The ideology of student engagement research

Abstract

In a series of recent papers, Nick Zepke has criticised those researching student engagement in higher education for uncritically supporting neoliberalism. The current highly politicised nature of higher education means that clarity about the political implications of engagement research is crucial. This conceptual paper argues that in focusing on literature on students' engagement in learning, Zepke overlooks another substantial body of engagement literature, on students' participation in decisions about learning and teaching. By exploring the political alignment of two of the key models used to conceptualise students' engagement in decision-making, the paper argues that a central element of the research into student engagement is in fact directly opposed to neoliberal approaches to higher education. Student engagement has been deployed both for and against neoliberalism. Zepke has argued that the research on engagement sides with neoliberalism; I show that the research that focuses on student engagement in decision-making supports the opposition

‘It’s one of the first times I’ve felt fully engaged’: developing student engagement using blogging as a form of assessment

“…Anderson, 2013). There is less agreement about what student engagement is (Mandernach, 2015;Boekaerts, 2016), who it benefits (Buckley, 2018), and how to measure it effectively (Fredricks, Pedagogical innovations designed, at least in part, to foster active learning and engagement have occurred across the entangled spectrum of spaces in which learning now takes place. Thus we have heard much about the relative merits of flipped classrooms (Graham, McLean, Read, Suchet-Pearson and Viner, 2017), virtual laboratories (Mui, Nelson, Huang, He and Wilson, 2015), peer learning (Nicholson, 2011), experiential learning (Sim & Marvell, 2015;van den Bemt, 2018), and Web 2.0 technologies (Rourke & Coleman, 2009;Smith, 2010;Zawilinski, 2009) to name but a few.…”

The new tyranny of student participation? Student voice and the paradox of strategic-active student-citizens

“…The recent emphasis on student engagement within the UK's HE-sector flows from these developments. Driven by governmental policies and papers, and positioned as a core aspect of quality assurance and enhancement practices (Buckley, 2018) student voice activities include module evaluation questionnaires, student representatives on Departmental and Faculty committees, and the involvement of students in curriculum and programme design activities. This heightened emphasis echoes both wider trends across the public sector to promote user involvement in planning and decision-making and the discursive positioning of students-asconsumers (Carey, 2013;Milburn-Shaw and Walker, 2017).…”

“…More pertinently, is the need to consider how efforts to encourage student voice are expected to both promote and result from students' sense of identity as a part of the university. Thus, Buckley (2018) argues that efforts to realise effective student voice can be understood through Sherry Arnstein's ladder of participation, suggesting that efforts to enhance student voice are expected to improve teaching quality and excellence and to ensure learners feel and act like active, engaged citizens of the university.…”

The New Tyranny of Student Participation? Student voice and the paradox of strategic-active student-citizens

“…The recent emphasis on student engagement within the UK's HE-sector flows from these developments. Driven by governmental policies and papers, and positioned as a core aspect of quality assurance and enhancement practices (Buckley, 2018) student voice activities include module evaluation questionnaires, student representatives on Departmental and Faculty committees, and the involvement of students in curriculum and programme design activities.…”