“There are limits to being helpful”: student engagement from the perspectives of Social Scientists at a post-92 university in the UK
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.66561/sehej.v7i3.1443Keywords:
Student Engagement, Self-efficiacy, Mental Health, Participation, AttendanceAbstract
This primary research paper synthesises responses from lecturers at a post-92 university in the Midlands, UK, with existing literature on the contested concept of ‘student engagement’. Through thematic analysis, key themes include conceptualising student engagement, perceived barriers to such readings of student engagement, and potential strategies to improve it. Key findings are that the dialectical relationship between academics (providers) and student (receivers) under neoliberal conditions of Higher Education (HE) provision in the United Kingdom (UK) highly compromises enacting progressive readings of student engagement. Strategies to address this range from pedagogies of care to punitive measures, with the impact of dwindling student participation upon academics’ self-concept made apparent. This paper will be of interest to academic staff working within the Social Sciences (and wider disciplines) in the marketised context of UK HE. The paper concludes by calling for further research into academics’ self-concept and self-efficacy.
Downloads
References
Alexander, R. (2004). Towards dialogic teaching: rethinking classroom talk. Dialogos.
Amsler, S. S. (2011). From ‘therapeutic’ to political education: the centrality of affective sensibility in critical pedagogy. Critical Studies in Education, 52(1), 47–63. https://doi.org/10.1080/17508487.2011.536512
Ashton, S., & Stone, R. (2018). An A-Z of creative teaching in higher education. SAGE.
Bandura, A. (1977). Social Learning Theory. Prentice Hall.
Bartram, B. (2014). Emotion as a Student Resource in Higher Education. British Journal of Educational Studies, 63(1), 67–84. https://doi.org/10.1080/00071005.2014.980222
Biesta, G. (2010). Learner, Student, Speaker: Why it matters how we call those we teach. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 42(5–6), 540–552. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-5812.2010.00684.x
Bokhove, C., & Muijs, D. (2019). Can we reliably compare student engagement between universities? Evidence from the United Kingdom Engagement Survey. Oxford Review of Education, 45(3), 417–434. https://doi.org/10.1080/03054985.2018.1554530
Bryson, C. (2014). Understanding and developing student engagement. Routledge.
Byrne, D. (2022). A worked example of Braun and Clarke’s approach to reflexive thematic analysis. Quality & Quantity, 56, 1391–1412. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-021-01182-y
Cassidy, K. J., Sullivan, M. N., & Radnor, Z. J. (2021). Using insights from (public) services management to improve student engagement in higher education. Studies in Higher Education, 46(6), 1190–1206. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2019.1665010
Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2018). Research methods in education (Eighth edition). Routledge.
Crabtree, R. M., Briggs, P., & Woratschek, H. (2021). Student engagement and barriers to implementation: the view of professional and academic staff. Perspectives: Policy and Practice in Higher Education, 25(4), 144–150. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603108.2021.1946446
Deci, E. L. & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behaviour. Planum Press.
Dickinson, J. (2022, December 9). ‘What if they’re all part time students now?’ WONKHE. https://wonkhe.com/blogs/what-if-theyre-all-part-time-students-now/
Dickinson, J (2024, July 21). ‘Universities and their staff should be under a “duty of candour”’. WONKHE. https://wonkhe.com/wonk-corner/universities-and-their-staff-should-be-under-a-duty-of-candour/
Dismore, H., Turner, R., & Huang, R. (2019). Let me edutain you! Practices of student engagement employed by new lecturers. Higher Education Research & Development, 38(2), 235–249. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2018.1532984
Frey, T. K., & Bloch, B. S. (2023). Using Microsoft Teams to Facilitate Asynchronous Online Focus Groups. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 22. https://doi.org/10.1177/16094069231211251
Fugard, A. J. B., & Potts, H. W. W. (2015). Supporting thinking on sample sizes for thematic analyses: a quantitative tool. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 18(6), 669–684. https://doi.org/10.1080/13645579.2015.1005453
Gattegno, C. (1963). Teaching foreign languages in school. The silent way. Educational Explorers.
Gourlay, L. (2015). ‘Student engagement’ and the tyranny of participation. Teaching in Higher Education, 20(4), 402–411. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2015.1020784
Gourlay, L. (2017). Student Engagement, ‘Learnification’ and the Sociomaterial: Critical Perspectives on Higher Education Policy. Higher Education Policy, 30(1), 23–34. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41307-016-0037-1
Gourlay, L., Campbell, K., Clark, L., Crisan, C., Katsapi, E., Riding, K. & Warwick, I. (2021). ‘Engagement’ Discourses and the Student Voice: Connectedness, Questioning and Inclusion in Post-Covid Digital Practices. Journal of interactive media in education, 1. https://doi.org/10.5334/jime.655
Grove, J. (2024, March 14). Lectures in question as paid work pushes attendance even lower. Times Higher Education.
Hase, S. & Kenyon, C. (2013). Self-determined learning: heutagogy in action. Bloomsbury.
Hattie, J. (2008). Visible learning for teachers: maximizing impact on learning. Routledge.
Higher Education Statistics Agency (2025, April 3). Where do HE students study? HESA. https://www.hesa.ac.uk/data-and-analysis/students/where-study
hooks, b. (1994). Teaching to transgress: education as the practice of freedom. Routledge.
