Abstract
A hallmark of recent higher education policy in developed economies is the move towards quasi-markets involving greater student choice and provider competition, underpinned by cost-sharing policies. This paper examines the idealizations and illusions of student choice and marketization in higher education policy in England, although the overall conclusions have relevance for other countries whose higher education systems are shaped by neoliberal thinking. First, it charts the evolution of the student-choice rationale through an analysis of government commissioned reports, white papers, and legislation, focusing on policy rhetoric and the purported benefits of increasing student choice and provider competition. Second, the paper tests the predictions advanced by the student-choice rationale—increased and wider access, improved institutional quality, and greater provider responsiveness to the labour market—and finds them largely not met. Finally, the paper explores how conceptual deficiencies in the student-choice model explain why the idealization of student choice has largely proved illusionary. Government officials have narrowly conceptualized students as rational calculators primarily weighing the economic costs and benefits of higher education and the relative quality of institutions and programs. There is little awareness that student choices are shaped by several other factors as well and that these vary considerably by social background. The paper concludes that students’ choices are socially constrained and stratified, reproducing and legitimating social inequality.
Highlights
A hallmark of much recent higher education (HE) policy in developed economies is the move towards the creation of quasi-markets through policies seeking to promote student choice and provider competition, what has been called the “marketisation of higher education” (Brown 2013; Marginson 2009)
Open University compared with other universities and Further Education (FE) colleges, suggests that access to distance learning courses has been affected more than face to face part-time provision at other universities and Another promise of the student-choice model is that HE participation would widen and there would be more opportunities for groups currently under-represented to enter HE
How do we explain these anomalies? We argue that much of this is due to misconceptions that were woven into the student-choice model and the policies that were adopted in its stead
Summary
A hallmark of much recent higher education (HE) policy in developed economies is the move towards the creation of quasi-markets through policies seeking to promote student choice and provider competition, what has been called the “marketisation of higher education” (Brown 2013; Marginson 2009). This paper examines the idealization and illusions of student choice and marketization in HE policy The paper explores the evolution of the student-choice and marketization rationale in England in relation to undergraduate HE through analysis of commissioned reports, white papers, and legislation It focuses on the evolving idealization of student choice in policy rhetoric as policy ideologues developed arguments for the benefits of increasing student choice and market forces in HE. The choice processes and mechanisms discussed in this paper that reproduce social inequalities are evident as well within and across diverse contexts nationally and internationally They are apparent in secondary or K-12 public education both in England and the US and have been the focus of much research, policy debate, and discourse (Burgess 2016; Labaree 2012). Our original contribution can be found in our critique of the theoretical sparseness of the student-choice concept as elaborated by policy makers, underpinned by our review of major policy documents and the assessment of a range of claims made about the benefits of student choice by its proponents
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
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 callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
