Wright 1989 Who Defines Quality in Higher Education Reflections on the Role of Professional Power in...

7/28/2019 Wright 1989 Who Defines Quality in Higher Education Reflections on the Role of Professional Power in Determinin…

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/wright-1989-who-defines-quality-in-higher-education-reflections-on-the-role 1/17

H i g h e r E d u c a t i o n 1 8 : 1 4 9 - 1 6 5 ( 1 9 8 9 )9 K l u w e r A c a d e m i c P u b l i s h e r s , D o r d r e c h t - P r i n t e d in t h e N e t h e r l a n d s

W h o d e f i n e s q u a l i t y i n h i g h e r e d u c a t i o n ? R e f l e c t i o n s o n t h er o l e o f p r o f e s s i o n a l p o w e r i n d e t e r m i n i n g c o n c e p t i o n s o f

q u a l i t y i n E n g l i s h h i g h e r e d u c a t i o n *

P E T E R W . G . W R I G H T

Faculty o f Human it ies and Social Sc iences , Portsmouth Poly technic , Portsmo uth, P0 1 2ED,

U.K.

Abstract. I n r e c e n t y e a r s B r i t i sh h i g h e r e d u c a t i o n h a s c o m e u n d e r c o n s i d e ra b l e f i n a n c ia l a n dp o l i t ic a l p r e s su r e w h i ch h a s l ed i n c r ea s i n g l y t o t h e u s e o f v a r i o u s i n d i ca t o r s f o r t h e m eas u r e me n t

o f q u a l i t y . A l t h o u g h t h e u s e o f s u c h m e a s u r e s h a s o f t e n b e e n s e e n a s le a d in g t o e n c r o a c h m e n t s

o n a c a d e m i c a u t o n o m y , t h e p a p e r a r g u e s - d r a w i n g o n c o n c e p t s f r o m t h e s o c io l o gy o f p o w e r a n d

t h e p r o f e s s i o n s - t h a t s u ch meas u r e s s ti ll , e s s en ti a l ly , d e r i v e f r o m , an d r ep r o d u c e u n q u es t i o n i n g l y ,

t h e t a c i t a s s u m p t i o n s an d p r o f e s s i o n a l s e l f - in t e r e s t o f a cad em i cs . T h i s p o i n t i s i l l u s t ra t ed t h r o u g h

a b r i e f c o n s i d e r a t i o n o f t h e m o s t c o m m o n l y - r e c o m m e n d e d p e r f o r m a n c e i n d i c a t o r s a n d b y

r e f e r e n ce t o t h e w o r k o f t h e C o u n c i l f o r N a t i o n a l A c a d e m i c A w a r d s i n t h e r e v ie w a n d v a l i d a t i o n

o f co u r s e s . A t t en t i o n is a ls o g iv en t o t h e s t i mu l a t i o n o f m ar k e t f o r ce s a s a mea n s o f q u a l i t y co n t r o l .

T h e p ap e r co n c l u d es w i t h a p l ea f o r g r ea t e r p l u r a l i s m w i t h i n Br i t is h h i g h e r ed u ca t i o n a n d a r g u es

t h a t s ev e r a l f a c t o r s mak e t h i s mo r e l i k e l y . T h es e i n c l u d e d emo g r ap h i c ch an g e , t h e i n c r ea s i n g

i n v o l v e m e n t o f i n d u s t r y a n d t h e e m e r g e n c e o f d i v e r se s o u r ce s o f f u n d i n g f o r B r i t is h H E i n c l u di n g

t h e M a n p o w e r S e r v i c e s C o m m i s s i o n ( n o w t h e T r a i n i n g C o m m i s s i o n ) .

Higher education und er scrutiny

No o n e w o u l d d o u b t t h a t i n m a n y W es t e rn co u n t r i e s s in ce t h e s ev en ti e s t h e re

h as b een a g ro w i n g t en d en cy fo r h i g h e r ed u ca t i o n t o b e ca ll ed in t o q u es t i o n .

Th i s h a s i n v o l v ed n o t o n l y t h e s p read o f cu r r en ts o f s cep t ic i s m ab o u t t h e b a s i cv a l u e o f s u ch ed u ca t i o n , b u t h a s a l s o s t i m u l a t ed a v a r i e t y o f a t t em p t s t o

m ea s u re p e r fo rm an ce , r eg u l a t e s t an d a rd s , an d i m p ro v e e f f ic i en cy . Th es e h av e

f r eq u en t l y b een a s s o c i a t ed w i t h t h e i m p l em en t a t i o n o f p o l i c i e s s p ec i f i ca l l y

d es i g n ed t o r e - s h ap e h i g h e r ed u ca t i o n , u s u a l l y w i t h t h e ex p re s s ed i n t en t i o n o f

m ak i n g i t s e rv e s o m e eco n o m i c o r s o c i a l en d wh i ch i t was j u d g ed t o b e

n eg l ec t i n g . As Gu y Neav e h as r em ark ed , r e f e r r i n g t o W es t e rn Eu ro p e a s a

wh ole , ' . . . i s sues tha t h i ther to rem ained la rge ly in te rna l to un ive rs i ty adm in is -

t r a t i o n ( cam e) . . . u n d e r c l o se r s c ru t i n y (b y Go v e rn m en t ) ' Neav e (1 9 8 6b : 1 57 ).

No t s u rp r i s i n g l y , a cad em i cs h av e t en d ed t o r eg a rd t h em s e l v es a s u n d e ra t t ack . In B r i ta i n , fo r ex am p l e , Graem e M o o d i e wr it e s t h a t t h e re h a s b een

* A n e a r l i e r v e r s i o n o f t h i s p a p e r w a s p r e s e n t e d t o t h e N i n t h E u r o p e a n A I R F o r u m o n t h e

C h a n g i n g R e l a t io n s h i p b e tw e e n G o v e r n m e n t a n d H i g h e r E d u c a t i o n , U n i v e r s it y o f T w e n t e ,

E n s ch e d e , N e t h e r l an d s , 2 4 - 6 A u g u s t 1 9 8 7.



150

' . . . a fee l in g o f in j u s t ice an d b ewi l d e rm en t . .. i n t h e f ace o f p u b l i c d o u b t . . . '

(M o o d i e , 1 98 6: 1 ). M a n y h av e b e l i ev ed t h a t p o l ic i e s we re b e i n g i m p o s e d o n

t h e m b y p o w e r h o ld e r s w h o w e r e o u t o f s y m p a t h y w i t h a c a d e m i c v al u e s a n d

i g n o ran t o f th e n a t u re an d t ru e b en e f i t s o f h i gh e r ed u ca t i o n . T h e re w as a

d a n g e r , s o m e h a v e a r g u e d , t h a t i r r e p a r a bl e d a m a g e w o u l d b e d o n e b y t h e

ab ru p t en fo rcem en t o f a l i en an d i n ap p ro p r i a t e r eq u i r em en t s .

I f t h i s p e rcep t i o n o f t h e c l i m a t e o f o p i n i o n i s a ccu ra t e , an d i f , a s s eem s

p ro b ab l e , s u ch sen t i m en t s a r e s h a red b y acad em i cs i n o t h e r co u n t r ie s , n o t h i n g

wo u l d ap p ea r m o re u n t i m e l y t h an t o s u g g es t t h a t t h e acad em i c wo r l d n eed s

t o b e r eg a rd ed a s a p ro fe s s i o n a l i n t e r e s t g ro u p wh i ch h as n o t s i m p l y ap p ro -

p r i a t ed ed u ca t i o n t o i t s e l f , b u t l a rg e l y co n t i n u es t o m o n o p o l i s e t h e o n l y

co n cep t u a l f r am ewo rk t h ro u g h wh i ch ed u ca t i o n a l i s s u es can b e d i s cu s s ed .

