Across almost all of the studies, there was a strong axiological rationale, much of which focused on the experiences of first generation students. Where a field of study has a strong emphasis on moral, ethical and ideological concerns, it is described as axiologically charged (Maton, 2014). The kind of charge has an impact on which research topics are taken up, but it is important to note that for research to have value, it needs to have explanatory power.
As has been argued thus far, many of these studies positioned students as being in need of remedial assistance outside of the mainstream curriculum, but a few of them also provided a broader social lens which allowed for conclusions to be reached at system level.
Such studies acknowledged that the student experience emerges from the interplay between the norms, values and practices of the institution and those of the students, and thus there was a need to consider the complexities of such interplay.
… students’ understanding of the behaviours they should display in higher education and how this clashes with the expectations of academics. (M93)
In general, higher education institutions do not have control over student attributes that significantly influence persistence, but this study demonstrates that institutional factors play equally important or even more significant roles and are under the control of institutions to change. (D108)
Such studies revealed concerns with institutional culture and other structural matters pertaining to social and academic inclusion and exclusion.
In debates around transformation, black students are frequently represented in stigmatising ways. These negative representations are part of a discourse that holds the increasing numbers of black students responsible for lowering university standards. When black students encounter these discourses, it can affect their self-esteem and academic performance. (M26)
Racist, homophobic, xenophobic and sexist biases from both peers and faculty were identified as key issues in the student experience. There were studies focused on the ways in which racism was experienced in particular ways by black African international students because of:
… narrowness of ... transformation focus, the prevalence of racial stereotypes ... and the racialisation of space on campus. (M26)
Universities were thus seen to reflect the prejudices of society, including homophobia:
… predominantly heteronormative institutional spaces homosexual students … experience social isolation, rejection, prejudice, harassment … [to the point where they] end up having multiple identities. (M34)
Findings reveal a persistent culture of sustained tolerance for homophobia among the general students in the residences, determined fundamentally by the systemic circumstances present in higher education residential spaces. These conditions normalise homophobia … (M20)
Most of the studies were conducted in historically advantaged universities, and it was interesting that most of those few studies conducted within historically black universities did indeed focus on issues of the institution and not just the attributes of the student. However, such focus was on fundamental issues such as the shortage of resources and students struggling to use IT facilities, rather than issues of institutional culture.
Barriers when accessing computer and ICTs: 1) lack of access to actual computer hardware and internet; 2) digital eg. Lack of online content in understandable format, language and cultural relevance; 3) shortage of experiences and trained facilitators; 4) students in low socio-economic groups experience lack of resources including maintenance, use, effectiveness; 5) lack of IT literacy; 6) shortage of peer support with IT. (M6)
There were a large number of studies which focused on disabilities and most of these included a concern with institutional structures and cultures, and the extent to which universities are welcoming places for a full range of people or whether they are ‘created for able-bodied student’ (M21).
People with impairments have been treated differently from that of their able- bodied counterparts and, as a group of people have generally been excluded from social activities. (M21)
Such exclusion manifests as marginalization and oppression which does limit the students with impairments to realise their potential as citizens. (M21)
Alongside the focus on physical disability were studies related to psychological well-being, though again the intersections between issues of gender, race, physical well-being, financial stability,
HigHer education PatHways
psychological well-being and so on do not seem to be particularly well understood and simple relationships tended to be sought between student characteristics and student experiences.
Conclusion
The theories used and conceptualisations of students evidenced across the 123 masters and doctoral studies emerged from multiple influences. As indicated, the postgraduate scholar’s personal projects and concerns would intersect with the influence of the supervisor’s history and research interests, and the availability of particular ideas and theories in the literature. The concerns raised in this study about some of the conceptualisations of students are thus not a critique of any of the individual masters and doctoral graduates but rather, we are suggesting to the field of researchers concerned with student experiences that there are some issues that we collectively need to confront.
In this chapter we argue that if we do not have theoretically rigorous and conceptually rich approaches to researching the student experience, we will not be in a position to address the significant concerns raised by the student protests mentioned earlier. Our meta-analysis of 123 masters and PhD studies that look at issues of student experience in higher education revealed some of the conceptual gaps within existing research on the student experience, which impedes a nuanced understanding. While some of the research was indeed critical, we found that a significant proportion of current research suffers from a lack of criticality with regards to discursive constructions of the student, together with somewhat problematic recommendations for responding to issues of student dissatisfaction and poor student retention and throughput. The study calls for stronger theorisation of such studies and better dissemination of existing critical approaches to teaching and learning in research.
References
Archer, M. (2000). Being human: The problem of agency. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Archer, M. (2005). Structure, culture and agency. In M. D. Jacobs & N. W. Hanrahan (Eds.), The Blackwell companion to the sociology of culture. Sussex: Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
Archer, M. (2007). Making our way through the world: Human reflexivity and social mobility. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Armstrong, E. A., & Hamilton, L. T. (2013). Paying for the party: How college maintains inequality. Cambridge, MS: Harvard University Press.
Arum, R., Gamoran, A., & Shavit, Y. (2012). Expanded opportunities for all in global higher education systems.
