How not to fund teaching and learning

Higher Education Policy, 1997

In examining the concept of the "market" in relation to public higher education it is important to consider both its financial and ideological dimensions. In relation to the first dimension, an ongoing challenge faced by governments everywhere is how best to meet the costs of a mass system of higher education. A common policy response has been to pressure the higher education institutions themselves into seeking a greater proportion of their revenue from non-government sources through diversifying their funding base. To reinforce this shift in policy, governments have also sought to develop and implement mechanisms which can be used to differentially reward institutions on the basis of the amount of non-government funding secured. The second dimension of the "market" as it applies to higher education, is, however, far more complex, involving a re-definition of the basic ideological principles underpinning the relationship between higher education and the state, on the one hand, and higher education and society in general, on the other. The resulting interplay between these financial and ideological dimensions are examined in the context of Australian higher education. 3; 1997 International Association of Universities Kry wmds: Market forces. privatization, financing higher education, diversity, management. commercialization

Transylvanian review of administrative sciences, 2011

Australian universities face increased challenges in a global higher education marketplace. They have responded to this competitive environment by introducing greater efficiency and accountability measures. One key measure is the quality of teaching and in particular, the delivery of student-centred teaching. However, the reforms have changed the working lives of academic teachers who now have greater reporting and administrative responsibilities with less sense of collegiality in the sector. In these circumstances, it is not clear that teaching staff will share the same perceptions of quality teaching as their institutions expect. This paper examines the utility of role theory and learning organization theory as part of a project which will examine the ways in which implicit knowledge can be made explicit and shared in the organization as part of academic teachers’ roles. The paper hypothesizes that when academics share their perceptions of good teaching, universities will benefit ...

Teaching Excellence in Higher Education, 2017

Transylvanian Review of Administrative Sciences, 2011

Australian universities face increased challenges in a global higher education marketplace. They have responded to this competitive environment by introducing greater efficiency and accountability measures. One key measure is the quality of teaching and in particular, the delivery of student-centred teaching. However, the reforms have changed the working lives of academic teachers who now have greater reporting and administrative responsibilities with less sense of collegiality in the sector. In these circumstances, it is not clear that teaching staff will share the same perceptions of quality teaching as their institutions expect. This paper examines the utility of role theory and learning organization theory as part of a project which will examine the ways in which implicit knowledge can be made explicit and shared in the organization as part of academic teachers' roles. The paper hypothesizes that when academics share their perceptions of good teaching, universities will benefit from a coherent set of quality teaching indicators which are aligned with their organizational cultures.

Higher Education Quarterly, 1995

The purpose of this paper is to outline recent changes to higher education in Australia and assess the implications of those changes for teaching and learning in universities. Three main changes have been identifgd:

The Social Educator, Vol 3, No.2, 2013

The rise and fall of Australian higher education There is no doubt that the Australian higher education system has grown dramatically in the last fifty years. Yet so much of this growth has not been primarily driven by the genuine educational aspirations of government leaders to grow a high quality university system. Instead, growth has primarily (though not exclusively) come from real political pressures to broaden access to a university education. Unfortunately all too often the need to address these political demands has led to educational pragmatism, centred on generating university places rather than genuinely building the capability of Australian universities. Now we are on the eve of a further dramatic transformation, again based on the logic of expanding university places. This transformation is driven by a radical model that is unashamedly based on ‘other people’s ideas’, amounting to the effective privatisation of Australian higher education. This paper will reflect on this broad history and will argue that this market-driven model will represent (another) failure of leadership in higher education.

Journal for Critical Education Policy Studies, 2017

This paper offers conceptual and theoretical insights relating to the Teaching Excellence Framework (TEF), highlighting a range of potential systemic and institutional outcomes and issues. The paper is organised around three key areas of discussion that are often under-explored in debates. Firstly, after considering the TEF in the wider context of recent reforms, the paper offers a critical assessment, highlighting a broad range of flaws, issues and weaknesses in its design and execution. Counter to many 'common assumptions', it is argued that such weaknesses may mean the TEF is unlikely to pass smoothly or unopposed into policy and practice, and moreover it may result in a range of unexpected outcomes and 'refractions'. The paper then attempts to offer conceptual insights into possible institutional responses to the TEF, and the implications these may have for institutions and across the sector as a whole. Finally, it is argued that the TEF should be considered in its wider context, as a landmark initiative that is designed to further embed a neoliberal audit and monitoring culture into Higher Education, and one that is unlikely to bring about the proclaimed teaching excellence.

The Course Experience Questionnaire (CEQ) is a survey conducted with all Australian university graduates within 12 months after completing a university degree qualification. It assesses a graduate's overall experience and assessment of their university and program of study. As such it acts as a form of performance assessment of teaching in the Australian tertiary sector. The CEQ has a long history and originated from the sector, and particularly by Ramsden and other academics keen to foster reflection on and evaluation of tertiary teaching quality. This policy research paper provides an overview of the CEQ, its history and its location with contemporary Australia government policy aimed at advancing quality tertiary education. It outlines the contents and administration of the survey and its evolution, the policy context in quality assurance and teaching standards in tertiary education, and parallel practices of teaching evaluation in Australian institutions, public policy and internationally, and considers how the CEQ is located in the wider governance of Australia's university governance at both the institutional and sectorial levels. As such it sits alongside parallel processes of performance measurement and governance of research within Australian universities.

