English language perplexity: articulating the tensions in the DEEWR "Good Practice Principle"

Rowena Harper, Sue Prentice, Kate WILSON

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    3 Downloads (Pure)

    Abstract

    In 2009, the Australian Universities Quality Agency (AUQA) published the Good practice principles for English language proficiency for international students in Australian universities. While the sector has generally welcomed these Good Practice Principles (GPPs), universities have been somewhat slow in implementing them and the literature has remained relatively silent in response. One important article—Murray (2010), published in The International Journal of the First Year in Higher Education—discusses several problems inherent in the report in order to recommend a coherent approach to implementing the guidelines. This paper challenges aspects of Murray’s article and extends his critique of the AUQA GPPs by focussing on three key points of tension: the group of students the report discusses; its definition of English language proficiency, and its conflicting discourses of inclusion and exclusion. The aim here is to offer universities points for discussion as they work to translate this complex report into practice
    Original languageEnglish
    Pages (from-to)36-48
    Number of pages13
    JournalStudent Success
    Volume2
    Issue number1
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - 2011

    Fingerprint

    best practice
    English language
    university
    exclusion
    student
    inclusion
    discourse
    Group
    literature

    Cite this

    Harper, Rowena ; Prentice, Sue ; WILSON, Kate. / English language perplexity: articulating the tensions in the DEEWR "Good Practice Principle". In: Student Success. 2011 ; Vol. 2, No. 1. pp. 36-48.
    @article{1a2cc0f82b63470ab65b9995e9c219ea,
    title = "English language perplexity: articulating the tensions in the DEEWR {"}Good Practice Principle{"}",
    abstract = "In 2009, the Australian Universities Quality Agency (AUQA) published the Good practice principles for English language proficiency for international students in Australian universities. While the sector has generally welcomed these Good Practice Principles (GPPs), universities have been somewhat slow in implementing them and the literature has remained relatively silent in response. One important article—Murray (2010), published in The International Journal of the First Year in Higher Education—discusses several problems inherent in the report in order to recommend a coherent approach to implementing the guidelines. This paper challenges aspects of Murray’s article and extends his critique of the AUQA GPPs by focussing on three key points of tension: the group of students the report discusses; its definition of English language proficiency, and its conflicting discourses of inclusion and exclusion. The aim here is to offer universities points for discussion as they work to translate this complex report into practice",
    keywords = "English Language, Higher Education",
    author = "Rowena Harper and Sue Prentice and Kate WILSON",
    year = "2011",
    doi = "10.5204/INTJFYHE.V2I1.51",
    language = "English",
    volume = "2",
    pages = "36--48",
    journal = "Student Success",
    issn = "1838-2959",
    number = "1",

    }

    English language perplexity: articulating the tensions in the DEEWR "Good Practice Principle". / Harper, Rowena; Prentice, Sue; WILSON, Kate.

    In: Student Success, Vol. 2, No. 1, 2011, p. 36-48.

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    TY - JOUR

    T1 - English language perplexity: articulating the tensions in the DEEWR "Good Practice Principle"

    AU - Harper, Rowena

    AU - Prentice, Sue

    AU - WILSON, Kate

    PY - 2011

    Y1 - 2011

    N2 - In 2009, the Australian Universities Quality Agency (AUQA) published the Good practice principles for English language proficiency for international students in Australian universities. While the sector has generally welcomed these Good Practice Principles (GPPs), universities have been somewhat slow in implementing them and the literature has remained relatively silent in response. One important article—Murray (2010), published in The International Journal of the First Year in Higher Education—discusses several problems inherent in the report in order to recommend a coherent approach to implementing the guidelines. This paper challenges aspects of Murray’s article and extends his critique of the AUQA GPPs by focussing on three key points of tension: the group of students the report discusses; its definition of English language proficiency, and its conflicting discourses of inclusion and exclusion. The aim here is to offer universities points for discussion as they work to translate this complex report into practice

    AB - In 2009, the Australian Universities Quality Agency (AUQA) published the Good practice principles for English language proficiency for international students in Australian universities. While the sector has generally welcomed these Good Practice Principles (GPPs), universities have been somewhat slow in implementing them and the literature has remained relatively silent in response. One important article—Murray (2010), published in The International Journal of the First Year in Higher Education—discusses several problems inherent in the report in order to recommend a coherent approach to implementing the guidelines. This paper challenges aspects of Murray’s article and extends his critique of the AUQA GPPs by focussing on three key points of tension: the group of students the report discusses; its definition of English language proficiency, and its conflicting discourses of inclusion and exclusion. The aim here is to offer universities points for discussion as they work to translate this complex report into practice

    KW - English Language

    KW - Higher Education

    U2 - 10.5204/INTJFYHE.V2I1.51

    DO - 10.5204/INTJFYHE.V2I1.51

    M3 - Article

    VL - 2

    SP - 36

    EP - 48

    JO - Student Success

    JF - Student Success

    SN - 1838-2959

    IS - 1

    ER -