In L. Weiss & N. Dolby (Eds.), Social class and education. New York: Routledge.
Boughey, C., & McKenna, S. (2015). Analysing an audit cycle: A critical realist account. Studies in Higher Education, 42(6), 963–975.
Boughey, C., & McKenna, S. (2016). Academic literacy and the decontextualized learner. Critical Studies in Teaching and Learning, 4(2), 1–9.
Case, J. M. (2013). Researching student learning in higher education: A social realist approach. London: Routledge.
Case, J. M., Marshall, D., McKenna, S., & Mogashana, D. (2018). Going to university: The influence of higher education on the lives of young South Africans. Cape Town: African Minds.
Cloete, N., Mouton, J., & Sheppard, C. (2016). Doctoral education in South Africa. Cape Town: African Minds.
Council on Higher Education (2017). VitalStats: Public higher education data of 2015. Pretoria: Council on Higher Education.
Dhunpath, R., & Vithal, R. (2014). Alternative access to higher education: Underprepared students or underprepared institutions? Cape Town: Pearson.
Fairclough, N. (2009). A dialectical-relational approach to Critical Discourse Analysis in social research.
In R. Wodak & M. Meyer (Eds.), Methods of Critical Discourse Analysis. 2nd ed. Los Angeles: Sage.
Fairclough, N., Jessop, B., & Sayer, A. (2002). Critical realism and semiosis. Alethia, 5(1), 1–10.
Guinier, L. (2016). The tyranny of the meritocracy: Democratizing higher education in America. Boston MA:
Beacon Press.
Haggis, T. (2009). What have we been thinking of? A critical overview of 40 years of student learning research in higher education. Studies in Higher Education, 34(4), 377–390.
Higher Education Qualifications Sub-Framework (HEQSF) (2013). Notice No 549, South African Government Gazette No. 36721, 2 August 2013.
Kandlbinder, P. (2014). Theorising teaching and learning in higher education research. In J. Huisman & M.
Tight (Eds.), Theory and method in higher education research II (International Perspectives on Higher Education Research, 10: 1–22). Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
Luescher, T. M., Loader, L., & Mugume, T. (2017). #FeesMustFall: An internet-age student movement in South Africa and the case of the University of the Free State. Politikon: South African Journal of Political Studies, 44(2), 231–245.
Maton, K. (2000). Languages of legitimation: The structuring significance for intellectual fields of strategic knowledge claims. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 21(2), 147–167.
Maton, K. (2014). Knowledge and knowers: Towards a realist sociology of education. London: Routledge.
Marton, F., & Säljö, R. (1976a). On the qualitative difference in learning I-Outcome and Process. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 46, 4–11.
Marton, F., & Säljö, R. (1976b). On the qualitative difference in learning II-Outcome as a function of the learner’s conception of the task. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 46, 115–127.
McKenna, S. (2017). Crossing conceptual thresholds in doctoral communities. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 54(5), 458–466.
Mettler, S. (2014). Degrees of inequality: How the politics of higher education sabotaged the American dream.
New York: Basic Books.
Moyo, M. (2018). An analysis on the use of the Teaching Development Grant in South African universities (unpublished doctoral dissertation). Rhodes University.
Muller, J. (2000). Reclaiming knowledge: Social theory, curriculum and education policy. Routledge: London.
National Research Foundation (2009). Audit and interpretative analysis of education research in South Africa:
What have we learnt? Pretoria: National Research Foundation.
Niven, P. (2012). Narrating emergence in the curious terrain of academic development (unpublished doctoral dissertation). Centre for Higher Education Research, Teaching and Learning, Rhodes University.
Richardson, T. E. (2005). Students’ approaches to learning and teachers’ approaches to teaching in higher education. Educational Psychology, 25(6), 673–680.
Shay, S. (2012). Educational development as a field: Are we there yet? Higher Education Research and Development, 31(3), 311–323.
Shay, S. (2015). Curriculum reform in higher education: A contested space. Teaching in Higher Education, 20(4), 431–441.
Teo, S. T. T., Segal, N., Morgan, A. C., Kandlbinder, P., Wang, K. Y., & Hingorani, A. (2012). Generic skills development and satisfaction with groupwork among business students: Effect of country of permanent residency. Education & Training, 54(6), 472–487.
Tight, M. (2014). Discipline and theory in higher education research. Research Papers in Education, 29(1), 93–110.
Walker, M., & Wilson-Strydom, M. (Eds.). (2017). Socially just pedagogies, capabilities and quality in higher education. New York: Palgrave. Retrieved from link.springer.com/book/10.1057/978-1-137-55786-5
HigHer education PatHways
Walpole, M. (2003). Socioeconomic status and college: How SES affects college experiences and outcomes.
The Review of Higher Education, 27(1), 45–73.
Ylijoki, O. (2014). A temporal approach to higher education research. In J. Huisman & M. Tight (Eds.).
Theory and method in higher education research II. (International Perspectives on Higher Education Research, 10: 141–160). Emerald Group Publishing Limited.