Happy Families? Pedagogy, management and parental discourses of control in the corporatised further education college

Abstract

A new masculinist managerialism has become increasingly dominant in the marketised further education sector (Leonard, 1998). Recent changes in management discourses and practices in colleges have been described in terms of a move from a rather 'benign' paternalism to an aggressive and 'thrusting' entrepreneuria l managerialism (Whitehead, 1998). This article will draw on case study research in two inner-city FE colleges to explore the ways in which management is performed and perceived, and staff identities constructed within this discursive context. Paternalism, authoritarianism and 'bully-boy' tactics are all evident. Family discourses can be read into the patterns of authority and control, and are indeed sometimes explicitly utilised by staff themselves in their attempts to make sense of organisational relations and the performance of management. Yet it is not only masculine-gendered familial identities that are referenced; mothering discourses are also apparent in the ways in which woman managers and lecturers articulate their activites, values and priorities, and are perceived by others. Such discursive practices can be seen to not only re ect, reinforce and reconstitute gendered power relations and to 'smooth' the transition to the new FE (Prichard & Deem, 1998), but also in many cases to resist dominant masculinist managerial discourses. One difference between the two colleges in this study is the gender balance of the senior management teams. Drawing particularly on feminist and other critical work on organisations and management, the article will explore the ways in which women and men in the study talk about management, and highlight some of the contradictions and tensions apparent within the gendered famialial discourses of control, caring, dependence and independence that have emerged as key themes in this research.

Gender, equity and the discourse of the independent learner in higher education

“…This, I suggested, not only has implications for students, but also for the gendered division of labour in colleges, with tutoring marked as feminine, and separate from the masculinsed knowledge work of the lecturer. Such constructions reinforce gendered understandings of learning and position both those who ask for help/support, and those who provide it, along traditional gender lines (see also Cotterill and Waterhouse 1998;Leathwood 2000). As can be seen from the data discussed above, this presents potential difficulties for both women and men students.…”

Promises and lies: An exploration of curriculum managers’ experiences in FE

“…It is apparent that this top-down style of management (Ferlie et al 1996) was superseded by a more affiliative style that emphasised co-operation and a shared purpose within the organisation (Avis 2005). An increase in the appointment of female managers in the sector (evidenced by the LSIS census 2012), may be a significant factor in this in the adoption of a more 'feminised' style of management (Leathwood 2000), as an alternative to what has been described as the 'bully boy' tactics employed post-Incorporation (ibid).…”

“…Whereas before, lecturers had significant freedom in the design, assessment and teaching of the curriculum (an approach that was enshrined in the notion of professional judgement), post-Incorporation, lecturers were the subject of increased scrutiny and the departmental focus tended to be on KPIs that stressed quantifiable objectives such as success rates or retention rates. This led to many tutors talking of being treated as recalcitrant children (Leathwood 2000) if they failed to embrace the change in focus from the process to the end product. Whilst representing a broadly unwelcome change in culture within the sector, it could be argued that aspects of a performance-orientated regime may, in fact, enhance the learner experience as well as provide a set of clear guidelines and professional standards for those working in the sector.…”

A comparative thematic review of vocational leadership literature from the USA, Great Britain and Australia

“…These have indicated there has been a marked increase in female managers with a few reaching senior levels in the historically male domain (Cole 2000;Deem, Ozga, and Prichard 2000;McTavish and Miller 2009). Leathwood (2000) views the traditional discourse of FE colleges as paternalistic, autocratic, bullying and essentially masculinist. In contrast, research on female FE managers found them to be 'open, democratic, consultative, supportive, fair, consensual, listening, encouraging and drawing on people's strengths' (Leathwood 2000, 173).…”