Literature Review #3

1)
2)Martin, Ben R. "Are Universities And University Research Under Threat? Towards An Evolutionary Model Of University Speciation." Cambridge Journal Of Economics 36.3 (n.d.): 543.
3) The article is about the changing role of universities. The author talks about two missions of universities, teaching and research. He argues that there is now a third mission, that of contributing to the economy and industry. This third mission was not well received by all. Two perspectives arose from the introduction of the third mission, the pessimistic and the optimistic thesis. The pessimists argue that the third mission is intrusive and universities should not have to adopt it, that is, they should be free from outside pressure and stick to their original missions. The optimistic approach argues that the universities should change as do the demands of the society. It argues for a university that cooperates with the industry and society in closer manner. It argues that universities have the opportunity to become engines of the knowledge economy, eventually fueled by private capital. The author goes in depth to compare the two and analyze them. He even starts from the foundation of medieval universities and tries to explain the previous changes faced by universities.
4)Ben R. Martin is a professor of science and technology studies at Sussex University, UK.
5) The author gives two different perspectives on the recent changes in universities and their missions.
The Pessimistic Thesis : The University and basic research (or the scientific commons” are under threat by the new missions imposed on universities by the changing economic dynamics.

The Optimistic Thesis : Universities have the opportunity to become ‘entrepreneurial universities’, taking on the role of the ‘engine’ of the knowledge economy.
6)“Universities are conventionally seen as having two missions –teaching and research. Over recent decades, however, they have been expected to give greater emphasis to a ‘third mission’ –that of contributing to industry, the economy, the local region or society more generally” (Martin, 543).

The traditional mission of the university, knowledge for its own sake, makes universities immune to the pressures of society or economic for that matter. As institutions with a higher purpose (that of learning and teaching), universities have been the equivalent of the Catholic Church of medieval Europe, transcending the realities and hardships of the time. This traditional status quo, however, is about to change thanks to the economic and social pressures put on the universities. Possessing the know-how required to train skilled workers and conduct research better than any other type of institution, universities are expected to add another mission to their goal sheet, that of contributing to worldly matters, such as economics and industry.

“In their view the university is about the provision of a ‘liberal education’ and the pursuit of ‘knowledge for its own sake’, both of these conducted under conditions of ‘academic autonomy’. For them, the introduction of the third mission represents something that is new, intrusive and potentially threatening” (Martin, 544).

The author talks about the pessimistic thesis. It argues that pressures on the universities to contribute more to the economy, industry and their local regions is the invasion of university space. According to the thesis, this ‘third mission’ is nothing more than the corruption of the concept of traditional university. Its proponents believe universities should be protected from such demands and stick to their original missions of teaching and research in a fully autonomous environment.

“The roots of the medieval university phenomenon were formed in utilitarian soil. Europe’s earliest universities were institutional responses to the need to harness the expanding intellectual forces of the eleventh and twelfth centuries to the ecclesiastical, governmental and professional
requirements of society” (Martin,548).


Even though the pessimistic thesis dubs the ‘third mission’ intrusive, Martin argues that this mission was there since the foundation of universities. In medieval times, he notes, universities were expected to contribute to their society. While it is true that universities were utilized to provide trained professionals, their main purpose have been teaching and research. Even so, the pessimistic thesis doesn’t argue for a university to be completely isolated from the society but it promotes autonomous universities that are independent from outside pressure, universities that are autonomous in their policies.


7) This article is useful for my research because it talks about the two different perspectives on the evolution of universities and their missions. He also talks about the early history of universities, which is helpful in deciphering the evolutionary history of modern university.

