A case illustration of identity mismatch in Higher Education

In our recent presentation at the 10th Teaching and Learning Conference organised by Bloomsbury Institute in London on the theme “Who Do We Want To Be?,” we posited that “there has been a flurry of social media posts where students, staff and management include vice chancellors in some cases have celebrated their achievements in university rankings.”

More recently, these rankings have assumed an interesting dimension as they have moved away from research outputs and other metrics such as citations and to some extent the Graduate Outcomes Survey — previously known as the Destinations of Leavers from Higher Education (DLHE) Survey that serves as one of the key considerations in being accepted on the register of the Office for Students (OfS).

These new rankings have only been recently published based on institutions demonstrating contributions to the United Nations (UN) sustainable development goals (SDGs) with the University of Manchester being placed on top globally.

Context and Arguments

Drawing upon the prior experience of the authors, and falling well within the remit of the conference theme on identities, we set about deconstructing identity, and disentangling the concept from three lenses — notably the student (our case study), the University (HE providers), and the regulatory body (OfS).

The Graduate Outcomes Survey was our key point of departure, as we called for a reconsideration of student destinations based on their identity and prior study motivations. However, the regulatory requirements for inclusion in the OfS register has prompted a change in the identity of HE, with an emphasis on “tracking” and “tracing” students who take up graduate level employment within a short period of time (say 6 months) after graduation. We argue that this might well be an identity crisis and/or mismatch as the demography of students has evolved especially at the postgraduate level.

Many students are no longer “freshers” or recent “school leavers” with strong GCSE results as many nontraditional students have decided to return to the classroom in search of the “soft skills” to develop themselves and their businesses (many are either self-employment or working within a family business context). The question, therefore, is whether their identities are being erroneously shaped by HE in a bid to conform with the requirements and/ or expectations of HE regulatory bodies.

Our Case Study

A case illustration of a serial entrepreneur and previously a self-employed MBA student at London University, is provided as evidence of a gap that needs to be bridged by HE providers as well as recognised by regulatory bodies such as the OfS. This is very much similar to the research excellence framework (REF) and balancing with the teaching excellence framework (TEF).

Conclusions

We conclude that teaching students just how to gain “salaried employment,” may not be part their identity at any stage — prior, during or after graduation.

Looking back at the case illustration, further questions on the future research directions arise thus:

1. How matched is the University’s identity to yours?
2. If not, very much, how can the gap be filled based on your own personal experience as a student
3. Should the OfS be judging universities based on a revised metric?
4. Where does this leave those that have identified with solo self-employment?

Further reading may serve as a guide, see for example, “Life of a Lone Ranger: What makes or breaks the solo self-employed?”