In f ac t , I b e l i ev e t h a t t h e re is n o co n f l i c t b e t w een m y a rg u m en t an d t h e

p rev a l en ce n o wad ay s o f i n s ecu r i t y an d an x i e t y w i t h i n t h e acad em y . On t h e

co n t r a ry , I co n t en d t h a t t h e c r ea t i o n o f p a r t icu l a r g o v e rn m en t a l p o l ic i es an d

t h e ex e rc i se o f p ro fe s s i o n a l p o w er a r e p ro ces s e s o p e ra t i n g a t d i f f e r en t l ev e ls

o f g en e ra l it y wh i ch m ay , f ro m t i m e t o t i m e , m o v e i n d ep en d en t l y o f each o t h e r .

Th e ch an g es ap p a ren t i n p u b l i c an d g o v e rn m en t a l a t t i t u d es can n o t , fo r i n -

s t an ce , s i m p l y b e ex p l a i n ed a s a co n s eq u en ce o f t h e a t t em p t s o f v a r i o u s

g o v e rn m en t s t o r ed u ce ex p en d i t u re , t o l im i t g rad u a t e u n em p l o y m en t , o r t o l ay

t h e b a s e f o r e c o n o m i c e x p a n s i o n b a s e d u p o n h ig h t e c h n o l o g y - t h o u g h ,u n d o u b t ed l y , t h e s e h av e b een i m p o r t an t co n s i d e ra t i o n s (Neav e , 1 9 8 6 a ,

1 98 6b ); t h ey n eed a l s o t o b e p l aced i n t h e co n t ex t o f a m a j o r s h i ft i n t h e p u b l i c

ev a l u a t i o n o f c l a i m s t o p r i v il eg ed ex p e rt i se an d p ro fe s s i o n a l s t a t u s (Has k eU,

1984: xiii-xxviii).

P ro fe s s i o n a l s i n ev i t ab l y f i n d i t h a rd , i f n o t i m p o s s i b l e , t o r eco g n i s e s u ch

s h i ft s b ecau s e th ey a re a l w ay s , t o an ex t en t , p r i s o n e r s o f t h e ir o w n m y t h s .

Th es e m y t h s a r e i m p l an t ed t h ro u g h t h e l o n g p ro ces s o f p ro fe s s i o n a l q u a l i f i -

ca t i o n an d co n s t an t l y n o u r i s h ed b y t h e d ay - t o -d ay p rac t i ce o f t h e p ro fe s s i o n .

Ex terna l c r i t i c i sm i s a l l - to -eas i ly d i smissed as ph i l i s t in i sm, l ay ignorance o r

h o s t i li t y t o t h e p ro fe s s i o n ' s v e ry raison-d'etre. D o c t o r s t e n d t o b e p r e d i s p o se d

t o r eg a rd l i m i ta t io n s o n t h e i r u s e o f co s t ly m ed i cam en t s a s o p p o s i t i o n t o

s p en d i n g m o n ey o n h ea l t h ; a cad em i cs h av e b een k n o w n t o r eg a rd t h e ca ll f o r

s h o r t e r a n d m o re acces s ib l e co u r s e s a s a p l o y fo r cu t t in g ed u ca t i o n a l ex p en d i -

tu re . I t seems , as Kle in has sugges ted , tha t h igher edu ca t io n has fa i l ed to com e

t o t e rm s wi t h t h e g ro w t h o f g en e ra l m i s t ru s t t o w ard s p ro fe s s i o n s an d , b y n o t

r eco g n is i n g h o w i m p l au s i b le t o o t h e r s m an y o f i ts c la i m s t o s p ec i al s t a tu s an d

co m p e t en ce h av e co m e t o ap p ea r , h a s p l ay ed a n o t i n s i g n i f i can t p a r t i ns t ren g t h en in g an d j u s t i fy i n g t h e s cep ti c is m t o w ard s i t se l f wh i ch i t h a s s o u g h t

to d ismiss Klein (1987: 10-11).

On e a s p ec t o f t h i s n ew c l i m a t e o f o p i n i o n h as b een a d em an d fo r acco u n t -

ab i l i t y wh i ch Ko g an h as l i n k ed t o :



151

... a weakening of consensus (in Britain as elsewhere) that public institutions

are beneficent and led by professionals who can be trusted to provide society

what it needs (Kogan, 1986: 19),

and, in the USA, to,

... a long tradition of resistance to the hegemony of professionals and their

ability to define needs... (Ibid, 20)

But the change in attitude toward the professions also goes beyond distrust

of the ways in which they use their power; it begins to lead to a questioning

of the nature o f the esoteric and technical knowledge which has - traditionally

- been the basis for claims to expert status.

N e w a t t i t u d e s t o p r o f e s s i o n a l k n o w l e d g e

This has been manifested at a variety of levels and from widely differing

standpoints. Within history and the social sciences, for instance, it has become

common to doubt whether recondite, specialist knowledge can be said to exist

before its embodiment in the practice of particular professional groups.(Dunleavy, 1981; Haskell, 1984; Larson, 1984). There is a propensity to

suggest that it is better understood as a social construct, shaped by the

processes of professionalisation and cultural legitimation, which can serve to

enhance the material interests of those who appropriate it - at the expense of

those who do not. Similar themes have been developed far more polemically

by Illich (1977), Friedman (1980) and Szasz (1979), and have been echoed

politically both by the 'New Right' and by some elements of the radical left

(Green, 1985, 1987; Young, 1977).

The aim of this paper is to consider how such approaches to expertise and

professionalism may relate to debates over quality and performance. It will

be suggested that any attempt at a thorough-going evaluation of the perfor-

mance of higher education must begin by recognising that the conventional

criteria for measuring such things as quality and effectiveness are predomi-

nantly internal to the professional discourse of the academic world. That is

to say, they derive their meaning from their position within the reproduction

of academic expertise - they are products of the practice of higher education.

I shall argue that, like other forms of expertise, academic knowledge entailsimplic it- but generally unnoticed - presuppositions about the nature of society

and the role and disposition of knowledge within it. I shall further suggest that

an authentically independent evaluation of higher education only becomes

possible by stepping outside our received assumptions and considering a



152

p l u ra l i ty o f d i f f e r en t p ro j ec t s , e ach em b o d y i n g d i f f e r en t im ag es o f ed u ca t i o n ' s

soc ia l ro le .

In d ev e l o p i n g t h e s e i d eas I s h a l l a l s o t o u ch u p o n t h e i n c rea s in g l y p rev a l en t

v i ew t h a t p l u ra l is m i n ed u ca t i o n can b e en co u rag ed an d p ro fe s s i o n a l m o n o p o -ly cha l lenged by a g rea te r re l i ance on marke t fo rces [ fo r a d i scuss ion see

Wil l iams (1984); Morris & Sizer (1982)] . I shal l , however, contend that

a l t h o u g h m a r k e t s m a y u n d e rm i n e c e r ta i n f o r m s o f p r o f e s s io n a l m o n o p o l y ,

t h ey m a y a l s o m as k i t s m o re s u b t le v a r ian t s . I n s i t u a ti o n s w h e re p ro fe s s i o n a l

acad em i cs g en e ra t e t h e v e ry v o c ab u l a r y w i t h in wh i ch n eed s a r e ap p reh e n d ed

an d ex p re s s ed an d s e t t h e c r i t e r i a fo r wh a t i s t o co u n t a s ed u ca t i o n , an y

d i v e r s i t y wh i ch t h e m ark e t s t i m u l a t e s w i l l b e m o re ap p a ren t t h an r ea l -

d i f f e r en ces o f p ack ag i n g r a t h e r t h an s u b s t an ce . I s h a l l co n s i d e r h o w fa r t h i s

i s the case in Eng l i sh h igher educa t ion .