Literature Review #2

1) 
2) Haupt, Alexander. "The Evolution Of Public Spending On Higher Education In A Democracy." European Journal Of Political Economy 28.4 (2012): 557-573.
3)The article explains the processes which at first cause government to expand public subsidies on education and then its inevitable demise. The initial public spending on education, the author argues, creates an education 'take-off', which in turn creates more skilled parents who also want their children to attend college. Eventually, the demand for college education is so high that greater public subsidies on education becomes unsustainable. As a result, public subsidies on education decrease and private contributions become the main source of finances for education institutions. The equality of opportunity that started with initial public support, inevitably diminishes because of increased demand.
4) Alexander Haupt is a professor at the School of Management in University of Plymouth, UK.
5)skilled class: part of the workforce who had college education
6) "As we have seen, the current call for higher private contributions might rather reflect a broad trend in public opinion than a short-lived political mood. One appeal of the current approach is that both the rise and the fall in subsidies per student follow from a single cause: the increase in the size, and thus voting power, of the skilled class."

So, as the government increases education subsidies, it expands the skilled class. This skilled class, as we expext in a democracy, becomes more influential in policymaking since increased numbers mean more votes. Desiring their children to attend college just like they did, this class asks for public subsidies on education. Even though the government can yield and keep increasing tuition, its finances are limited. The expansion of the skilled class, on the other hand, becomes a continuing trend with more people attenting college.

"the demand for higher education increases with the number of skilled parents because their children attend universities more than proportionally, and the families of students are those who support the respective tax financed subsidy as a means of redistributing resources to them"

An educated society demands their children to be treated in the same manner and get a good education. For that end, they support the tax policies that enable their children to attend college with public subsidies. The same, however, can't be expected from the financially better of segments of the skilled class. These people, being financially better off, have the ability to pay for their own children's college education. As we see in the United States recently, they won't be willing to support policies that make the government tax everybody so public subsidies on education can continue. The idea is "why should I pay taxes so somebody else's children can go to college, I'd rather pay for my own".

7) This article is important for my research because the author explains government policies on education as a process. This is new because most authors argue public subsidies is a matter of choice and policy, not a naturally repeating process. I can implement this process on the situation in America and relate to the recent privatization trend. Is privatization an inevitable product of this process?

Research Blog #5

-Bernasconi, Michele and Profeta, Paola "Public Education and Redistribution When Talents are Mismatched" European Economic Review 56.1 (January 2012): 84-96.
- Haupt, Alexander. "The Evolution Of Public Spending On Higher Education In A Democracy." European Journal Of Political Economy 28.4 (2012): 557-573.
- Jeleniewski Seidler, Victor. "Higher Education, Markets, And Emotional Values." Psychotherapy & Politics International 10.3 (2012): 228-245.
- Martin, Ben. "Are Universities and University Research Under Threat? Towards and Evolutionary Model of University Speciation" Cambridge Journal of Economics 36.3 (2012): 543-565
- Palle2 Rasmussen, et al. "Developmental Patterns Of Privatization In Higher Education: A Comparative Study." Higher Education 64.6 (2012): 789-803.
- Priest, Douglas M. Privatization and Public Universities. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 2006. Print

Research Questions:
Privatization, is it the natural evolution of higher education or capitalist economy's invasion of the education system?
Further Questions I'd like to explore in my paper
What are the effects of said privatization? is it bad or good for the institutions and quality of education given?That is, should measures be taken to reverse the privatization trend or should further privatization be encouraged? Also, current changes to our universities aside, how would a privatized higher education system would look like in the future? Would privatization be good for the nation and the economy in the long run? Does the education system need public protection from the predators of Wall Street or would we be interfering with its development for the better? (After all, all reform attempts face opposition when they first come to the fore)
These are the question I'd like to ask and try to answer in my paper but reflecting them in my research question and thesis seems problematic.

