Why was the QAA Approach to Teaching Quality Assessment Rejected by Academics in UK HE?

This article will review and evaluate the response of academics working in higher education institutions (HEIs) in the UK to the experience of teaching quality review. It will do so by gathering the viewpoints and opinions of academics from a particular source over a specific time period: the Times Higher Education Supplement (THES) between January and August of 2001. Before presenting and then evaluating these viewpoints, the paper will discuss the development of teaching quality assessment methodologies in UK HE within the context of the increasing importance and embededness of quality assurance and enhancement values and processes within the practices of HEIs. It is argued that this is both a recent and contested phenomenon. The article finds that the concerns of academics with the teaching quality review exercise fall under a number of headings: (1) administrative/cost burden; (2) grade inflation/gamesmanship/ organisational learning; (3) elitist bias within the system; (4) system impact of quality review; (5) reliability of the system; and (6) philosophical objections to the system. The implications of these concerns are discussed. The article's conclusion is that if academics are not convinced of, or do not actively support, the values and methodologies associated with teaching quality review, then there is little chance that these will either produce accurate or meaningful assessments of teaching quality, or act as a spur to the quality enhancement of this aspect of individual and institutional activity. This is an important point within the context of the recent review of the Quality Assurance Agency's Subject Review methodology, and the new institutional audit methodology.     

Perception of Counselor Behavior and Current Intergenerational Family Relationships

In this study, significant relationships were found between several dimensions of intergenerational family relationships and supervisor ratings of counselor behavior.     

Unsettling the State — How 'Demand' Challenges the Education System in the US

'Demand' in the education system has traditionally been articulated almost entirely in terms of access to more, better, and higher-status opportunities within the traditional public school system, rather than for alternatives to the standardised, highly-regulated opportunities provided by the state. This is changing, in the U.S. and elsewhere, as households and groups increasingly articulate demands that cannot easily be accommodated by the existing system. These new demands include calls for schooling that more fully reflects the linguistic, religious, or cultural preferences of specific communities. They represent a fundamental challenge to the assumption of collective interests pursued through public institutions that underlie contemporary public school systems. This article explores the character of this challenge and presents an assessment of the ways in which the U.S. education system is changing in its response.     

COMPUTERIZED DIAGNOSTIC TESTING

Efforts to use computers for diagnostic testing in education require appropriate psychometric and technological strategies and, equally important, good theoretical foundations as to what constitutes a diagnosis and how it is to be discerned in an examinee's performance. Although at present this combination is infrequent in education, for some years it has been in evidence in computer-managed diagnosis in medicine. For comparable success in the field of education, it is argued that artificial intelligence algorithms may provide a suitable avenue for developing diagnostic testing further.     

Differences among Male A,B, and C Master's Degree Candidates in a Counseling Practicum

Little or no research has been done on the counseling practicum grade as a measure of counseling effectiveness. This study explored the intellective and nonintellective differences among males with A, B, and C grades in the counseling practicum. Significant differences among grade categories were observed on 7 of 17 variables. The nature and direction of the differences among males with grades of A, B, or C suggested that practicum grades tend to make valid discriminations between candidates with high and low potential as counselors.     

The Why of Learning

Alexander, Schallert, and Reynolds's (2009 Alexander, P. A., Schallert, D. L. and Reynolds, R. E. 2009. What is learning anyway? A topological perspective considered. Educational Psychologist, 44: 176–192. this issue[Taylor &; Francis Online], [Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar]/this issue) what, where, who, and when framework situates different perspectives on learning in different places in this multidimensional space and by doing so helps us to better understand seemingly disparate approaches to learning. The framework is in need of a fifth, why dimension. The why dimension helps to place learning within an evolutionary and cultural perspective and to better understand students' motivation to learn and their preferences for what, where, and how to learn.     

Rising to the occasion: publishing diversity-focused scholarship in adult education

Publication of diversity-focused scholarship has increased over the last decade, yet marginalized groups are still inadequately represented in academic journals. In addition, research about diversity has become increasingly complex and its definition varies greatly. This poses obstacles for the emerging scholar interested in submitting diversity-focused scholarship to academic journals. A rarely investigated resource that offers insight into this task are peer reviewer written comments. This study explores the practice of publishing diversity-focused scholarship from a peer-review perspective. A grounded theory approach was used to conduct a content analysis of reviewer comments. From the findings four major categories emerged about the nature of publishing diversity-focused research: (a) clarification of terms; (b) explicit bias by the author; (c) formulaic approach; and (d) reviewers' standpoint. This article offers an understanding about the reviewers' approaches to diversity-focused submissions and suggests considerations when publishing in this area.     

Turtles All the Way Down: Academic Writing as Formalism

At least in the United States, the presentation of scholarship is highly formulaic. The emblematic product of this professional domain—the academic journal article—is less a lump of clay waiting to be moulded than a set of fired jars waiting to be filled. Not only are the jars unyielding to the touch, but even their number and order are fixed. There are five of them, which need to be filled in precise order: research question, literature review, methodology, results and conclusions. Don't stir. Repeat. In this paper I explore the form and function of this formulaic medium. I trace its roots to a series of earlier formalisms that dominate American schooling. First comes the five-paragraph essay, a form that is chillingly familiar to anyone who has attended an American high school. This model continues to hold sway in college. Then in graduate school comes the five-chapter doctoral dissertation. Same jars, same order. By the time the doctoral student becomes a professor, the pattern is fixed. The Rule of Five is thoroughly fixed in muscle memory, and the scholar is on track to produce a string of articles that follow from it. The formula is useful for all of the actors involved, making it easy to write acceptable academic papers, to skim and evaluate these papers, and to build a credible CV and a high citation journal. The only thing it's not good for is transmitting meaningful academic insights.