' A c a d e m i c c o o r d i n a t i o n ' a s p r o f e s s i o n a l c o n t r o l

A u s e fu l s ta r t in g p o i n t fo r co n s i d e r in g t h e d eg ree o f p ro fe s s i o n a l d o m i n an ce

in h igher educa t ion i s C lark ' s d i s t inc t ion (1979) be tween four models o f

acad em i c co -o rd i n a t i o n . C l a rk h as d raw n a t t en t i o n t o t h e d i f f i cu l t y o f an a l y s-

i n g acad em i c s y s t em s i n t e rm s o f t h e co n v en t i o n a l co n cep t s o f o rg an i s a t i o nt h eo ry , d u e t o t h e ir l o w d eg ree o f i n teg ra t i o n a n d d i s p a r i ty o f v a l u es , an d h as

s u g g es ted , i n s tead , t h a t ' co -o rd i n a t i o n ' m ay b e an ap p ro p r i a t e t e rm fo r

co n cep t u a l is i n g th e i r em erg en t p ro p e r t i e s o f o rd e r . Th i s co -o rd i n a t i o n m ay

fo l l o w fo u r d i f f e r en t p a t h way s : t h e b u reau c ra t i c , t h e p o l it ic a l , th e m ark e t an d

t h e p ro fe s s i o n a l .

Fo r C l a rk , t h e bureaucratic p a t h w ay i s o n e w h e re a ru l e -g o v e rn ed , s p ec i al is -

ed h i e ra rch y h o l d s s way ; the poli tical , d en o t e s a t en d en cy fo r h i g h e r ed u ca t i o n

t o b e s h a p ed b y t h e i n t e r ac t io n o f i n t e re s t g ro u p s , wh e t h e r i n t e rn a l o r ex t ern a l,

s o m e t h i n g wh i ch m ay , i n t u rn , s t i m u l a t e b u reau c racy . H e r eg a rds t h e m a r k e t

as b e i n g th e co -o rd i n a t i n g fo rce wh en t h e ed u ca t i o n a l s y s t em i s r e s p o n s iv e t o

i n d iv i d u a ls ex p re s si n g th e i r p re fe ren ces th ro u g h m o n e t a ry o r eq u i v a l en t fo rm s

of exchange . F ina l ly , p r o f e s s i o n a l co -o rd i n a t i o n t ak es p l ace wh en acad em i cs

p l ay a m a j o r p a r t i n s h ap i n g t h e s y s t em . C l a rk s u g g es t s t h a t t h i s m ay o ccu r

n o t s i m p l y fo r r ea s o n s o f ' t r ad i t i o n ' o r ' i d eo l o g y ' b u t a s a ' f u n c t i o n a l '

co n s eq u e n ce o f i n te l le c t u a l s p ec ia l is a t io n . 'As k n o wl ed g e ex p an d s , ' h e wr i t es ,

' t h o u s an d s o f j u d g em en t s a t o p e ra t i n g l eve ls m u s t b e b a s ed o n t h e ev e rm o re

eso ter ic and spec ia l ized know ledge o f the p ro fess o rs ' (C lark , 1979 : 258) . The

acad em i c d i s c i p l i n e , h e o b s e rv es , p l ay s an i m p o r t an t p a r t i n m a i n t a i n i n g

cohes ion and in suppor t ing co l leg ia te iden t i ty .

I t i s n o t c l ea r wh e re , p rec i s e l y , C l a rk wo u l d l o ca t e t h e s o u rces o f t h e

p ro fe s s i o n a l p o wer t h a t i s em p l o y ed i n p ro fe s s i o n a l co -o rd i n a t i o n . A t l e a s t



15 3

t w o i n t e r p r e t a t io n s m a y b e i n f e r r e d : o n e is t h a t p o w e r r e s u lt s f r o m t h e

p o s s e s s i o n o f a v a l u e d g o o d - e s o t e ri c k n o w l e d g e . P r o f e s s i o n a l p o w e r d e r iv e s

f r o m t h e p o s s e s s i o n o f a n i n t r in s i c a l ly s c a rc e r e s o u r c e . A n o t h e r i n t e r p r e t a t i o n

- n o t i n c o m p a t i b l e w i t h t h e f i r s t - i s t h a t t h e e x i s t e n c e o f a c a d e m i c s a s a n

o c c u p a t i o n a l g r o u p s i m p l y g e n e r a t e s a m a t e r i a l i n te r e s t w h i c h is th e n

m a i n t a i n e d , o r a d v a n c e d , a g a i n s t t h e i n t e r e s t s o f o t h e r g r o u p s .

C l a r k m a k e s n o r e f e r e n c e t o t h e p o s s i b il it y t h a t t h e d e f i n i t i o n o f e s o t e ri c

a n d s p e c ia l is e d k n o w l e d g e c a n i t s e lf b e c o n t e n t i o u s , n e i t h e r d o e s h e m a k e t h e

p o i n t t h a t i t m a y b e i n th e i n t e re s t s o f a p r o f e s s i o n to e x p a n d t h e b o u n d a r i e s

o f i ts p r o f e s s i o n a l ex p e r ti s e , w h e r e p o s s i b le , i n o r d e r t o ap p r o p r i a t e n ew f i e l d s

t o i t s e l f a n d t h u s i n c r e a s e it s p o w e r a n d s e c u r it y . T h e e x t e n t t o w h i c h a

p r o f e s s i o n s u cceed s i n d e f i n i n g a p a r t i cu l a r t o p i c a s f a l l i n g w i t h i n i t s s pec i a li s -e d c o m p e t e n c e w i ll v a r y a c c o r d i n g t o l o c a l c i r c u m s t a n c e s . T h u s , f o r e x a m p l e ,

i n E n g l a n d - b u t n o t i n t h e U S A - a c a d e m i c s h a v e l a rg e l y s u c c e e d e d i n

m a i n t a i n i n g c o n t r o l o v e r th e c o m p o s i t io n o f a s t u d e n t ' s c u r r ic u l u m o f s t u d y

b y i n s is t in g th a t o n l y t h e y - a s p r o f e s s io n a l s , a r e q u a l i f ie d t o j u d g e w h a t

s u b j e c t s s h o u l d b e s t u d i e d , a n d i n w h a t o r d e r , w i t h i n a p a r t i c u l a r c o u r s e

( P e r k i n , 1 98 4: 3 6 - 8 ) . W h a t i s d is t in c t iv e l y i m p o r t a n t a b o u t s u c h m a n i f e s -

t a t i o n s o f p r o f e s s i o n a l p o w e r i s t h a t , h o w e v e r a c h i e v e d , t h e y c o m e t o b e

ex p e r i en ced a s s e l f - ev i d en t an d n a t u r a l .

Th i s t ak es u s t o a f a m i l i a r i n s i g h t o f p o l i t ic a l s c ien ce - t h a t p o w er m ay b ea l l t h e g r ea t e r f o r b e i n g i n v i s i b l e . To w i n a d i s p u t ed v o t e may b e ev i d en ce o f

t h e p o s s e s s io n o f p o w e r ; t o e n s u r e t h a t t h e i ss u e i t c o n c e rn s n e v e r a p p e a r s o n

a n y a g e n d a m a y b e t o k e n y e t g r e a t e r p o w e r . A s S c h a t t s c h n e i d e r (1 96 0: 7 1)

w r o t e , ' S o m e i s su e s a r e o r g a n i s e d i n t o p o li ti c s w h il e o t h e r s a r e o r g a n i s e d o u t ' .