-

Research Blog #4: Research Proposal Final Repost

Hamdi Saglam
Research Proposal, Final Draft

1)Privatization and Its Effects on the Evolution of US Higher Education
2)Privatization and the inevitable corporatization of US higher education system created a system where students are customers and universities are businesses trying to maximize profit. As incompatible as they may be with education, corporate concepts took hold in US universities. Quality of education dropped significantly in some colleges due to budget cuts and outsourcing. Corporatization also created top-down college administrations that are not in line with that of a traditional university. Corporatization made universities too aggressive in the education market. They started marketing more aggressively -normal for a retail company but unusual for a university-to attract more students. This uncontrolled growth, coupled with budget cuts, decreases quality of education given since the attention and resources of the university are diverted to marketing rather than academics. What is more striking is that students are ignorant of the deteriorating condition of the education system. Despite having the right to protest, students are not demanding of the system. In my paper, I will talk about the changes brought by corporatization. I will try to pinpoint their effects on universities, negative and/or positive.
3)Is privatization part of the evolution of the US higher education system for the better or an invasion of the education system by the corporate world?
4)Privatization takes away from the spirit of traditional higher education by making it too materialistic, expansionist, competitive, and not demographically egalitarian. As a result of privatization, corporatization takes hold in universities. Its concepts, however, are not compatible for running a quality higher education institution. Numbers become too important in a corporation. Universities, on the other hand, are places of learning where -ideally- numbers come secondary to academics.Corporate demand for profit and expansion create financially healthy but academically failing schools. Corporations also makes universities too aggressive in the education market, they try to get more students to bring in more revenue. Even though controlled investment and expansion are necessary for universities to serve a growing population, uncontrolled growth of a university has the potential to decrease quality by overextending its administration and faculty.
5)-What fuels privatization ? Is it part of higher education’s evolution for the better or is it an intrusion of alien concepts and values?
-Universities used to be scenes of Civil Rights and War Protests (Vietnam). College population used to be politically active. What changed? What made students less sensitive about the world?
-What effect does privatization have on the college experience?
-is privatization necessarily a bad thing?Can the financial benefits ever be significant enough to make up for the radical changes?
-we have the right to protest, but does it really help the cause?is protesting in campuses the right way to go about it?
-did privatization create a politically passive college environment? (Do people care about politics when they are shopping?)
6)
Conner, Thaddieus W., and Thomas M. Rabovsky “Accountability, Affordability, Access : A Review of the Recent Trends in Higher Education Policy Research” Policy Studies Journal 39. (2011): 93-112.

Douglass, John Aubrey. “The Rise of The For-Profit Sector in the US Higher Education and The Brazilian Effect” European Journal of Education 47.2 (2012): 242-259.

Kirschner, Ann. "Innovations In Higher Education? Hah!." Chronicle Of Higher Education 58.32 (n.d.): B6. 

Haupt, Alexander. "The Evolution Of Public Spending On Higher Education In A Democracy." European Journal Of Political Economy 28.4 (2012): 557-573.

Lee, Philip. "The Griswold 9 and Student Activism for Faculty Diversity at Harvard Law School In the Early 1990s." Harvard Journal On Racial & Ethnic Justice 27.(n.d.): 49.

Mills, Nicolaus1. "The Corporatization Of Higher Education." Dissent (00123846) 59.4 (2012): 6-9.

Martin, Ben. "Are Universities and University Research Under Threat? Towards and Evolutionary Model of University Speciation" Cambridge Journal of Economics 36.3 (2012): 543-565

Rhoads, Robert A. "Student Protest And Multicultural Reform: Making Sense Of Campus Unrest In The 1990S." Journal Of Higher Education 69.6 (n.d.): 621.

Sanyal, Bikas, “International Trends in the Public and Private Financing of Higher Education” Prospects 41.1 (2011): 157-175

Trakman, Leon. "Modelling University Governance." Higher Education Quarterly 62.1/2 (n.d.): 63.

