Close
About
FAQ
Home
Collections
Login
USC Login
Register
0
Selected
Invert selection
Deselect all
Deselect all
Click here to refresh results
Click here to refresh results
USC
/
Digital Library
/
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
/
The relationship between academic capitalism and student culture at two four-year higher education institutions
(USC Thesis Other)
The relationship between academic capitalism and student culture at two four-year higher education institutions
PDF
Download
Share
Open document
Flip pages
Contact Us
Contact Us
Copy asset link
Request this asset
Transcript (if available)
Content
THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN ACADEMIC CAPITALISM AND STUDENT
CULTURE AT TWO FOUR-YEAR HIGHER EDUCATION INSTITUTIONS
by
Rocke DeMark
________________________________________________________________________
A Dissertation Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE USC ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCTATION
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements of the Degree
DOCTOR OF EDUCATION
August 2011
Copyright 2011 Rocke DeMark
ii
DEDICATION
I would like to dedicate this dissertation to my best friend and biggest cheerleader,
Alison Nordyke. Thank you for all of your help and support, through the good and the
bad. I could not have achieved this without you.
iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Writing this dissertation has been one of my most meaningful accomplishments of
my life, but I could not have done this without the help and support of many important
individuals in my life who I would like to acknowledge. First and foremost, I would like
to thank Dr. Adrianna Kezar for agreeing to serve as my dissertation chair. I am honored
that Dr. Kezar took the time and effort to assist me during this process. She has put a
significant amount of time into this study, and for that I am extremely grateful. This
dissertation is a culmination of her guidance, encouragement, knowledge, and support
throughout the last two years. She has been a wonderful academic mentor and someone
for whom I will always hold a great amount of respect. I am so appreciative of Dr.
Kezar’s efforts and cannot thank her enough.
I would also like to thank the other members of my dissertation committee, Dr.
Tatiana Melguizo and Dr. Mark Robison. I appreciate the amount of time they spent to
assist me in the dissertation process. I could not have completed the dissertation without
their help. Their insight on the topic and their recommendations were invaluable. I also
want to thank them for their early support of my topic when I was a student in their
EDUC 522, EDUC 706, and EDUC 709 courses. They inspired me to pursue this study in
greater depth.
I also want to acknowledge my family, in particular my mother and father, Nancy
and Thomas DeMark, for their contribution. Their encouragement to pursue my
professional interests has led me to where I am today. I would like to thank them for their
iv
support throughout these last five years as I have transitioned careers. This degree would
not be possible without them.
The journey to degree completion these past three years has been a difficult one. I
could not have survived the challenges, from both academic and personal standpoints,
without the unwavering support of my friends. While I wish I could thank them all by
name, I want to give a special acknowledgement to Alison, Nadine, Jason, Karen, Jennie,
Jessie, Emily, and Elisa for all of their help and understanding throughout these past three
years. They are all amazing people who I am lucky to have in my life. I also want to
thank the great classmates I met during the program. I want to acknowledge in particular
my friends in the Los Angeles Weekend core group, Ivan, Sabrina, and Stephen. It has
been a great ride. I am grateful we were able to take it together.
Last but certainly not least, I want to thank the entire Ed.D. Program Office. It has
been a privilege to serve as an advisor for such a great office comprised of an outstanding
team. My four years in the Ed.D. Program Office have been the most rewarding for me
from a professional standpoint. I will always be grateful for the opportunities the Ed.D.
team has given me. I want to acknowledge Jessica Gibson, Dr. Kathy Stowe, Nadine
Singh, Margaret Cyrus, Guadalupe Garcia, and Melisa Carson for helping to create a
wonderful environment in which to work. These individuals also have been as
understanding and supportive as any co-workers could be during these past three years. I
am honored to have worked with each of them and call them friends.
v
TABLE OF CONTENTS
DEDICATION ii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS iii
LIST OF TABLES viii
ABSTRACT ix
CHAPTER ONE: OVERVIEW OF THE STUDY 1
Introduction 1
Background of the Problem 1
Purpose of the Study 11
Research Question 12
Significance of the Study 13
Dissertation Overview 14
CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW 15
Introduction 15
Student Culture 17
The Importance of Culture on Campus 17
Defining Culture 19
Tierney’s Framework for Understanding Culture 20
Kuh & Whitt’s Definition of Student Culture 23
Academic Capitalism 27
The Definition of Academic Capitalism 28
Academic Capitalism’s Positive Contribution to Higher Education 31
Academic Capitalism’s Negative Contribution to Higher Education 37
Academic Capitalism and Student Culture 45
Conclusion 49
CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY 53
Introduction 53
Methodology 53
Research Sites 56
Institution location 57
Sample and Participant Information 62
Data Collection Procedures 65
Focus Group Protocol and Survey Design 68
Data Analysis Procedures 69
Trustworthiness of the Data 73
Ethical Considerations 74
Limitations 74
vi
CHAPTER FOUR: PRESENTATION OF FINDINGS 78
Introduction 78
Student Culture and Students’ Perceptions of Institutional Culture 79
Beach University 83
General Overview 83
Student Perceptions of Institutional Culture 85
Environment 85
Mission 89
Socialization 93
Information 96
Strategy 97
Leadership 104
Student Culture 105
Student Priorities 106
Competition 110
Diversity 111
Student Goals 113
Satisfaction 115
University of the Mountains 117
General Overview 117
Student Perceptions of Institutional Culture 119
Environment 119
Mission 122
Socialization 129
Strategy 134
Leadership 139
Student Culture 142
Student Priorities 143
Competition 146
Diversity 147
Student Goals 148
Satisfaction 150
Conclusion 151
Academic Capitalism and Culture 154
Attempts to Save Costs at the Expense of Important Educational Endeavors 157
Support for Schools or Programs that have the Potential to Generate Revenue 162
Attempts to Attract Larger Numbers of Students and Revenue 165
Connection between Industry and Institution 168
Emphasis on Professional Students 170
Increased Competition 172
Increased Emphasis on Research 176
Corporate Involvement in Education or Connections to Industry 179
Increased Student Marketing 180
vii
Push for High Quality, High SES Students 183
Conclusion 185
CHAPTER FIVE: CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS 186
Introduction 186
Research Findings and Discussion 188
Competitive Student Culture 189
Values of the Students 193
Financial Implications on Culture 197
Student Learning Experience 200
Implications for Practice 201
Future Research 206
Conclusion 211
REFERENCES 213
APPENDICES 219
Appendix A: Administrative Interview Protocol 219
Appendix B: Focus Group Protocol 220
Appendix C: Survey Design 222
viii
LIST OF TABLES
Table 3.1: The Four Data Collection Phases of the Study 65
Table 3.2: How Academic Capitalism May Have Impacted the Two Institutions in
the Study
72
Table 4.1: The Six Institutional Culture Indicators and Examples Found in the
Study
82
Table 4.2. The Five Student Culture Indicators and Examples Found in the Study
83
Table 4.3: Summary of the Eleven Cultural Indicators and Examples found at
both Beach University and the University of the Mountains
153
Table 4.4: Presence of Academic Capitalism at Beach University and the
University of the Mountains
155
ix
ABSTRACT
The current literature pertaining to US News & World Report college rankings
mainly focuses on the effects they have on prospective college students but ignores
students who are enrolled. These rankings are a byproduct of academic capitalism, a
larger force in higher education. This study investigates the ways academic capitalism
influences student culture in order to help comprehend how the rankings may affect
current students. A mixed methods, comparative case study was conducted at two similar,
non-profit, private institutions. The main difference between the two institutions was the
approach administrators took towards the US News & World Report rankings. One
university used the rankings to determine the institution’s direction, while the other
university did not. The study’s participants consisted of current students and university
administrators, who took part in individual interviews, focus groups, and online surveys.
This study found that student culture appears to be influenced by the increasing
presence of academic capitalism. The institution that emphasized the rankings had a
competitive student culture where the students were more focused on personal interests.
However, the institution appeared to be thriving from a financial standpoint. In contrast,
the institution that did not focus on the rankings featured more community- and civic-
minded students. Additionally, this institution was experiencing financial difficulties that
were harming the student culture. This study determines that institutions should attempt
to find a balance between honoring important missions and values that have defined
higher education in the past and accepting the capitalistic management approach that is
necessary to thrive in the future.
1
CHAPTER ONE: OVERVIEW OF THE STUDY
Introduction
When deciding upon which institution to attend, Jane ultimately chose the
institution with the highest rank in the US News & World Report college rankings
publication. Many of the institutions she considered had similar characteristics, so the
institution’s rankings became a deciding factor. She believed that attending the most
prestigious institution with the highest ranking would provide her with the best collegiate
experience. Soon after beginning her first year, she noticed that her expectations of the
institution were not being met. She was dissatisfied with the institution both inside and
outside of the classroom. Most of her classes lacked the level of quality she hoped to
encounter, as they were taught mainly by adjunct faculty members and graduate students.
Additionally, the student body was homogenous and lacked diversity both ethnically and
socioeconomically. Shortly coming to this conclusion, the US News & World Report
came out with their rankings; her institution’s ranking improved. The institution heralded
its achievement to the students, alumni, and community. She believed that the
institution’s performance in the US News & World Report rankings was more important
than the institution’s obligations to students and the surrounding community. Because of
this, her learning was stifled.
