What is the Bottom Line?!!!
I'm not sure what book everyone else was reading, but this book made my head absolutely hurt. It jumped from past to present, and had way too much going on in the chapters. I found myself saying GET TO THE POINT ALREADY!!! YOU ARE CIRCLING THE AIRPORT...LAND THIS BABY!!! I just didn't think it was a good read at all, and there has to be something better.
Laudable, but Limited by Its Methodology
This informative and provocative book is presented as a series of case studies. They cover a quite comprehensive set of issues and institutions. Among schools mentioned or treated in depth are U of Chicato, Dickinson College, NYU, New York Law School, USC, U Michigan, UVA, Columbia, MIT, Rhodes College in Memphis, the British "Open University," the University of CA (various campuses), the University of Phoenix, and DeVry University (the last two are for-profits). The problems faced by these various schools -- raising operating funds, preserving their missions, collaborating with private industry, surviving a ratings-driven admissions process, adapting to and exploiting technology -- are issues that each institution faces in ways that are both distinctive and overlapping. The case-study method permits exploration of the complexities of the higher education landscape without reductiveness.
The method, however, does have its drawbacks. Too many issues (for instance, the role of technology) circle around repeatedly, so one starts to feel issue-fatigue. Also, the case study method attempts to "tell a story," often featuring personalities. The approach borrows a lot from the "New Journalism." For example, here is the opening sentence of Chapter 3: "For William Durden, the peripatetic president of Dickinson College, the October 5, 2001, issue of the Wall Street Journal contained some very good news." Well, maybe that gets a reader to want to keep going (actually, it turns me off), but it also suggests a focus on individuals and their impact on the places where they work, not on the abstract patterns to be found in the problems they confront.
This focus competes with the underlying structural argument of the book, which I take to be the following: The line between the academy and the marketplace is increasingly blurred in ways that are both exciting but also dangerous to the underlying mission of higher education. If institutions and their leaders do not become more self-conscious about this problem, they will be in danger of selling their schools down the river; i.e., there will be no problem with selling the academy because in essence the academy, as a separate institution in our society, will not longer exist. It will already have morphed into a trade school.
However, I did not really understand that this was the message until I got to the final chapter, entitled "Conclusion: The Corporation of Learning." (I'd actually suggest readers START with this chapter.) That's because the case study method provides lots of details and not very much analysis. It's also because Kirp wrote this book by conducting (or having others conduct) a lot of very specific interviews, which he does not seem entirely to have digested and because he entrusted the writing of a good part of this book to his graduate students and research assistants (see his "Acknowledgments," which are tucked away at the very end of the book).
In sum, this is an engaging book. It's full of interesting and useful narratives. In the broadness of its focus, it's really quite ambitious. But, in the end, it feels a little half-baked. It's a reasonable place to start thinking about some of the important issues it raises, but its focus is too fragmented and specific to permit the kind of abstract and sustained analysis that these issues truly require.
Excellent analysis on higher education
This is an excellent analysis of the current state of affairs in higher education. The book includes 14 chapters including the conclusion. Each chapter can be read independently, as they follow the famed Harvard case study method. Each chapter describes a unique issue impacting higher education. Some of these interesting issues include: a) the advent and so far failing of online higher education; b) the success of for profit publicly traded university companies; c) the new sources of funds for universities, including copyrights and patents; d) the ongoing restructuring of undergraduate core curriculum to please the students and private industry; e) the shrinking government subsidization of public universities and their resulting de facto privatization; f) the compromising of the independence of university research when financed by the private sector; and f) various attempts to revive the liberal arts discipline within an increasingly profit driven higher education culture.
Throughout these issues, the authors covers recurring themes. These include the many conflict of interest between: a) intellectual culture and profits; b) professors' research activities and undergraduate teaching; c) practical job oriented education and liberal arts.
Some of these fascinating themes beg the questions of what is knowledge? What is culture? Even what is critical thinking? During the Renaissance the answer to such questions would include being fluent in both Latin and Greek in addition to a couple of vernacular languages. It also entailed having an extremely developed art appreciation supported by demonstrated artistic capabilities. A broad and deep understanding of most aspects of science was also important. Thus, in comparison to this ideal Renaissance Mind model, we are really all a bunch of illiterates no matter how well educated we are.
The author finishes the book by asking what will be the Latin and Greek disciplines of tomorrow. What he means by that is what will be the dying intellectual disciplines that will not survive our practical and profit driven culture. He ventures to offer some candidates for the intellectual cemetery, including: English literature, pure mathematics, foreign languages, maybe sociology and other liberal arts disciplines. He mentions these with much sadness. He does not want it to happen. But, he suggests that the painting may be on the wall.
The bright side of the coin is that higher education has never been so alive. Universities attempt a cocktail of different strategies to survive and thrive. Also, a bunch of smart institutions are attacking the higher education monopoly from all sides. Students of all ages never had so many opportunities to acquire higher learning in so many different ways. None of us does speak Latin and Greek anymore. But, we all have infinite opportunities to keep on learning throughout our lives be it a certification in C++ programming, or a business or law degree from specialized institutions. Also, online education is bound to make a come back and compound learning opportunities for all of us. What's wrong with all that? Not much really.
Thus, there is a lot of food for thought in this book. You will never think of higher education quite the same way after reading it.
One Student's Opinion
This book was an interesting case study review of financial forces that are shaping our universities. While reading I found myself contemplating questions such as "Can schools preserve their heritage of `the disciplines of the mind' while adapting to the competitive pressures of the new millennium?" Kirp has thoroughly investigated the problems and opportunities facing the funding and the recruiting practices of universities today. It was fascinating to learn how courageous and creative leaders were able to turn their institutions around. I would recommend this book to individuals who make decisions regarding the funding and on-going solvency of institutions of higher learning.
The crumbling wall between the university and the market
David Kirp does a superlative job of illustrating the many ways in which universities, indeed all types of higher and further education, are being increasingly exposed to market forces. By the judicious use of case studies based upon educational institutions as diverse as Dickinson College, the University of Chicago, the University of California Berkeley, MIT, the Open University and DeVry University, he shows how the embrace of the market has led some universities astray, some to prosper enormously, and at least one to prosper by giving its "product" away.
Kirp generally provides a balanced view of his subject, although it is evident that he is very concerned about the injury to the "academic commons" to which market forces can lead. In this respect he recognizes the ongoing phenomenon, describes it well and leaves it to his readers to devise an appropriate response.
The book is clearly and engagingly written, and nicely complements Derek Bok's _Universities in the Marketplace_ (2003), which takes a narrower view of the diversity of higher educational institutions while also considering a broader set of functional aspects of the university, for example, athletics. Together Kirp and Bok have left this reader impressed by the power and persistence of market forces and keenly aware that something very valuable will be lost if they dominate higher education completely.
(13 reviews)
