UEF//eRepository
DSpace https://erepo.uef.fi
Rinnakkaistallenteet Filosofinen tiedekunta
2020
'Non-traditional' and 'traditional' students at a regional Finnish
University: demanding customers and school pupils in need of support
Siivonen, Päivi
Informa UK Limited
Tieteelliset aikakauslehtiartikkelit
© Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group All rights reserved
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02601370.2020.1758814
https://erepo.uef.fi/handle/123456789/8135
Downloaded from University of Eastern Finland's eRepository
‘Non-traditional’ and ‘traditional’ students at a regional Finnish University:
Demanding customers and school pupils in need of support
Siivonen, Päivi, University of Eastern Finland & Filander, Karin, University of Tampere Corresponding author:
Päivi Siivonen, Docent, Senior Researcher, School of Educational Sciences and Psychology,
University of Eastern Finland, PO Box 111, 80101 Joensuu. paivi.siivonen@uef.fi +358 503458634
International Journal of Lifelong Education, DOI 10.1080/02601370.2020.1758814
Abstract
This article exlores university students’ constructions of the ideal student at present-day university, that emphasises student-as-consumer culture and employability rather than education as a virtue in itself. The research is based on thematic narrative accounts (n=67) generated in a generalist field in one regional Finnish university. We apply a narrative-discursive approach to analyse how ‘traditional’
young students (n=34) and ‘non-traditional’ mature students (n=33) position themselves in relation to the ideal good student in a present-day university and in relation to their university studies.
Moreover, we examine some of the consequences of such positionings for the students themselves.
Our analysis indicates that the present-day university student is constructed in line with the ideal student of the neoliberal order and student-as-consumer culture. However, whereas mature students positioned themselves as customers and were comfortable with the demands of today’s university for self-directedness and self-responsibility, younger students positioned themselves as ‘school pupils’
and were critical about being left on their own without adequate support. The study suggests that the terms ‘traditional’ and ‘non-traditional’ make differences related to age and different kinds of student
positionings visible and, thus, also possible to reconstruct the ideals and normalities of the present- day neoliberal university.
Key words: (non-)traditional mature/young university student, employability, social positioning, student-as-consumer, school pupil
Introduction
In the Finnish higher education (HE) system, based on the Nordic welfare model, everyone has the possibility to educate themselves and to get ahead in life through free HE. This concerns both young and mature, so-called ‘non-traditional’ adult students who follow the same study programmes in Finland. Paradoxically, however, the ‘societal curriculum’ (Alheit and Dausien, 2002) favours young students, despite the emphasis on lifelong learning and the aim to prolong careers at the beginning, middle and end to guarantee a future workforce and national as well as European competitiveness (Siivonen, 2016; Siivonen & Isopahkala-Bouret, 2016).
Young people are expected to continue straight from upper secondary school to university, to graduate quickly and to become employed in their own field. Economic motives and employability have become the central aims of the present-day science-oriented universities1. The new university student has also become more instrumental and achievement- and vocation-oriented (Honkimäki, 2001; see also Ylöstalo, 2014). S/he is less committed to university as an institution, and does not appreciate
1 The dual Finnish higher education system includes both traditional science-oriented universities and
Universities of Applied Sciences (UAS), which concentrate on providing professional and vocational education. This study relates to the former.
scientific knowledge in itself but rather focuses on an individualised educational and working life pathway (ibid.).
So far, the neoliberal change at Finnish universities has been studied from the personnel’s point of view but less from the students’ perspective (see, however Komulainen, Siivonen, Kasanen, & Räty, 2020; Siivonen & Isopahkala-Bouret, 2016; Siivonen, Peura, Hytti, Kasanen, & Komulainen, 2019;
Ylöstalo 2014). This is, however a highly topical issue that relates to students’ well-being: one third of Finnish university students report suffering from stress (Kunttu, Pesonen, & Saari, 2017). They study under heavier pressure than before due to demands to produce credit points at an increasing rate as well as to work alongside studying in order to gain work experience and to finance their studies.
Studying at university can also be a lonely task, as ICT-based distance learning has increasingly replaced face-to-face teaching (Jauhiainen, Jauhiainen, & Laiho, 2009).
In this article we examine younger (aged under 30) and mature (aged 30 or over) university students’
thematic narrative accounts (n=67) generated in one unit in a regional multidisciplinary Finnish university that has a rather large number of mature students (Nori & Vanttaja, 2018; Rinne, Haltia, Nori, & Jauhiainen, 2008). Furthermore, the generalist field chosen for this study is popular among mature students (ibid.). About half of the thematic accounts in this study were written by young (n=34) and the other half by mature (n=33) students. We adopted Erja Moore’s (2000, 2003) definition of mature students based on age: 30 or over. In Finland university students start their studies rather late:
in 2007 the average age of new university students was 27 (OPH, 2008c in Nori, 2011). Mature students’ educational and working life pathways are diverse and they typically have considerable work experience. Many of them also have prior degrees – sometimes even several – from vocational education and some also from HE. (Moore, 2003; see also Siivonen & Isophakala-Bouret, 2016.) Age refers to social differences and meanings constructed in relation to age in the context of Finnish HE.
In the research literature, the mature adult student is depicted as ‘non-traditional’ and positioned as deficient (e.g. Finnegan, Valadas, O’Neill, Fragoso, & Paulos, 2019; Munro, 2011; Reay, Crozier, &
Clayton, 2010; Santos, et al., 2016; Thunborg, Bron, & Edström, 2013; Webber, 2014). S/he comes from a disadvantaged background, for example, an under-represented socioeconomic group, s/he may be a first generation HE student and potentially also lacks exposure to academic discourses as well as social and cultural capital. S/he may also have dependent children. S/he is a student-worker who studies on a part-time basis by distance learning. Consequently, ‘non-traditional’ students juggle work, family and study commitments. They struggle to adapt to HE and to fit into the university environment. They may also lack confidence and express feelings of self-doubt. As a result, they may need more support to develop study skills. Thus the academic ideal of a ‘traditional’ student is still the young full-time student whose main responsibility is to study (e.g. Munro, 2011; Thunborg, Bron,
& Edström, 2013), even if most university students in Finland now work in addition to studying in order to manage financially (Pyöriä, Ojala, Saari, & Järvinen, 2017; Statistics Finland, 2015).
However, in her study of Finnish mature university students, Erja Moore (2003) showed that although university has been considered as a place for young students, it is also well suited for more mature students working in addition to studying. The mature students that Moore interviewed completed their degrees succesfully in the expected time while concurrently working.
