Why is corporatization a bad thing and what can we do about it?
Fink, Leon. "Corporatization and What We Can Do About It". History Teacher. Volume 41. Issue 2. February 1, 2008. Education Full Text Database. March 3, 2016
Fink's article says corporatization likens developments in higher education to those of the business world. He looks at corporatization as a problem that needs to be fixed. He talks about the business domination of campuses in regard to buildings, bureaucracy, athletics, and vocational courses. He summarizes Veblen's book by saying "Veblen feared subordination of intellectual inquiry to a focus on output and crude Utilitarianism, symbolized by the inter-institutional scramble for prestige, competitive advantage and power." Of course with the growth of corporatization comes critiques, mainly centered around the autonomy of individual students. This corporatization became known as "knowledge industry," according to Clark Kerr, received many protests from students who felt that they were the mere product for this commodity of higher education. Though higher education continues to increase, institutions are becoming more and more privatized, which has transformed the decision making process and internal hierarchies of the university. There has been a big concern in this growing corporatization that is evident in big-time college sports, entrepreneurship in research, and extension into "alternate" systems centered around Internet courses. However, critics are saying that the cost of increased commercialization seem considerable larger than the benefits.Yet the even bigger problem seems to be the specific commercialization and large shift toward administrative direction of most colleges and universities without a clear education purpose. Fink also goes into the fact that there has been less and less respect given towards history and other liberal arts disciplines. As discussed by former Harvard Dean Harry Lewis, he says that the greater the university, the more intent it is on competitive success in the "marketplace". Fink states that we can no longer ignore the publics questions as to the purpose and function of the university and their calls for proof to see the added value in the university. Fink gives two areas to help combat this corporatization, unionization, to ensure protection of benefits for faculty, and to reassert the standards for a liberal arts education. It is perhaps time for citizens to set our own standards if what constitutes educational excellence. And if students graduate without a substantial background in core subjects, should the prestige of the university be questioned?
This source definitely looks at corporatization as a bad thing and something that we need to reform. Fink discusses how students are offended that they are being looked at as puppets in a marketplace rather then as independent individuals. I think that this is an interesting point because I feel like under graduate students don't even recognize the negative affects of corporatization because they are the ones reaping the benefits (lazy rivers, awesome sports teams, luxury dorms). It also makes me wonder if their are benefits of corporatizing higher education to people besides administrators. Like does anyone else benefit from this change?I also find the last part of his paper very very interesting. Fink says that if students don't graduating with a background in liberal art "common core"classes, should we question the prestige of the university? It is interesting to me because a huge part of corporatizing higher ed in the first place is because it has become a way for schools to gain "prestige, competitive advantage, and power". So if school were really looking for this prestige and powerhouse advantage, wouldn't they be putting this money into producing the best students that will contribute to society instead of hiding behind the illusion of nice facilities?
******Fink focuses on corporatization as a business analogy and a way to gain money. Where as Mills focused on corporatization as a way for higher education to gain social standing. Mills' focus on the use of high test scores and awesome facilities to end up ranked the best and how this gives schools (and students) a competitive goal when it comes motivation to be the best or get into the best school. Fink discusses how schools are taking advantage of some people like grad students and individual rights are becoming less and less valued in higher education.
Isn't the whole point of going to college getting good education?? So are there any benefits to corporatizing the university?
No comments:
Post a Comment