This paper analyzes the discourse of academic quality audit reports by drawing upon Appraisal Theory (Martin & White 2005). It focuses on the evaluative prosodies in the discourse leading up to the three main components of the reports, namely commendations, affirmations, and recommendations. These reports are prepared by the audit panels formed by the Quality Assurance Council of the University Grants Committee of Hong Kong upon the completion of academic quality audit visits to each of the city’s eight publicly-funded tertiary institutions. This paper argues that such evaluative prosodies, or the pattern of use of evaluative language, are strategically employed by the audit panels in an attempt to strike a balance between three needs: (1) to discharge their quality assurance responsibilities with their power vested by the Hong Kong Government through the University Grants Committee; (2) to maintain and/or reinforce a credible ethos for the panels themselves; and (3) to attend to the face wants of the institutions and the stakeholders concerned.
2009Promotional (meta)discourse in research articles in language and literary studies. English for Specific Purposes 28(1). 58–68.
Billing, David
2004International comparisons and trends in external quality assurance of higher education: Commonality or diversity?Higher Education 47(1). 113–137.
Brennan, John & Tarla Shah
2000Managing quality in higher education: An international perspective on institutional assessment and change. Buckingham: Open University Press.
Brown, Gillian & George Yule
1983Discourse analysis. Cambridge: CUP.
Carr, Sarah, Emma Hamilton & Phil Meade
2005Is It possible? Investigating the influence of external quality audit on university performance. Quality in Higher Education 11(3). 195–211.
Crismore, Avon & Rodney Farnsworth
1989Mr. Darwin and his readers: Exploring interpersonal metadiscourse as a dimension of ethos. Rhetoric Review 8(1). 91–112.
Findlow, Sally
2008Accountability and innovation in higher education: A disabling tension?Studies in Higher Education 33(3). 313–329.
Gallardo, Susana & Laura Ferrari
2010How doctors view their health and professional practice: An appraisal analysis of medical discourse. Journal of Pragmatics 42(12). 3172–3187.
Hodson, Peter & Harold Thomas
2003Quality assurance in higher education: Fit for the new millennium or simply year 2000 compliant?Higher Education 45(3). 375–387.
Hoecht, Andreas
2006Quality assurance in UK higher education: Issues of trust, control, professional autonomy and accountability. Higher Education 51(4). 541–563.
Holmgreen, Lise-Lotte & Torben Vestergaard
2009Evaluation and audience acceptance in biotech news texts. Journal of Pragmatics 41(3). 586–601.
Hyland, Ken
1998aExploring corporate rhetoric: Metadiscourse in the CEO’s letter. Journal of Business Communication 35(2). 224–245.
Hyland, Ken
1998bPersuasion and context: The pragmatics of academic metadiscourse. Journal of Pragmatics 30(4). 437–455.
Hyland, Ken
2005Metadiscourse. London: Continuum.
Kong, Kenneth
2008A filial son or a loving mother? Evaluation as recontextualisation devices in property transaction reports. Journal of Pragmatics 40(3). 431–453.
Mackay, Ronald
1981Accountability in ESP programmes. The ESP Journal 1(2). 107–122.
Martin, James R. & Peter R.R. White
2005The language of evaluation: Appraisal in English. Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan.
Mok, Ka-Ho
2000Impact of globalization: A study of quality assurance systems of higher education in Hong Kong and Singapore. Comparative Education Review 44(2). 148–174.
Morley, Louise
2003Quality and power in higher education. Maidenhead, PA: Society for Research into Higher Education & Open University Press.
Shore, Cris & Susan Wright
1999Audit culture and anthropology: Neo-liberalism in British higher education. The Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute 5(4). 557–575.
Spencer-Oatey, Helen
2008Face, (im)politeness and rapport. In Helen Spencer-Oatey (ed.), Culturally speaking: Culture, communication and politeness theory, 2nd edn., 11–47. London: Continuum.
Stensaker, Bjørn
1999External quality auditing in Sweden: Are departments affected?Higher Education Quarterly 53(4). 353–368.
Stensaker, Bjørn
2000Quality as discourse: An analysis of external audit reports in Sweden 1995-1998. Tertiary Education and Management 6(4). 305–317.
Stenvall, Maija
2008On emotions and the journalistic ideals of factuality and objectivity: Tools for analysis. Journal of Pragmatics 40(9). 1569–1586.
Strathern, Marilyn
1997“Improving ratings”: Audit in the British university system. European Review 5(3). 305–321.
Strathern, Marilyn
(ed.)2000Audit cultures: Anthropological studies in accountability, ethics and the academy. London: Routledge.
Tang, K.H. & Mohamed Zairi
1998Benchmarking quality implementation in a service context: A comparative analysis of financial services and institutions of higher education: Part II. Total Quality Management 9(7). 539–552.
Thomas, Harold
2001Towards a new higher education law in Lithuania: Reflections on the process of policy formulation. Higher Education Policy 14(3). 213–223.
Trowler, Paul
1998Academics responding to change: New higher education frameworks and academic cultures. Buckingham: Society for Research into Higher Education & Open University Press.
University Grants Committee
2007Quality Assurance Council audit manual. HKSAR: Government Printer.
University Grants Committee
2010Aspirations for the higher education system in Hong Kong: Report of the University Grants Committee. HKSAR: Government Printer.
Cited by
Cited by 2 other publications
Ho, Victor
2020. Marketization attempts by universities in Hong Kong: An appraisal analysis of institutional responses to quality audit evaluations. Lingua 237 ► pp. 102811 ff.
Pham, Huong Thi & Phuong Vu Nguyen
2023. ASEAN quality assurance scheme and Vietnamese higher education: a shift to outcomes-based education?. Quality in Higher Education► pp. 1 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 27 february 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers.
Any errors therein should be reported to them.