Academic Capitalism, Evolution and Comparisons

  • Sheila Slaughter
Living reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-9553-1_601-1

Introduction

During the second half of the twentieth century, professors, like other professionals, gradually became more involved in the market (Slaughter and Rhoades 1990; Brint 1994). In the 1980s, globalization accelerated the movement of faculty and universities toward the market. The 1980s were a turning point, when faculty and universities were incorporated into the market to the point where professional work began to be patterned differently, in kind, rather than in degree. Participation in the market began to undercut the tacit contract between professors and society because the market put as much emphasis on the bottom line as on client welfare. The raison d’etre for special treatment for universities, the training ground of professionals, as well as for professional privilege was undermined, increasing the likelihood that universities would be treated more like other organizations and professionals more like other workers.

As the economy globalized, the business or corporate...

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. Becker, G.S. 1964. Human capital: A theoretical and empirical analysis, with special reference to education, National Bureau of economic research, general series. Vol. 80. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  2. Brint, S.G. 1994. In an age of experts: The changing role of professionals in politics and public life. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Bruno, I. 2009. The ‘indefinite discipline’ of competitiveness benchmarking as a neoliberal technology of government. Minerva 47: 261–280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Ehrenberg, R.G. 2000. Tuition rising: Why college costs so much. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  5. Etzkowitz, H. 1994a. Academic-industry relations: A sociological paradigm for economic development. In Evolutionary economics and chaos theory: New directions in technology studies? ed. Loet Leydersdorff and Peter Van den Besselaar. London: Pinter.Google Scholar
  6. Etzkowitz. 1994b. Beyond the frontier: The convergence of military and civilian R&D in the U.S. Science Studies 7 (2): 5–22.Google Scholar
  7. European Commission. 2000. Presidential conclusions: Lisbon. European Council 23 and 24 March 2000. Resource document. http://www.europarl.europa.eu/summits/lis1_en.htm. Accessed 20 May 2010.
  8. European Commission. 2006. Delivering on the modernization agenda for universities. European Commission. http://ec.eupropa.eu/education/policies/2010/lisbon_en.html. Accessed 17 May 2010.
  9. European Research Council. 2008. ERC advanced grant competition 2008: Statistics. Brussels: ERC.Google Scholar
  10. Geuna, A., and B. Martin. 2003. University research evaluation and funding: An international comparison. Minerva 41 (4): 277–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Gummett, P. 1991. The evolution of science and technology policy: A UK perspective. Science and Public Policy 18 (1): 31–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Halliday, J. 1993. Maoist Britain? The ideological function of vocationalizing the higher education curriculum. Curriculum Studies 1 (3): 365–381.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hill, S. 1993. Concentration of minds: Research centres in Australia. In Paper presented to the third international conference on University-industry relations. SUNY Purchase. May 1. State University of New York at Purchase, Purchase, New York.Google Scholar
  14. Jessop, B. 1993. Towards a Schumpeterian workfare state? Preliminary remarks on post-Fordist political economy. Studies in Political Economy 40 (Spring): 7–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Julien, G. 1989. The funding of university research in Canada: Current trends. Higher Education Management 1 (1): 66–72.Google Scholar
  16. Lederman, L.L. 1994. A comparative analysis of civilian technology strategies among some nations. Policy Studies Journal 22 (2): 279–295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Leslie, L., and P. Brinkman. 1988. The economic value of higher education. New York: American Councilon Education/MacMillian Series on Higher Education.Google Scholar
  18. Leydesdorff, L. 1994. New models of technological change: New theories for technology studies? In Evolutionary economics and chaos theory: New directions in technology studies? ed. Loet Leydesdorff and Peter Van den Besselaar, 180–192. London: Pinter.Google Scholar
  19. Marshall, N. (1996). Policy communities, issue networks and the formulation of Australian higher education policy. Higher Education. forthcoming 1996. 30 (3): 273–293.Google Scholar
  20. Martin, B.R., Irvine, J., and Isard., P.A. 1992. Input measures: trends in UK government spending on academic and related research: a comparison with F R Germany, France, Japan, the Netherlands and USA. Science and Public Policy 17 (1): 3–13.Google Scholar
  21. McMahon, W. 2009. Higher learning, greater good: The private and social benefits of higher education. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
  22. Pestre, D., and P. Weingart. 2009. Governance of and through science and numbers: Categories tools and technologies – Preface. Minerva 47 (3): 241–242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Slaughter, S. 1990. Lipset’s ‘continental divide’ and the ideological basis for differences in higher education between Canada and the United States. Canadian Journal of Higher Education 20 (2): 81–93.Google Scholar
  24. Slaughter, S., and B. Cantwell. 2012. Transatlantic moves to the market: Academic capitalism in the US & EU. Higher Education. 63 (5): 583–606.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Slaughter, S., and L.L. Leslie. 1997. Academic capitalism: Politics, policies and the entrepreneurial University. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
  26. Slaughter, S., and G. Rhoades. 1990. Renorming the social relations of academic science: Technology transfer. Educational Policy 4 (4): 341–361.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Slaughter, S., and G. Rhoades. 1996. The emergence of a competitiveness research and development policy coalition and the commercialization of academic science and technology. Science, Technology and Human Values 21 (3 Summer): 303–339.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Slaughter, S., and G. Rhoades. 2004. Academic capitalism and the new economy: Markets, state and higher education. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
  29. Slaughter, S., and G. Rhoades. 2005. From endless frontier to basic science for use: Social contracts between science and society. Science, Technology and Human Values. 30 (4): 1–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Wood, F.Q. 1992. The commercialisation of university research in Australia: Issues and problems. Comparative Education 28: 293–313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute of Higher EducationThe University of GeorgiaAthensUSA

Section editors and affiliations

  • Pedro Nuno Teixeira
    • 1
  1. 1.Director CIPESMatosinhosPortugal