We aren’t comfortable with the thought of a profit-seeking university. We don’t like to think that the organization that we trust to turn us into better people only exists to generate revenue. However, perhaps a university corporation is exactly what we need and would serve the good of all.
The greatest concern is where a business oriented university’s priorities would lie: the education and well being of its students should be the university’s top priority. A corporate university would consider this its top priority because in order to generate revenue, the university must successfully educate its students. Universities cannot fail to educate their students because employers would notice their employees can’t do the work that is required of them. This in turn would cause problems for the university, as it would no longer be held in high regard. A corporate university should be surrounded by other corporate universities that serve as competition. Even having slightly lower prestige would cause the business to lose clients (students) to its competitors, which would lead to decreased profits for the university.
Universities would remain as diverse as they are now: some would be small, others large. The disadvantage of a corporate university is that while some universities would remain very cheap, those that have gathered recognition would inevitably raise their tuition costs. Merit based scholarships would naturally be handled by the universities themselves, as it would be in their best interest to accept more intellectual students in order to raise their recognition. However, need-based scholarships would be rare in a business-oriented university. These scholarships could continue to be handled by government agencies as they are now. With less money spent by the government on public universities, there would be more money to spend on giving poorer families money to use at private universities.
We aren’t comfortable with the thought of a profit-seeking university, but then again nothing scares Americans more than the thought of socializing anything. A combination of for-profit universities and greater government-funded need-based scholarships would benefit people from all areas of the social spectrum and would enable them to get the education they require using the method they choose.
I would say that I have fairly mixed feelings about relying entirely (or mainly) on for-profit universities to provide us with our educations and assuming that government-funded scholarships will take care of those who are unable to pay for school on their own. Although I realize that businesses (in this case universities) that are run for the purpose of maximizing profit are generally considered to be more efficient in their utilization of resources and better at providing people with what they want, I also think that the current system excludes many people from going to college from the very outset. Despite the fact that a certain number of underprivileged students in America are able to acquire scholarships that enable them to pay for college, I think that there are many times more who perceive that college is not something that they should expect to be part of their futures. Whether this perceived inability to pay for college is grounded in reality or simply arises from feelings of hopelessness due to low family income, I think that the root of it lies in the existence of a system that from the very beginning puts students into two groups (the haves and the have nots) and then brings a large number of students from the first category to college and only a few from the second. This does not seem to conform to Jefferson's idea of a "meritocracy" at all, and it creates a natural division based on wealth instead of ability. Phil is right in saying that most Americans are scared to death of socializing anything, but I don't think that contemporary examples show that laissez-faire economics and capitalistic institutions are always the way to go. Being from Denmark, a nation that is considered socialistic, I can speak from personal experience in this area. In Denmark, universities are run by the state, and students gain admission entirely based on their grades and performance in high school. I could easily picture many Americans, including media figures (Bill O'Reilly cough cough), scoffing at the idea of socializing higher education and claiming that it would never work. However, Denmark, like the other "socialistic" Scandinavian countries, has one of the highest per capita GDP's in the world and is considered to be a very economically developed and prosperous nation. Of course that isn't to say that this is entirely because of Denmark's educational structure, but it undoubtedly speaks for the idea that what we currently have in the U.S. isn't the only thing that works.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteA for profit university would probably only have career oriented majors. These universities wouldn't offer philosophy, but would offer majors in business related areas. According to College Board this is what The University of Phoenix, a current for profit university, offers:
ReplyDeleteBusiness, Management, & Marketing
Accounting B
Business Administration/Management B
Business Communications B
Finance/Banking B
Hospitality Administration/Management B
Management Information Systems B
Management Science B
Marketing Management B,C
Retailing B
Computer & Information Sciences
Computer Networking/Telecommunications B,C
Computer Programming - General B
Computer/Information Sciences - General B,C
Database Management B
Web/Multimedia Management C
Education
Elementary Education A,B
Health Professions & Clinical Sciences
Health Services - General B
Health System Administration B
Nursing Science B
Liberal Arts & Sciences
General Studies A
Military Techonologies
Military Technologies A
Public Administration & Services
Public Administration B
Security & Protective Services
Corrections B
Criminal Justice Studies B
Law Enforcement Administration B
Security Services Management B
There probably wouldn't be space for the humanities; which I at least believe it is important. I believe the term "corporate university" does not necessarily mean universities that are for profit, but rather non-profit universities that have some similarities to a business. In this regard there is a vast difference in scope in how universities are run. George Washington University is the most expensive university in America which just tuition is $40,437. On the other hand Grove City College which is a private university in Pennsylvania is $12,074 a a year. There might be cheaper state colleges but these are subsidized by universities and do not reflect the real cost of education. What accounts for the vast difference between these universities then ? I am not sure if university business offices make this information public, but it would be interesting to see where our money goes if it apparently does not go to the faculty. So the current state of colleges does not necessarily mean that they should all be for profit, but rather that each university should manage their costs better or that there at least various ways to manage costs. After all, is GWU three times better than Grove City College ?
links:
http://collegesearch.collegeboard.com/search/CollegeDetail.jsp?collegeId=3737&profileId=2
http://collegesearch.collegeboard.com/search/CollegeDetail.jsp?collegeId=1151&profileId=2
http://collegesearch.collegeboard.com/search/CollegeDetail.jsp?collegeId=1040&profileId=7
Wouldn't we all like to know where the money goes? I think Daniel makes an intriguing point about the lack of transparency (buzz word) when it comes to the way that universities and corporations manage their budgets.
ReplyDeleteChristian's point about socializing higher education makes a lot of sense, especially given successful working models throughout Europe. But as with health care, the problem always seems to be a fear of raising taxes on the part of the American citizen. What I would like to know is how much of a change there really would be in taxes if the government did wholly subsidize university tuition. Of course, making this socialized system of higher education work might also require greater transparency of where our tax dollars are going now and possibly introducing necessary reforms accordingly. Is there an economist in the room?