In this study we set as our task to analyse: What kind of ideal student is constructed at a present-day university? How do the so-called ‘traditional’ young students and ‘non-traditional’ mature students position themselves in relation to the ideal good student in a present-day university and in relation to their studies? What are some of the consequences of such positionings for the students themselves?
In the following we shall discuss the present-day neoliberal university and higher education, describe our data and methods and present our results in three sections, followed by some final remarks.
The present-day neoliberal university and the employability regime of higher education
Over the last decade the Finnish HE has undergone reforms that have challenged the basic values of the welfare state (Ylijoki & Ursin, 2013). Most importantly the New Universities Act in 2009 granted universities stronger financial and administrative independence in relation to the state (Tapanila, Siivonen, & Filander, 2020). The reform’s purposes were to facilitate universities’ operations in an international environment, allocate resources to top-level research and ensure the quality and effectiveness of research and teaching (ibid.). Consequently, however, academic freedom and autonomy have decreased and academics are steered and monitored by institutional management (Tapanila et al., 2020; Ylijoki & Ursin, 2013). Academics’ commitment to basic research or reseach- based teaching for the benefit of students are increasingly replaced by new pressures for accountability, cost-effectiveness, efficiency and income-generating activities in competition for external funding (Tapanila et al., 2020; Ylijoki & Mäntylä, 2003).
In conjunction with the above neoliberal policies university courses and programmes that link vocational practice-based knowledge to the functional imperatives of the world of work change the purposes of teaching and learning at present-day university (Komulainen et al., 2020; Olssen & Peters, 2005; Siivonen et al., 2019). This has resulted in a technical-rational and instrumental perspective on education that emphasises employability, i.e. individuals’ ability to obtain and maintain a job, to ensure the supply of competence in the labour market (Nilsson & Nyström, 2013; see also Bunce, Baird, & Jones, 2017).
Simultaneously, widening participation in university education has also been high on the agenda of the present-day university focusing on neoliberal, market-driven outcomes while simultaneously promoting the rhetoric of diversity (Naidoo, Shankar, & Veer, 2011). Students from so-called ’non-
traditional’ besides more ’traditional’ backgrounds will enter university, gain qualifications and become ’useful’ workforce.
In the employability regime such traditional missions of education as mediating cultural heritage, introducing a new perspective, and providing critical observations of society have been pushed to the background (Puhakka, Rautapuro, & Tuominen, 2010). Education is no longer considered as an end in itself, and theoretical knowledge is deemed as less relevant in the labour market (Honkimäki, 2001;
Nilsson & Nyström, 2013; Ylöstalo, 2014). Today, being employable is primarily associated with being a generally knowledgeable and educated person who is able to adapt easily and move flexibly in the labour market (Nilsson & Nyström, 2013).
As a result, the aim of education has become to produce employable individuals, who are qualified, independent, flexible, adaptable, innovative, enterprising, active and responsible (Laalo & Heinonen, 2016; Siivonen & Brunila, 2014). Becoming such an employable self of the neoliberal order creates new kinds of demands for the students. They are facing increased pressure to attain high grades and good diplomas in order to succeed in the increasingly competitive graduate labour market (Nilsson
& Nyström, 2013). They are expected to graduate effectively with Master’s degrees in five years, with the help of ICT-based distance learning (Jauhiainen et al., 2009). They must also be ready to continuously update their competence and degrees. Education has turned into a marketable commodity for which students-as-customers and consumers also expect refundable returns in the form of credentials and graduate level jobs (Brown, Hesketh, & Williams, 2003; Naidoo et al., 2011;
Puhakka, Rautopuro, Tuominen, & Vuorinen-Lampila, 2012; Siivonen et al., 2016; Tomlinson, 2017;
Ylöstalo, 2014).
However, formal qualifications are not sufficient to secure a job, and students are increasingly expected to enhance their ‘employabilily’ and social networks through extracurricular activities and working as well as studying in order to be judged as worthy of employment by potential employers upon their graduation (e.g. Siivonen & Isopahkala-Bouret, 2016; Siivonen et al., 2016; Tomlinson, 2008). This has become especially important in the generalist fields chosen for this study, as they do not prepare students directly for any profession. In the positional competition an individual needs to possess the right kinds of characteristics and abilities that make her/him appealing for potential employers (Brown et al., 2003; Siivonen & Isopahkala-Bouret, 2016).
Mature students and graduates who have gained work experience and updated their degrees may in effect have a positive advantage in the labour market. On the basis of their study on adult students’
educational and working life, Päivi Siivonen and Ulpukka Isopahkala-Bouret (2016) suggested that by adopting an enterprising and lifelong learning mindset, the mature students were able to advance in working life by means of both former work experience and updated degrees. They benefitted from the neoliberal individualistic discourse that emphasises self-responsibility and an enterprising attitude towards life. This raises the question of mature university students’ position, formally labelled as
‘non-traditional’. Are they in effect the winners in today’s universities?
Data and Methods
The dataset of this pilot study consists of 67 thematic narrative accounts written by young and mature students in a generalist programme in the field of social sciences and humanities at one regional Finnish university. In our case university unit, blended and distance learning are favoured in order to make studying possible for the so-called ‘non-traditional’ students with work, family and other commitments, as well as for students living in the region but outside the university town or for
students living at a long distance, for example, in the metropolitan area. The data was generated as part of a wider survey collected by Ella Nikkanen, focusing on students’ engagement and their progress in their university studies as well as their experiences of the curriculum. All in all, 88 students answered the survey and the overall response rate of the survey was 39 %. In order to protect the anonymity of the data we are not able to describe the programme and the field of study in greater detail. At the end of the survey the students were asked to write thematic accounts about their experiences based on the following instruction:
Based on your own experiences describe how you perceive students’ position at a present-day university from as many different viewpoints as possible. What kinds of positive and/or negative experiences have you encountered in your university studies?
And what kinds of expectations do you feel you face as a university student?
Thematic narrative writing was chosen as a method as it provided a means to generate reflections on university studies from all younger and mature students in one discipline who volunteered to participate in the study. The students’ accounts varied in length and detail from one-word answers to half-page answers. The average length of an account was one paragraph. Besides the thematic written accounts, we also have access to background information collected in the survey: gender, age group (under 30 vs. 30 or over), the year of starting university studies, the number of credits gained so far, the level of study (Bachelor’s versus Master’s level), the amount of distance learning and the amount of working along with studying. Three of the students did not provide information about their age.