Background of the Problem
This anecdote is an example of a potential problem within higher education. Since
1983, the US News & World Report college rankings have had a significant influence on
2
higher education in the United States. The publication’s rankings have captivated
prospective students while forcing higher education administrators to alter how they
approach the management of their institutions. The popularity of the US News & World
Report rankings has advanced a climate where institutions compete with one another to
capture the attention and tuition dollars of the most impressive students. The rankings
make both positive and negative contributions to higher education. With growing
criticism of the problems the rankings cause, measuring their impact on higher education
is both useful and pertinent.
College rankings produced by various publications and organizations are a tool
widely utilized by the public to determine the performance and value of higher education
institutions. Without strong accountability measures in place for higher education, college
rankings have assumed an important role in the higher education landscape. Higher
education administrators hoping to improve their institution’s standing alter the way they
manage and operate their institution with the rankings in mind (Gallagher & Holley,
2003). Of the many college rankings, the US News & World Report college rankings are
considered by many to be the definitive rating system available to prospective students
(Ehrenberg, 2003). The US News & World Report’s college rankings were not the first
college ranking system to be used, but the publication’s rankings have garnered the most
attention since their introduction. Considered to be the “gold standard” of rankings to
many individuals both inside and outside of higher education (Ehrenberg, 2003), the US
News & World Report’s college ranking system has profoundly altered the higher
education landscape. The rapid ascent of the US News & World Report rankings derives
3
in part from its appearance of utilizing an objective, scientific approach in measurement
and from its decision to rank a large number of institutions in multiple categories
(Ehrenberg, 2003). The rankings are the oldest and most widely used benchmark for
relative institution performance in higher education (Grewal, Dearden & Lilien, 2006).
While college rankings in general have been utilized in higher education for a
significant period of time, rankings designed for the general public have only been in
existence since the 1980’s. The first academic rankings were largely relegated to an
audience of higher education administrators and government officials (Stuart, 1995). In
1870, annual reports created by the United States Bureau of Education ranked
universities based upon statistical information (Meredith, 2004). College rankings did not
see progress until 1925, when Raymond Hughes published “A Study of the Graduate
Schools of America,” which was the first college ranking system based upon institutional
reputation (Stuart, 1995). This publication is often cited as the original study of graduate
quality (Bogue & Hall, 2003). Additionally, most rankings only took into consideration
graduate school programs. Reputational rankings involving undergraduate institutions are
a recent phenomenon, beginning with a pilot study conducted by Lewis Solomon and
Alexander Astin in 1981 to rate seven programs in four states (Bogue & Hall, 2003).
Until the introduction of the US News & World Report rankings, most of the early
rankings were a product of graduate departments and independently published by
universities (Meredith, 2004). The US News & World Report rankings ushered college
rankings to the national forefront (Meredith, 2004). The publication first introduced its
college rankings issue in 1983 as a means to judge the academic quality of colleges. It
4
began as a strictly reputational survey of institutions but switched to its current format of
combining objective and reputational data in 1987 (Meredith, 2004). In 1998, the
publication’s rankings expanded to the top 50 institutions (Grewal, et al., 2006). The
2004 version of the rankings introduced the three categories which are still present in the
most recent publication of the US News & World Report rankings - national doctoral
universities, regional master’s universities, and colleges (Grewal, et al., 2006). The
methodology of reviewing institutions might vary slightly each year, but the formula has
remained relatively constant. In 2010, US News World Report assigned weights of
twenty-five percent to peer assessment, twenty and twenty-five percent to retention based
upon the type of institution, twenty percent to faculty resources, fifteen percent to student
selectivity, ten percent to financial resources, five percent to alumni giving rate, and five
percent to graduation rate performance at some types of institutions (Morse & Flanigan,
2009). As the only ranking system created for public consumption when introduced, the
rankings were well-received by the public. The publication’s popularity with national
audiences and the amount of revenue generated from the rankings sales spawned
imitators from other publishers and organizations (Meredith, 2004). Despite the large
number of emulators, the US News & World Report college rankings are the most well
known and anticipated college ranking system by both the public and higher education
administrators. Having established the rankings as the first of its kind, US News & World
Report has been able to remain the leader in the college rankings game. The rankings
receive extensive publicity every year and reach a wide audience, which influences
potential college applicants (Meredith, 2004).
5
The publication’s power within higher education is undeniable. Monks and
Ehrenberg (1999) find evidence that suggests that the US News & World Report ranking
can significantly impact an institution’s ability to attract new applicants. Institutions in
the year following improvements in the rankings received more applications, accepted a
smaller number of applications, had a greater number of its admitted students accept the
institutions’ admission offers, and could accomplish all of this by offering less generous
financial aid packages (Monks & Ehrenberg, 1999). If an institution fell in the rankings,
then the opposite would occur. Monks & Ehrenberg (1999) find that institutions accept a
greater percentage of applicants, a smaller percentage of those students matriculate, the
students who do accept perform at a lower standard, and institutions must offer more
financial incentives to attract applicants. Additionally, Schultz, Mouritsen, and
Gabrielsen (2001) establish that the ranking of a particular organization can have a
lasting impact on reputation. A positive ranking will yield favorable opinions of an
institution and a positive reputation. The foundation of the US News & World Report
rankings is an institution’s reputation. The reputation of peer institutions among higher
education administrators comprises twenty-five percent of the current US News & World
Report rankings (Morse & Flanigan, 2009). Finally, in addition to attracting students,
positive rankings can bring in alumni donations, recruit faculty and administrators, and
attract potential donors (Machung, 1998). Overall, changes in an institution’s rankings,
both positive and negative, can have a profound impact on academic quality and finances
(Ehrenberg, 2002). In this study, the definition of institutional quality will follow
Melguizo’s (2008) take on the concept. Institutional quality will be based on the level of
6
admissions selectivity, since it is assumed that quality increases with selectivity
(Melguizo, 2008). Selectivity is measured by indicators such as the average SAT scores
of incoming students (Melguizo, 2008).
Despite the positive benefits that the US News & World Report college rankings
offer prospective students and higher education institutions, many educational researchers
and administrators believe that the US News & World Report rankings are damaging
higher education. Instead of focusing on the output of their institutions, a large number of
leading higher education administrators are focused on what is being put into their
institutions. Financial resources are tied to improving categories measured by the US
News & World Report rankings rather than improving the quality of education of
students. In addition to sending publicity materials to attract prospective students,
administrators send expensive materials to other institutions in order to improve their
reputation amongst other higher education administrators (Ehrenberg, 2003). This
approach is utilized to gain favor with other institutions’ administrators and improve the
institution’s reputation score in US News & World Report rankings. Another aspect in
which the publication’s rankings can produce a negative effect on higher education is
through the emphasis of student selectivity. Currently comprising fifteen percent of the
rankings methodology, student selectivity is a major component of the rankings (Morse
& Flanigan, 2009). The more selective a institution is with their prospective applicants,
the better their results are in the magazine. With acceptance rate a part of student
selectivity, institutions are rewarded by the US News & World Report rankings system for
reducing the number or applicants they allow to attend. Institutions are encouraged to
7
reject otherwise outstanding applicants who administrators believe are unlikely to enroll,
generate large applicant pools who have little to no chance of being admitted, and admit
students who apply early decision to allow manipulation of acceptance rates when
considering those who apply for regular decision (Ehrenberg, 2003).
Relying upon rankings may be detrimental for institutions and prospective
students. Rankings systems such as those produced by US News & World Report create
incentive for institutions to publish misleading or inaccurate information (Meredith,
2004). With much of the data coming from self-reported sources, administrators can
employ tactics that manipulate their numbers in favorable ways to improve their
institutions’ standings. An example of this includes administrators who do not factor the
statistical information of low-scoring transfer student populations into the statistical
information of their incoming student classes. A second problem with college rankings is
that the very subject they are aiming to measure, academic quality, is a difficult concept
to quantify (Meredith, 2004). Quality has different definitions to different individuals. A
third problem with college rankings is that they encourage institutions to make
questionable admissions decisions (Meredith, 2004). Instead of focusing on exemplary
qualities which will equate to student success such as leadership, admissions
administrators will instead search for students who possess positive attributes that are
measured by the rankings such as standardized testing or GPA scores (Guinier & Strum,
2001; Meredith, 2004). Lower income applicants tend to be adversely impacted by the
decisions of institutions that are focused on the rankings, since they are in worse
positions in terms of scores and finances (Meredith, 2004). This can be seen in the
8
handling of early admission and early action. Institutions focused on the US News &
World Report rankings will favor early decision and action candidates since it can
increase yield and decrease acceptance rates, both of which are measured by the rankings
(Avery, Fairbanks & Zeckhauser, 2003; Ehrenberg, 2003; Grewal, et al., 2006). Lower
income students are less likely to apply for early decision or action due to financial
constraints (Meredith, 2004). Even though institutions stand to benefit from following the
US News & World Report rankings closely, their actions have the potential to create
negative repercussions.
Although rampant negative perceptions of the US News & World Report rankings
exist in higher education, many administrators are swayed by the publication’s rankings.