Hubble, S. & Bolton, P. (2021, February 24). Mature higher education students in England (Briefing Paper Number 8809). House of Commons. https://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/CBP-8809/CBP-8809.pdf
Hubble, S. & Bolton, P. (2022, April 13). Part-time undergraduate students in England. House of Commons. https://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/CBP-7966/CBP-7966.pdf
Kahu, E. R. (2011). Framing student engagement in higher education. Studies in Higher Education, 38(5), 758–773. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2011.598505
Krashen, S. D. (1982). Principles and practice in second language acquisition. Pergamon.
Maslach, C. & Jackson, S. E. (1981). The measurement of experienced burnout. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 2(2), 99 – 113. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.4030020205
McKay, L. & Dunn, J. (2018). Critical consciousness as a response to student disengagement: an initial teacher education case study. Teaching Education, 31(8), 1–15. https://doi.org.10.1080/10476210.2018.1512093
Mendes, A. B., & Hammett, D. (2020). The new tyranny of student participation? Student voice and the paradox of strategic-active student-citizens. Teaching in Higher Education, 28(1), 164–179. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2020.1783227
Meyer, J., & Land, R. (2006). Overcoming barriers to student understanding: threshold concepts and troublesome knowledge. Routledge.
Morgan, M. (2020). An exceptional transition to higher education: induction of new and returning students during the ‘new normal’ year. AdvanceHE. https://www.advance-he.ac.uk/knowledge-hub/exceptional-transition-higher-education-induction-new-and-returning-students-during
Morgan, M. (Ed.). (2012). Improving the student experience: a practical guide for universities and colleges. Routledge.
Morris, S. (2024, February 14). ‘Bristol University loses appeal over suicide of disabled student on exam day’. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/education/2024/feb/14/bristol-university-contributed-to-death-of-student-who-killed-herself-court-finds
Moses, J. W., & Knutsen, T. L. (2019). Ways of knowing: competing methodologies in social and political research (3rd ed.). Red Globe Press.
Neary, M. (2020). Student as Producer: How Do Revolutionary Teachers Teach? Zer0 Books.
Neves, J., Freeman, J., Stephenson, R. & Sotiropolou, P. (2024). Student Academic Experience Survey 2024. Higher Education Policy Institute. https://www.hepi.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/SAES-2024.pdf
Office for Students (2022, December 15). A statistical overview of higher education in England. OfS. https://www.officeforstudents.org.uk/publications/annual-review-2022/a-statistical-overview-of-higher-education-in-england/
Oliver, P. (2003). The student’s guide to research ethics. Open University Press.
Otte, J. (2024, May 28). ‘I see little point: UK university students on why attendance has plummeted’. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/education/article/2024/may/28/i-see-little-point-uk-university-students-on-why-attendance-has-plummeted
Pokorny, H., & Warren, D. (2016). Enhancing teaching practice in higher education. SAGE.
Rawdin, C., & Dhillon, S. (2024). Confronting well-being and mental health in the ‘therapeutic university’: implications for educators, students and the curriculum. Studies in Higher Education, 50(2), 321–332. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2024.2337805
Rondeau, C. (2024). Who stole quality? Maple Publishers.
Rosenshine, B. (2012). Principles of Instruction: Research-Based Strategies that All Teachers Should Know. American Educator, 78(3), 12–39. https://www.aft.org/sites/default/files/Rosenshine.pdf
Serrano, D. R., Dea-Ayuela, M. A., Gonzalez-Burgos, E., Serrano-Gil, A., & Lalatsa, A. (2019). Technology-enhanced learning in higher education: How to enhance student engagement through blended learning. European Journal of Education, 54(2), 273–286. https://doi.org/10.1111/ejed.12330
Smith, A. (1998). Accelerated learning in practice: brain-based methods for accelerating motivation and achievement. Network Educational Press.
The Quality Assurance Agency. (2024). UK Quality Code for Higher Education 2024. https://www.qaa.ac.uk/the-quality-code/2024
Tomlinson, M. (2017). Student Engagement: Towards A Critical Policy Sociology. High Education Policy, 30, 35–52. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41307-016-0035-3
Trowler, V. (2010). Students Engagement Literature Review. The Higher Education Academy.
Trowler, V. (2015) Negotiating Contestations and 'Chaotic Conceptions': Engaging 'Non-Traditional' Students in Higher Education, Higher Education Quarterly, 69(3), 295–310. https://doi.org/10.1111/hequ.12071
Vignato, J., Inman, M., Patsais, M., & Conley, V. (2022). Computer-Assisted Qualitative Data Analysis Software, Phenomenology, and Colaizzi's Method. Western journal of nursing research, 44(12), 1117–1123. https://doi.org/10.1177/01939459211030335
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: the development of higher psychological processes (M. Cole, Ed.). Harvard University Press.
Wintrup, J. (2017). Higher Education’s Panopticon? Learning Analytics, Ethics and Student Engagement. Higher Education Policy, 30(1), 87–103. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41307-016-0030-8
Young, N., Rawlings Smith, E., & Hodgkin, K. (2024). Student engagement in the first year of university in Wales during COVID-19. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 48(3), 301–313. https://doi.org/10.1080/0309877X.2024.2327031
Zepke, N. (2017). Student Engagement in Neoliberal Times: Theories and Practices for Learning and Teaching in Higher Education. Springer.
Zepke, N., Leach, L., & Butler, P. (2013). Student engagement: students’ and teachers’ perceptions. Higher Education Research & Development, 33(2), 386–398. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2013.832160
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:a. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
b. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
c. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