However, we have included their answers in the dataset, interpreting their approximate age through other information (e.g. work and family engagement, year of starting university studies). The thematic written accounts provided diverse and rich material on the questions we were interested in from a
considerable number of students in one discipline. Moreover, the students who participated in this study also took a wide variety of minor subjects, and thus their experiences as students were not limited to only one discipline.
Out of the 67 answers, 34 were provided by students aged under thirty (see Table 1). In this group, all the respondees were females. Ten of the students in this group were Master’s level students. The average number of credits gained so far was 157. Thirty-three of the answers were written by students aged thirty or over. In this group, 28 of the participants were females and five were males. On the whole the number of male students is very low in the unit, reflecting the low number of answers from male participants. Most of the students in this latter group, i.e. 23 of them, were Master’s level students and ten of them Bachelor’s level students. In this group the average number of credits gained so far was 216.
Age group Under 30 30 or over
Females/Males 34/0 28/5
Bachelor’s/Master’s level 24/10 10/23
Average number of credits 159 216
Total 34 33
Table 1. The number of female/male students and Bachelor’s/Master’s level students in age groups under 30 and 30 and over. The average number of credits gained so far in both groups.
Students’ accounts were divided into two groups for comparative analysis based on the age group of the participants. This choice was informed by our initial reading of the dataset, that made some differences visible between the young and mature students. We quantified the background information of both age groups (see Table 2) in order to make comparisons between them. Moreover, based on discussions in joint data sessions, we analysed the thematic narrative accounts by applying a narrative-discursive approach (Davies & Harré, 1990) and examined how the participants positioned
themselves in the narrative environment (Gubrium & Holstein, 2008) of our regional case university.
The social and discursive narrative environment provides words, concepts and forms of speech which allow participants to talk about their experiences. In their accounts, the students elaborated different social positionings in relation to university and university studies and applied different social and cultural storylines available to them (see Davies & Harré, 1990). In our analysis we focused on the construction of the ideal student of a present-day university. We read similarities and differences both within and between young and mature students in relation to social positionings towards university and studies. In the following we shall focus on the construction of the new kind of ‘normal’ and
‘authentic’ university student as well as on the social positioning of mature and younger students:
‘The individualised and flexible academic pathway’ and ‘The unbearable freedom of studying’.
The new kind of ‘normal’ and ‘authentic’ university student
Based on our analysis the ‘non-traditional’ student described in the research literature as deficient and lacking (e.g. Munro, 2011; Reay et al., 2010; Thunborg et al., 2013; Webber, 2014) has become a very ‘traditional’ student in the context of our regional case university. We argue in this article that s/he has become the new ‘normal’ and also in many ways the ideal university student of the present- day university. As mentioned above, half of the students who participated in this study were aged 30 or over (see Tables 1 and 2). Working alongside studying was very common in our data: 57 % of the students worked full-time or part-time and less than half (39%) of them studied full-time (see Table 2). This is in line with the average of 55 % of Finnish university students working alongside studying (Statistics Finland, 2015). The older the students, the more likely it is that they also work (ibid.).
Consequently, 45 % of all the students studied more than 50 % of their courses by distance learning.
Working full-time and distance learning were clearly more common among students who were aged 30 or over.
To sum up, based on the background data in our study the ‘normal’, ‘authentic’ and ‘traditional’ full- time student described in the research literature has become rather atypical in our regional case university, which also reflects the general trend in Finland, where working alongside studying has become a norm (Pyöriä et al., 2017). Continuing changes and uncertainties in the Finnish labour market as well as cuts in students’ social benefits have resulted in increased numbers of students – both younger and more mature students – working alongside studying. It has become increasingly important to guarantee one’s employability upon graduation in the competitive graduate labour market.
Age Under 30 (n=34) 30 or over (n=33) Total (n=67)
Full time student 16 (47%) 10 (30%) 26 (39%)
Studies but also works 14 (41%) 2 (6%) 16 (24%)
Works but also studies 4 (12%) 18 (51%) 22 (33%)
Does not study 0 3 (9%) 3 (4%)
Distance learning
under 50% 25 (74%) 12 (36%) 37 (55%)
Distance learning over
50% 9 (26%) 21 (60%) 30 (45%)
Table 2. Summary (frequencies and percentages) of engagement in study, work and distance learning divided by the age groups of the participants in the study.
Based on the analysis of the thematic narrative accounts the new kind of ‘normal’ and ‘authentic’
university student was constructed in line with the ideal student of the neoliberal order (see also Siivonen & Brunila, 2014). Both younger and more mature students described such a student as active, self-directed, independent, responsible, efficient and hard-working, a student who is well-motivated and graduates in the expected time, has good learning skills and social skills, is flexible, ambitious, resilient, ready to face challenges, energetic and physically and mentally healthy. However, only two students in our data explicitly mentioned such academic qualities as theoretical and critical thinking and research orientation as important characteristics of the present-day university student. This may reflect the dominance of the technical-rational perspective of education and the importance of
university education in enhancing employability (Nilsson & Nyström, 2013). Theory and research may be seen as a hindrance to timely graduation and transition in the world of work, where short- term practical and economic benefits of knowledge and employability skills are favoured rather than long-term commitment to theory and research (see also Ylöstalo, 2014). The following examples illustrate how students in our data in both age groups perceived present-day university study:
The student’s position is largely dependent on her/his own self-directedness. At university you are responsible for your study yourself (…) you have to ask for supervision and no-one is interested whether you advance in your study or not. I like the freedom of university studies. University students are expected to have adequate skills to organise their studies and to have adequate skills for studying. It’s central that a student’s life is determined by freedom and responsibility, you can advance at your own pace, but on the other hand it’s you who is responsible for making progress. (ID 252: F, under 30, 2010, full-time student, MA, 345, DL under 10%)
University studies will be successful if the student is self-responsible, hard-working, good at time management and self-organisation and able to withstand pressure and work piling up. (ID 44: F, 30 or over, does not study at the moment, MA, 332, DL under 10%)
2 ID indicates the number of the participant, F/M the gender, under 30/30 or over the age group, full- time student/(mainly) studies but also works/(mainly) works but also studies/does not study at the moment, the amount of engagement in study. BA/MA indicates bachelor’s/master’s level and the number indicates the number of credits gained (the total number of credits for a bachelor’s degree is 180 and for a master’s 120). In the Finnish system it is a common practice for a student to be admitted to study for both a bachelor and master level degree. Most students study for and graduate with a master’s degree and bachelor’s degree is, thus, an intermediate stage. Due to an unlimited number of minor subjects some students also gain more than the total of 300 credits. DL indicates the amount of distance learning of the participant.