Contrary to the public pronouncements of college and university presidents, the US News
& World Report rankings do matter to institutions and the results of the rankings are of
great concern to higher education administrators (Ehrenberg, 2002). Standifird (2005)
finds that institution administrators throughout the United States seek to downplay the
results of the US News & World Report rankings while simultaneously creating a positive
spin for their respective institutions. Despite their criticism of the rankings, higher
education administrators recognize that college rankings like those produced by US News
& World Report are publicly visible performance scorecards, causing them to both act
and react accordingly to their results (Grewal, et al., 2006). Gallagher and Holley (2003)
conclude that deans and other educational leaders understand rankings and “use them
strategically in their decision-making” (p. 12). Many deans believe that it is crucial to pay
attention to the implications of the publications rankings when making decisions
9
(Gallagher & Holley, 2003). With the publication’s expansive reach and captive
audience, higher education administrators stand to attract more students when they use
the US News & World Report rankings as a marketing tool. The need to attract students is
important to administrators since competition is fierce within higher education (Grewal,
et al., 2006). The increasing costs of college coupled with decreasing state and federal
funding for higher education institutions contributes largely to the increasing competition
(Grewal, et. al, 2006; Hossler, 2000). The US News & World Report rankings will
continue to encourage and foster increased competition between institutions.
Since their introduction in 1983, the US News & World Report rankings have
gained significant support from the public. While ranking systems are commonplace
throughout the country in different industries, the recent demand for rankings from the
public can be attributed to various trends. Significant changes in the market structure
have created an environment where rankings are valuable to prospective students. In
1949, roughly ninety-three percent of all college students attended undergraduate
institutions in the state they attended high school (Hoxby, 1999). By the mid-1990’s, the
percentage dropped to seventy-five percent (Hoxby, 1999). Each decade experienced
lower percentages of students attending institutions in their home states. This denotes a
significant trend where students have grown increasingly amenable to attending
institutions throughout the country. This desire to travel beyond the home state requires
the need for more information about schools where it is not readily available. The
rankings are one way to digest information about these schools and differentiate between
them. Another reason for the demand for rankings is the increased stratification of
10
students and colleges by the academic backgrounds of the students (Ehrenberg, 2003).
The current student backgrounds at higher education institutions vary much more at
schools than they once did, as the SAT scores allowed by institutions has declined from
past years (Ehrenberg, 2003). The establishment of federal financial aid programs and the
reduction of various expenses such as transportation and communication have
encouraged a greater percentage of students to attend schools far away from their home
cities (Ehrenberg, 2003). Finally, one of the most important factors in the increased
interest in the worth of an institution pertains to the income college graduates can earn. In
the 1980’s and 1990’s, the salaries of college graduates grew at a significant rate
(Ehrenberg, 2003). Obtaining a college degree is important for future earning success.
For a better chance at higher earnings, enrolling at a high quality institution is important
(Brewer, Gates & Goldman, 2002). Attending a top tier institution is associated not only
with higher earnings, but higher probabilities of enrolling in top graduate programs
(Ehrenberg, 2003). This leads students and their parents to strive to attend the best
schools possible. The need to define what is the best school is where the rankings become
most useful.
The students’ and parents’ utilization of the rankings to determine the best schools
that will increase future marketability and the higher education institutions’ utilization of
the rankings for economic gains signifies a capitalistic approach to education. While the
US News & World Report rankings do not cause this capitalistic approach, it is a
byproduct of a larger trend within higher education. Academic capitalism may encourage
the use of college rankings products like the US News & World Report’s since there is a
11
capitalistic approach to selecting and managing institutions (Slaughter & Leslie, 1997;
Slaughter & Rhoades, 2004). To gain a better understanding of the US News & World
Report rankings and their impact on higher education, exploring the academic capitalism
concept is beneficial. This concept will serve as a framework for analyzing the US News
& World Report rankings.
Purpose of the Study
Through a comparative case study of two institutions with similar characteristics,
this study will investigate if and how the US News & World Report college rankings,
through academic capitalism, influence the student culture at four-year higher education
institutions. The study will establish how prevalent the publication’s rankings are on
campuses and if they are at all influential to the institutions’ students. To do this, research
will be conducted at two similar institutions, Beach University and the University of the
Mountains. The institutions chosen for this study will be extensively discussed in the
third chapter. Both institutions are small, master’s granting institutions located near Los
Angeles, CA. The universities are private, non-profit institutions that are adjacent to each
other in the US News & World Report college rankings’ West regional universities
classification. Despite sharing many similarities, the major difference between the two
institutions is the emphasis the institutions place on the US News & World Report
rankings. One university aggressively seeks to improve and promote their standing within
the rankings system while the other does not actively use the rankings to determine the
direction of the institution.
12
Some of the aspects of student culture that the study will investigate include
student satisfaction, peer culture, competition, student interests from both academic and
extracurricular standpoints, student perceptions of administrative actions, and student
awareness of their institutions’ participation in US News & World Report rankings.
Student culture is defined as the collective patterns of norms, values, practices, beliefs
and assumptions that guide the behavior of students at an institution and provide a frame
to interpret the meaning of events and actions both on and off campus (Kuh & Whitt,
1988). With the continued success and popularity of the publication’s college rankings,
the likelihood that more prospective students will factor the rankings into their college
decision process increases. The lack of research on this topic coupled with the
proliferation of the rankings creates an opportunity to examine just how influential the
rankings are at higher education institutions. Through the academic capitalism
framework, the extent to which the US News & World Report rankings impact student
cultures at higher education institutions will be studied.
Research Question
The purpose of this mixed methods study is to examine the level of influence the
US News & World Report college rankings have on the student cultures at four-year
institutions. In particular, the study aims to investigate how the rankings impact
institutions that are influenced by administrators more concerned with their institutions’
performances in the publication’s rankings. The following research question will guide
this study:
13
Does academic capitalism, as represented by the US News & World Report
college rankings, shape student culture? And if so, in what ways are the rankings
producing changes in the student culture at two four-year higher education institutions?
Significance of the Study
As college rankings such as those published by US News & World Report
continue to influence the enrollment decisions of students and the financial decisions of
higher education institutions, understanding the extent of impact they have on higher
education is both relevant and worthwhile. Most research in regards to the US News &
World Report college rankings focuses on either the impact the rankings have on the
admissions process or how institutions choose to allocate funding based upon the ranking
methodology. Looking beyond these two areas will be useful in order to determine the
significance of the US News & World Report rankings in higher education as a whole.
The lack of literature on the topic creates an opportunity to conduct this study.
Furthermore, adding new and different research to the topic of college rankings influence
can potentially encourage institutions to examine their approach to college rankings and
evaluate if positive or negative results are yielded from their actions. The study can
establish who exactly on college campuses is affected by the crucial decisions
administrators make in regards to the US News & World Report rankings. If there are
negative implications to basing significant management and financial decisions on
standing within the US News & World Report rankings, these implications should be
highlighted and alternative administrative decisions should be explored.
14
Dissertation Overview
Since institutions stand to benefit from positive contributions to their student
cultures, identifying if a major influence in higher education like the US News & World
Report rankings either enhances or hurts student culture is a valuable undertaking. To
better understand the impact the US News & World Report has on student culture, a study
will be conducted to determine which elements of student culture are positively and
negatively influenced by the rankings. This first chapter has provided background on the
US News & World Report college rankings and the purpose and significance of the
dissertation. The second chapter will define student culture and investigate the literature
of academic capitalism, which is the theoretical framework that will guide the study. The
third chapter will highlight the methodology of the research that will be conducted to
determine the extent which rankings impact student culture. The results and findings of
the research will be highlighted in the fourth chapter. The study will conclude with the
fifth chapter, which will feature recommendations for change and suggestions for future
research.
15
CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW
Introduction
The purpose of this study is to determine what type of impact the US News &
World Report college rankings has on the student culture at four-year, private higher
education institutions. In particular, the study will aim to establish how the rankings
system shapes the institution’s key population. In order to understand how and why the
student culture is affected, the rankings will be viewed through the framework of
academic capitalism. In the previous chapter, the history and the current status of the US
News & World Report rankings within higher education was established. In this chapter,
the student culture will be described in order to provide better insight for this study. The
definition of academic capitalism will be provided and the positive and negative impact
that academic capitalism has on student culture and higher education will be explored.
The bulk of the chapter will focus on academic capitalism’s presence in higher education
and its potential impact on student culture. Through the analysis of academic capitalism’s
role in defining current student culture, the potential role US News & World Report plays
in student culture will also be determined. Finally, the literature will be used to establish
what aspects of academic capitalism may impact student capitalism. This chapter will be
guided by the following research question:
Does academic capitalism, as represented by the US News & World Report
college rankings, shape student culture? And if so, in what ways are the rankings
producing changes in the student culture at two four-year higher education institutions?
