the corporatization of the university uup technology and intellectual property issues committee...
Post on 17-Dec-2015
215 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
The Corporatization of the University
UUP Technology and Intellectual Property Issues Committee
Karen Volkmankaren.volkman@plattsburgh.edu
SUNY Plattsburgh
Glenn McNittmcnittfg@newpaltz.edu
SUNY New Paltz
Expansion of Postsecondary Distance Education in the U.S.
• Distance Education at Postsecondary Institutions 1997-98, published by the National Center for Education Statistics is still the definitive survey
• This survey indicates that 78% of public 4-year institutions and 62% of public 2-year institutions offer distance learning courses
Distance Education at Postsecondary Education Institutions: 1997-98 http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2000/2000013.pdf p. 31
The Pie Chart on the Right Shows Enrollment in Credit-Granting Distance Education Classes
Corporate America Also Tracks University Distance Education
• International Data Corporation (IDC) reports that in 2002 approximately 85% of 2-year and 4-year institutions will offer distance education courses
• IDC refers to increased enrollments as the “elearning market”
http://www.idc.com/getdoc.jhtml?containerId=pr51213
IDC Corporate Analysis on Market Potential
“Elearning” on Wall Street
• Some of larger distance education corporations have graduated from venture capital to publicly traded companies on U.S. stock exchanges
• The Chronicle of Higher Education has created a special index to track the performance of these companies
http://chronicle.com/free/v48/i35/35a03601.htm
Note that the “for profit” higher education companies outperformed the S&P 500
http://chronicle.com/free/v48/i35/35a03601.htm
Why? All companies showed significant increases in enrollments; especially the U. of Phoenix
http://chronicle.com/free/v48/i35/35a03601.htm
The U. of Phoenix is part of the Apollo group.This company outperformed the rest of thefor-profit index.
Distance Education by Category
• State or community college distance education systems
• Course Management System Vendors
• Virtual Universities
• Corporate - University Joint Ventures
State or community college systems
• Mixture of non-profit and for-profit
• SUNY Learning Network (SLN), NYU Online, and U of Maryland University College are examples
• Typically accredited same as home system, such as Middle States or North Central
Course Management System Vendors
• Vendors provide software platform environments for faculty to build their courses
• The course environment simplifies organization and faculty interaction with students without having to know programming
• Generally don’t provide course content
• Examples: WebCT and Blackboard
Virtual Universities
• Completely online institutions
• Most faculty are part time
• Many are aimed at working adults
• Accreditation varies; some have North Central
• Often taught by practitioners; have more practical training focus
• Examples are Capella U., U. of Phoenix, and Western Governors University
Corporate -University Joint Ventures
• Content contracted through corporate entity
• Course offered through university
• Course content is provided in module format for selection into course
• Typically content is created by faculty stars
• Teaching assistants can be subcontracted through company to “monitor” course
A Virtual Revolution: Trends in the Expansion of Distance Education p. 13 http://www.aft.org/higher_ed/downloadable/VirtualRevolution.pdf
Who Are the Corporate - University Joint Ventures?
Watch the WorkCorporate -University Ventures
• Many of these ventures are new on the horizon
• These ventures tend to approach at the system level to gain entry
• They focus on large enrollment classes, such as general education
• They contract with expert faculty to develop various modules for a class
Watch the Work in Your Backyard
• Global Education Network (GEN) approached SUNY Central this academic year
• GEN wanted to provide courses to meet the SUNY General Education requirements
• GEN distributed recruitment emails to SUNY Faculty– See recruitment email
GEN Deals with General Education
• GEN’s premise is that system wide entry level courses are difficult to find enough faculty to cover
• GEN assumes that there is less interest in humanities courses offered via distance learning
• GEN contracts with five or six superstars to assemble course content
Distance Education at Postsecondary Education Institutions: 1997-98 http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2000/2000013.pdf p. 39
NCES data doesn’t support a dearth of humanities courses via distance education
What’s the Story Behind GEN?
• GEN was started by venture capitalist Herbert Allen and Williams College Professor Mark Taylor
• $20 million has already been invested
• GEN originally sought professors from private elite liberal arts colleges to develop content
• Few such institutions have signed on
GEN even seems to be interested in marketing distance education via PBS
Corporatization of the UniversityWhat Core Values Do We Lose
• Academic freedom
• Academic work ethic
• Freedom for research
• Traditional university interaction
Wither Academic Freedom If you’re not the “superstar”
• Dinner Module menu to choose from
• No creation of own class content
• Simplified mass production
• Loss of departmental control of curriculum
• Loss of comparison to traditional class based course
• Different standards of assessment
• Class can be contracted to outsider
Wither Academic Freedom What Happens to Your Tenure?
• How can you be evaluated for teaching someone else’s content?
• Different expectations of both you and your students for the contract course
• Second class citizen of faculty
• Differing expectations of terminal degree
Wither Academic Work Ethic
• Faculty have no reason to be engaged
• Faculty have no opportunity to share research with their students
• Subcontracted faculty are not part of campus life; serving on governance and other campus functions
• Department level work ceases to be relevant
Wither Freedom for Research
• Classes devolve into degree mills
• Devaluation of faculty scholarship
• Students miss opportunity to share and participate in faculty research
• Enrollments, not scholarship are rewarded
• Practitioner level scholarship emphasis
• Devaluation of humanities scholarship
Wither the Traditional University
• No sense of engagement of peers
• Devaluation of university peer system of department and faculty governance
• Reliance on outsiders to teach
• Loss of traditional interaction with students both in class and at campus forums
• Loss of intellectual community
What Will Be the Condition of the University?
What Risks Does Corporatization of the University Ultimately Impose?
top related