Freedom and responsibility go hand in hand. Freedom was seen as positive, as traditional academic freedom of choice (see Honkimäki, 2001), but it also meant that students were expected to take responsibility for their studies: to be active and to ask for supervision and advice for themselves. In this way students were invited to position themselves as customers and actively to demand such services as supervision, that may not be readily available at present-day Finnish universities because the number of students per member of the university teaching staff has radically increased (Honkimäki, 2001; Rinne, 2019). As a consequence, this also created feelings of being left alone, and that nobody was interested in how students progressed in their studies (this theme will be further developed in the section ‘The unbearable freedom of studying’). Based on our analysis, time management and good studying skills were seen as important in managing the freedom of academic study without too much pressure and stress. However, teachers did not always appreciate self- directedness:
I think university students are expected to be active. On the other hand, I feel that one should be humble as a student; teachers don’t always appreciate too much self- directedness; students are not considered to be too high in the hierarchy by some. (…) There is no university without students and that’s why students should also be respected, which luckily also happens. (ID 60: F, under 30, works but also studies, BA, 120, DL over 75%)
As the above extract indicates, students needed to balance between being active, but not too active and being humble enough not to consume too much of busy teachers’ time from research. Concern for students’ status in academia and demand for students to be respected may reflect the low status of teaching compared to research in academia (Jauhiainen et al., 2009; Ylijoki, 2013). From the students’
point of view this creates increasing demands for independence and self-responsibility, as teacher- researchers are more and more pressed with their increasing teaching and administrative duties.
In the employability regime, working alongside studying has become a norm, first in order to make a living due to cuts in students’ social benefits, and second in order to gain work experience to enhance one’s employability and social networks (Siivonen et al., 2016). The double burden of working and studying should not prolong graduation, however. The ideal student also graduates in a prescribed time:
Studying at university is independent and strenuous labour (…) You should graduate as quickly as possible. The ideal is that a student works in her own field during the day, thus gaining work experience, and studies at night (…) In a way I think it’s right that students have the pressure to graduate in time; to use 7 years for an MA degree seems a bit odd. (ID 19: F, under 30, studies but also works, BA, 120, DL over 75%)
Studying at university was frequently described as ‘independent and strenuous labour’ and timely graduation as an ideal. Seven years, formerly the target time for a Master’s degree in Finland, was described as ‘odd’ and too long a time to spend on university study by the above young student. The speeding up of the tempo and rhythm in academia (Ylijoki, 2013) not only applies to teachers and researchers but also to students (Filander, 2016), reflecting the overall acceleration of pace in society at large (see also Finnegan et al., 2019). For university students, rapid graduation and speeding up entrance to the labour market by working alongside studying have become a new norm, reflecting the neoliberal ideals of efficiency, performance and competition. Paradoxically this may result in a passive, instrumental and utilitarian way of studying, in which studying becomes a hunt for credit points rather than for knowledge or learning (Jauhiainen et al., 2009; Naidoo et al., 2011).
Based on our analysis we found differences between younger and more mature students in the way they positioned themselves in relation to the demands of the present-day university depicted in this section. Whereas more mature students seemed to adjust themselves better and be more comfortable at today’s university, demanding independence and self-responsibility from the students (e.g.
Siivonen & Isopahkala-Bouret, 2016), the younger students were clearly more critical about ‘too much freedom’ and being left on their own without adequate support, as well as of the emphasis on performance rather than learning. Based on the average number of credits gained so far (see Table 1) the mature students in our data were more experienced as university students, which may reflect this finding. In the following we shall interpret the different positionings and some of the consequences of the demands of the present-day university for both more mature and younger students in two separate sections entitled: ‘The individualised and flexible academic pathway’ and ‘The unbearable freedom of studying’.
Individualised and flexible academic pathways
Mature students generally appreciated the freedom of choice and responsibility that university both required and offered them. This made an individualised and flexible academic pathway possible for them. The possibility for distance learning was generally well appreciated by mature students, some of whom lived a long distance from the university and also had family commitments. They were generally very content with their position as university students:
As a student I feel my position is very good. (…) Distance learning works very well via the Internet for a student like me with a family and living far away. (ID 47: F, 30 or over, full-time student, BA, 239, DL over 75%)
I think of university primarily as offering me an individualised studying pathway. The freedom of studying is especially positive: everything is up to me. By freedom I mean time management, the choice of minor subjects, research topics and a good possibility for distance learning. Responsibility follows freedom; everything is up to me. I also feel that I’m expected to advance quickly in my studies. (ID 6: F, 30 or over, works but also studies, BA, 188, DL over 75%)
Interaction with other students has been active and I don’t feel I’ve been left outside even if I’ve been working from home sometimes. (ID 89: F, 30 or over, full-time student, MA, 236, DL 51-75%)
As the above extracts indicate, mature students in our data felt that they were able to profit from the individualised and flexible pathways at the present-day university. The freedom emphasised by the repeated slogan ‘everything is up to me’ was constructed as a possibility to manage their time, subject choices and research themes – to plan their own studies independently. ‘Working from home sometimes’ was denied to result in being ‘left outside’ or not belonging in the academic community;
rather belonging was construed as a self-evident norm that could not be shaken by distance learning.