16
The rankings are an aspect of a larger trend in higher education where institutions
pursue capitalistic ventures. The goals of colleges and universities are shifting towards
those that are financially beneficial. This shift towards a capitalistic approach to
managing institutions may conflict with the traditional philosophies of the purpose of
higher education. With the close attention paid towards college rankings and the desire to
adopt a more capitalistic approach to managing institutions, the influence these
movements have on both students and student culture at four-year higher education
institutions will be valuable to administrators. Creating and maintaining positive
connections with the student population will require positive student experiences. The
student culture plays an important role in the students’ views of the institution. In order
for institutions to maintain positive environments that will potentially establish future
connections with their students, institutions would benefit from creating and fostering a
positive student culture. The first goal of this chapter is to establish the importance of
student culture. The second goal of the chapter is to define both student and institutional
culture. Defining both institutional and student culture will help explain how academic
capitalism and the corporatization of higher education can affect student culture. The
third goal of the chapter is to present the two frameworks that will be used to decipher the
student culture in the study. These combined frameworks will capture the student cultures
and the students’ perceptions of institutional cultures at both institutions. Finally, the
academic capitalism theoretical framework will be defined and explored in greater detail.
17
Student Culture
The Importance of Culture on Campus
Culture has the potential to impact the students’ experience within higher
education. The cultural properties of an institution affect almost everything that happens
at a college or university (Kuh, 2001/2002). Culture is deeply rooted within an
organization, distinctive to it, and enduring to those that comprise it, which provides a
sense of identity and meaning (Kuh, Schuh & Whitt, 1991). The organization cultures,
and especially the student subcultures, exert an influence on persistence decisions as well
as other important student indicators (Kuh, 2001/2002). In addition to persistence, a
higher education institution’s cultural elements may also influence student satisfaction,
achievement, and graduation rates from the institution (Kuh, 2001/2002). The strength of
influence that the student subculture has on these aspects of the student experience is
consistent with the social integration perspective that asserts students who are unable to
identify with one or more peer groups are more vulnerable to leaving college early (Kuh,
2001/2002; Tinto, 1993). Institutions can positively influence students through culture in
multiple ways. A coherent educational philosophy and value structure that clearly sets
forth clear expectations of students will exert a stronger cultural pull that will teach
students to succeed academically and socially (Kuh, 2001/2002). Another way that
culture can positively influence students is through community involvement. Institutional
and student cultures that value and celebrate community have higher student satisfaction
and retention rates (Kuh, 2001/2002). The community environment is commonly referred
to as a fix to many of the issues that contemporary higher education institutions encounter
18
(Boyer, 1987; Kuh, 2001/2002). Through rituals and traditions, institutions are able to
cultivate a shared culture and sense of community for their students (Kuh, 2001/2002).
A third way culture has an impact on students is through residential campuses
where stronger, more engaging cultures encourage more conforming behavior that results
in higher persistence and graduation rates (Kuh, 2001/2002). Student culture is a
powerful force that establishes a social system independent of authority and influence
(Kuh, 2001/2002). This culture is especially important since these student systems have
more influence on student satisfaction and other attitudes than any other group (Astin,
1993; Kuh, 1993; Kuh, 2001/2002; Pascarella & Terenzini, 1991). A fourth way the
culture can impact the student experience is by integrating values in the new students.
Newcomers are socialized to adopt the values, attitudes, beliefs, and assumptions of the
groups or institution they are joining, which is especially true with traditional social and
academic integration for students in the first four to six weeks of college (Kuh,
2001/2002; Tinto, 1993; Van Maanen, 1984; Weidman, 1989). Higher education
institutions have the ability to shape their new students through culture while promoting
student success and achievement. Finally, the distance between the values and norms of
the student subculture and the academic values of the institution can significantly
influence student persistence (Kuh, 2001/2002). The greater the distance between the two
sets of values increases the likelihood that students will leave college prematurely (Kuh,
2001/2002).
The cultures found at higher education institutions may significantly impact the
collegiate experience for students. The student culture especially has the ability to
19
influence the student experience in a multitude of ways. The decision to study student
culture in this study is valuable due to the impact that culture has on the student
experience. Although there are various definitions for student culture, the definition of
culture that will be followed for this study will focus on the cultural interpretations of
Kuh & Whitt (1988) and Tierney (1988). Tierney’s (1988) six cultural indicators will be
used to help determine the student culture. The students’ perceptions of these
organizational culture indicators will assist in clarifying elements of the students’ culture.
Kuh & Whitt’s definition of culture will also be used in this study, with the focus being
on the values of the students. Investigating values of the student population will also be
an integral way to define the student culture. These values will include student priorities,
competition, diversity, student goals, and satisfaction.
Defining Culture
In order to conduct a thorough study of the US News & World Report college
rankings’ impact on student culture, understanding the concept of student culture is
important. By defining culture and the different perspectives used to look at culture, what
exactly should be focused on during the data collection and analysis stages will become
more apparent. While there is no universally accepted definition of student culture at a
higher education institution, most of the literature parallels or draws upon broader
cultural research (Renchler, 1992). A significant amount of the foundational higher
education cultural research has been drawn from studies on organizational cultures. The
definitions of organizational and institutional culture are combined to help offer a clearer
20
picture as to what comprises student culture. This foundational research will play an
important role in defining student culture in this study. After identifying the definitions
that will be used in the study, the frameworks for which institutional and student cultures
will be explored in the study will be presented. These frameworks will provide tangible
means to identify the cultural elements at both of the study’s institutions.
Tierney’s Framework for Understanding Culture
Culture can be considered a nebulous concept that is difficult to fully
comprehend. In order to grasp the intricacies of the culture at an institution, a framework
that will capture various elements of the culture should be utilized. While a framework
might not interpret the full scope of the culture, it can capture numerous elements that
comprise and shape the culture. Of the various frameworks employed to describe culture,
Tierney’s framework of organizational culture offers an effective tool that helps describe
the culture at a higher education institution in great detail. Although the framework was
originally designed for organizational culture, its utility moves beyond organizations.
Organizational culture is the foundation in which the definition of student culture is
clarified. Additionally, Tierney’s framework focuses on higher education and both
directly and indirectly includes student culture.
While organizational culture has been defined by extensive researchers, Tierney’s
take on the concept will be utilized in this study due to its relevance to higher education.
Higher education institutions are influenced by both internal and external factors.
Although powerful external factors such as demographic, economic, and political
21
conditions help define organization culture, strong internal forces also play a significant
factor (Tierney, 1988). These internal forces have roots in the history of the organization
and are derived from the values, processes, and goals held by those who are most
intimately involved with the organization (Tierney, 1988).Tierney (1988) claims, “An
organization’s culture is reflected in what is done, how it is done, and who is involved in
doing it. It concerns decisions, actions, and communication both on an instrumental and
symbolic level” (p. 3). Tierney (1988) views organizational culture as a study of
“particular webs of significance within an organization setting” (p. 4). An analysis of
organization culture of a higher education institution occurs as if the various elements of
the institutions are an “interconnected web that cannot be understood unless one looks
not only at the structure and natural laws of that web, but also at the actors’
interpretations of the web itself” (Tierney, 1988, p. 4). Understanding organizational
culture within the context of higher education is important as it will help define student
culture. Because students are part of this web, their interpretation of organizational
culture will assist in not only defining the organizational culture, but also the student
culture. An organization’s culture is grounded in the assumptions of the individuals
participating in the organization (Tierney, 1988). “These assumptions can be identified
through stories, special language, norms, institutional ideology, and attitudes that emerge
from individual and organizational behavior” (Tierney, 1988).
To assist in the evaluation of the culture in a higher education setting, Tierney
(1988) outlines six elements that should be emphasized: environment, mission,
socialization, information, strategy, and leadership. These concepts are based upon the
22
anthropological understanding of the social constructs of reality and sociological
conceptualization (Valimaa, 1998). Assessing the role that each of these elements play
will help describe and define an institution’s culture. Understanding the attitudes
institution administrators have towards their environments and how they define their
environments will establish the role environments play on culture (Tierney, 1988). The
environment will be where the culture takes place. This can be in the classrooms,
residential halls, and the general campus, among other locations. The definition, the role,
and the articulation of institutional missions are also key components of culture (Tierney,
1988). The mission has the ability to shape the direction of the institution. Mission
reflects the priorities, values, and norms of the campus. Organizational culture will also
factor in the socialization of the culture’s members. Determining how new members
become socialized within the culture and what needs to take place for success within the
institution will be beneficial in deciphering the culture (Tierney, 1988). Defining how the
institution’s constituents classify information, how information is disseminated to its
members, and who possesses the information is another important determinant of an
institution’s culture (Tierney, 1988). Analyzing the information infrastructure is useful in
uncovering the power structure and the impact this has on culture. The institutional
strategy adopted by administration will also be useful in defining an institution’s culture.
Establishing who makes the decisions and how they are decided upon can give
insight into the institution’s current and future directions (Tierney, 1988). These
maneuvers can explain the priorities of the institution and the direction administrators
hope to take it. Finally, the leadership of the institution is a key cultural element.
23
Identifying the leaders and confirming the expectations the institution’s constituents have
of their leaders will be revealing when attempting to define culture (Tierney, 1988). Each
of these concepts assists in confirming an institution’s culture, as the way the elements
occur, the forms they take, and the importance that they have to those who comprise the
institution will highlight cultural intricacies (Tierney, 1988). In this study, the role that all
six elements play at a higher education institution will be important in describing the
institutional and student culture. Studying these aspects will give a full picture of the
various influences that define the cultures at the two selected institutions. The data
collection phase will seek to discover what shapes and defines these elements. The
analysis of the data will utilize these six concepts to help make sense of the findings.
