Research Methods, 2016; Harrison and Waller, 2017). 'Robust evaluation' (University of Exeter, 2019), is now a core element of the regulatory framework in\n England. English policy makers and Government departments are also keen to see evaluation evidence, highlighted by the formation of a new 'What Works' centre specifically focussed on evaluation of access and student success activities (TASO, 2019). Using Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA),\n this article analyses the English regulator's guidance documentation for higher education providers' Access and Participation Plans. It explores how the language of evaluation is framed within the discourses of widening participation and access. The article argues that current discourses promote\n performative evaluation methods, rather than an occasion to explore opportunities to develop transformative widening participation (Jones and Thomas, 2005). The article concludes by suggesting that higher education regulators and providers should rethink what constitutes robust evaluation\n evidence to facilitate equity in progression to higher education for under-represented groups.","PeriodicalId":90763,"journal":{"name":"Widening participation and lifelong learning : the journal of the Institute for Access Studies and the European Access Network","volume":"97 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-02-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"WIDENING PARTICIPATION, EVALUATION AND PERFORMANCE: Using critical discourse analysis to explore performativity within English higher education access and participation plan (2020-2025), regulatory guidance and accompanying texts\",\"authors\":\"Naomi Clements\",\"doi\":\"10.5456/wpll.24.3.56\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In England, evidencing impact of higher education widening participation and access activities, such as mentoring programmes, summer schools and school-university partnerships, has become central to conditions of the newly established regulatory body, the Office for Students (OfS).\\n However, evaluation evidence of these activities remains elusive across the higher education sector (Gorard, 2013; National Centre for Research Methods, 2016; Harrison and Waller, 2017). 'Robust evaluation' (University of Exeter, 2019), is now a core element of the regulatory framework in\\n England. English policy makers and Government departments are also keen to see evaluation evidence, highlighted by the formation of a new 'What Works' centre specifically focussed on evaluation of access and student success activities (TASO, 2019). Using Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA),\\n this article analyses the English regulator's guidance documentation for higher education providers' Access and Participation Plans. It explores how the language of evaluation is framed within the discourses of widening participation and access. The article argues that current discourses promote\\n performative evaluation methods, rather than an occasion to explore opportunities to develop transformative widening participation (Jones and Thomas, 2005). The article concludes by suggesting that higher education regulators and providers should rethink what constitutes robust evaluation\\n evidence to facilitate equity in progression to higher education for under-represented groups.\",\"PeriodicalId\":90763,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Widening participation and lifelong learning : the journal of the Institute for Access Studies and the European Access Network\",\"volume\":\"97 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-02-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Widening participation and lifelong learning : the journal of the Institute for Access Studies and the European Access Network\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5456/wpll.24.3.56\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Widening participation and lifelong learning : the journal of the Institute for Access Studies and the European Access Network","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5456/wpll.24.3.56","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
在英格兰,高等教育扩大参与和获取活动的证据影响,如指导计划,暑期学校和学校-大学合作,已经成为新成立的监管机构,学生办公室(OfS)的核心条件。然而,这些活动的评估证据在整个高等教育部门仍然难以捉摸(Gorard, 2013;国家研究方法中心,2016;哈里森和沃勒,2017)。“稳健评估”(埃克塞特大学,2019年),现在是英国监管框架的核心要素。英国政策制定者和政府部门也渴望看到评估证据,一个新的“什么是有效的”中心的成立突出了这一点,该中心专门关注评估机会和学生成功活动(TASO, 2019)。本文运用批评性话语分析(CDA)分析了英国监管机构对高等教育机构准入和参与计划的指导文件。它探讨了如何评价的语言框架内的话语扩大参与和访问。文章认为,当前的话语促进了绩效评估方法,而不是探索发展变革性扩大参与的机会(Jones and Thomas, 2005)。文章最后建议,高等教育监管机构和提供者应该重新思考什么是强有力的评估证据,以促进弱势群体在接受高等教育过程中的公平。
WIDENING PARTICIPATION, EVALUATION AND PERFORMANCE: Using critical discourse analysis to explore performativity within English higher education access and participation plan (2020-2025), regulatory guidance and accompanying texts
In England, evidencing impact of higher education widening participation and access activities, such as mentoring programmes, summer schools and school-university partnerships, has become central to conditions of the newly established regulatory body, the Office for Students (OfS).
However, evaluation evidence of these activities remains elusive across the higher education sector (Gorard, 2013; National Centre for Research Methods, 2016; Harrison and Waller, 2017). 'Robust evaluation' (University of Exeter, 2019), is now a core element of the regulatory framework in
England. English policy makers and Government departments are also keen to see evaluation evidence, highlighted by the formation of a new 'What Works' centre specifically focussed on evaluation of access and student success activities (TASO, 2019). Using Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA),
this article analyses the English regulator's guidance documentation for higher education providers' Access and Participation Plans. It explores how the language of evaluation is framed within the discourses of widening participation and access. The article argues that current discourses promote
performative evaluation methods, rather than an occasion to explore opportunities to develop transformative widening participation (Jones and Thomas, 2005). The article concludes by suggesting that higher education regulators and providers should rethink what constitutes robust evaluation
evidence to facilitate equity in progression to higher education for under-represented groups.