T h e z e n i t h o f a p r o f e s s i o n ' s d o m i n a n c e , t h e r e f o r e , i s w h e n i t s i m a g e o f t h e

w o r l d , a n d o f it s p l a c e in i t, a r e g e n e r a l ly a c c e p t e d a s u n c o n t e n t i o u s c o m m o n

sense .

P r o f e s s i o n a l k n o w l e d g e , c o n t r o l a n d l e g i t i m a c y

S u c h a n o t i o n l i e s a t t h e h e a r t o f J o h n s o n ' s b o o k , Professions and Power

( 1 9 7 2 ) . P r o f e s s i o n a l i s a t i o n , h e t e l l s u s , i s t h e f r u i t o f t h e emer g en ce o f

s p ec i a li s ed o cc u p a t i o n a l s ki ll s , w h i ch c rea t e s b o t h d e p en d en c e - b y t h e u n s p ec -

i a l i s ed co n s u mer o n t h e s p ec i a l i s ed p r o d u ce r - an d s o c i a l d i s t an ce r e s u l t i n g

f r o m t h e a b s e n c e o f k n o w l e d g e a n d e x p e r i e n c e s h a r e d b y b o t h p a r t i e s . P r o f -e s s i o n a l i s a t i o n i s a m e c h a n i s m f o r r e g u l a t i n g t h e ,

... irreducible but variable m i n i m u m o f u n c e r t a i n t y i n t h e c o n s u m e r - p r o d u -

c e r r e l a t i o n s h i p . . . P o w e r r e l a t i o n s w il l d e t e r m i n e w h e t h e r ( t hi s) u n c e r t a i n t y



154

is reduced at the expense of producer or consumer (Johnson, 1972: 41, -

italics in the original).

Broadly, this may be done in three ways: by co l leg ia te control - 'In which theproducer defines the needs of the consumer and the manner in which these will

be catered for ' (Johnson, 1972: 45.); by p a t r o n a g e - 'In which the consumer

defines his own needs and the manner in which they are to be met' (Ibid.,

p. 46); or m e d i a t i v e l y - 'In which a third party mediates in the relationship

... defining both the needs and the manner in which the needs are to be met'

(loc. cit.).

In the case of collegiate control, Johnson suggests, the practitioner may,

seek to increase the social distance and his own au tonomy and control over

practice by engaging in a process of 'mystification'. Uncertainty is not,

therefore, entirely cognitive in origin but may be deliberately increased to

serve manipulative or managerial ends. (Ibid., p. 43).

Is such a form of control one of the foundations for academic co-ordination?

Before trying to answer this question directly it is helpful to examine the

assumption that underlies the last quotation from Johnson: namely, that a

meaningful distinction can be made between uncertainty arising from theinherent esotericism of a field of knowledge (that which is 'cognitive in origin')

and uncertainty which serves social ends ('manipulative or managerial'). 1

So much has been written on the relationship between cognition and social

practice since the publication of Johnson' s book that accurate summary is all

but impossible; the best that can be said, perhaps, is tha t a lthough many social

scientists would still wish to maintain such a distinction, few would be

confident that it could be done simply and unproblematically. (e.g., see

Barnes, 1982, 1985; Law & Lodge, 1984; Wright, 1979) Giddens conveys a

sense of this complexity when he remarks:

... many of the most deeply sedimented elements of social conduct are

cognitively ... established, rather than founded on definite 'motives'

prompting action; t h e i r c o n t i n u a t i o n i s a s s u r e d t h r o u g h s o c i a l r e p r o d u c t i o n

i t s e l f (Giddens, 1980:218 - italics in the original).

The applicability of such ideas to understanding the establishment of modern

higher education has been elaborated by Bender (1984) who has examined the

central part played by universities in providing a new basis o f author ity and

legitimacy for American intellectual life and public culture in the period

between the Civil War and the First World Wa r. .. They provided, he suggests:



155

... an institutional matrix that confer(red) authority and concentrate(d)

attention on selected ways of perceiving and interpreting experience'. (Such)

communities of discourse, he continues, supply collective concepts, mecha-

nisms for exclusion and appropria tion, and give force to the paradigms that

guide the creative intellect (Bender, 1984: 85).

From such a standpoint, the universi ty comes to appear not simply as a special

sphere of activity in which professional interests may, or may not, reign, but

as the privileged site for the creation and warranty of dependable knowledge

in western societies from the late nineteenth century onwards.

It appears, then, that it is possible to distinguish at least three levels at which

professional control may be exercised. 2 The first is essentially behavioural in

that it concentrates on the more-or-less overt activities of professionals in

pursuit of their own ends. This appears to be what Clark has in mind when

he writes of the academic mode of co-ordination. (He concentrates on the

behaviour of academics: with the degree to which they are successful in

ensuring either that they, themselves, are charged with making decisions which

concern higher education or in exerting influence over others who may do so.)

The second level, o f which I believe Johnson's Professions and Power is an

example, is one in which professionals are seen as being able to frame and

control their practice by defining their clients' needs and how these ought tobe met. In doing so, they may generate specialised occupational knowledge

which both reflects and helps to perpetuate their particular interests. Prof-

essional control at this level is naturally more concealed than at the first;

nonetheless it can be brought into visibility fairly readily when challenged by

some procedures for accountability. The state, for example, as in Johnson's

mediative model may establish in legal form the terms of the relationship

between an occupation and its clients.

The third level, illustrated by Bender's (1984) writing and that of Young

(1971), is one where a profession is in a position of such cultural hegemony

that it alone acts as source and legitimator of the language and conceptual

framework in which its activities take place. In such a situation, any discussion

of the subject in question takes place on the profession's own terrain and its

power is such that it alone is able to determine the meaning and application

of the terms employed.

There is no reason why the exercise of professional power at one of these

levels will necessarily entail, at least in the short term, its exercise at another.

It is easy to recognise, for example, that particular successes or defeats at thefirst level of overt decision-making may have no necessary consequences for

power at the more fundamental , yet elusive, levels at which the framework and

vocabulary of professional practice are established. In the long run, however,

control at the deepest level will, unless eroded, tend to influence the outcome



156

of decision making. The familiar tendency towards 'academic drift' (Pratt &

Burgess, 1974) in British higher education could, for instance, be understood

in this light - as an example of control over the definition of quality and status

in education so deep-seated that it has repeatedly subverted political attemptsto change the system.

But, of course, professional control is neither established, nor maintained,

in a vacuum; it takes form in a context in which there is already a particular

pattern of power and sources of authority. As Clark has pointed out:

While separating f rom other segments of society (family, church, communi-

ty) to become a distinct sector, an educational system must be heavily a

product of its environment. It accumulates interior segments from ones

already existing in, for example, the church, and has much structure laid

down upon it by exterior bodies for its coordination and integration (Clark,

1983: 102).

This will mean that the forms of professional control in education will be

deeply coloured by the more general social and economic characteristics of the

society. As Jarausch (1983: 32-36) has shown, the forms of higher education

in western countries are very much the consequence of the particular ways in

which these countries responded to what he calls the problems of 'moderni-zation'.

A profession necessarily has to operate in a particular configuration of social

forces which both constrain its activities and provide it with certain opportu-

nities for establishing its control. To accommodate these forces to its best

advantage, and to embody them into its professional mythology is a sign of

success - an aspect of the 'invisibili ty' of power which was discussed above.