Kuh & Whitt’s Definition of Student Culture
In addition to utilizing Tierney’s framework to better understand culture, another
definition and frame that will be used to interpret student culture will be used. Together
with Tierney’s frame, Kuh & Whitt’s conception of student culture will be the basis to
describe the student culture at the two universities of the study. Culture at an institution
develops from interplay of external environment and a variety of institutionally distinct
features, including historical roots, external influences such as alumni, the academic
aspects of the institution, the social aspects of the institution as determined by student
subcultures, cultural artifacts like buildings, stories, and language, and contributions from
individual actors (Kuh & Whitt, 1988). This culture is relatively stable over time, but it is
also evolving constantly (Kuh & Whitt, 1988). The various elements that comprise the
24
overall culture bring in influences, both old and new, that shape the current culture. The
various campus cultures do not change easily or willingly (Kuh, 2001/2002). The
dominant assumptions, values, and preferences of the culture will continue to influence
new members and integrate them into the culture (Kuh & Whitt, 1988).
Within the subgroup of the larger student culture, subcultures will exist. The
student subcultures at institutions are created through peer interactions and mediated by
the structures and processes of the institution (Kuh & Whitt, 1988). The student culture is
a major component of an institution’s overall culture. A dominant student culture exists
when a set of beliefs, values, and attitudes are shared by most of the students at an
institution (Kuh & Whitt, 1988). This culture is visible on campus whether or not it may
or may not reflect the central ideals of the institution (Kuh & Whitt, 1988). It is passed
down at an institution as preferred approaches to resolving persistent problems
encountered by the group are shared with succeeding generations of students (Kuh &
Whitt, 1988). By doing this, the set of beliefs, attitudes, and values of the student
population are established and instituted (Kuh & Whitt, 1988). Within the dominant
student cultures, student subcultures thrive with different approaches to resolving the
problems and concerns students encounter on campus. Overall, student cultures impact
the perception students have about their work and their social lives in college and their
professional and personal goals in the future (Kuh & Whitt, 1988). Additionally, student
cultures affect the climate and culture of the institution and the experiences of the
institution’s constituents (Kuh & Whitt, 1988).
25
By studying the student populations and their responses to questions about their
institutions’ actions, both the institutional and student cultures may be more clearly
visible. The organizational culture is shaped by the student culture, just as the student
culture is affected by the organizational culture. Studying the way each culture impacts
the other can give more clarity to the various aspect that comprise the culture.
Additionally, studying the institution’s overall culture can give insight into the student
culture. Newer and older aspects of the student culture can possibly be obtained from the
research conducted in the study through the students’ responses to the study’s questions.
The students’ experiences may reveal viewpoints that are either in line with traditional
institutional beliefs or newer social ideology. Since the perceptions of students are shaped
by their cultures, the students’ experiences may help define the cultures at the two
campuses selected for the study.
Kuh & Whitt (1988) suggest that the student culture represents a set of beliefs,
values, and attitudes that are shared by most of the students at an institution. For this
study, the values of the students will be a focus in order to investigate measurable aspects
of the student culture. When using interview methods to collect data, values offer one of
the best ways to understand the student culture. Students and administrators can be asked
specific questions that can lead to a tangible and general portrayal of what values define
the students’ cultures. Utilizing other methods such as observation may be able to provide
other opportunities to explore the student culture from different perspectives. Because
interviewing is the method of choice for the study, values are an ideal and tangible
construct to investigate to understand the student culture.
26
The five student values that will be examined in this study include student
priorities, competition, diversity, student goals, and satisfaction These five indicators
were chosen because of their ability to describe the student population, their experiences
at the university, and their interactions with the other constituents of the university. The
priorities of the students will determine student standards and what is appreciated by the
students at the universities. Student priorities will play a key role in defining the values of
the students, which will help explain the student populations and their cultures.
Competition will also be useful in defining student culture. The level of
competition between students in academic and social settings will be explored in order to
gain a better understanding of the student experience and what students appear to value.
The institutional competition will also be analyzed in order to gain insight on the level of
influence administration may have in this area. The diversity at the two institutions will
serve as another indicator of student culture in this study. The amount of diversity will
help clarify the student population and whether diversity plays a major role on the two
campuses. The students’ perceptions of the role diversity plays on campus will be the
analytical focus for this indicator.
Another student culture indicator that will be used is the goals that the students at
the institutions possess. The current and future goals will be examined in order to gain a
better understanding of what students find to be important. This measure will explore the
needs of the students. The satisfaction of students at the two universities will be the final
student culture indicator. Satisfaction has been used as a means to interpret organizational
culture (Cooke & Lafferty, 1987). While satisfaction has been used to better understand
27
culture, literature on the subject is unclear in establishing the utility of satisfaction in
defining culture. However, satisfaction will be used as a cultural indicator in the study. In
trying to obtain a better understanding of the student culture, the level of satisfaction the
students have with their experiences at the two universities will be useful in providing a
broad overview of the culture as a whole. The overall enjoyment of the experiences
students have at the institutions both inside and outside of the classroom will highlight
the institutional elements that are either well-received or disliked. All of the elements,
both positive and negative, that comprise the students’ experiences are part of student
culture and will be factored into this perception. Because many cultural elements are
difficult to assess, finding measurable components is necessary.
Academic Capitalism
As academia has merged with modern business, the presence of academic
capitalism has become more apparent within higher education. In order to fully
understand and evaluate the impact of the US News & World Report rankings, an
academic capitalism framework will be employed. By reviewing the concept of academic
capitalism, the significance of the US News & World Report rankings can be better
understood. The rankings were introduced as a means to assist prospective students in
their decision of which higher education institution to attend. Prospective students have a
large selection of diverse institutions to attend. These students are essentially prospective
buyers and use their guide, in this case the US News & World Report rankings, to
determine the best value (Gumport, 2000). Administrators treat the prospective student as
a customer and in turn, the student treats the institution as a product. Students will utilize
28
whatever tools will help in their purchase. College rankings are a widely-used tool in the
process. With the influence of the publication’s rankings on students, the study will seek
to determine what kind of impact academic capitalism has on the student population and
its culture.
In this section, academic capitalism theory will be defined and examples of
academic capitalism will be presented. After establishing what academic capitalism
means to higher education, the positive and negative impact of academic capitalism will
be explored. Additionally, capitalism’s influence on culture will also be reviewed to show
how academic capitalism relates to student culture. Finally, academic capitalism’s
potential impact on student culture and higher education will be described.
The Definition of Academic Capitalism
Academic capitalism is a theory used to describe a growing trend within higher
education. The connection between higher education and the economy is the foundation
for the theory. Slaughter and Leslie (1997) define the term academic capitalism as the
market-like behaviors of faculty and academic institutions in order to seek alternative
funding sources. The market-like behaviors that some argue have taken hold of higher
education permeate almost all of the internal aspects of higher education institutions,
from research to instruction to administration (Slaughter & Rhoades, 2008). Slaughter
and Rhoades (2004) find that academic capitalism is a process in which a college or
university connects to the “new economy,” which emphasizes the importance of
globalization and information. The authors see a group of individuals - faculty, students,
29
administrators, and academic professionals - who comprise the institution using various
resources to create new knowledge that links higher education to the new economy
(Slaughter & Rhoades, 2004). These individuals use these resources to bring the private
sector into the institution, develop new networks that intermediate between public and
private sectors, and create managerial capacity that supervises the flow of external
resources to the institution while improving the institution’s ability to market its products
and services to students (Slaughter & Rhoades, 2004). The academic capitalism theory
presents the idea of the institution as a marketer (Slaughter & Rhoades, 2004). Once
students are recruited, they are transformed into captive markets to which institutions
market their branded products and services (Slaughter & Rhoades, 2008). Institutional
output such as research, educational services, and workforce are developed, promoted,
and sold to their captive audience and the private sector (Slaughter & Rhoades, 2004).
Academic capitalism has played a role in the privatization of many aspects of the public
higher education sector (Rhoades & Slaughter, 1997). Many top university administrators
look at their institutions as businesses that are selling a product, whether it is research,
information, or training (Steck, 2003).
Partnerships between higher education institutions and private industries are
common in the current educational environment. The collaborations that higher education
institutions have forged with the business and government sectors are an example of
academic capitalism. Instead of primarily educating undergraduate students and
conducting government research, research universities have become a source of national
wealth development through research projects (Mendoza, 2007). The bulk of institutional
30
research is focused on science and technology and other fields that are closely tied to the
market (Slaughter & Leslie, 1997). In addition to the higher education partnerships with
industry, some other examples of academic capitalism include the commercialization of
research, the formation of spin-off companies, and the institutional marketing and selling
of revenue generating products and services (Mendoza & Berger, 2008; Slaughter &
Leslie, 1997; Slaughter & Rhodes, 2004; Slaughter & Rhoades, 2008). The
commodification of knowledge production has linked higher education institutions to the
economy in a way where some question the degree to which higher education is
subservient to the economy (Chan & Fisher, 2008).