The academic community in its traditional meaning as a space for intellectual discussions and critical thinking is, thus, reconstructed as existing and real (see also Filander, 2016). Freedom and self- responsibility were seen as an opportunity rather than as a demand causing pressure. Moreover, advancing quickly in studies and timely graduation were often also seen as a personal goal of mature students:
Studying at university is very interesting and challenging, but the goal must be graduation on time or even before. (ID 24: F, 30 or over, works but also studies, BA, 138, DL 51-75%)
Prolonging studies was out of the question for the mature students in this study even if studying was interesting and rewarding. Teachers served their ‘customers’ reach their goals, simultaneously also producing degrees and strengthening the university finances (see Ylijoki, 2013). This also contributed to the construction of an ‘ageless’ academic community in which lifelong learning and mutual support flourished (Jauhiainen et al., 2009). Agelessness was frequently mentioned by mature students, who did not generally see age as a hindrance to studying or being part of the academic community:
I’m especially delighted that my age has not been a hindrance for studying, and it has not affected my lecturers in any way. I have not encountered any kind of age discrimination at university. (ID 12: F, 30 or over, works but also studies, MA, 235, DL 11-25%)
As a student I feel I’m part of the community and peer support is really positive, despite age differences. (ID 24: F, 30 or over, works but also studies, BA, 138, 51-75%)
For the mature students the demands of the present-day university were seen as no harder to reach than the demands set by the students themselves:
There are no demands from the side of the university that would be harder to achieve than the demands I’ve set for myself. I’m quite ambitious in my goal to reach a new degree. (ID 45: F, 30 or over, full-time student, BA, 210, DL over 75%)
In the above extract, the mature student sees herself as ambitious and determined to reach the goal she has set for herself: ‘a new degree’. Getting a degree rather than learning in itself may be fostered by the student-as-consumer culture, as it promotes passive instrumental attitudes to learning (Bunce et al., 2017). However, there were also accounts in our data indicating that an individualised and flexible pathway made it possible to advance slowly in university studies:
I’ve not really felt that I’m a student, but rather studying as a hobby. I’ve been working alongside studying all along, and advanced at my own pace. I’ve advanced slowly, but now I’m graduating, which has been my clear goal all this time. (ID 64: F, 30 or over, works but also studies, MA, 300, DL over 75%)
As I’ve been working for a long time, I have a different attitude towards studying from my youth. Studying is not an obligation, but rather a possibility to educate myself and gain expertise. It doesn’t have any impact on my working or family life, but it’s important for my expertise. (ID 46: M, 30 or over, works but also studies, BA, 106, DL less than 10%)
For the participant of the first extract (ID 64), freedom at university meant that she had the possibility to ‘study as a hobby’ and advance ‘slowly’ at her own pace, which is contrary to the overall speeding- up of rhythm in academia (cf. Ylijoki, 2013). Nevertheless, a clear goal for her was and had been all along to graduate and to get a degree. In the second extract (ID 46), the mature student had gained work experience for a long time and studying at university offered him a possibility for learning in order to gain more expertise, not just for employment.
However, despite the positive views on the possibility for distance learning, some mature students felt that the price for studying at a distance was the feeling of being an outsider and not belonging to the community because of never being present:
The possibilities for distance learning have been absolutely positive, as otherwise I wouldn’t have been able to complete the degree. The price of this has been this kind of feeling of being an outsider, because of never being present. (ID 3: F, 30 or over, full- time student, MA, 300, DL over 75%)
I’ve not been able to become part of the community/get to know very many other students. A feeling of not belonging, and how I get along in my studies doesn’t matter.
(ID 22: F, 30 or over, full-time student, BA, 155, DL 26-50%)
Being an outsider and not belonging was also sometimes connected to feelings of not being important as a student. This may relate to the value of research rather than teaching at present-day universities (Jauhiainen et al., 2009). Students in our data also positioned themselves as demanding customers who claimed that their needs as students were not adequately taken into consideration and that the timetables, for example, were planned primarily for local students:
The most difficult thing in studying has been working alongside studying, plus because I come from another geographical location. Courses have often been scheduled for local students and sometimes I have had to skip courses because of difficulties in scheduling.
(ID 75: F, 30 or over, works but also studies, MA, 274, DL 11-24%)
As a student with a family and a job, studying for the second time (…) I’ve lost my nerve a few times and my studies have been prolonged as the scheduling of courses is just insane. They have clearly been planned for full-time students. (ID 83: M, 30 or over, works but also studies, MA, information about credits missing, DL under 10%)
In the above extracts the mature students positioned themselves as demanding customers, who took it for granted that course schedules should be planned for their needs (see also Santos et al., 2016).
Implicitly they provoked a new norm from their own perspective: university study should be planned to serve their needs and special life situations, not those of ‘traditional’ full-time students and in our regional case university: the local students. They expected to be heard and served by the university personnel. In return they were independent and self-responsible students who set ambitious goals for their studies and graduation.
The unbearable freedom of studying
Academic freedom and independence have traditionally been distinguishable features of Finnish universities, but seemingly enforced by neoliberal individualised ideals of self-directedness and self- responsibility at present-day university (Siivonen & Brunila, 2014). Students are comparatively free to plan and schedule their own studies. In the same vein as with more mature students, younger students also appreciated the freedom they were both required and given at university:
I think that the student’s position is good. Students are able to make their own position as they wish: either participate actively in every way or combine studying as one part of life, for example, in addition to family or working life depending on possibilities and energy. I feel that it’s expected that my studies advance smoothly and that I will
graduate. However, I don’t feel any pressure from the outside but I’ve got support for advancing in my studies, flexibly at my own pace. (ID 15: F, under 30, full-time student, MA, 210, DL under 10%)
According to the above extract, students are free to choose their own position: to be an active participant or to combine studying, family life and work and study at their own pace. The university expects students to advance in their studies and graduate on time, but flexibly and with the support of teachers and staff members. On the other hand, however, for the majority of the younger students in our data, freedom also meant increased pressure and stress as work kept piling up and their studies did not advance as expected:
I feel I don’t get anything done, assignments keep piling up and my studies don’t advance. In this situation I feel that there is a lot of pressure from the part of the university (and of society, especially The Social Insurance Institution ) to make progress in studying or else I will not be able to continue, because I will run out of benefits and stay behind the others. Nevertheless, I feel my engagement is strong and I also feel that university is my own school where I feel good. (ID 31: F, under 30, full- time student, BA, 210, DL 26-50%)
Being self-directed and managing studies independently was not evident for some of the younger students in our data. They wrote about being left alone as well as about feelings of inferiority and not being good enough. They also criticised ‘intervention type of supervision’ that is only available once or twice, and wished for more support and a more structured curriculum:
At university you have to be very independent and manage on your own. The help you get is ‘intervention type’ so that you get supervision and help once or twice, after which you just have to manage or drop out. There is no long-term supervision/support. Do it like this and this and goodbye! (ID 79: F, under 30, studies but also works, BA, 208, DL 51-75%)
It would be nice if e.g. the study counsellor would invite us for an annual discussion and we could talk about study progress, minor subjects and plan the next year’s study.
