Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Supporting Engagement Through Critical Evaluation

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Student Engagement in Neoliberal Times

  • 1183 Accesses

Abstract

This chapter comprises four interrelated sections. The first asks whether student engagement can sensibly be connected to evaluation at all; and whether and how neoliberalism influences mainstream evaluation theories and practices. The second section outlines key features of mainstream evaluation in neoliberal times so that its weaknesses can be critiqued in the third. The fourth section discusses how a critical approach to evaluation might take evaluation beyond the mainstream.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Allan, J. (1997). Curriculum design in higher education using a learning outcome- led model: Its influence on how students perceive learning. A thesis submitted in partial fulfilments of the requirements of the University of Wolverhampton for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. Retrieved from http://wlv.openrepository.com/wlv/handle/2436/30415 in January 2016.

  • Au, M. (2012). Critical curriculum studies: Education, consciousness and the politics of knowing. New York, NY: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ball, S. (2012). Performativity, commodification and commitment: An I-spy guide to the neoliberal university. British Journal of Educational Studies, 60(1), 17–28. doi:10.1080/00071005.2011.650940

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barnett, R. (1994). The limits of competence: Knowledge, higher education and society. Buckingham, UK: Society for Research into Higher Education & Open University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barnett, R. (2009). Knowing and becoming in the higher education curriculum. Studies in Higher Education, 34(4), 429–440. doi:10.1080/03075070902771978

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bernstein, B. (1996). Pedagogy, symbolic control and identity: Theory, research, critique. London: Taylor & Francis.

    Google Scholar 

  • Biesta, G. (2004). Education, accountability, and the ethical demand: Can the democratic potential of accountability be regained? Educational Theory, 54(3), 233–250.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Biggs, J., & Tang, C. (2007). Teaching for quality learning at University (3rd ed.). Maidenhead, UK: Society for Research into Higher Education & Open University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bourdieu, P. (1998). Practical reason. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brameld, T. (1965/2000). Education as power. A re-issue by the Society of Educational Reconstruction. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brookfield, S., & Holst, J. (2011). Radicalizing learning: Adult education for a just world. San Francisco, CA: Jossey Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, S., & Race, P. (2013). Using effective assessment to promote learning. In L. Hunt & D. Chalmers (Eds.), University teaching in focus: A learning centred approach (pp. 74–91). London, UK: Routledge and ACER.

    Google Scholar 

  • Charlton, B. (2002). Audit, accountability, quality and all that: The growth of managerial technologies in UK universities. In S. Prickett & P. Erskine-Hill (Eds.), Education! Education! Education! Managerial ethics and the law of unintended consequences (pp. 18–28). Exeter: Imprint Academic.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crooks, T. (1988). Assessing student performance. HERDSA Green Guide No. 8. Kensington, Australia: Higher Education Research and Development Society of Australasia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cumming, A., & Ross, M. (2007). The tuning project for medicine—Learning outcomes for undergraduate medical education in Europe. Medical Teacher, 29(7), 636–641.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • de Santos, M. (2009). Fact-totems and the statistical imagination: The public life of a statistic in Argentina 2001. Sociological Theory, 27(4), 466–489.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eisner, E. (1996). Instructional and expressive objectives: their formulation and use in curriculum. In W. Popham, E. Eisner, H. Sullivan, & L. Tyler (Eds.), Instructional objectives (pp. 1–18). AERA monograph series on curriculum evaluation, no. 3. Chicago, Ill: Rand McNally.

    Google Scholar 

  • Entwistle, N. (2003). Concepts and conceptual frameworks underpinning the ETL project. Occasional Report 3, Enhancing Teaching-Learning Environment in Undergraduate Courses. http://www.etl.tla.ed.ac.uk/docs/ETLreport3.pdf

  • Entwistle, N. (2005). Contrasting perspectives on learning. In: F. Marton, D. Hounsell, & N. Entwistle (Eds.), The experience of learning: Implications for teaching and studying in higher education (3rd (Internet) ed, pp. 3–22). Edinburgh: University of Edinburgh, Centre for Teaching, Learning and Assessment.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Commission. (2012). Commission presents new Rethinking Education strategy. Press Release retrieved from Commission presents new Rethinking Education strategy, December 2015.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fielding, M. (2006). Leadership, radical student engagement and the necessity of person-centred education. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 9(4), 299–313.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Freire, P. (1995). Pedagogy of hope: Reliving pedagogy of the oppressed. New York: Continuum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Habermas, J. (1984). The theory of communicative action vol. I, Reason and the rationalization of society. Boston, MA: Beacon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Habermas, J. (1987). Knowledge and human interests. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harvey, L., & Green, D. (1993). Defining quality. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 18(1), 9–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • hooks, B. (2003). Teaching community: A pedagogy of hope. New York and London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Høstaker, R., & Vabø, A. (2005). Higher education and the transformation to a cognitive capitalism. In I. Bleiklie & M. Henkel (Eds.), Governing knowledge: A study of continuity and change in higher education. A Festschrift in honour of Maurice Kogan (pp. 227–243). doi:10.1007/1-4020-3504-7_14

  • Hudson, J., Bloxham, S., den Outer, B., & Price, M. (2015). Conceptual acrobatics: Talking about assessment standards in the transparency era. Studies in Higher Education. doi:10.1080/03075079.2015.1092130

  • Hughes, G. (2014). Ipsative assessment: Motivation through marking progress. London, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • International Engineering Alliance. (2012). International engineering alliance. Retrieved from http://www.ieagreements.org/Washington-Accord/signatories.cfm, December 2015.

