An analysis of costs in institutions of higher education in England

Cost functions are estimated, using random effects and stochastic frontier methods, for English higher education institutions. The article advances on existing literature by employing finer disaggregation by subject, institution type and location, and by introducing consideration of quality effects. Estimates are provided of average incremental costs attached to each output type, and of returns to scale and scope. Implications for the policy of expansion of higher education are discussed.

Researching primary engineering education:a UK perspective, an exploratory study

This paper draws attention to the findings of an exploratory study that critically identified and analysed relevant perceptions of elementary level engineering education within the UK. Utilising an approach based upon grounded theory methodology, 30 participants including teachers, representatives of government bodies and non-profit providers of primary level engineering initiatives were interviewed. Three main concepts were identified during the analysis of findings, each relevant to primary engineering education. These were pedagogic issues, exposure to engineering within the curriculum and children's interest. The paper concludes that the opportunity to make a real difference to children's education by stimulating their engineering imagination suggests this subject area is of particular value.

Innovation in education. Commentary:teaching statistics using dance and movement and a case for neuroscience in mathematics education

Review: A commentary on Teaching statistics using dance and movement by Irving, L.T. (2015). Front. Psychol. 6:50. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00050 A case for neuroscience in mathematics education by Susac, A., and Braeutigam, S. (2014). Front. Hum. Neurosci. 8:314. doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2014.00314

Something to talk about: Content and Language Integrated Learning in Modern Languages in British Higher Education. A case study of German at Aston University

This thesis investigates Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) in German undergraduate programmes in the UK. At its core is a study of how one German department integrates the teaching of language and content in its undergraduate programmes and how instructors and students experience this approach. This micro-context is embedded in the wider macro-context of UK Higher Education and subject to outside forces - be they political, economic, socio-cultural - whose effects will manifest in more or less obvious ways. Data was collected via an online survey of Heads of German at British universities to determine the status quo of CLIL in UK Higher Education and to investigate how certain institutional parameters determine the introduction of CLIL in Higher Education. This project employs a mixed-method case study approach and is based on student questionnaires and semi-structured interview with German teaching staff. The study brings to light a number of significant aspects. For example, contrary to popular belief, content provision in the L2 is rather common at British universities, which is currently not reflected in the research. Student data indicates that German students perceive clear advantages in the university’s approach to CLIL. They consider German-taught content classes challenging yet beneficial for their language development. Staff interviews have yielded intriguing information about perceived advantages and disadvantages of CLIL, about its implications for classroom practice, and about instructors’ attitude towards teacher training, which echo findings from similar investigations in European contexts. Finally, the results of the macro-analysis and the case study are compared and contrasted with findings from European research on ICLHE/CLIL to determine differences and similarities with the British context, a set of recommendations is made regarding CLIL practice at the case study institution, and some implications these indings may have for the future of CLIL in British higher education are discussed.

Gender and subject in higher education

This thesis is concerned with the issue of gender inequality in higher education. It examines the relationship between gender and subject specialisation, looking in particular at the reasons for the predominance, at undergraduate level, of men in the physical sciences, and of women in the humanities. It investigates ideas of `masculinity' and `femininity' and how these relate to constructions of `science' and `arts'. The thesis argues that students choose which subject to study on the basis of certain qualities these subjects are seen to hold, and that these qualities have close connections with beliefs about `masculinity' and `femininity'. It examines this through an interview study of male and female students on six higher education courses: two university courses of physics, two university courses of English, a polytechnic course in communications and a polytechnic course in physical science. The interview study demonstrates that the science subjects are perceived by science students as more certain, more useful and more important than the humanities, and emphasise the value of their degree in gaining a well-paid and important job. Female science students, however, experience conflict between being `a good scientist' and being `feminine'. English and communications students emphasise the breadth, uncertainty and individuality of their subjects, and find science restrictive and narrow. They make little link between their degree and their future career. Men, however, feel no conflict between their identity as men and their chosen subject. It is argued that there is a close link between the construction of masculinity and the construction of physical science, but that English and communications are more ambivalent: in some senses `masculine', in some `feminine'. Men are advantaged in these subjects because of their greater visibility and assertiveness. The thesis concludes that the division between `science' and `arts' reinforces ideas of masculinity and femininity, and argues that female `failure' in education is in part the result of higher education's inability to transcend that division.