Developing Student Character through Disciplinary Curricula: An Analysis of QAA
Subject Benchmark Statements
Abstract
I examine the UK written curriculum through an analysis of seven UK QAA Subject
Benchmark Statements that correspond with the most popular subjects (a total
enrolment of 57% of UK HE students). I looked for language, principles and
intended outcomes that suggest that students are expected to embrace or embody
particular affects, values or virtues or demonstrate social responsibility.
All of the statements emphasise cognitive/intellectual skills, with little attention to the
development of personal virtues or values. However, when present, the richest
expressions are embedded in the values of the particular discipline, rather than
presented as “transferable skills.” I give three examples of virtues that underpin
particular disciplines, including empathy as expressed in languages and related
studies and art and design; social justice and courage as expressed in social work;
and humility as expressed in biosciences and sociology. Implications for higher
education policy are suggested.
Introduction
Whilst UK higher education has historically attended to character development of its
students (Arthur, 2005), the language of character and morals has largely been
replaced by instrumental and managerialist higher education policy discourse (Smith,
2008).
Quinlan (2011) reviewed literature that reflects a broader interpretation of the goals
of university, emphasising affective and ethical outcomes in the education of the
“whole” student as a person. This paper builds on her argument, assuming that
higher education has an obligation to make positive contributions to society, in part
through emphasising the moral dimensions of higher learning. This paper explores
the meaning of these general notions in the context of specific subjects taught in the
UK.
I examine the values and implicit virtues underpinning the written curriculum in UK
universities in specific selected subjects, as evidenced through the Quality
Assurance Agency’s (QAA) Subject Benchmark Statements. These statements,
collaboratively written and widely consulted on, enable us to better understand UK
academics’ aspirations for students as people.
I look for language, principles and intended outcomes that suggest that students are
expected to exercise personal and social responsibility in their future lives or that
they are expected to embrace or embody particular affects, values or virtues.
Methods
Document1
I did a discourse analysis of the subject benchmark statements corresponding to the
five subject areas which account for the largest percentage of UK first degree
students in 2010-2011, according to Higher Education Statistics Agency (HESA,
2012) data (see Table 1). I also investigated languages (the most popular humanities
subject) to ensure that I sampled a range of disciplinary clusters (e.g.
arts/humanities, social sciences, sciences) both pure and applied.
Table 1. Popular HESA first degree subjects by Selected QAA honours benchmark
statements
HESA First Degree
Subject
Business and
administrative
studies
Biological sciences
Social studies
% of UK HE students
study first degrees in
this subject in 20102011
13.1%
Honours Degree QAA Subject
benchmark statement selected
9.9%
9.5%
General Business
Management (2007)
Creative arts and
design
Subjects allied to
medicine
Languages
9.5%
Bioscience (2007)
Social Work (2008), Sociology
(2008)
Art and Design (2008)
8.8%
Health Studies (2008)
6.3%
Languages and related studies
(2007)
Total of sample:
57.1% of first degree
undergraduates
Findings
All of the subject benchmark statements emphasise cognitive/intellectual skills, with
little attention to the development of personal virtues or values. However, when
present, the richest expressions are embedded in the values of the particular
discipline, rather than presented as “transferable skills.” I give three examples of
virtues that underpin particular disciplines, while being absent from others.
Empathy
Empathy emerges most prominently in language studies. The authors (Languages
and related studies, 2007) explain: “all students of languages will develop sensitivity
to, and awareness of, the similarities and dissimilarities between other cultures and
societies, and their own. In particular… they will have an appreciation of internal
diversity and transcultural connectedness, and an attitude of curiosity and openness
towards other cultures.” (p. 8)
Cultural understanding is coupled with “mediating skills and qualities of empathy” (p.
10) and “an ability to articulate to others the contribution that the culture has made at
2
a regional and global level.” Intercultural understanding is a core value embedded in
language studies, with graduates serving as empathic ambassadors and mediators.
Art and Design students are expected to develop as creative people, using “curiosity,
imagination and empathy.” This combination is connected with both culture and
creativity, insofar as students need to “visualise the world from different
perspectives” and make “a commitment to improving the quality of one’s own and
others’ cultural experiences.”
Social Justice and Courage
Social justice features prominently in the social work benchmark statement, which
emphasises the moral dimensions of social work (200practice. For instance,
students need to understand, “the complex relationships between justice, care and
control in social welfare and the practical and ethical implications of these.” Students
should work, “with others to increase social justice by identifying and responding to
prejudice, institutional discrimination and structural inequality.” (p. 13) Graduates will
need to “challenge others when necessary, in ways that are most likely to produce
positive outcomes.” (p.13) Challenging others, particularly authorities and
established norms, on the basis of intangible values like dignity, choice, respect,
ethics, care and justice demands moral courage. While the benchmark statement
doesn’t use words like courage, this virtue seems to be a key, implied requirement.
Humility
Biosciences (2007) and Sociology (2008) emphasise the incompleteness and
provisionality of knowledge, suggesting humility. Both statements articulate the
methodologies and epistemologies of knowledge construction in their fields. For
instance, “the biosciences exist in an environment of current hypotheses rather than
certainty….” (p.1). In both cases, the fields are aware of the ways in which their fields
matter to society, referring to debates with significant implications. Perhaps because
of the potential uses and misuses of knowledge in their field, they want students to
embrace the tentativeness and contested nature of the knowledge itself and
appreciate the limitations of the discipline.
Discussion
The structure of the QAA template seems to constrain the discourse. Each
statement contains sections called: Introduction, The nature and scope of the field;
subject knowledge, subject-specific and transferable skills; Teaching, Learning and
Assessment; and Benchmark Standards. The first two are more revealing of moral
commitments than other sections. Written in paragraphs, rather than bullet points,
they often convey the “non-negotiables” of the field, defining values, perspectives,
methods, questions, concerns and why the field matters.
While some disciplines used these discursive sections to make their values explicit,
the structure of the benchmark statements does not invite educational leaders and
teachers to reflect upon or articulate the virtues or habits of heart students should
adopt. Focusing merely on knowledge and skills does not require teachers to
consider to what end or for what purposes those knowledge or skills might be
applied, or the responsibilities that accompany their use.
3
Policy-makers might consider altering the benchmark statement templates, adding a
heading such as “attitudes,” “character strengths” or “graduates’ contribution to
society” to highlight these aspects of higher education.
References
Arthur, J. (2005) ‘Student character in the British University’, in Arthur, J. and Bohlin,
K.E. (eds.) Citizenship and higher education: The role of universities in community
and society, London and New York: RoutledgeFalmer, pp. 6-24.
Higher Education Statistics Agency (2012). Table D - HE students by subject
area(#5) and level of study 2010/11. Accessed on 27 February 2013 at:
http://www.hesa.ac.uk/
Quality Assurance Agency Subject benchmark statements explaining the core
competencies at honours degree level, specifically Biosciences (2007), Sociology
(2008), Social Work (2008), General Business and Management (2007), Art and
Design (2008), Health Studies (2008), Languages and Related Studies (2007).
Accessed 27 February at:
http://www.qaa.ac.uk/ASSURINGSTANDARDSANDQUALITY/SUBJECTGUIDANCE/Pages/Honours-degree-benchmark-statements.aspx
Quinlan, K.M. (2011). Developing the whole student: leading higher education
initiatives that integrate mind and heart. Stimulus Paper. London: Leadership
Foundation for Higher Education. Accessed on 27 February 2013 at:
Smith, K. (2008). “Who do you think you’re talking to? – the discourse of learning
and teaching strategies, Higher Education, 56:4, 395-406.
4