Abstract
“Partnership” is often promoted as an unquestioned “good” for higher education institutions in relation to its various stakeholder organizations. This paper seeks to problematize this uncritical valorization through a critical interrogation of the concepts and socio-material practices associated with partnership. In the name of partnership, new forms of governance are inaugurated that have far-reaching effects. More specifically, this paper is concerned with a critical analysis of partnership in relation to a longitudinal study of the relational practices between a university and five local authorities within a Scottish educational context. In particular, we trace how a “signature event” transformed a partnership assemblage, from one characterized by a grammar of participation, to a formal partnership aligned with a set of principles that we characterize as a grammar of representation. We argue that this transition led to a new assemblage that enacted new accountabilities, performativities, and alignments under the sign of partnership.
Highlights
Abstract: “Partnership” is often promoted as an unquestioned “good” for higher education institutions in relation to its various stakeholder organizations
Each of these narrations is illustrative of an assemblage that we characterize as a grammar of participation, in which open-ended dialogue about matters of mutual concern informed the kinds of relational practices that took place prior to the signature event
This paper offers a distinctive approach to understanding educational partnership that is focused upon a reading of empirical happenings and their bearing upon a critical analysis of two successive partnership assemblages
Summary
Partnership, as a particular form of knowledge exchange between university departments of education and other stakeholders, has been promoted as a desirable outcome at both European and national levels (Caul & McWilliams, 2002; Dahlstedt, 2009; MacAllister, 2015; Scottish Government, 2011; Smith, Brisard, & Menter 2006). Given the ambiguities that are associated with understandings of partnership to date, we identify three different approaches that are characterized as lexical, stipulative, and empirical orientations respectively. I’Anson & Eady: Partnership as educational policy imperative type has its own characteristic focus for analysis and questioning that distinguishes it from alternative approaches. Having briefly outlined each approach, we will analyse how these intersect in practice within the context of an empirical study that follows
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