(ID 1: F, under 30, full-time student, BA, 188, DL 26-50%)
I think we could have a more structured schedule that we should follow. (ID 61: F, under 30, works but also studies, BA, 200, DL 26-50%)
Students were left to manage on their own or else drop out altogether. Long-term supervision and support were not always available. The above accounts suggest that younger students wished for a
‘school-type’ university with a more structured schedule as well as regular supervision and support (see also Honkimäki, 2001; Leathwood, 2006). On the one hand, distance learning was appreciated for its flexibility, on the other, it was considered as a lonely way of studying. Mass lectures reinforced the feeling of loneliness:
I’m most frustrated about ‘self-responsibility’ in relation to advancing in my studies. It means that there is too little supervision, and failure is everyone’s personl problem. As a student I’m quite faceless at mass lectures. (ID 52: F, under 30, full-time student, BA, 107, DL 11-25%)
Lack of support and supervision is veiled under ‘self-responsibility’, and failure becomes the individual’s personal problem. Paradoxically, a self-directed and self-responsible student becomes a faceless body in the mass lectures – a body that disturbs the teacher-researcher as little as possible with demands for supervision and support.
The unbearable freedom of studying was experienced by some younger students as what Oili-Helena Ylijoki (2005) has called academic nostalgia, i.e. longing for theoretical and intellectual work and discussions that have been discontinued due to the increased control of managerial practices. Some younger students in our data longed for academic discussions and learning rather than distance learning and ‘essay-by-essay performance to gain credits’:
Too much working alone, fellow students are competitors, who don’t offer support, because there are no ‘face-to-face’ contacts. Because it is possible to complete all the courses by distance learning and this is in fact the only possibility in most cases, I don’t feel university is a place for discussion and thinking. Instead, studying at university is essay-by-essay performance to gain credits. (ID 49: F, under 30, full-time student, BA, 110, DL 51-75%)
Working independently and little contact with other students resulted in fellow students becoming competitors rather than peers offering support (see also Nixon, Scullion, & Hearn, 2018). The emphasis at present-day university is strongly on efficient performance:
Both university and society seem to value most of all quick graduation. University is awarded money for graduates, you have to graduate to get money (without a certificate from university you don’t get a job), you need money to graduate (=to study full-time).
Money, money, money. The emphasis is on performance and not on learning. (ID 5: F, under 30, full-time student, BA, 102, DL 11-25%)
The above account illustrates how the university favours performance rather than learning, reflection and discussion. However, many of the younger students in our data, who had little or no previous work experience compared to the mature students, worked in addition to studying in order to gain experience and become employable. Nevertheless, many of them worried about their future employability:
Some courses are too much like all-round education and it is difficult to understand the purpose in relation to my own studying and transition to working life. (ID 16: F, under 30, studies but also works, MA, 250, DL 11-25%)
Studying at university is motivating, but I’m nervous about future employment and I don’t feel that university prepares me for working life in any way. (ID 82: F, under 30, studies but also works, BA, 122, DL 51-75%)
The above younger students expected that university education should prepare them for working life and not just ‘for life’. They did not understand the significance of academic theoretical knowledge and ‘all-round education’ for their future in working life. It is not surprising that employability is a key issue that students want from university education: a positive impact on their transition into working life (Puhakka et al., 2012). However, such views also show that they had adopted an instrumental view and the neoliberal ideal of university education as preparing them primarily for the labour market; for them academic education had lost its traditional missions as mediating cultural
heritage, introducing a new perspective, and providing critical observation of society (Puhakka et al., 2010).
Discussion
The present-day aim of a university is to deliver outstanding economic, social and cultural benefits and innovations to secure the competitive edge of the nation state. In this context university students have become key players in securing the future workforce and entrepreneurship of the knowledge- based economy (see e.g. Finnegan et al., 2019; Tomlinson, 2017). As a result the purpose of HE has been reduced to serving short-term economic benefits rather than such traditional academic values as the construction of new knowledge, introducing new perspectives, or enabling critical observations of society (Siivonen et al., 2019).
Both younger and more mature students constructed the present-day student in line with the active, self-directed and self-responsible ideal student of the neoliberal order (Nilsson & Nyström, 2013;
Siivonen & Brunila, 2014; Nixon et al., 2018). Moreover, only two students explicitly described such traditional academic abilities as theoretical and critical thinking and research orientation as important characteristics of the present-day university student. These findings are in line with a student-as- consumer culture and passive instrumental attitudes to learning as consequences of the ascendance of market mechnisms in higher education systems worldwide (e.g. Naidoo et al., 2011; Bunce et al., 2017).
‘Traditional’ and ‘non-traditional’ students are seen in a new light in this study, as the mature students defined as ‘non-traditional’, deficient and lacking in research literature (e.g. Thunborg et al., 2013;
Webber, 2014) were the ones who were coping the best and, thus, also becoming the winners of our
present-day neoliberal university. They were familiar with the demands of working life through previous work experience, and had adjusted themselves to the employability discourse and work- related new ideals of the present-day university. Mature students positioned themselves as demanding customers who expected to be heard and served by university personnel in terms of organisation and timing of studies as well as supervision. The positioning of a customer may be interpreted in line with neoliberal ideals, although it may also be seen in the light of the demanding situation of combining studying with family and work commitments. For mature students, age was not seen as any kind of hindrance and they preferred to be seen as equal members of the academic community rather than as
‘students’. They pursued the goal of timely graduation set by society, university as well as the mature students themselves.
The so-called ‘traditional’ younger students, on the other hand, seemed to be adjusting themselves with considerable difficulty to the current university culture. Preparing themselves for the labour market, they struggled to gain both work experience and academic education to prove them worthy of employment for potential employers. They also expressed feelings of inferiority (e.g. Webber, 2014) and did not display such qualities as independence and self-responsibility emphasised at present-day university (see also Leathwood, 2006). They wished for a university that would be like a
‘school’, with a more structured schedule, regular supervision and support (see also Honkimäki, 2001). Education was seen in an instrumental way: preparation for working life and not just for life.
The purpose of theoretical knowledge and of all-round education was questioned. Most of the younger students seemed to have adopted the neoliberal ideal of university education as preparation for the labour market, although some of them longed for an academic learning space of the classical university ideal, with independent thinking and discussions. The younger students positioned themselves as ‘school pupils’ on the one hand, and as consumers of education on the other. Their
positionings were, thus, somewhat blurred and differed from those of the mature students in relation to how they had adjusted to the neoliberal demands of being active, self-responsible and enterprising.