Certain academic disciplines are more likely to engage in academic capitalism
practices due to close ties to the market while other disciplines do not have viable
connections (Slaughter & Leslie, 1997; Ylijoki, 2003). Of the various academic
departments, those that are immersed in science and technology are most likely to engage
in capitalistic practices (Chan & Fisher, 2008; Slaughter & Leslie, 1997; Ylijoki, 2003).
The technology that results from research in the science and technology fields can be
easily integrated and offered in the private sector. The technology-based disciplines have
close links with commercial product development (Slaughter & Leslie, 1997; Ylijoki,
2003). Unlike technology-related programs, disciplines within humanities and social
sciences are less likely to engage in academic capitalism practices due to the difficulty in
commercializing their activities and finding customers (Albert, 2003; Slaughter & Leslie,
1997; Ylijoki, 2003). Engaging in academic capitalism is not a mechanical process that
impacts all academic fields in the same manner (Ylijoki, 2003). Academic capitalism is
31
manifested in various ways in different academic environments within higher education
(Ylijoki, 2003).
Academic capitalism is argued to be a formidable force within higher education.
As academic capitalism continues to take hold at institutions throughout the world,
determining what positive and negative elements it brings to higher education will
establish whether capitalistic approaches to managing higher education are beneficial or
detrimental to the institution and its cultures. If academic capitalism has a negative
impact on higher education and student culture, the US News & World Report rankings
may adversely affect higher education and student culture. The positive and negative
aspects of academic capitalism will clarify the academic capitalism theory and highlight
potential cultural influences.
Academic Capitalism’s Positive Contribution to Higher Education
It is suggested that academic capitalism provides a number of positive benefits to
higher education and the student population (Brewer, et. al, 2002; Mendoza, 2007;
Mendoza & Berger, 2008; Subotzky, 1999; Ylijoki, 2003). One of the most important
ways academic capitalism benefits higher education is by giving institutions options to
either expand or maintain their current operations despite the lack of traditional funding
sources. While the modern university shares some similarities with the university from
previous eras, the current higher education system is vastly different. Financial realities
loom large for administrators who are pressured to consider alternatives to knowledge
area commitments (Gumport, 2000). Institutions are asked by outside forces to expand
32
their missions and create opportunities for more students while reducing the tuition
revenue and curtailing the search for other revenue streams with questionable corporate
partners (Weisbrod, Ballou, and Asch, 2008). The wealthier institutions are expected to
drain their endowments (Weisbrod, et al., 2008).
In addition to these financial concerns, the overarching social missions of higher
education are all deemed unprofitable (Weisbrod, et al., 2008). Higher education
institutions have to balance these concerns while receiving less money from former
funding sources like the federal and state governments. With dwindling funding from
state and federal governments in recent years and increasing operational costs,
institutions need to generate revenue in other ways to support their expansive missions
and values (Breneman & Finney, 2001; Johnstone, 2001; Slaughter & Leslie, 1997).
Institution administrators, with encouragement from the government, implement business
practices and rely upon partnerships with outside industry in order to generate the
revenue that was once provided by the government.
Between 1969 and 1990, the share of universities’ revenue received from the
government dropped from 19.2 percent to 12.2 percent (Slaughter & Leslie, 1997).
Additionally, with the increased desire to participate in a global economy, a surge in the
demand for research that will allow the United States to compete with other countries
brought corporations to higher education has taken place (Slaughter & Leslie, 1997). The
encouragement of new revenue streams at higher education institutions is a necessary
development for many, if not most, institutions. Since the 1980’s, the US government has
fostered cooperation between industries and higher education institutions to cope with the
33
funding gaps and global competitive markets (Mendoza, 2007; Mendoza & Berger,
2008). The government has introduced laws and programs that allow institutions to patent
research and engage in collaborations with the private sector to take advantage of the
opportunities in the new economy (Mendoza, 2007). The government has also removed
obstacles for higher education institutions’ ability to profit from its research (Anderson,
2001). The cooperation between higher education and outside industries is a developing
trend for institutions throughout the world, causing institutions to rely upon private and
corporate funding (Mendoza & Berger, 2008; Neave, 2001).
With cuts in governmental funding of higher education, institutions actively
search for new ways to generate revenue. There are four main revenue markets for higher
education institutions: student enrollment, research funding, public fiscal support, and
private giving (Brewer, et. al, 2002). A variety of smaller revenue markets such as sales
and services, hospitals, auxiliary enterprises, and independent operations also factor into
the revenue streams of higher education institutions (Brewer, et. al, 2002).The future of
higher education may be dependent upon the revenue created by these business practices.
With the decrease in funding from the government, institution administrators will need to
integrate capitalistic approaches to operating their institutions unless they want to scale
down their institutions and their operations.
Another benefit of academic capitalism is that institutions can keep the current
academic culture and learning environments. The potential for academic culture and
learning environments to be harmed is realistic concern for some critics. Although the
motivation behind academic capitalism can conflict with some of the goals of academia,
34
some researchers find that academic culture remains unaffected by the infusion of
capitalism into higher education (Mendoza & Berger, 2008). Faculty members strive to
preserve the fundamental values of academic freedom, production and dissemination of
knowledge, and education of students despite the presence of industry and entrepreneurial
opportunities (Mendoza & Berger, 2008). In their case study of a top-ranked materials
science department, Mendoza and Berger (2008) find that faculty members are able to
maintain academic freedom, conduct basic research, and publish their work in peer-
reviewed journals despite the connections to the business world. The faculty’s desire to
educate students is also an imperative goal of faculty. Mendoza and Berger (2008) claim
that faculty use industry only to better the educational experience for their students and
actively protect students from any advancement by sponsors that potentially jeopardize
the students’ education. The presence of industry within higher education also positively
impacts the socialization and education of graduate students by offering more funding for
research opportunities (Mendoza, 2007; Mendoza & Berger, 2008). Additionally,
Mendoza and Berger (2008) find that the academic culture within specific academic
departments is strong, homogenous, and cohesive and likely would not be impacted by
the presence of academic capitalism. Finally, while some critics believe that academia
will be harmed by a reliance on applied research, this type of research dominated United
States academic research until roughly 1920 (Feller, 1997).
Even though some critics of academic capitalism worry about the direction of
higher education with the adoption of capitalistic practices, academic capitalism allows
for counter-trends that balance institutions’ entrepreneurial endeavors (Subotzky, 1999;
35
Ylijoki, 2003). The market pressures from outside industry can be counteracted so
academic research, teaching, and service promote social justice, community development
and public good through collaborative partnerships (Subotzky, 1999; Ylijoki, 2003).
Academic capitalism leaves space for alternative practices and values (Ylijoki, 2003).
An additional benefit that academic capitalism produces is greater opportunities
for students to learn. Industrial sponsorship is used by institutions’ administrators and
faculty to foster a learning environment for students by providing full financial support
for students, useful facilities to conduct research, and opportunities to interact and work
with the industrial world on projects that might benefit society (Mendoza, 2007). The use
of business funding also contributes other positive elements to the learning environment
including improved student-advisor relationships and direct involvement in the research
enterprise of the institutions (Mendoza, 2007). Finally, students are able to establish
connections which might lead to employment upon graduation (Mendoza, 2007).
Additionally, new courses, programs, and majors may be created (Slaughter & Rhoades,
2004). These additions will create more academic opportunities for students to pursue
work that may be relevant upon graduation (Slaughter & Leslie, 2004).
A final benefit that researchers suggest academic capitalism encourages is an
increasingly competitive environment. While increased competition within higher
education can yield negative results, the positive aspects should not be ignored. Because
higher education institutions need to generate money to sustain their endeavors,
competition between institutions for students and their money is fierce. Most institutions
report that competition is increasing in most markets (Brewer, et. al, 2002). An example
36
of this competition can be seen in the intense focus higher education administrators place
on the US News & World Report college rankings. In order for institutions to recruit and
enroll the highest quality students, administrators feel they need to differentiate their
institutions from others. Factors such as reputation and prestige have become important
ways to distinguish these differences and promote quality. Institutional decisions about
how much money should be invested in prestige generators such as the quality of
incoming students, the amount of federal research funding, and sports programs shape
institutions (Brewer, et. al, 2002). The desire to improve the reputation and prestige of an
institution is in part a reaction to the US News & World Report college rankings, which
places significant value in the reputation of institutions.
Academic capitalism intensifies the competition between higher education
institutions, which can bring positive elements to the field of higher education. The best
example of the benefits of competition can be seen in the battles between institutions
seeking to improve their reputation and prestige. In higher education, competition among
institutions appears to be limited to overlapping segments of similar institutions within a
hierarchical market (Winston, 2001). For the institutions seeking to improve their
prestige and reputation, competition is mainly focused on quality students and faculty
members who will improve an institution’s educational quality and position (Winston,
2001). Prestige-seeking approaches to management may raise industry standards for
student admissions, research, and athletic competition (Brewer, et. al, 2002). The
increased competition between schools encourages institutions to search for high-quality
students and for federal research funding, which may improve the academic experience
37
for those attending the institutions (Brewer, et. al, 2002). Resources are funneled into
research and activities that attract high-quality students which benefit the federal
government’s research programs and generate quality research and educational
institutions (Brewer, et. al, 2002). Because of the increased competition, institutions pay
attention to the quality of students and research they attract since other institutions will
continue to strive to attract the same research funding and students (Brewer, et. al, 2002;
Winston, 2001). Institutions should be aware of current higher education trends and
respond to them accordingly. While seeking prestige is a costly undertaking, the payoff
for institutions may be worth the risk to some administrators (Brewer, et. al, 2002).
