Page 89 - Šolsko polje, XXIX, 2018, no. 1-2: The Language of Neoliberal Education, ed. Mitja Sardoč
P. 89
r. leyva ■ unpacking the usage and implications of neoliberal language ...
Admittedly, the codes listed above are rough and not entirely mu-
tually exclusive, but it should be noted that even the most rigorous and
objective of quantitative content analysis coding procedures will have in-
escapable elements of subjective hermeneutic interpretation. This is be-
cause words and phrases are very often polysemous, and because deter-
mining the content producer’s communicative intent is usually beyond
the scope of the content analysis method. Instead, this method is used
to extrapolate and approximate the discursive mediations and effects of
texts via the application of a reliable coding scheme that represents a fair-
ly accurate model of what a given body of text is effectively communicat-
ing (Krippendorf, 2004). Therefore, to ensure the reliability of my coding
scheme, a second researcher was asked to code 6 randomly selected docu-
ments (25% of the sample corpus), using the codes shown in Tables 1 and
2. Furthermore, to avoid linguistic priming and consequent coding bias,
the second coder was only given the codes and their definitions, but was
not told about the broader discursive formations that they corresponded
to nor about the purpose of the study. Following consultation, we gener-
ated acceptable inter-coder reliability estimates with percent agreements
for all 8 codes ranging from 83% to 100%.
Analysis and Results
Table 3 below shows the number of times each of the 8 discursive codes
was identified in each Russell Group university’s education strategy state-
ments where applicable. Note that percentages were rounded to the near-
est tenth. Furthermore, as shown in Table 4, the frequency counts for the
neoliberal discursive codes were summed to create an additive index (M
= 32.08, SD = 18.99), so were the counts for the traditional university dis-
cursive codes (M = 8.33, SD = 11.13). A paired-sample T-test procedure was
then conducted to determine whether the mean difference between these
two sets of observations was statistically significant. The test showed that
neoliberal discourses were significantly more numerous than traditional
discourses t (23) = 4.93, p < .01. With regards to RQ1, combined, these de-
scriptive and inferential statistics give a clear indication that the Russell
Group’s prioritized educational and research objectives and values, as
can be gleamed from their official education strategy documents, large-
ly reflect those extolled by the paradigmatic neoliberal university model.
Specifically, these statements by and large, positively communicated their
respective institutions’ adoption, advancement, and planned implemen-
tation of employability, value for money, instrumental research, and per-
formativity discursive practices.
87
Admittedly, the codes listed above are rough and not entirely mu-
tually exclusive, but it should be noted that even the most rigorous and
objective of quantitative content analysis coding procedures will have in-
escapable elements of subjective hermeneutic interpretation. This is be-
cause words and phrases are very often polysemous, and because deter-
mining the content producer’s communicative intent is usually beyond
the scope of the content analysis method. Instead, this method is used
to extrapolate and approximate the discursive mediations and effects of
texts via the application of a reliable coding scheme that represents a fair-
ly accurate model of what a given body of text is effectively communicat-
ing (Krippendorf, 2004). Therefore, to ensure the reliability of my coding
scheme, a second researcher was asked to code 6 randomly selected docu-
ments (25% of the sample corpus), using the codes shown in Tables 1 and
2. Furthermore, to avoid linguistic priming and consequent coding bias,
the second coder was only given the codes and their definitions, but was
not told about the broader discursive formations that they corresponded
to nor about the purpose of the study. Following consultation, we gener-
ated acceptable inter-coder reliability estimates with percent agreements
for all 8 codes ranging from 83% to 100%.
Analysis and Results
Table 3 below shows the number of times each of the 8 discursive codes
was identified in each Russell Group university’s education strategy state-
ments where applicable. Note that percentages were rounded to the near-
est tenth. Furthermore, as shown in Table 4, the frequency counts for the
neoliberal discursive codes were summed to create an additive index (M
= 32.08, SD = 18.99), so were the counts for the traditional university dis-
cursive codes (M = 8.33, SD = 11.13). A paired-sample T-test procedure was
then conducted to determine whether the mean difference between these
two sets of observations was statistically significant. The test showed that
neoliberal discourses were significantly more numerous than traditional
discourses t (23) = 4.93, p < .01. With regards to RQ1, combined, these de-
scriptive and inferential statistics give a clear indication that the Russell
Group’s prioritized educational and research objectives and values, as
can be gleamed from their official education strategy documents, large-
ly reflect those extolled by the paradigmatic neoliberal university model.
Specifically, these statements by and large, positively communicated their
respective institutions’ adoption, advancement, and planned implemen-
tation of employability, value for money, instrumental research, and per-
formativity discursive practices.
87