Based on our study we can ask whether the instrumental student-as-consumer culture and the expectations for independence and self-responsibility have become too demanding in Finnish universities, especially for the younger students. Despite many promises of university reforms to provide students with better individual guidance and counselling, students are offered less and less direct small-group teaching and more and more mass lectures organised by busy and stressed academics facing the new managerial demands of today’s university. This has resulted in less space for academic discussions between teachers and students, and students being increasingly left to manage on their own (see also Budd, 2017). Paradoxically, however, increasing expectations for independence and self-responsibility may reinforce ‘learned helplessness’ and longing for ‘a school’
with structured schedules and individual support.
In the same vein Carole Leathwood (2006) argued, based on her study of undergraduates’ experiences in a post-1992 university in the UK, that the current articulations of an independent learner are inappropriate for many students and proposed that the emphasis should be switched to interdependence rather than independence. Academic thinking and discussions in the ‘real’ university demand time and interaction between students and the academic staff; they cannot be performed on the basis of mass lectures, or solely online as distance learning – even though modern network-based pedagogies offer valuable tools for communication independently of time and place. As our study indicates, the present-day university is not an ideal space for theoretical thinking and knowledge production as well as the time-consuming developmental process of becoming an academic citizen and expert in one’s own field. Paradoxically, it appears to be more ideal for mature than for younger students. The mature students seem to adjust themselves without difficulty to the demands of the employability regime of present-day university. We can conclude that our case unit at the regional
university has succeeded well in serving its mature customers by providing an environment that supports their study and helps them overcome problems of being able to combine studying and working (see Santos et al., 2016). However, based on our study the present-day university environment is not supportive enough for the younger students who are its primary target. This may also reflect students’ well-being and experiences of stress.
We aknowledge that this study has some limitations. First, the data concentrates on one Finnish university and the students in one discipline. Second, there was no interaction between researchers and participants to further discuss the written answers provided by the students. Third, it would have been fruitful to analyse also such social differences as gender and class. Despite these limitations, the results of this pilot study indicate interesting novel ideals and normalities of the present-day university, and in future research it will be important further to explore and compare the development of student positionings and how they intertwine with age as well as other social distinctions in different universities and disciplines over time. We have continued our study along these lines and currently, we examine university students’ experiences and positionings in two larger research projects on academic entrepreneurship and HE graduates’ employability in which we generate student follow-up interviews.
To conclude we argue that the terms ‘traditional’ and ‘non-traditional’ are important in making differences related to age and different kinds of student positionings visible and, thus, also possible to reconstruct the ideals and normalities of the present-day university. The neoliberal ideal of an active, self-directed and self-responsible student promoted for all creates winners and losers and the employability regime reduces the purpose of university education to serve economic needs, a finding that should open up alternatives for universities as the basis for their meaning, purpose and future.
This work was supported by the Academy of Finland under Grant [number 295961] and Grant [number 315796].
References
Alheit, P., & Dausien, B. (2002). Lifelong learning and ‘biographicity’: Two theoretical views on current educational changes. In A. Bron and M. Schemmann (Eds.), Social Science Theories in Adult Education Research (pp. 211–241). Münster: LIT Verlag.
Brown, P., Hesketh, A., & Williams, S. (2003). Employability in knowledge-driven society. Journal of Education and Work, 16(2), 107–126.
Budd, R. (2017). Undergraduate orientations towards higher education in Germany and England:
Problematizing the notion of ‘student as consumer’. Higher Education, 73(1), 23–37.
Bunce, L., Baird, A., & Jones, E. S. (2017). The students-as-consumer approach in higher education and its effects on academic performance. Studies in Higher Education, 42(11), 1958–1978.
Davies, B., & Harré, R. (1990). Positioning: The discursive production of selves. Journal of the Theory of Social Behaviour, 20(1), 43–63.
Filander, K. (2016). Yliopistojen moraalijärjestys ja toimijuuden ehdot – Miten rakentaa vaihtoehtoja vaihtoehdottomuuteen? [The moral order and conditions of agency in universities – how to create alternatives in situations of no alternatives?]. Tiedepolitiikka, (41)2, 9–20.
Finnegan, F., Valadas, S., O’Neill, J., Fragoso, A., & Paulos, L. (2019). The search for security in precarious times: Non-traditional graduates perspectives on higher education and employment.
International Journal of Lifelong Education, 38(2), 157–170.
Gubrium, J., & Holstein, J. (2008). Narrative ethnography. In N. Hesse-Biber & P. Leavy (Eds.), Handbook of emergent methods (pp. 241–264). New York, NY: The Gilford Press.
Honkimäki, S. (2001). Going to school at university? In J. Välimaa (Ed.), Finnish higher education in transition: Perspectives on massification and globalization (pp. 91–112). Jyväskylä: University of Jyväskylä.
Leathwood, C. (2006). Gender, equity and the discourse of the independent learner in higher education. Higher Education, 52(4), 611–633.
Jauhiainen, A., Jauhiainen, A., & Laiho, A. (2009). The dilemmas of the ‘efficiency university’ policy and the everyday life of university teachers. Teaching in Higher Education, 14(4), 417–428.
Komulainen, K., Siivonen, P., Kasanen, K., & Räty, H. (2020). ‘How to Give a Killer Pitch?’
Performances of entrepreneurial identities in higher education. Journal of Entrepreneurship Education and Pedagogy.DOI: 10.1177/2515127420908039
Kunttu, K., Pesonen, T., & Saari, J. (2017). Ylioppilaiden terveydenhoitosäätiön tutkimuksia 48.
Korkeakouluopiskelijoiden terveystutkimus 2016 [Student Health Survey 2016: A national survey among Finnish university students]. Helsinki: Finnish Student Health Service.
Laalo, H., & Heinonen, J. (2016). Governing the entrepreneurial mindset: Business students’
constructions of entrepreneurial subjectivity. European Educational Research Journal, 15( 6), 696–
713.
Moore, E. (2000). Aikuisena yliopistossa. Yliopisto-opiskelijoiden ikärakenne ja 30 vuotta täyttäneiden opiskelijoiden elämänkulku [At university in adulthood. University students’ age structure and the life course of 30-year-old students]. Joensuu: University Press.
Moore, E. (2003). Pitkä opintie. Aikuisiällä suoritettu yliopistotutkinto ja koulutuksellisen elämänkulun muutos [Long study paths. Studying for a degree in adulthood and change in educational life course]. Joensuu: University Press.
Munro, L. (2011). ‘Go boldly, dream large!’: The challenges confronting non-traditional students at university. Australian Journal of Education, 55(2), 115–131.
