Table of Contents Table of Contents
Previous Page  466 / 547 Next Page
Information
Show Menu
Previous Page 466 / 547 Next Page
Page Background

The risks of misdiagnosis of obstacles and solutions:

An example of concurrent support vs. structural design

The need for an alternative framework has long been recognised in HE

policy and has taken the form of the Extended Curriculum intervention

but this is designed for a minority of the student intake while analysis

indicates that it would benefit a far larger proportion (probably a majority)

Current national policy evidently assumes that concurrent support is the

only academic intervention required to bring about the substantial

improvement in ‘mainstream’ student performance that is needed

yet decades of experience point to the ineffectiveness of concurrent support

as the primary means of addressing structural faults that perpetuate

educational inequalities

This can be seen as a prime example of assuming intervention in one area

(in this case Delivery) can overcome major faults in another (Structure)

in contrast, curriculum re-structuring can be a prime example of the value of

innovative design

‘Reframing the problem, for example by seeing the problem as a symptom of

some larger problem, is a classic design move.’

(Goodyear 2015: 35)

17