Abstract
American higher education has been undergoing significant changes in recent years. These changes affect students, faculty, and administrators and involve interlocking contingencies and meta-contingencies that constitute a great part of higher education but also involve issues of social justice. Changing practices (e.g., distance learning, posttenure review) are sources of controversy and instability in contemporary American academe (Lamal, Rakos, & Greenspoon, 2000; Willis, 2001). A fundamental transformation underlying, and responsible for, many of the changing practices is the movement toward the “corporatization” of higher education. On this view, the model for higher education should be the business world, specifically the corporate world. The rationale is that by adopting the structure and practices of the corporate world, higher education will be better able to meet its current challenges. These challenges include: (a) the need to serve a wide range of students, (b) mounting costs, (c) questions regarding the occupational status and role of faculty, and (d) institutional governance.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Alexander, F. K. (2000). The changing face of accountability: Monitoring and assessing institutional performance in higher education. The Journal of Higher Education, 71, 411–431.
Birnbaum, R. (2000). Management fads in higher education: Where they come from, what they do, why they fail. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Burbules, N. C., & Callister, T. A. Jr. (2000). Universities in transition: The promise and the challenge of new technologies. Teachers College Record, 102, 271–293.
Carnevale, D. (2000, December 15). Accrediting panel grants candidate status to Western Governors U. The Chronicle of Higher Education, p. A51.
Carr, S. (2000, December 15). A day in the life of a new type of professor. The Chronicle of Higher Education, pp. A47–A48.
Hebel, S. (2001). Experts call for a renewed emphasis on student aid that is need-based. The Chronicle of Higher Education, 47, A28.
Kirschenheiter, M. (2001, April 6). A Columbia U. professor praises the interactivity of teaching online. The Chronicle of Higher Education, p. A44.
Lamal, P. A., Rakos, R. F., & Greenspoon, J. (2000). Collegiate contingencies. The Behavior Analyst, 23, 219–238.
Palattella, J. (2001, March). May the course be with you. Lingua Franca, 11, 50–57.
Qualified low-income students locked out of higher education, says report. (2001). Black Issues in Higher Education, 18, 28.
Ruch, R. S. (2001). Higher ed, Inc.: The rise of the for-profit university. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press.
Smith, C. W. (2000). Market values in American higher education: The pitfalls and promises. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.
Taylor, S.S. (2001). Under fire, Chicago colleges step back from outsourcing classes. Community College Week, 13, 2–3.
Willis, E. (2001, May 28). Why professors turn to organized labor. The New York Times, p.A15.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
A reviewer of an earlier version of this article pointed out that the designation of a current chair as a “former administrator” highlights a systemic problem in higher education today. Department chairs are often seen by faculty and by themselves as part faculty/part administrator. But in fact they are full-time administrators, contrary to the myth that is perpetrated.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Lamal, P.A. Higher Education: Social Institution or Business?. Behav. Soc. Iss. 11, 65–70 (2001). https://doi.org/10.5210/bsi.v11i1.101
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.5210/bsi.v11i1.101