We examine the impact of recent policy on the nature of competition within English higher education (HE) for students. Revisions made to the method of allocating Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE) teaching funds and the introduction of performance monitoring and targeted recruitment premiums have changed the incentives facing higher education institutions (HEI)s when designing recruitment strategies. We consider the extent to which the experience of similar market-based reforms on the English secondary schooling system is being replicated in HE. (...) Promoting increased competition by comparison was advocated as a means of stimulating greater allocative, technical and dynamic efficiency in both schools and universities. Similarly, relaxing institutions' capacity constraints and introducing targeted financial incentives have been touted as effective mechanisms to assist the attainment of policy objectives. However, the experience of market-based reforms of state secondary schooling indicates that dysfunctional responses occur and that the overall impact on market behaviour is more complex than anticipated. We consider whether similar processes are evolving in HE. (shrink)

In this paper we argue that transnational as well as national political demands and expectations on the educational field are contributing to produce four ideological-based educational leadership discourses in the literature. In order to conceptualize these discourses, we turn to the work of Schmidt and Zizek. On that basis we identify four dominant educational leadership discourses: a personhood-based discourse, a profession-based discourse, a standard-based discourse, and a resource-based discourse. These discourses have—as we will show—various consequences for the way we think (...) and talk about education and educational leadership in our age. Using examples that stem from a project about educational leadership in Danish upper secondary school, we will illustrate how educational leaders’ beings and doings are ‘regulated’ by these discourses, which place them in a tension field where different and conflicting fantasies seem to be played out. Then, we will discuss how these fantasies can be challenged and how we can think and speak more intellectually about education and educational leadership. By using the term intellectual we are referring to educational leaders’ ability as human beings to critically reflect on their contemporary doings and beings within and beyond the existing social order. Hopefully this can help them to establish new ways for discussing not only what educational leadership is and should be about, but also what it could be about. (shrink)