ABSTRACT

U.S. policymakers designed the Gainful Employment Rule (GE) and College Scorecard (CS) to make college decision-making, the outcome of major choice, and long-term economic cost/benefits of student loans readily transparent. Yet, focus group d/Discourse indicate that such interventions fail to meet these ethical objectives but also undermine student educational progress and well-being. Using structurating activity theory and critical discourse analysis, we draw out discursive-material themes and contradictions to portray how students resist, shift, and comply with GE as well as U.S. educational and career philosophies and practices. We contribute to critiques of academic and vocational preparation and achievement as cultural formations or Discourses that appear to (a) offer hope for personal fulfillment, economic prosperity, and life-long career success; while they simultaneously (b) alter expectations, defer dreams, and incur unanticipated outcomes. In doing so, we contribute to policy communication research and social justice with pragmatic multi-level applications based on generative contradictions.

摘要

美国政策制定者设计了有酬就业规则 (GE) 和大学记分卡 (CS)，以使大学决策、专业选择的结果以及学生贷款的长期经济成本/收益易于透明化。然而，焦点小组 d/Discourse 表明，此类干预无法满足这些道德目标，而且还会破坏学生的教育进步和福祉。使用结构化活动理论和批判性话语分析，我们提取话语材料主题和矛盾来描绘学生如何抵制、转变和遵守通用电气以及美国的教育和职业理念和实践。我们有助于批评学术和职业准备和成就作为文化形式或话语似乎（a）为个人成就、经济繁荣、和终身事业成功；而他们同时（b）改变期望，推迟梦想，并产生意想不到的结果。在此过程中，我们通过基于生成矛盾的务实多层次应用为政策传播研究和社会正义做出贡献。