Studies in Higher Education

Drawing on recent research involving over 6,000 academic staff from in Higher Education, this paper examines the impact of the Teaching Excellence Framework (TEF) on their professional lives since its launch in 2016. Our findings raise fundamental concerns, conceptually and methodologically, about the fitness for purpose of the TEF as a policy and its failure to take into account the views and experiences of Higher Education teaching staff. With a reliance on proxy metrics that emphasise the economic value of Higher Education over the quality of teaching, we explore how the TEF lacks legitimacy and credibility as an instrument of measurement of teaching excellence across all levels of the workforce. We also argue that the TEF has failed to achieve its original aims of improving the quality of teaching and increasing student choice to date, which raises further questions about its effectiveness and the repercussions for future policy reform. (149)

Proceedings of the 2014 ISAA Conference, The Lucky Country? Canberra (October 2014), 2015

There is no doubt that the Australian higher education system has grown dramatically in the last fifty years. Yet so much of this growth has not been primarily driven by the genuine educational aspirations of government leaders to grow a high quality university system. Instead, growth has primarily (though not exclusively) come from real political pressures to broaden access to a university education. Unfortunately all too often the need to address these political demands has led to educational pragmatism, centred on generating university places rather than genuinely building the capability of Australian universities. Now we are on the eve of a further dramatic transformation, again based on the logic of expanding university places. This transformation is driven by a radical model that is unashamedly based on ‘other people’s ideas’, amounting to the effective privatisation of Australian higher education. This paper will reflect on this broad history and will argue that this market-driven model will represent (another) failure of leadership in higher education.

1997

Understanding, recognising and rewarding teaching quality in higher education: an exploration of the impact and implications of the Teaching Excellence Framework, 2019

This report presents the findings and recommendations of an independent research study on the impact and implications of the Teaching Excellence and Student Outcomes Framework (TEF) on staff working in higher education (HE) provision in the UK. The study captures the views and experiences of over 6,000 UCU members working in universities and college-based HE providers in England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, along with the perspectives of the Chair of the TEF assessment panel and representation from the National Union of Students (NUS). The introduction of the Teaching Excellence Framework (TEF) in 2016 marked a key turning point for HE in the UK. Never before has the ‘quality’ of HE teaching been subjected to such external scrutiny, culminating in high stakes assessment outcomes for institutions through the TEF’s medal categories of gold, silver and bronze. HE providers are still very much coming to terms with what the TEF means for them and how best to organise their institutional responses. Thus the TEF and the whole debate around the quality of teaching in HE is not only live and topical but equally one that continues to raise more questions than answers across the sector. Between February and November 2018, a team of academic researchers from Birmingham City University (BCU), commissioned by the University and College Union (UCU), carried out an independent study aimed at plugging the gap in knowledge and research relating to the impact and implications of the TEF on those working in HE. The study aimed to investigate UCU members’ awareness, involvement and perception of the TEF and its impact on them. The project was commissioned in anticipation of UCU’s contribution to the Independent Review of the TEF in 2019. UCU also recognised the need for staff perspectives to be made more visible in the Review, which has not been the case in the development and implementation of the TEF to date, as they have largely been excluded from the process. Thus one of the unique contributions of this report to debates around teaching excellence and the TEF in particular is the inclusion of the voices and experiences of the HE workforce who are most directly affected by this policy reform. A distinctive strength of this report and the research project it encapsulates is the scale and breadth of the sample it captures. To date, no other study has harnessed the views of such a large representation of staff working in HE provision about the TEF. The TEF and how it has impacted on the professional lives of the HE workforce was a subject about which the participants in this project had a lot to say. This report brings together a wealth of perspectives, opinions and situated experiences generated in the project data through the voices of those directly involved in and affected by the TEF. This report has drawn on a range of evidence collected during the research project to inform its findings and recommendations. These include: 1) a literature review on teaching excellence and cognate publications; 2) an online survey of university and college-based HE staff across England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland; 3) a series of national strategic seminars hosted in England and Scotland and 4) interviews with representatives from the TEF assessment panel and the NUS.

2017

In a provocative article published in 'Minerva' in 2015, Halffman and Radder discuss the Kafkaesque worlds that academics in the Netherlands now find themselves in, as an underfunded university sector predates upon itself and its workforce (2015, p. 165-166). Their Academic Manifesto observes that Dutch tertiary institutions have become obsessively focused on ‘accountability’ and pursue neoliberal-style imperatives [forced upon them] of ‘efficiency and excellence’. They paint a portrait of academics under siege, untrusted, and constantly micro-managed. The pursuit of so-called efficiency has involved accountability systems that are themselves wasteful, driving seemingly endless institutional restructuring. Moreover, institutions have become obsessed with star-performers in research, driven by competitive targets that undergird global rankings. Metrics – publication outputs, journal quality, citations, impact and grant revenue – produce a culture of competition and sometimes,...