Overview
This research-based course explores the theoretical, policy and empirical issues relating to research on access and equity for adult learners in the context of globalisation. The course adopts a comparative perspective and focuses, in particular, on issues of access and equity in relation to higher education. In doing so, it brings together two somewhat disparate fields of research: adult education and higher education.
Despite the significant expansion of higher education across Europe and internationally, patterns of participation in post-school education continue to reflect deep socio-economic and other inequalities. In particular, opportunities for adult learners and part-time students remain marginal in many, if not most, systems.
Writing almost four decades ago, Burton Clark (1973) one of the foremost scholars in the field of higher education, warned against the dangers of two tendencies he discerned in research: one was towards what he termed the extremes of the ‘intensive’ approach, and the other towards the ‘wandering’ approach. In relation to the former, he expressed concern that that research on crucial issues- in particular, inequality, was in ‘… danger of an inbred tradition of work, with increasing tunnel vision riveted on the trivial’. In relation to the latter, his concern was that qualitative case studies might degenerate into ‘a game of vignettes’- where it is more fun for the ‘wandering analytical gypsy’ to find another interesting case study to explore, with a ‘…maximum of zig and zag, a minimum of accumulation, and even a reduction of scholarly discipline to journalistic play’.
Writing some three and a half decades later (2007), Clark’s critique had grown, if anything, stronger: he argued there was an acute disconnect between researchers and practitioners in higher education with researchers writing mainly for each other. ‘Early in their careers, they test hypotheses generated by a review of the literature. As they grow older, they aim to generate “theory” ensuring turgid prose’. (319) This critique, of course, carries echoes of the charge levied against much sociological research by C.Wright Mills (1959) between ‘useless universalism’ on the one hand, and ‘idiotic ideography’ on the other.
Using Clark’s dichotomy as a starting point, this course will examine the current conceptual and empirical state in relation research on issues of access and equity for adult learners. To what extent does this notion of disconnect resonate? Is some tension between research excellence and the pragmatic needs of policy and practice inevitable in an applied area such as adult education? What kinds of research might help bridge research, policy and practice divides to enhance equity?
Participants will proceed to develop a fully worked out research project proposal aimed at addressing a conceptual weakness or filling a major empirical gap.
Structure
This course will be delivered though on-line collaborative learning using TOOL (Task Orientated On-line Learning) and an intensive Research Symposium.
Assessment
Participants will complete two pieces of work for this course. Assignment A: an analytic literature review of a particular dimension of equity and access. (30%) Assignment B: a collaborative project the outcome of which will be presented in the form of a research proposal- elaborated with a full rationale, methodology, costings, outcomes and potential impact. (40% for teamwork, on-line engagement and presentation at a Research Symposium: 30% for individual written contribution).
The following guidelines for the on-line collaborative exercise are drawn from Oscail- Distance Education @ Dublin City University (Bachelor of Science Module- Cultures of Technology)
In your postings, you can agree or disagree with the statements in a debate topic (or statements made by another participant) but in each case you must support your arguments. Remember there is rarely a complete ‘right’ or ‘wrong’ answer in these types of topic area – rather the objective is to explore the topic in depth. Personal experience is valid (and welcome) but you should try to analyse your personal experience and, if appropriate, link it with the ideas from relevant literature.
While some of your contributions should be new contributions, most of your contributions should be replies to issues/questions raised by your fellow participants. In other words, the online discussion/debate should take on the format of a discussion (not a series of individuals making separate points).
Experience has shown that the participants who got most from engaging in the online discussion/debate are those who set out to learn about the topics under discussion (rather than those who see it an exercise in fulfilling the minimum contributions). In this context, it should be noted that a relevant, targeted question or even a question seeking clarification is often better than making a non-original contribution that does not add to the discussion. Also, as noted above, personal experience is often a worthwhile contribution and point of departure for further discussion.
When possible, you should provide support for your opinions, for example, by referring to a piece of research in the area and quoting the conclusions/outcomes of the research. You should try not to repeat or paraphrase the contributions of another participant.
When you refer to a source, please give the full reference. The introduction of sources, other than those given in the Contextual Readings below, is strongly encouraged.
Some online debates can become rather complex, involved and even sometimes heated. Especially in these cases, please bear in mind the need for respectful communication with others- especially important when you disagree with their views! |