Academic Capitalism’s Negative Contribution to Higher Education
Despite academic capitalism’s positive contributions to higher education and the
student experience, academic capitalism may produce negative results that are harmful to
higher education and the student population. One of the greatest detriments of academic
capitalism is the threat to the missions of higher education. As some institutions attempt
to identify and implement new approaches to generate revenue, critics of academic
capitalism believe that the adoption of capitalistic methods many institutions employ may
compromise institutional missions. Despite their benefits, current market forces that
promote commercialization and capitalism have moved higher education away from its
mission and threatened its integrity (Kezar, 2008; Stecker, 2003; Zemsky, Wegner &
Massy, 2005). With an emphasis on generating money, the mission may be ignored by
some institutions. Weisbrod, et. al (2008) indicate that the overarching social missions
38
undergirding higher education are not considered to be profitable. With the capitalistic
approach to managing educational institutions taking hold in higher education, missions
and values that do not produce revenue may be disregarded in favor of more profitable
priorities. The elimination of majors, courses, and departments that are not deemed to be
profitable may move institutions away from missions. A reduction in academic areas
such as the social sciences may prevent some institutions from achieving more socially
minded goals (Slaughter & Rhoades, 2004). Higher education has traditionally been a
social institution of society and by definition must preserve a broad range of social
functions including the cultivation of citizenship, the preservation of cultural heritages,
and the formation of individual character and intellectual capacity (Gumport, 2000).
Social institutions such as higher education serve these long-standing and stable societal
missions and establish a core set of values to support such a mission (Gumport, 2000;
Kezar, 2004). This charter counteracts the current capitalistic perspective where the
industry of higher education is viewed as a sector of the economy (Gumport, 2000).
According to Kezar (2004), critics of academic capitalism believe the societal role that
higher education once served is being foregone in order to cater to an industrial approach
to academics. The charter between society and higher education is being compromised,
which is problematic since the charter is the foundation of the missions and values of
higher education institutions (Kezar, 2004). Anderson (2001) believes that contributions
to the social good, which is the foundation of public school, are compromised when part
of the investment in higher education results in private gain. Critical social research that
contributes to the public interest will be constrained, curbing higher education’s
39
contribution to society (Tudiver, 1999). Furthermore, adopting corporate practices and
looking at short term financial implications will shed the promise of education: to educate
citizens for the responsibilities of self-government (Johnson, et. al, 2003). Finally,
academic capitalism will shift the emphasis of higher education away from serving
missions within the local community in favor of pursuing global opportunities (Slaughter
& Rhoades, 2008).
Another major negative element of academic capitalism is its potential harm to
the faculty profession. The incorporation of academic capitalism practices by higher
education faculty in order to garner necessary funding for research may cause negative
outcomes for faculty. The external pressures of industry on institutions and faculty may
transform the way most academics think about themselves and their role (Parker and
Jarry, 1995; Ylijoki, 2003). Faculty members are expected to subscribe to a social
contract with society where they altruistically serve the public good rather than special
interests, which allows them to receive a monopoly of practice ensuring them a decent
livelihood and respect (Slaughter & Leslie, 1997). By serving commercial interests as
opposed to the public good, faculty members are violating this contract and are subject to
charges of conflict of commitments (Anderson, 2001). Additionally, internal diversity
within academia may lose relevance since market-oriented values, morals, beliefs and
practices will be applied to all fields and institutional settings (Ylijoki, 2003). Bringing
market forces to higher education institutions engaging in academic capitalism creates
homogeneity and uniformity in the internal functioning of the institution (Ylijoki, 2003).
40
Another significant faculty-related impact of academic capitalism is the shift in
faculty roles at higher education institutions. Faculty positions may be reduced as a result
of academic capitalism. Courses, majors, and departments that do not connect well with
industry or are considered unprofitable by administrators are in danger of being reduced
or removed (Slaughter & Rhoades, 2004). While other degree programs or courses may
be added in areas deemed to be profitable by the institution, significant faculty reductions
will take place with dramatic academic changes. Newer programs that are connected to
the industry can utilize more adjunct faculty members. In order to increase revenue
streams and global competitiveness, institutions rely upon a mode of production that
encourages the growth of adjunct faculty and non-faculty professionals as opposed to
full-time, tenure track professors (Ehrenberg & Zhang, 2005; Rhoades, 2005). The
substitution of lower cost adjunct faculty members and graduate students for tenure and
tenure-track faculty is in part due to the financial pressures experienced by institutions
(Ehrenberg & Zhang, 2005). Additionally, with the rise of non-faculty professionals, the
power within the academic professional field shifts from the faculty to management
because supervisors, not peers, hire and evaluate these individuals’ work (Rhoades,
2005). Another negative faculty-related outcome of academic capitalism is the amount of
time and resources that may have to be utilized in order to provide faculty with the
support necessary to succeed. Some of the many extraneous elements the faculty may
encounter include spending additional time applying for external research funding and
devoting more money and personnel to assist the management of faculty grants,
contracts, partnerships, and other entrepreneurial activities (Anderson, 2001; Slaughter &
41
Leslie, 1997). The faculty member may have to take on more roles when assuming the
role of principal investigator of research, acting as the leader of a research team who
serves as a fund raiser, a human resources manager, marketer, and research director
(Etzkowitz & Webster, 1998). The extra tasks associated with maintaining a financially
viable research team may distract faculty from previous interests and responsibilities.
An additional faculty-related problem that academic capitalism may cause is the
suffering of faculty research. The purpose of academic research can be described as the
pursuit of truth or advancement of human knowledge (Anderson, 2001). When research
initiatives begin to deviate from this purpose, conflict between the expectations and
standards of academia and the private sector may exist (Anderson, 2001; Eztkowitz,
Webster & Healey, 1998). The academic profession is driven by intrinsic motivation and
rewards that have been historically based on the appeals of research, teaching, and
discipline-oriented prestige rather than on financial gains (Clark, 1987; Mendoza &
Berger, 2008). The shift towards a more market-based approach to the profession is a
concern to the faculty position. The faculty members immersed in academic capitalism
might move away from values such as altruism and public-service in favor of more
business-minded values (Mendoza & Berger, 2008; Slaughter & Leslie, 1997). Critical
social research that serves the public interest such as community development, taxation
systems, income distribution, and welfare systems is restrained (Tudiver, 1999). Instead,
faculty are drawn by market opportunities and focus on research topics that have market
appeal but are plagued by conflicts of interest (Kezar, 2008; Slaughter & Rhoades, 2004).
Professors may turn away from conducting research, including the important basic
42
research, and teaching in favor of consulting, pursuing entrepreneurship opportunities,
and developing technology as instructed by corporations (Bok, 1982). Support for basic
research within higher education is becoming less favorable since government and
industry funding has shifted away from this type of research (Mowery, 1998). The
traditional basic research that once dominated higher education has given way to
externally funded, problem-oriented research projects (Ziman, 1996). This shift is present
outside of the United States, as well. The education policies in Australia, Canada, the
United Kingdom, and the United States have moved towards science and technology
policies at the expense of basic or fundamental research (Chan & Fisher, 2008; Slaughter
& Leslie, 1997). Additionally, the differences between academic and industrial research
are fading away (Ylijoki, 2003; Ziman, 1996). The role institutional faculty play in
generating and disseminating knowledge may be adversely altered, as well (Duderstadt,
2001). Faculty may only conduct and publish research that is beneficial to corporations or
industries that offer funding. The overemphasis of applied research is a concern that
results from industry-university partnerships (Mendoza & Berger, 2008). In addition to
these concerns, secrecy and distrust with faculty research will be more common, which
could harm scientific progress (Bok, 1982; Mendoza & Berger, 2008). Research and
teaching has the potential to suffer with the shift in priorities.
Another negative element of academic capitalism is the shifting of institutional
administrators’ philosophies and the impact the shift has on higher education. Rhoades
and Slaughter (1997) claim that academics are increasingly viewed by the academic
departments’ ability to generate revenue and commercial value. Ylijoki (2003) has found
43
this claim to be true outside of the United States higher education system, as well. Higher
education administrators are influenced by increased demand for higher education, which
pressures administrators to rapidly change their institutions’ curricula, alter their
institutions’ faculties, and modernize their institutions’ expensive buildings and
equipment (Clark, 1998). The influence of partnerships with outside interests has also
altered the approach of higher education administrators which may directly and indirectly
affect students and their cultures. Before the incorporation of business practices in higher
education, institutional presidents were critical commentators who reached out to
surrounding communities and student affairs administrators focused on the development
of students (Kezar, 2008). With the rise of academic capitalism, the roles of higher
education personnel have changed. University presidents encounter more conflicts of
interest due to the research partnerships with the business sector (Kezar, 2008).
Presidents serve as entrepreneurs who raise money to supplement declining public funds
and support (Kezar, 2008). Instead of focusing solely on student development, student
affairs administrators have to be more aware of the current financial climate of their
institutions and create revenue opportunities through various sources such as student
housing and bookstores (Kezar, 2008).
