Page 137 - Šolsko polje, XXIX, 2018, no. 1-2: The Language of Neoliberal Education, ed. Mitja Sardoč
P. 137
s. hayes and p. jandrić ■ resisting the iron cage of ‘the student experience’
37 This strategy will support the development of a curriculum which
makes links across and beyond the University
However, note that in (37) it is ‘this strategy’ (and not people) that will
support the development. Furthermore, it is ‘a curriculum’ (and not peo-
ple) that makes the links across and beyond the University.
As demonstrated in prior research, ‘the strategy’ or ‘the student ex-
perience’ is often said to enact something (Hayes, 2018a, Hayes, forth-
coming 2019). Linguistically, we tend to place the student experience in
the hands of entities like ‘curriculum’ and ‘strategy’, in our written poli-
cies, rather than explicitly reinforce the people (staff and students) whose
individual labour actually effects change.
548 The Strategy targets the development of a high quality estate and an
environment populated with facilities and services
In (548) it is ‘the strategy’ that targets ‘the development’ of a range of facili-
ties and services. Exactly who will make this happen is not mentioned, but
at some point, actual human labour is required to develop these facilities.
564 The University is committed to supporting the development of all
its staff and to the enhancement of the staff experience
In (564) ‘the university’ is credited with the commitment to enhance
‘the staff experience’ too. People provide ‘commitment’ though, not or-
ganizations or buildings. Once more, in an age where so much empha-
sis is placed on metrics and measurements, it is important to ask exactly
how enhancement of ‘the staff experience’ is understood, in relation to ac-
ademic autonomy. Categories of staff contracts have never been more var-
iable, leading to important questions on widening participation for pro-
gression of diverse university staff (Hayes, 2018b). Yet it is assumed in the
discourse that something generic entitled ‘the staff experience’ can be en-
hanced across the board, by ‘the university’.
In wider consumer culture, it is not unusual to find many com-
mercial products such as cars, holidays and other posessions invested
with human qualities in order to sell these. However, along with the
notion that ‘the experience’ a university wishes us to have can be ‘deliv-
ered’ to students or staff, comes the concept that this can also be pro-
vided by an ‘environment’ and indeed that a ‘sense of ’ something (what-
ever that may be) can be ‘enhanced’ by an environment (not by people)
for all students.
135
37 This strategy will support the development of a curriculum which
makes links across and beyond the University
However, note that in (37) it is ‘this strategy’ (and not people) that will
support the development. Furthermore, it is ‘a curriculum’ (and not peo-
ple) that makes the links across and beyond the University.
As demonstrated in prior research, ‘the strategy’ or ‘the student ex-
perience’ is often said to enact something (Hayes, 2018a, Hayes, forth-
coming 2019). Linguistically, we tend to place the student experience in
the hands of entities like ‘curriculum’ and ‘strategy’, in our written poli-
cies, rather than explicitly reinforce the people (staff and students) whose
individual labour actually effects change.
548 The Strategy targets the development of a high quality estate and an
environment populated with facilities and services
In (548) it is ‘the strategy’ that targets ‘the development’ of a range of facili-
ties and services. Exactly who will make this happen is not mentioned, but
at some point, actual human labour is required to develop these facilities.
564 The University is committed to supporting the development of all
its staff and to the enhancement of the staff experience
In (564) ‘the university’ is credited with the commitment to enhance
‘the staff experience’ too. People provide ‘commitment’ though, not or-
ganizations or buildings. Once more, in an age where so much empha-
sis is placed on metrics and measurements, it is important to ask exactly
how enhancement of ‘the staff experience’ is understood, in relation to ac-
ademic autonomy. Categories of staff contracts have never been more var-
iable, leading to important questions on widening participation for pro-
gression of diverse university staff (Hayes, 2018b). Yet it is assumed in the
discourse that something generic entitled ‘the staff experience’ can be en-
hanced across the board, by ‘the university’.
In wider consumer culture, it is not unusual to find many com-
mercial products such as cars, holidays and other posessions invested
with human qualities in order to sell these. However, along with the
notion that ‘the experience’ a university wishes us to have can be ‘deliv-
ered’ to students or staff, comes the concept that this can also be pro-
vided by an ‘environment’ and indeed that a ‘sense of ’ something (what-
ever that may be) can be ‘enhanced’ by an environment (not by people)
for all students.
135
