Abstract
This article develops a critcal policy analysis of the student engagement agenda, exploring its establishment as a key policy framework in HE and why it has developed such momentum. Based on a critical policy sociology approach, this article analyses the levels through which student engagement can be conceptualised: macro, meso and micro. At the macro-level, the concept can be seen as partly aligned to the market-driven and massified institutional context and informed by New Public Management policy levers intended to enhance the performative value of contemporary universities. At the meso-level, student engagement has been instituted by policies and practices evaluated by a range of performance measures that purportedly capture the efficacy of engagement practices. At a micro-level, it presents issues around students’ relationship with institutions in light of their changing role. If student engagement policy and practice is able to elevate students as active co-producers of self-directed learning, they may also potentially affirm their role as regulatory customers.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Ball. S. (1997) ‘Policy sociology and critical policy research: a personal review of recent education policy and policy research’, British Educational Research Journal 23(3): 257–274.
Ball, S. (1999) ‘Labour, learning and the economy: a policy sociology approach’, Cambridge Journal of Education 29(2): 196–206.
Ball, S. (2012) ‘Performativity, commodification and commitment: an I-spy guide to the neoliberal university’, British Journal of Educational Studies 60(1): 17–28.
Baron, P. and Corbin, L. (2012) ‘Student Engagement: rhetoric and reality’, Higher Education Research and Development 31(6): 759–772.
Bell, L. and Stevenson, H. (2006) Education Policy: Process, Themes and Impact, London: Routledge.
Becker, G.S. (1993) Human Capital: Theoretical and Empirical Analysis with Special Reference to Education. 3rd edn. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Bernstein B. (1996) Pedagogy, Symbolic Control and Identity: theory, research, critique, London: Taylor and Francis.
Brown, R. and Carasso, H. (2013) Everything for Sale: The Marketisation of UK Higher Education, London: Routledge.
Buckley, A. (2014) ‘How radical is student engagement? (and what is it for?)’, Student Engagement and Experience Journal 3(2): 1–23.
Bunce, L., Baird, A. and Jones, S. (2016) ‘The student-as-consumer approach in higher education and its effect on academic performance’, Studies in Higher Education. doi:10.1080/03075079.2015.1127908.
Coates, H. (2005) ‘The value of student engagement for higher education quality Assurance’, Quality in Higher Education 11(1): 25–36.
Department for Business, Innovation and Skills (2011) Higher Education: Students are the Heart of the System, London: HMSO.
Department for Business, Innovation and Skills (2016) Success as a Knowledge Economy, London: HMSO.
Duzevic, I. (2015) ‘A conceptual framework for analysing the impact of influences on student engagement and learning’, Tertiary Education and Management 21(1): 66–79.
Evans, C., Muijs, D. and Tomlinson, M. (2016) Engaged Student Learning: High Impact Pedagogies to Enhance Student Engagement, York: Higher Education Academy.
Fairclough, N. (2003) Critical Discourse Analysis: The Critical Study of Language, London: Routledge.
Ferlie, E., Ashburner, L., Fitzgerald, L. and Pettigrew, A. (1996) The New Public Management in Action, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Frambach, J.M., Driessen, E.W., Beh, P. and van der Vleuten, C.P.M. (2014) ‘Quiet or questioning? Students’ discussion behaviors in student-centered education across cultures’, Studies in Higher Education 39(6): 1001–1021.
Gibbs, G. (2016) Response to the Green Paper — Teaching, London: Higher Education Policy Institute.
Haggis, T. (2006) ‘Pedagogies for diversity: retaining critical challenge amidst concerns of ‘dumbing down’, Studies in Higher Education 31(5): 521–535.
Klemenčič, M. (2014) ‘Student power in a global perspective and contemporary trends in student organising’, Studies in Higher Education 39(3): 396–411.
Kuh, G.D. (2010) High‐Impact Educational Practices: What They Are, Who Has Access To Them and Why They Matter, Washington, DC: American Association for Colleges and Universities.
Locke, W. (2014) ‘The intensification of rankings in an increasingly marketised higher education environment’, European Journal of Education 49(1): 77–90.
Lynch, K. (2014) ‘New Managerialism, Neoliberalism and ranking’, Ethics in Science and Environmental Politics 13(2): 141–153.
Macfarlane, B. (2015) ‘Student performativity in higher education: converting learning as a private space into a public performance’, Higher Education Research and Development 34(2): 338–350.
Macfarlane, B. (2013) ‘The surveillance of learning: a critical analysis of university attendance’, Higher Education Quarterly 67(4): 373–386.
Mann, S. (2001) ‘Alternative perspectives on the student experience: student alienation’, Studies in Higher Education 26(1): 7–19.
Marginson, S. (2014) ‘The impossibility of capitalist markets in higher education’, Journal of Education Policy 28(3): 553–570.
McCowan, T. (2015) ‘Should universities promote employability?’, Theory and Research in Education 13(3): 267–285.
Mok, K.H. (2016) ‘Critical reflections on the massification of higher education, graduate employment and social mobility’, Journal of Education and Work 29(1): 1–13.
Molesworth, M., Scullion, R. and Nixon, E. (eds.) (2010) The Marketisation of Higher Education and the Student a Consumer, London: Routledge.
Nauffal, D. (2012) ‘Assessment of Student Engagement: an analysis of trends’, Tertiary Education and Management 18(2): 171–191.
Neary, M. (2009) ‘Student as producer: Risk, responsibility and rich learning environments in higher education’, in J. Barlow, G. Louw and M. Price (eds.) Social Purpose and Creativity — integrating learning in the real-world, Brighton: Brighton University Press, pp. 6–13.
Olssen, M. and Peters, M. (2005) ‘Neoliberalism, higher education and the knowledge economy’, Journal of Education Policy 20(3): 313–345.
Palfreyman, D. and Tapper, T. (2014) Reshaping the University: The Rise of the Regulated Market in Higher Education, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Porter, S. (2011) ‘Do college surveys have any validity?’ Higher Education Review 35(1): 45–76.
Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education (2014) Exploring Themes to Improve Quality for Students, Gloucester: QAA.
Rizvi, F. and Lingard, B. (2010) Globalizing Education Policy, London: Routledge.
Scott, P. (2009) ‘Structural changes in higher education: the case of the United Kingdom’, in D. Palfreyman and T. Taper (eds.) Structuring Mass Higher Education: the role of elite institutions, London: Routledge, pp. 35–56.
Taylor, S., Rizvi, F., Lingard, B. and Henry, M. (1997) Educational Policy and the Politics of Change, London: Routledge.
Thomas, L. and Quinn, J. (2007) First Generation Entry in Higher Education, Buckingham: Open University Press.
Trowler, V. (2010) Student Engagement: Literature Review, York: Higher Education Academy.
van der Velden, G. (2012) ‘Institutional Level Student Engagement and Organisational Cultures’, Higher Education Quarterly 66(3): 227–247.
Wallace, M., Deem, R., O’Reilly, D. and Tomlinson, M. (2011) ‘Developing Leadership Capacity in English Secondary Schools and Universities: global positioning and local mediation’, British Journal of Educational Studies 59(1): 21–40.
Zepke, N. (2014) ‘What future for student engagement in neoliberal times?’, Higher Education 69(4): 694–704.
Zimmerman B.J. (1989). ‘A social cognitive view of self-regulated academic learning’. Journal of Educational Psychology 81(3): 329–339.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Tomlinson, M. Student Engagement: Towards A Critical Policy Sociology. High Educ Policy 30, 35–52 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41307-016-0035-3
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/s41307-016-0035-3