You are on page 1of 3

Article Analysis and Altbach Summary

Citation:

Griffiths, C., Lloyd, M.G., (2008). A Review of the Methods of Delivering


HE Programmes in an FE College and an Evaluation of the Impact This
Will Have on Learning Outcomes and Student Progression. Journal of
Further and Higher Education, 32(1):15-27.

What is the research question the author is investigating?

What types of support needs to be provided to non-traditional college


students in FEIs (Further Education Institutions) located in Great Britain
as they take Higher Education (HE) courses.

What do you know about the authors?

“Mary Golding Lloyd and Colin Griffiths are joint course directors of HE
programmes in health, social and childcare “ (Griffiths, 2008).

Methodology and Specific Techniques:

Mixtures of quantitative and qualitative models of research were


incorporated in this study. Qualitative models of research were the
predominant approaches used by the authors of this article on the later
part of the test. Qualitative techniques such as focus groups and
interviews were used to ward off the questions other scholars have
regarding the effectiveness of attitude-related questionnaires.

Griffiths and Lloyd discussed how and why they selected the sample
group tested. Admittedly, the authors noted that the sample group
may appear to be a “convenience sample”, but there is still valuable
feedback gathered from these discussions and research. Griffiths and
Lloyd selected participants over a 7 yr. span and who had completed
courses successfully or who were currently enrolled in courses.

Methodologies Appropriateness:

Call me bias, but I believe that research should possess both


qualitative and quantitative components. Understandably there are
incidents that call for a specific type of research methodology, but as a
whole, I believe that incorporating both techniques will give more
credibility and substance to a study. Even research solely related to
numbers should possess a certain percentage of qualitative research;
it is the nature of the higher-education beast to use qualitative
approaches. Aren’t when in the business of people and not money
after all?

Major Findings:

The authors found that quantitative approaches utilized in this study


produced minimal results. Where as, qualitative approaches produced
results pertaining to participants positively indicating the helpfulness
of technology, clear expectations and deadlines,

What are the questions leftover?

The article is lacking appendices of questions that were asked, if any,


of participants.

Where does the research fit in:


-Bray Thomas Cube:
-Rodman Matrix- Need help understanding this model!
-The “Trends” Altbach et al outlined
Altbach mentions the global trend of massification of HIED. The
background information provided in this article provides support
to this prediction. Altbach also discusses the topic of access and
how there is a trend of pushing access to those who have been
otherwise neglected in previous years.

Was article what I expected?

The title of the article was not deceiving. The article itself reflected the,
“Methods of Delivering HE Programmes in an FE College and an
Evaluation of the Impact This Will Have on Learning Outcomes and
Student Progression.” It was clear, concise, and thorough!

Most interesting idea encountered?

The fact that non-traditional students appreciated the online/electronic


resources available to them! I am usually opposed to distance learning,
and online supplements, but these were helpful to these particular
students.

Overall evaluation of this article?

I thought that the article ok. It is normally not my area of interest. The
purpose of the article was to look into the best practices of assisting
non-traditional students as they participate in FEIs and I believe it was
done very well.
Altbach Summary

Do you agree with Dr. Altbach?

Thank-You Dr. Altbach!!  Since when was the “one-size fits all”
approach the best for anything, especially HIED. Complexity is infused
in the veins of this global community particularly HIED. Each country is
wonderfully unique! Political structures, dominate languages and
beliefs, traditions, etc. vary drastically from one geographical location
to the next. As Dr. Altbach explained, briefly used the United State’s
military occupancy in Iraq as an example. How effective and beneficial
would it be for US presence to be in foreign countries?

I believe that creating universal and cross-country standards can be


beneficial in some respects, but it can be far more detrimental and
limiting in many other. For example, it is beneficial to have US
accredited HIED Institutions. This US presence in other countries allows
US students and professionals to study in a foreign country. a
disservice to have US Accreditors comply to the . US Accreditation
agencies should work with varying countries to help them establish the
system. As a whole, it is a disservice to education as the diversity of
HIED institution types diminishes. Dr. Altbach echoed this in his article.

This article is somewhat relevant to the NEASC accreditation of AUBG.


Dr. Altbach mentions the need and importance of American
accreditation for “American” institutions that have physical presence in
foreign countries; which is the type of institution AUBG is currently. Just
as long as NEASC accreditation doesn’t extend outside of the
“American” foreign universities and colleges, I believe it is ok to have
AUBG be accredited by NEASC.