Higher Education, Further Education and the English Experiment

England has a two-sector system of higher education and further education. Shaped by legislation in 1988 and 1992, the architecture of this system was intended to concentrate each type of education in separate institutions and separate sectors. In recognition of these different missions, each territory came under different funding and regulatory regimes, with little or no movement of institutions anticipated between sectors. These arrangements continue, although Government policy is now to support and expand higher education in further education colleges. This policy turnaround is part of a larger strategy or experiment to change the future pattern of demand for, and supply of, undergraduate education. However, the college contribution to this new higher education is neither co-ordinated nor protected. Rather, further education colleges compete as well as collaborate with institutions in the higher education sector, under conditions of complexity, uncertainty and dependency.     

Colleges and the Governance of Higher Education

The governance of higher education in colleges and college sectors that offer other types of education and training is distinctive in four main respects. First, governance structures are frequently separate and different for higher education and for other segments of tertiary education. Second, the size and scope of the higher‐level education taught by individual institutions will bear on the extent to which the management and governance arrangements in colleges are joint or divided. Third, the growth of small and distributed forms of higher‐level education has created specific problems and dilemmas for national and sub‐national governance. Fourth, the multiple missions of many colleges continue to pose questions about their educational and organisational coherence and governability. It is only in recent years that a base of evidence has been available to comprehend these developments, although definitional difficulties and data deficiencies remain.     

History,place and the learning society: towards a sociology of lifetime learning

This paper aims to shift the debate on the Learning Society away from the normative focus which has predominated hitherto. Rather than beginning with questions about what a Learning Society ought to constitute, we seek to engage with the patterns of participation in learning through the life‐course and their determinants. Our discussion begins with an examination of the way in which the official discourse of the Learning Society is dominated by human capital theory. The critical evaluation of the latter is thus a serious undertaking. Human capital theory involves an unwarranted abstraction of economic behaviour from social relations more widely; participation in lifetime learning cannot be understood in terms of the narrow calculation of utility maximization. This critique provides the basis for the development of a more satisfactory theoretical account, in which learning behaviour is conceived as the product of individual calculation and active choice, but within parameters set by both access to learning opportunities and collective norms. These parameters, by their very nature, vary systematically over space and time: accordingly, place and history must play a central role in any adequate theorization. We conclude that this kind of theoretical approach has important implications not only for empirical research, but also for strategies aimed at creating a Learning Society.     

Patterns of locomotor regulation during the pole vault approach phase

A successful approach phase is key to achieving high performances in the pole vault. The aim of this study was to explore the nature of locomotor control patterns during the pole vault approach phase. Fourteen well-trained athletes performed ten jumps which were recorded using 2D video sampling at 200 Hz and analysed. Key kinematics were reconstructed from camera data using a modified 2D-DLT. Patterns of regulation were determined from the standard deviation of footfall locations during the approach phase. These patterns were found to be highly individual but structural differences between those who did and those who did not regulate were identified. Regulation of locomotion was associated with an ability to produce functionally adaptable movement patterns and the consistent achievement of desired performance outcomes. Coaches should include training exercises that require intentional use of regulation to aid athletes in achieving the flexibility to adapt to changing constraints during the approach phase. Athletes should be considered on an individual basis in order to effectively, efficiently and safely improve performance.