1st Literature Review

1) photo of the author or a relevant picture

2) Full citation, MLA format
Mills, Nicolaus1. "The Corporatization Of Higher Education." Dissent (00123846) 59.4 (2012): 6-9. OmniFile Full Text Mega (H.W. Wilson)
3)summary as to what the reading is about
The author talks about the changes in US higher education in terms of corporatization and privatization of the education system. He gives universities' unceasing efforts to make it to the rankings as an example of this corporatization. He argues that desire for high rankings is so significant that it comes to shape university policies. Administrators, he argues, resemble CEOs with their high salaries; schools are turning into corporations.
4)information about the author
Nicolaus Mills, a professor of American Studies at Sarah Lawrence College, is author of “Winning the Peace: The Marshall Plan and America’s Coming of Age as a Superpower"
5)define at least two key terms/concepts  
corporatization:  Adoption of corporate practices by universities, such as budged cuts and outsourcing.
privatization: The increasing role private capital plays in the US education system through partnerships and for-profit colleges.
6)give 3 quotes
"In 2003, only two colleges charged more than $40,000 a year for tuition, fees, room, and board. Six years later more than two hundred colleges charged that amount...By driving down endowments and giving tax-starved states a reason to cut back their support for higher education, the recession put new pressure on colleges and universities to raise their price " (Nicolaus, 6). The very first paragraph of the article identifies one of the most significant problems of US higher education; the fact that education is the first target for budget cuts when states face economic problems. . Even though a correlation between the well-being of national economy and public funding for universities is to be expected, education seems to be the first department to cut due to its inability to produce 'physical' evidence of its benefits to the state and the nation. These cuts, in turn, make universities raise tuition to make up for the difference, putting a heavier burden on the students.
"If corporatization meant only that colleges and universities were finding ways to be less wasteful, it would be a welcome turn of events. But an altogether different process is going on, one that has saddled us with a higher-education model that is both expensive to run and difficult to reform as a result of its focus on status, its view of students as customers, and its growing reliance on top-down administration" (Nicolaus, 6). Privatization and the corporatization that followed it were introduced with the hopes that universities would be less extravagant in their spending and their dependence on public funding would diminish in time. Instead of incorporating itself to the existing education structure, corporatization and its concepts came to dominate the system.
"It is now a standard practice for many schools to solicit applications from students who have done well on their SAT tests, even though they know there is no room for most of these students. Admissions officers don’t mind this waste of their time. The more students a college or university gets to reject, the higher it is ranked on the all-important U.S. News selectivity scale" (Nicolaus, 6). One of corporatization's effects, quest for rankings, became so important for university administrators that they find it within themselves to play with students' futures for sake of rankings. What is worse is that getting high rankings does not make a university academically better, only more marketable - and more expensive.
7)how does this help explore my research question?
This article is helpful for my research because it explains the process of  hijacking of higher education sytem by corporate principles. Those principles, which first crept in with the purpose of cutting waste, ended up spreading to all aspects of higher education.Result, as the author argues, is an overpriced and failing system.

blog post #3

Privatization of higher education is becoming a problem in America because core corporate principles, such as significance of capital and the quest for profits, are not compatible with education. In NEA, it is argued that "In its narrowest meaning, privatization suggests a movement away from public financing and toward private financing. For higher education, the term includes a range of activities taking place on campus. Generally, in the name of financial necessity, colleges and universities cut services, undertake agressive outsourcing, reduce the number of regular tenured teaching slots, and increase tuition" (NEA, 1). While corporate habits make a financially healthy university, it cuts spending to make profit, spending less per student instruction. Privatization is incompatible for a healthy education system because students, who traditionally have had little power over university policies, can't be as influential and demanding as a regular customer and it is the customers' demand that set the standard. On the contrary, it is the student who has to be on good terms with the school so he can be academically successfull and graduate. In a privatized system, the students' weakness results in a situation where the company (school) doesn't have to satisfy the customer(students). Students are complicit by not standing up for their interests. Low budgeted, poor quality education at arbitrary prices is the endproduct. In an environment where education comes to be regarded as a private good, the quality of education can only be assured by the students' demands. And if those students don't stand up for their rights, higher education will underachieve and lose its significance.