Naidoo, R., Shankar, A., & Veer, E. (2011). The consumerist turn in higher education: Policy aspirations and outcomes. Journal of Marketing Management, 27(11–12), 1142–1162.
Nilsson, S., & Nyström, S. (2013). Adult learning, education, and the labour market in the employability regime. European Journal for Research on the Education and Learning of Adults, 4(2), 171–187.
Nixon, E., Scullion, R., & Hearn, R. (2018). Her majesty the student: Marketised higher education and the narcissistic (dis)satisfactions of the student-consumer. Studies in Higher Education, 43(6), 927–943.
Nori, H. (2011). Keille yliopiston portit avautuvat? Tutkimus suomalaisiin yliopistoihin ja eri tieteenaloille valikoitumisesta 2000-luvun alussa [For whom will the university gates open? A study of the selection for admission to Finnish universities and elds of study in the beginning of the 21st century]. Turku: University of Turku publications.
Nori, H., & Vanttaja, M. (2018). Pitkä tie yliopistoon. Toisen mahdollisuuden käyttäjät [A long way to university: Second chancers]. Aikuiskasvatus, 38(4), 276–290.
Olssen, M., & Peters, M. A. (2005). Neoliberalism, higher education and the knowledge economy:
From the free market to knowledge capitalism. Journal of Education Policy, 20(3), 313–345.
Puhakka, A., Rautopuro, J., & Tuominen, V. (2010). Employability and Finnish university graduates.
European Educational Research Journal, 9(1), 45–55.
Puhakka, A., Rautopuro, J., Tuominen, V., & Vuorinen-Lampila, P. (2012). Current employability and graduate employment research in Finland. In S. Ahola & D. H. Hoffman (Eds.), Higher education research in Finland. Emerging structures and contemporary issues (pp. 357–381). Jyväskylä:
University of Jyväskylä.
Pyöriä, P., Ojala, S., Saari, T., & Järvinen K.-M. (2017). Nuoret työelämässä [Young people in working life]. In P. Pyöriä (Ed.), Työelämän myytit ja todellisuus [Myths and reality about working life] (pp. 81–99). Helsinki: Gaudeamus.
Reay, D., Crozier, G., & Clayton, J. (2010). ‘Fitting in’ or ‘standing out’: Working-class students in UK higher education. British Educational Research Journal, 36(1), 107–124.
Rinne, R. (2019). Suomalaisen yliopiston tila: Rahan, vallankäytön ja hallinnan uudet muodot [The status of Finnish universities: New forms of finances, power and governance]. In H. Nori, H. Laalo and R. Rinne (Eds.), Kohti oppimisyhteiskuntaa – Koulutuspolitiikan uusi suunta ja korkeakoulutuksen muuttuva maisema [Towards a learning society – The new direction of educational policy and the changing landscape of higher education] (pp. 451–483). Turku: University of Turku Department of Education.
Rinne, R., Haltia, N., Nori, H., & Jauhiainen, A. (2008). Yliopiston porteilla: Aikuiset ja nuoret hakijat ja sisäänpäässeet 2000-luvun alun Suomessa [At the university gates: Adult and young applicants and admissions at the beginning of 21st century in Finland]. Turku: Finnish Educational Research Association.
Santos, L., Bago, J., Baptista, A. V., Ambrósio, S., Fonseca, H. M.A.C., & Quintas, H. (2016).
Academic success of mature students in higher education: a Portuguese case study. European Journal for Research on the Education and Learning of Adults, 7(1), 57–73.
Siivonen, P. (2016). Becoming an educable lifelong learning subject. Adult graduates’ transitions in education and working life. International Journal of Lifelong Education, 35(1), 35–50.
Siivonen, P., & Brunila, K. (2014). The making of entrepreneurial subjectivity in adult education.
Studies in Continuing Education, 36(2), 160–172.
Siivonen, P., & Isopahkala-Bouret, U. (2016). Adult graduates’ negotiations of age(ing) and employability. Journal of Education and Work, 29(3), 352–372.
Siivonen, P., Komulainen, K., Räty, H., Korhonen, M., Kasanen, K., & Rautiainen, R. (2016).
Salvation or a Broken Promise? Two adult graduates’ social positioning in education and working life. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 60(1), 110–125.
Siivonen, P., Peura, K., Hytti, U., Kasanen, K., & Komulainen, K. (2019). The Making of Collective Entrepreneurial Identity in Student Entrepreneurship Societies. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour & Research. DOI 10.1108/IJEBR-09-2018-0615
Statistics of Finland. (2015). Opiskelijoiden työssäkäynti [University students working alongside studying]. ISSN=1798-999X. 2015. Helsinki: Tilastokeskus. Retrieved from December 15, 2017, from http://www.stat.fi/til/opty/2015/opty_2015_2017-03-17_tie_001_fi.html
Tapanila, K., Siivonen, P., & Filander, K. (2020). Academics’ social positioning towards the restructured management system in Finnish universities. Studies in Higher Education, 45(1), 117–
128.
Thunborg, C., Bron, A., & Edström, E. (2013). Motives, commitment and student identity in higher education–experiences of non-traditional students in Sweden. Studies in the Education of Adults, 45(2), 177–193.
Tomlinson, M. (2008). ‘The Degree Is Not Enough’: Students’ Perceptions of the Role of Higher Education Credentials for Graduate Work and Employability. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 29(1), 49–61.
Tomlinson, M. (2017). Introduction: Graduate employability in context: Charting a complex, contested and multi-faceted policy and research field. In M. Tomlinson, & L. Holmes (eds.), Graduate employability in context (pp. 1–40). London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Webber, L. (2014). Accessing HE for non-traditional students: ‘Outside of my position’. Research in Post-Compulsory Education, 19(1), 91–106.
Ylijoki, O-H. (2005). Academic nostalgia: A narrative approach to academic work. Human Relations, 58(5), 555–576.
Ylijoki, O-H. (2013). Boundary-work between work and life in the high-speed university. Studies in Higher Education, 38(2), 242–255.
Ylijoki, O-H., & Mäntylä, H. (2003). Conflicting time perspectives in academic work. Time & Society, 12(1), 55–78.
Ylijoki, O.-H., & Ursin, J. (2013). The construction of academic identity in the changes of Finnish higher education. Studies in Higher Education, 38(8), 1135–49.
Ylöstalo, H. (2014). Työntekijäkansalaisia vai maailman muuttajia? [Students in the neoliberal university]. Sukupuolentutkimus – Genusforskning, 27(4), 5–15.