This means that it would be misleading to try to measure professional power

at the deeper levels by the extent to which a profession appeared to be acting

independently of other social forces. The test of professional power which I

shall employ is to enquire how far a particular group succeeds in retaining

control over the construction and definition of its practice and of the nature

and application of the criteria which are used to judge it. How far, I shall ask,

does it frame the discourse in which its own practice is considered?

Measures o f qua l i ty

Recent attempts to assess various aspects of higher education have brought

many different terms into currency which are often, unfortunately, used in

disparate ways. To promote consistency and avoid confusion, I shall begin by

setting out my own usage, which I hope is in accord both with the British



157

Government 's 1985 White Paper, The Development of Higher Education into

the 1990s, and of the final report o f the Leverhulme programme (Williams &

Blackstone, 1983: 104-110). 'Quali ty' I shall use as the most general and

all-embracing term to mean the degree to which are present any characteristics

which are thought desirable, and 'assessment', as any attempt to measure these

characteristics. I shall limit the use of 'evaluation' to those processes which

are employed to assess courses, students' work on them, or research, and have

as their aim validation, the moderation of a standard or ranking. To 'efficien-

cy' I shall reserve a narrow meaning - that, simply, of avoiding waste.

'Cost-effectiveness' I shall use to denote the degree to which a series o f goals

are attained with the most economic use of resources - something, which is

often attempted by means of data on comparative unit-costs. Finally, by

'performance' I shall understand a more general conception of the extent to

which higher education meets wider social needs such, for example, as 'the

needs of the labour market'.

The 1985 White Paper provides a useful starting point for the study the

growing concern for measuring quality in English higher education both

because it discussed this at some length and because it was the present

Government's first major policy statement on higher education and its role.

One of the document's seven sections is entitled 'Patterns of Provision and

Academic Standards' and states:

External judgements about quality can be attempted by comparing the

success of students in obtaining jobs, their relative salaries and their reported

performance in employment, and by reference generally to the international

standing of our academic qualifications. Judgements will also be made

through the comparative assessment of a variety of outside agencies. The

primary responsibility for preserving and enhancing quality however lies

within each institution, (DES, 1985b: 27-8).

In addition, one of the paper's two annexes is devoted to an examination of

'performance measures in higher education'. This successively examines unit

costs per student and per graduate, non-completion rates, the average A-level

scores of entrants to courses in different subjects and different kinds of

institutions, data on the employment of graduates sixth months after grad-

uation (First Destination Surveys) and 'rates of return' on higher education.

It finally notes that higher education also produces research and important

wider social benefits but that these are hard, if not impossible, to quantify -although it is remarked that 'peer review' may contribute to the measurement

of research (DES, 1985b: 49-59).

Another source for information on assessment is Sizer's survey of the

relevant research literature, 'Assessing Institutional Performance and Pro-



158

gress', which he presented to the third seminar in the Leverhulme Programme

of Study into the Future of Higher Education (Sizer, 1982). In this, he points

to the general consensus among researchers that an authentic measurement of

performance requires agreement over the objectives of an institution and overthe ways tha t these might be translated into quantif iable goals (Sizer, 1982:

35-6). In its absence, the best which can be done, he suggests, is to employ

partial, and essentially proxy, measures. Among these, he devotes favourable

attention to portfolio analysis, a technique for assessing all courses in an

institution in terms o f two dimensions: the attractiveness of their subject area

- measured in various ways, and the strength of their position within that area.

The institution is able to use this information to guide its resource allocation

and development plans.

T h e s e a r c h f o r q u a l i ty i n E n g l is h h i g h e r e d u c a t i o n

I shall now examine how these various measures o f quali ty have impinged on

the power of the academic profession in England to define the nature of

quality. 3

Perhaps the most familiar o f these, certainly the longest-established, is thesystem of evaluation based upon peer review. As the name suggests, it is

essentially a process in which professionals assess one another's standards,

their application to the work of students, and, in certain cases, validate courses

(but not in universities). Although non-academics are involved to some extent

- the CNAA's statutes, for example, require all its committees to include,

'. .. persons having appropriate experience in branches of industry or com-

merce ... ' (CNAA, 1986: 10)- there is no evidence tha t the process has caused

significant movement away from professional, academic criteria of assess-

ment. This is hardly surprising given that the CNAA statutes also require it

to ensure that its awards are, '... comparable in standard to awards granted

and conferred by universities (CNAA, 1986:11).

Indeed, the Council for National Academic Awards (CNAA) which created

by far the most extensive and explicit system of evaluation in the UK has tended

to concentrate on judging courses in terms of the internal criteria used by the

academics who developed them, as Adelman & Alexander have remarked:

(CNAA validation) ... is pre-eminently a means for appraisingintentions,

only marginally (through external examiners' reports) a means of appraising

products, and hardly at all a means of appraising processes (Adelman &

Alexander, 1982:17 - italics in the original).



159

A point taken farther in the Lindop Report, Ac ade m ic Validation in Pub lic

S ec to r Hig h er E d u ca t io n , which commented:

(CNAA's approach) ... does not safeguard effectively the ways in which

those intentions are put into effect or their outcome (DES, 1985a: 12)

In the universities, evaluation has generally has been less formal, and as can

be seen in the 'guidance' of the University Grants Committee almost entirely

based on the judgements of academics on one another (Shattock, 1986).

Only, perhaps, in the validation and accreditation in non-university higher

education by bodies such as the Business and Technical Education Council

(BTEC) or non-academic professions has there been much sign of an attempt

to introduce criteria into the process of assessment which had not been

generated by the academic world itself.

By the pursuit of efficiency in the restricted sense o f the avoidance of waste

I have in mind, for example, decisions such as those to save fuel or paper, to

restrict photocopying facilities, or to limit library hours to periods of maxi-

mum use. While these may often have inconvenienced academics and worsened

their working conditions they do not in themselves undermine professional

control in the deeper senses. Indeed, debates over such matters may, paradoxi-

cally, reinforce academic control over the definition of education by providingoccasions for laying down 'what can be done without damaging academic

standards'.

Measures of cost-effectiveness such as data on unit costs or non-completion

also do nothing to encroach upon professional definitions of education

because they begin by taking as given the forms in which academic activity is

cast. This is especially obvious in the case of statistics on unit costs since they

depend on the assumption that a student or a degree, as currently understood,

is a suitable category for judging the quality of higher education. In fact, of

course, such categories are very much artefacts of the academic process. Even

the concept of 'student ' is far less tangible than might be imagined since it is

defined in the UK in relation to those who happen to be regarded as full-time

students for the purposes of student grant regulations. This means that

part-t ime, short-course and distance-learning students are not easy to assimil-

ate into the statistics and are, resultantly, either omitted or converted accord-

ing to some fairly arbitrary formula into 'Full-Time Equivalent Students'.

Thus, the statistical procedures themselves embody, and reproduce, the con-

ception of higher education which happened to dominate in Britain around1960 at the time when grant regulations were being framed.

A similar point can be made concerning the use of non-completion as a

measure of quality. The 1985 White paper illustrates this point strikingly. This

yardstick is used, we are told, because,



160

... the rate at which students drop out f rom courses without obtaining the

originally envisaged (or another relevant) qualification provides a measure

of success in achieving a basic objective (DES, 1985b: 53).

Obviously, at face value this is a truism, but it is a truism which is based on

the unquestioned assumption that the tradi tional academic view is unproble-

matic. Al though no information is given on how the data are compiled it seems

clear that movement between courses and institutions, patterns of intermittent

study and transfer between different modes of study are simply treated as cases

of failure. So they may be; but f rom another standpoint they can be regarded

as evidence of effectiveness. To take an extreme - but real - example, a student

who decides to leave after completing the first year of a B Ed . (a degree

resulting in qualified teacher status), having discovered that teaching is uncon-

genial, who then transfers, without loss of time, to the second year of a degree

in Communication Studies at another institution, would appear from the

standpoint of the White Paper to be evidence of the poor quality of a course.

It is not difficult to see how, from another standpoint, it might appear as an

instance of success.

The use, as a measure of quality, of the average A-level scores of entrants

to higher educational establishments raises similar problems. Obviously such

scores themselves represent the outcome of professional practice, and thechoices made by applicants to higher education reflect self-reproducing images

of reputation and quality. The fact that a course, or institution, is popular

among applicants with high A-level grades can in no way be regarded as

evidence of external assessment: it is clearly an indirect manifestation of the

application of internal academic criteria. What is more, the use of such data

reveals another distinctive characteristic of English academic ideology: name-

ly, is is apparently assumed that, in higher education, the quality of entrants

is more important than what they achieve ('value-added').

It might be assumed, however, that comparative data on the employment

of graduates or on rates of return f rom higher education would yield measures

of performance that were free from the influence of professional, academic

definitions of quality, since they would seem to be external to the education

system. But for this to be so, it needs to be demonstrable that such data provide

an independent assessment by employers of the extent to which graduates

possess qualities that f it them for employment. Research on graduate employ-

ment provides little evidence that this is the case, except for a few highly

specialised occupations. Firstly, many employers seem unclear exactly how to

measure the qualities that they feel are needed in their recruits and simply take

as a proxy for these a combination of the reputation o f the institution attended

and the class of degree attained. Secondly, they sometimes assume that the

content of higher education is less important than the fact that it is thought



161

to act as a filtering mechanism which conveniently identifies the most able

young adults within the general population. (CNAA, 1987; Hunter, 1981;

Roizen & Jepson, 1985).

To the extent tha t either of these factors operate, da ta on the employability

of graduates simply replicates the academic judgements which are embodied

in institutional reputations, in the processes of the distribution of candidates

between institutions, and in the classification of students' awards. Nonethe-

less, if systematic long-term comparative data were available on the careers

of graduates in the UK - which it is not at present - it might provide some

more independent measure of the success with which graduates were able to

respond to the demands of employment. But even then, there is still the

methodological difficulty of knowing how far the qualifications awarded from

various educational institutions simply serve as self-fulfilling prophecies.

The same criticism can be made of the concept of rate of return as a way

of obtaining a measure of quality independent of the internal judgements of

academics. It seems impossible to know to what extent variations in the

economic benefits of the possession of a degree reflect its ' real' worth in the

labour market, rather than being merely the outcome of education system

serving as a mechanism to place individuals within a system of structured, but

changing, inequalities.

Port folio analysis, by concentrating on quas i-market forces, naturally shiftsattention to some extent towards the needs and wishes of consumers, especially

when emphasis is placed upon an active conception of marketing in which an

institution is encouraged to develop new kinds of courses based on research

into needs. Nonetheless, consumers' perceptions of their needs are likely to

be shaped to a great extent by the ways in which education is understood and

practised in a soci ety - in which traditional academic conceptions play a major

part.

P l u r a l i s m i n h i g h e r e d u c a t i o n

The same can also be true of attempts to introduce market forces into

education if these take place in an environment which is not conducive to the

existence of a diversity of consumer needs and preferences, as Castagnos &

Echevin (1984) have shown. For the market to be an effective method of

politico-economic regulation it is necessary for consumers and their needs to

be independent of the interests of producers; for there to be what Lindblomhas described as '.. . a private-property society of free men' (Lindblom,

1977: 78). In education, this would mean a state of affairs where, to some

significant extent, educational needs and the manner in which they were met

were defined independently of the academic profession. As I have argued



162

above, whatever the tribulations English academics may have experienced over

the last decade or so, there is no evidence that this has happened within higher

education. Rather, the English system has remained one in which:

Absolute or comparable standards have been elusive particularly as the

system, whatever its expansions and contract ions, has remained hierarchical

- although with interlocking and complex hierarchies. The traditional social

and intellectual hierarchies have remained intact, whilst adapting to

hierarchies established by new universities, new styles of academic life and

community, new sectors, new statutes of subjects and graduate employ-

ment...

Accusations of elitism have doubtless been confirmed by the ways in

which quality questions have been addressed ... (Silver, 1986: 23-4).

From this standpoint, the hierarchy and powers of assimilation of English

higher education are closely bound up with features of English society which

maintain them. The introduction of a greater element of market relations in

emulation of the USA seems unlikely, of itself, to transform the English

system; American higher educat ion was born out of a society where intellectual

diversity was cultivated explicitly (Boorstin, 1958) and its present heterogeneity

and consumerism reflect this. Such diversity has been noticeably absent inEngland.

My analysis should not be read as a fatalistic account in which professional

power inevitably reproduces itself and propagates its own assumptions.

Certainly, I believe that the academic profession has maintained its dominance

over English higher education for as long as it has because of English social

structure. But there have also, I believe, been times, when a shift might have

been possible, even though, for a variety of contingent reasons, it did not take

place, or, if it did, was not sustained (Wright, forthcoming).

Significant movement away from traditional academic conceptions is only

probable when counteravailing social forces become involved in education and

have the power and desire to define it differently: pluralism in education

depends on social pluralism. There is no necessary reason why increased

government intervention will, of itself, undermine professional dominance.

Civil Servants, especially if drawn from a department, such as the Department

of Education and Science in England, with a long tradition of informal contact

with educationalists, may well share the academics' definition of their own

activities, and simply apply internal, professional criteria to them (Kogan,1987) - as I believe my examination of the treatment o f quality in the 1985

White Paper has shown.

So far it is too early to say whether new social forces have emerged in English

higher education although there are reasons for expecting that this will take



163

p l a c e. T o b e g i n w i th , d e m o g r a p h i c f a c t o r s ( D E S , 1 9 87 ) s e e m t o c o n s t r a i n

h i g h e r e d u c a t i o n i n t o f o l l o w i n g t h e U S e x a m p l e ( K e r r & G a d e , 1 9 86 ) b y

r e c r u i t i n g a fa r h i g h e r p r o p o r t i o n o f s tu d e n t s w h o l a c k t r a d i t io n a l a c a d e m i c

q u a l i f i c a t i o n s o r a r e o ld e r , t h u s p o t e n t i a l l y b r i n g i n g i n t o e x i s te n c e a n e w k i n d

o f s t u d e n t i n t e re s t g r o u p ; s e c o n d l y , i n d u s t r y s h o w s s o m e s ig n s o f w a n t i n g t o

p l a y a m o r e a c t i v e p a r t i n t h e d e f i n i t i o n o f h ig h e r e d u c a t i o n ( C o u n c i l f o r

I n d u s t r y a n d H i g h e r E d u c a t i o n , 1 98 7) ; t h i r d l y , t h e i n c r e as i n g in v o l v e m e n t o f

t h e M a n p o w e r S e rv ic e s C o m m i s s i o n ( n o w t h e T r a i n i n g C o m m i s s i o n ) i n h i g h er

e d u c a t i o n h a s b e g u n t o p r o v i d e t h e b as is f o r n e w d e f i n i t io n s o f h i g h e r

e d u c a t i o n a n d , i n d e e d , t h e f u n d s t o s u p p o r t t h e m .

F o r p l u r a l i s m t o b e m a n i f e s t i n t h e a s s e ss m e n t o f q u a li ty , a n e w a p p r o a c h

n e e d s t o b e d e v e l o p e d r a t h e r l i ke t h a t a d v o c a t e d b y K l e in a n d D a y ( 1 9 87 ) in

t h e i r r e c e n t s t u d y o f a c c o u n t a b i l i ty : o n e w h i c h d o e s n o t s i m p l y l im i t i ts e lf to

t h e m e a s u r e m e n t o f a p r o f e s s i o n ' s s u c ce s s i n a c h i e v i n g g i v e n e n d s , b u t a l so

s e ts o u t t o a s s e ss t h e d e s i r a b i l i t y o f d i f f e r e n t s e ts o f e n d s , a n d t h e i r c o n n e c t i o n

w i t h d i f f e r e n t k i n d s o f p r a c ti c e . T h e i n d i c t m e n t o f p r o f e s s i o n a l p o w e r is t h a t

i t h a s l e d t o ,

' . . . t h e p r i v a t i z a t i o n o f a c c o u n t a b i l i t y , i n s o f a r a s p r o f e s s i o n a l s a n d e x p e r t s

c l a i m th a t o n l y t h e ir p e e rs c a n ju d g e t h ei r c o n d u c t a n d p e r f o r m a n c e ' ( K le in

& D a y , 1 9 8 7 : 1 ).

Not e s

1. I think Johnson's introduction of the notion of deliberateness simply clouds the issue and

weakens his argument. It see m s to me perfectly possible to think of si tuations where a

profession m ay m ystify knowledge quite unintentionally and yet do s o in a wa y which just

happens to serve i ts ow n ends. K lein argues that university teachers in England have don e this

in debates over acad emic tenure. (Klein, 1987 : 11).

2. These levels resemble in several ways Lukes's (1974) distinction between three views of power,

especially in that m y second and third levels, l ike Lukes's ' two-dimensional ' and ' three-dimensional ' views, increasingly move away from a behavioural approach. In m y third level,

however, I place much greater emphasis on the social construction of know ledge (Wright &Treacher, 1982) than does Lukes. Like B end er (1984), I giv e considerable weight to what

Structuralist writers, espec ially Fouc ault (1971), have have to sa y abou t the constitution o f

discourse as an aspect of power.

3. M y discussion is consciously l imited to a consideration o f English higher education because,

although the UK system as a wh ole possesses m any co mm on features, in som e parts, especially

Scotland, the tradition and present so cial significance of higher education is noticeably

different from England.

Bibliography

Adelman, C. and Alexander, R. J. (1982). The Self-Evaluating Institution: Practice and Principles

in the Management of Educational Change. London: Methuen.



164

Bar n es , B . (1 9 82 ). " O n th e E x ten s io n o f Co n cep t s an d th e Gr o w th o f Kn o w led g e , " Sociological

R e v i e w 30 ( I ) : 23-44 .

Barnes, B. (1985). About Sc ience . Ox f o r d : B lack we l l .

Bell , D. (1973). Th e C o min g o f P o s t - In d u s t r ia l S o c ie t y . New Yo r k : Bas i c Bo o k s .

Ben d e r , T . ( 19 8 4) . " T h e E r o s io n o f Pu b l i c Cu l tu r e : C i t ie s , D i sco u r ses an d Pr o f e ss io n a l D i sci -p l in e s , " i n : T . L . Hask e l l ( ed . ) , Th e A u th o r i t y o f E xp er ts : S tu d ie s in H i s to ry a n d Th eo ry .

Blo o m in g to n : I n d ian a Un iv e r s i t y P r e ss .

Boo rst in , D. J . (1958). T h e A m e r i c a ns , Vo lu m e 1 : The Colon ia lExperience . N e w Y o r k : R a n d o m

H o u s e .

Bu d , R . an d Ro b e r t s , G . ( 1 9 8 4 ) . Science versus Practice: Ch em istry in Victorian Britain.

Man ch es t e r : Man ch es t e r Un iv e r s i t y P r e ss .

Cas t ag n o s , J - C . & E ch ev in , C . ( 1 98 3) . " T h e My th o f t h e Co m p e t i t iv e M ar k e t : L in k ag e wi th t h e

Pr iv a t e Sec to r an d Pr o b lem s f o r H ig h e r E d u ca t io n Re f o r m ," Hig h er E d u ca t io n 12: 101-116.

C l a r k , B . ( 19 79 ). " T h e M a n y P a t h w a y s o f A c a d e m i c C o o r d i n a t i o n , " Hig h er E d u ca t io n 8:

251-267.

Cla r k , B . (1 98 3 ). " T h e Co n t r ad ic t io n s o f Ch an g e in Acad em ic Sy s t em s , " Hig h er E d u ca t io n 12 :101-116.

C NA A ( Co u n c i l f o r Na t io n a l Acad em ic Aw ar d s ) . (1 96 8 ). H a n d b o o k o f t h e C N A A " s P o l i c y a n d

Regula t ions . L o n d o n : C N A A .

CNAA ( Co u n c i l f o r Na t io n a l Acad em ic Awar d s ) . ( 1 9 8 7 ) . Graduates at W ork : Degree Courses

a n d t h e L a b o u r M a r k e t. L o n d o n : C N A A ( T h is i s o n ly a su m m ar y . T h e f u l l r ep o r t b y J . Br en n an

an d P . McG eev o r i s y e t t o b e p u b l i sh ed ) .

Co u n c i l f o r I n d u s t r y an d H ig h e r E d u ca t io n . ( 19 87 ). Tow ards a Partnersh ip: Highe r Educat ion

- Go vernm ent - Industry . L o n d o n : Co u n c i l f o r I n d u s t r y an d Hig h e r E d u ca t io n .

DE S (Depa r tmen t o f Edu cat ion an d Science) . (1985a). Ac ade mic Validat ion in Pub l ic Sec tor

Hig h er E d u ca t io n . L o n d o n : H M S O .

DES (Depar tment o f Educat ion and Science) . (1985b) . Th e Deve lo p men t o f H ig h er E d u ca t io ninto the 1990s. L o n d o n : H M S O .

DE S (Depa r tment o f Edu cat ion a nd Science). (1987). High er Educat ion: M eet ing the C hallenge.

L o n d o n : H M S O .

Du n leav y , P . ( 19 81 ). " P r o f e ss io n s an d Po l i cy Ch an g e : No te s T o w ar d s a M o d e l o f I d eo lo g ica l

C o r p o r a t i s m " , P u b l i c A d min i s t ra t io n B u l l e ti n 36: 2-16.

Foucau l t , M. (1971) . L'Ordre du d iscours . Par i s : Ga l l im ar d .

Fr iedman, M. & R. (1980) . Free to Choose. L o n d o n : M a c m i l l a n .

Giddens, A. (1980) . Centra l Pro b lem s in Socia l Theory: A ct ion , S truc ture and Contrad ic t ion in

Socia l Analysis . L o n d o n : M a c m i l l a n .

Green , D. G. (1985) . W hich Do ctor? A Cri tica l Analysis o f the Pro fess iona l Barriers to C omp e-

t i t ion in Heal th Care . L o n d o n : I n s t i t u t e o f E co n o m ic Af f a i r s , Resea r ch Mo n o g r ap h 4 0 .Green , T . C. (1987) . The N ew Righ t: The Counter-Revo lu t ion in Poli tica l, Ec ono mi c and Socia l

Th o u g h t . Br ig h to n : W h ea t sh ea f .

Haske11, T. L. (ed.) . (1984). The Au tho ri ty o f Experts: S tud ies in His to ry and Theory . B l o o m i n g -

to n : I n d ian a Un iv e r s i t y P r e ss.

Hu n te r , L . C . ( 19 81 ). " E m p lo y e r s ' Pe r cep t io n s o f D em an d " , i n : Hig h er E d u ca t io n a n d th e

La b o u r Ma rke t , Leverh u lme P ro g ra m me o f S tu d y in to t h e F u tu re o f H ig h er E d u ca t ion . Vol . 1 ,

R . L in d ley (ed . ) Gu i ld f o r d : S o c ie ty f o r Resea r ch in to H ig h e r E d u ca t io n .

I l l ich, I . (ed.) . (1977). Disabling Professions. L o n d o n : M a r i o n B o y a r s .

Ja r au sch , K . H . ( 19 8 3) . " H ig h e r E d u ca t io n an d So c ia l Ch an g e" , i n K . H . Ja r au sch ( ed . ), T he

Transform at ion o f High er Learn ing 1860-1930. Ch icag o : Un iv e r s i t y o f Ch icag o Pr e ss .

Johnson , T . J . (1972) . P ro fe ss io n s a n d P o wer . L o n d o n : M a c m i l la n .

Ke r r , C . an d Gad e , M. ( 19 86 ). " R esp o n se to Dec l in e an d to Ch an g e : t h e US A E x p e r i en ce" ,

E u ro p ea n Jo u rn a l o f E d u ca t io n 21 (1): 67-79.

Kogan , M. (1986) . Educat iona l Accountab i l i ty : an Analy t ica l Overv iew. L o n d o n : H u t c h in s o n .

K o g a n , M . ( 1 9 8 7 ) . " T h e D E S a n d W h i t e h a l l " , High er Educat ion Quarter ly 41 (3): 225-240.

Kle in , R . ( 19 87 ). " I n s id e th e I v o r y T o we r " , N e w S o c i e t y 17 (Apr i l 1987) : 10-12 .



165

Klein , R. and Day , P . (1987) . Accountabilities: Five Public Services. L o n d o n : T av i s to ck .

L a r so n , M. S . (1 98 4 ). " T h e Pr o d u c t io n o f E x p e r t i se an d th e Co n s t i t u t io n o f E x p e r t Po we r " , i n

T . H . Hask e l l ( ed . ) , The Authority of Experts: Studies in History and Theory. B l o o m i n g t o n :

I n d ian a Un iv e r s i t y P re ss .

Law, J . and Lodge , P . (1984) . Science for Social Scientists. L o n d o n : M a c m i l l a n .Lindblom, C. (1977) . Politics and Markets: the World's Political-Economic Systems. N e w Y o r k:

Bas i c Bo o k s .

Lukes, S. (1974). Power: a Radical View. L o n d o n : M a c m i l l a n .

Mo o d ie , G . C . ( 19 86 ). " F i t f o r W h a t?" , i n : G . C . Mo o d ie (ed . ), Standards and Criteria in Higher

Education. Gu i ld f o r d : So c ie ty f o r Resea r ch in to Hig h e r E d u ca t io n - Ne l so n .

Morris, A. and Sizer , J. (eds.) (1982). Resources and Higher Education: Leverhulme Programme

of Study into the Future of Higher Education, Vol . 8 . Gui ld fo rd : Soc ie ty fo r R esearch in to

H i g h e r E d u c a t io n .

Neav e , G . ( 19 86 a) . " O n Sh i f t in g San d s ; Ch an g in g Pr io r i ti e s an d Pe r sp ec t iv e s in E u r o p ean Hig h e r

E d u ca t io n f r o m 1 9 8 4 to 1 9 8 6 , " European Journal o f Education 21 (1): 7-24.

Neav e , G . ( 1 9 86 b ). " T h e A l l -See in g E y e o f t h e P r in ce in W es te r n E u r o p e , " i n : G . C . M o o d ie(ed.) , Standards and Criteria in Higher Education. G u i l d f o rd : S R H E - N e l s o n.

Pe r k in , H . ( 1 9 8 4 ) . " T h e Hi s to r i ca l Pe r sp ec t iv e , " i n : B . R . C la r k ( ed . ) , Perspectives on Higher

Education: Eight Disciplinary and Comparative Views. Ber k e ley /L o n d o n : Un iv e r s i t y o f Ca l i -

f o r n i a P r e ss.

Pra t t , J . and Burgess , T . (1974) . The Polytechnics: a Report. L o n d o n : P i t m a n .

Roizen , J . and Jepson , M. (1985) . Degrees or Jobs: Employer Expectations of Higher Edueation.

Gu i ld f o r d : So c ie ty f o r R esea rch in to Hig h e r E d u ca t io n .

Schat tschneider , E . E . (1960) . The Semi-Sovereign People: A Realist's View of Democracy in

America. New Yo r k : Ho l t , R in eh a r t an d W in s to n .

Sh a t to ck , M. L . ( 1 9 8 6 ) . " T h e UGC an d S tan d a r d s" , i n : G . C . Mo o d ie ( ed . ) , Standards and

Criteria in Higher Education. Gu i ld f o r d : So c ie ty f o r Resea r ch in to H ig h e r E d u ca t io n - Ne l so n .S ize r, J . ( 19 82 ). " Assess in g I n s t i tu t io n a l Pe r f o r m an ce an d Pr o g r e ss" , i n : L . W ag n e r ( ed . ),

Agenda for Change in Higher Education, Leverhulme Programme of Study into the Future of

Higher Education, Vo l . 3 . Gu i ld f o r d : S o c ie ty f o r Resea r ch in to H ig h e r E d u ca t io n .

Szasz, T. (1979). The Theology of Medicine. Ox f o r d : Ox f o r d Un iv e r s i t y P r e ss .

Wil l iams, G. and Blackstone , T . (1983) . Response to Adversity: Higher Education in a Harsh

Climate. Final Report of the Leverhulme Programme of Study into the Future of HigherEducation. Gu i ld f o r d : So c ie ty f o r Resea r ch in to H ig h e r E d u ca t io n .

W i l l i am s , G . (1 9 84 ). " T h e E co n o m ic A p p r o ac h , " i n : B . R . C la r k ( ed . ), Perspectives on Higher

Education: Eight Disciplinary and Comparative Views, Ber k e ley /L o n d o n : Un iv e r s i t y o f Ca l i -

fo rn ia Press .

W r ig h t , P . W . G . ( 1 97 9) . " O n th e Bo u n d a r i e s o f Sc i en ce in Sev en teen th - Cen tu r y E n g lan d " in :Mendelsohn , E . , and Elkhana , Y. (eds . ) , Sciences and Cultures. Do r d r ech t : Re id e l .

W r ig h t , P . W . G . ( f o r th co m in g 1 9 8 9 ) . " Access o r E x c lu s io n ? So m e Co m m en t s o n th e Hi s to r y

an d Fu tu r e P r o sp ec t s o f Co n t in u in g E d u ca t io n in E n g lan d " , Studies in Higher Education.

Wright , P . W. G. and Treacher , A. (eds . ) . (1982) . The Problem of MediealKnowledge: Examin-

ing the Social Construction of Medicine. E d in b u r g h : E d in b u r g h Un iv e r s i t y P r e ss.

Young , B. (1977) . "Science is So c ia l Re la t io n s , " Radical Science Journal 5: 65-129.

Yo ung , M. (ed . ) . (1971) . Knowledge and Control." New Directions in the Sociology of Education.L o n d o n : Co l l i e r - Macm i l l an .

Wright 1989 Who Defines Quality in Higher Education Reflections on the Role of Professional Power in...

Documents

Transcript of Wright 1989 Who Defines Quality in Higher Education Reflections on the Role of Professional Power in...