  • Jansen, J. (1998). Curriculum Reform in South Africa: A critical analysis of outcomes-based education. Cambridge Journal of Education, 28(3), 321–331. doi:10.1080/0305764980280305

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jennings, J. (2007). The role of an independent quality assurance body in a climate of accountability: New Zealand at the crossroads. Paper presented at the Asia-Pacific Quality Network meeting, Kuala Lumpur, 6th February.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jost, J., Federico, C., & Napier, J. (2009). Political ideology: Its structure, functions and elected affinities. Annual Review of Psychology, 60, 307–337.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Killen, R. (2005). Programming and assessment for quality teaching and learning. Southbank, Vic: Thomson Social Science Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuh, G., Cruce,T., Shoup, R., Kinzie, J., & Gonyea, R. (2008). Unmasking the effects of student engagement on first-year college grades and persistence. The Journal of Higher Education, 79(5), 540–563. doi:10.1353/jhe.0.0019

  • Kuh G, J. Kinzie, J. Buckley, B. Bridges, and J. Hayek. (2006).What matters to student success: A review of the literature. Commissioned Report: http://nces.ed.gov/IPEDS/research/pdf/Kuh_Team_Report.pdf. [accessed July 2010].

  • Leathwood, C. (2005). Assessment policy and practice in higher education: Purpose, standards and equity. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 30(3), 307–324.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lemke, T. (2002). Foucault, governmentality, and critique. Rethinking Marxism, 14(3), 49–64.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lemke, T. (2007). An indigestible meal? Foucault, governmentality and state theory. Distinktion: Scandinavian Journal of Social Theory, 15(2), 43–64. doi:10.1080/1600910X.2007.9672946

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lynch, K. (2010). Carelessness: A hidden doxa of higher education. Arts & Humanities in Higher Education, 9(1), 54–67. doi:10.1177/1474022209350104

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Macfarlane, B. (2016). The performative turn in the assessment of student learning: A rights perspective. Teaching in Higher Education, 21(7), 839–853. doi:10.1080/13562517.2016.1183623

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Madden, B. (2015). Pedagogical pathways for indigenous education with/in teacher education, Teaching and Teacher Education, 51, 1–15. 10.1016/j.tate.2015.05.005

  • Marton, F., & SäljÓ§, R. (1976). On qualitative differences in learning: I outcome and process. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 46, 4–11.

    Google Scholar 

  • McArthur, J (2015). Assessment for social justice: The role of assessment in achieving social justice, Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, doi:10.1080/02602938.2015.1053429

  • McDowell, L. (2012). Assessment for learning. In L. Clouder, C. Broughan, S. Jewell, & G. Steventon (Eds.), Improving student engagement and development through assessment: Theory and practice in higher education (pp. 73–85). London, UK: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Medland, E. (2016). Assessment in higher education: Drivers, barriers and directions for change in the UK. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education. doi:10.1080/02602938.2014.982072

  • OECD. (2005). Definition and selection of competencies: Executive summary. Retrieved from http://www.oecd.org/pisa/35070367.pdf in December 2015.

  • Raban, C. (2007). Assurance versus enchancement: Less is more? Journal of Further and Higher Education, 31(1), 77–85.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schrag, P. (1995). The new school wars: How outcome-based education blew up. The American Prospect. Retrieved from http://prospect.org/article/new-school-wars-how-outcome-based-education-blew in December 2015.

  • Scott, D. (2016). New perspectives on curriculum, learning and assessment. Heidelberg, De: Springer International.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Spady, W. (1994). Outcome-based education: Critical issues and answers. Arlington, VA: Association of School Administrators. Retrieved from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED380910.pdf

  • Stuckey, H., Taylor, E., & Cranton, P. (2014). Developing a survey of transformative learning outcomes and processes based on theoretical principles. Journal of Transformative Education, 1–18. doi:10.1177/1541344614540335

  • Walsh, R., Teo, T., & Baydala, A. (2014). A critical history and philosophy of psychology: Diversity of context, thought, and practice. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wyatt, L. (2011). Nontraditional student engagement: Increasing adult student success and retention. The Journal of Continuing Higher Education, 59(1), 10–20. doi:10.1080/07377363.2011.544977

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yorke, M., & Longden, B. (2004). Retention and student success in higher education. Maidenhead, UK: The Society for Research into Higher Education and Open University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Young, M. (2008). Bringing knowledge back in: From social constructivism to social realism in the sociology of education. Abingdon: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute of Education, Massey University Manawatu, Palmerston North, New Zealand

    Nick Zepke

Authors
  1. Nick Zepke
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nick Zepke .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Zepke, N. (2017). Supporting Engagement Through Critical Evaluation. In: Student Engagement in Neoliberal Times. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-3200-4_10

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-3200-4_10

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore

  • Print ISBN: 978-981-10-3198-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-981-10-3200-4

  • eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation