UK university part-time higher education: a corpus-assisted discourse analysis of undergraduate prospectuses

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

    2 Citations (Scopus)
    48 Downloads (Pure)

    Abstract

    In the UK, higher education (HE) policy discourse over the past 60 years has advocated flexible part-time HE for social mobility, personal development, economic advantage and leisure. However, part-time undergraduate HE in the UK is in steep decline. Against this backdrop, we were interested in how universities promote, or fail to promote, part-time study options today. We built a corpus of 90 UK undergraduate prospectuses for 2018 entry (5,673,799 words). Using a corpus-assisted discourse analysis approach, we found significant mismatch between policy discourse and marketing discourse regarding part-time study. In particular, we found that UK university marketing discourse positions full-time study as the dominant mode of study and writes of part-time study as ‘second-best’. This discourse mismatch is particularly marked when it comes to the elite Russell Group of universities. Viewing the absence of strong promotional discourse relating to part-time study alongside other factors such as increased tuition fees and the rise of global online education platforms adds a new perspective to the decline of flexible part-time undergraduate HE at campus-based universities in the UK.
    Original languageEnglish
    Pages (from-to)1186-1201
    JournalHigher Education Research and Development
    Volume39
    Issue number6
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - 29 Jan 2020

    Keywords

    • Higher education policy
    • Discourse analysis
    • Democracy
    • Online education
    • online education
    • discourse analysis
    • democracy

    ASJC Scopus subject areas

    • Education

    Fingerprint

    Dive into the research topics of 'UK university part-time higher education: a corpus-assisted discourse analysis of undergraduate prospectuses'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

    Cite this