Academic capitalism can also adversely impact equity in higher education
through the perpetuation of privilege. A institution’s motivation to compete with other
institutions for the best students may not be completely tied to the desire to create the best
educational experience for the students. This decision may be partially tied to an
institution’s desire to improve its reputation in publications such as the US News & World
44
Report in order to attract more students and their tuition dollars (McPherson & Shapiro,
1998). Many higher education institutions are rewarding privileged members of society
who are able to access resources necessary to improve the qualifications viewed highly
by higher education institutions (McPherson & Shapiro, 1998; Slaughter & Rhoades,
2004). While these individuals are heavily recruited by institutions, many students from
lower socioeconomic backgrounds are ignored by institutions (Slaughter & Rhoades,
2004). Students who can utilize various financial resources can negotiate access to
selective institutions through such advantages as college counselors (Slaughter &
Rhoades, 2004). This luxury is afforded to privileged individuals who can afford the
services necessary to navigate the college process effectively. Privileged students also
have an advantage over lower socioeconomic students due to the economy’s reliance
upon higher education to improve professional opportunities (Slaughter & Rhoades,
2004). Academic capitalism has ushered in an era where education and employment are
closely aligned. Successful individuals who possess white-collar positions are encouraged
to return to higher education to improve skills and advance in their professions (Slaughter
& Rhoades, 2004). Institutions target these individuals and place greater emphasis on
their experience (Slaughter & Rhoades, 2004). By doing this, institutions pay less
attention to expanding initial access to students from underserved populations who have
been unable to secure prestigious jobs (Slaughter & Rhoades, 2004). Academic
capitalism creates incentives for institutions to attract privileged students. Unless
institutions place a greater emphasis on lower socioeconomic students, privileged
individuals will continue to be the main focus for institutions.
45
Finally, the increased competition that results from academic capitalism can
produce negative repercussions for higher education. Although competition yields
positive elements as well, the competition associated with the pursuit of prestige may
have a detrimental impact on institutions. Attempting to improve prestige and reputation
is both expensive and risky, potentially putting tremendous strain on the financial health
on institutions (Brewer, et. al, 2002). The cost of the decisions to compete with
institutions for prestige and reputation are not incurred by those making the strategic
decision. Instead, the costs of these decisions are imposed on current students, adjunct or
part-time faculty members, private donors, and state taxpayers (Brewer, et. al, 2002).
Competition has also incited an arms race within higher education. Examples of the arms
race include increased student marketing, the constructions of new student-friendly
facilities, and the recruitment of academically high-achieving students through
scholarships (Slaughter & Rhoades, 2004). The competitive arms race that is a result of
academic capitalism has driven up student costs and tuition, makes the admissions
process complex for students, creates access problems for underrepresented students,
causes integrity problems in research, and raises the costs for the institutions (Hoxby,
1997; Kezar, 2008; McPherson & Schapiro, 1998; Slaughter & Rhoades, 2004; Zemsky,
et. al, 2005).
Academic Capitalism and Student Culture
As the previous two sections establish, academic capitalism produces visible
positive and negative results within higher education. These results appear to directly and
46
indirectly impact the student cultures found at higher education institutions. A
relationship between academic capitalism and student culture may exist. By determining
the extent of this relationship, the impact that US News & World Report has on student
culture can be established. Most aspects of culture within higher education have changed
with the rise of academic capitalism. Previous university culture has shifted to a culture
colored by values appropriate to modern business corporations (Steck, 2003).
Institutional culture has been altered to resemble that of the business sector, which has
played a role in engineering the shift (Minsky, 2000; Steck 2003). The overall change in
culture in higher education can permeate to the student culture.
Many of the areas within higher education that are positively or negatively
impacted by academic capitalism may have an influence on the various cultures of the
institution, including the student culture. Student culture is the collective patterns of
norms, values, practices, beliefs and assumptions that guide the behavior of students at an
institution and provide a frame to interpret the meaning of events and actions both on and
off campus (Kuh & Whitt, 1988). Previous values, practices, and beliefs of higher
education institutions will incorporate newer philosophies to form the institutional
culture. Academic capitalism’s presence will be a part of the institutional culture. This
institutional culture will shape the student culture, as well. As Kuh (2001/2002) indicates,
student persistence, satisfaction, achievement, and graduation rates are all impacted by
the student culture. If academic capitalism has an effect on student culture, academic
capitalism may shape these four student indicators, as well.
47
Student culture may benefit from the positive aspects of academic capitalism. The
most obvious way that the culture will benefit is through the generation of revenue. By
finding new ways to offset the money lost with the decline in governmental funding for
higher education, the new revenue streams play a role in the funding of key programs and
student initiatives that may increase the satisfaction and support of the students. Also, the
assertion that academic capitalism does not alter the academic culture and learning
environment for students will not detract from student achievement and graduation rates
(Mendoza, 2007; Mendoza & Berger, 2008). Additionally, academic capitalism arguably
creates more opportunities for students to learn (Mendoza, 2007). Providing students with
a more tangible learning experience through sponsored work with faculty and industry
and the support needed to succeed may positively impact all four student indicators
(Mendoza, 2007). Finally, the element of increased competition in higher education can
have a positive impact on culture through the search for and promotion of academic
quality (Brewer, et. al, 2002). Direct attempts to create a positive learning environment
may lead to greater student persistence and achievement.
While the positive aspects of academic capitalism like institutional funding, the
maintenance of certain cultures and learning environments, and research opportunities for
students can benefit the student culture, the negative elements of academic capitalism can
potentially hurt the student culture. Through the prominence of generating revenue, the
altering of faculty roles, and the compromising of institutional missions, the student
culture at many higher education institutions may suffer. One of the major issues related
to academic capitalism is the emphasis on budgets as opposed to the classroom
48
experience and student performance. The focus on budgets has shifted the composition of
higher education faculty. In order to save money, fewer tenured and tenure-track faculty
members are being hired (Ehrenberg & Zhang, 2005; Rhoades, 2005). More adjunct
faculty members and graduate students inherit the teaching responsibilities once occupied
by these faculty members. This approach to faculty use does not offer a coherent
educational philosophy to students nor does it offer the students a clear indication of the
institutions’ academic values. Widespread use of adjunct faculty members and graduate
students may signal a lack of commitment to student learning. This message to the
students may potentially lead to a decrease in graduation rates, student success, and
persistence. Ehrenberg & Zhane (2005) confirm the decline in student graduation rates
with the increase in part-time faculty members. Additionally, the increased focus on
specific, money-generating research as opposed to teaching and learning may confuse
students attempting to understand the values of the institution. The undefined or
questionable values of an institution may prevent institutions from instilling values that
promote achievement and student success. Finally, if institutions focus solely on the
financial implications of their actions, the missions of the institutions may be
compromised. Slaughter and Leslie (2008) find that involvement in local communities is
decreased as a result of academic capitalism since the larger focus of institutions is on
global information. If institutional administrators ignore the local community or disregard
institutional missions and certain unprofitable values and rituals that build community,
the student culture could deteriorate. Failure to honor and develop the community can
result in decreased student satisfaction. Despite the likelihood that academic capitalism
49
will have a significant influence on student culture at higher education institutions, many
of the aforementioned effects can be considered indirect. The possibility exists that
academic capitalism may have little impact on the student culture.
Academic capitalism practices may have a significant impact on student culture.
The key student culture indicators of student persistence, satisfaction, achievement, and
graduation rates have the potential to be negatively affected by academic capitalism.
Because of this conclusion, the US News & World Report rankings may negatively
influence student culture, as well. This study aims to determine if the rankings
significantly affect student culture or if their impact is not largely felt by students. The
rankings main influence may only be on administrators actively seeking prestige for their
institutions. Further research of this hypothesis will be needed to determine the level of
impact the rankings have on student culture.
Conclusion
Student culture is comprised of norms, values, practices, beliefs and assumptions
that guide the behavior of individuals and groups at an institution and guide the
community’s interpretation of the meaning of events and actions both on and off campus
(Kuh & Whitt, 1988). These aspects of student culture are what assist in defining the
institution and its missions. Students and the institutions where they attend stand to
benefit from student cultures that emphasize learning, tradition, and social progress. Not
only can students learn from past experiences of students before them, but they also can
have a positive impact on society when leaving their institutions. Veering from these
50
emphases can adversely impact the students’ learning and their experiences at their
institutions.
Student culture can influence the student experience in a multitude of ways. Kuh
(2001/2002) finds that student persistence, satisfaction, achievement, and graduation rates
are all tied to student culture. A positive student culture will be reflected in high student
persistence, satisfaction, achievement, and graduation rates. When evaluating student
culture, determining which internal and external forces shape the student culture will help
clarify the level of cultural influence that is taking place. Since student culture may
strongly influence key student indicators, identifying negative influences will be
important for administrators who are concerned with student success. Ignoring negative
influences may lead to a deterioration of the student culture. The level of impact that
outside forces such as academic capitalism and the US News & World Report rankings
may have on the student culture should be a concern to administrators.
Even though higher education institutions need to utilize more capitalistic
approaches to management in order to survive, close attention should be paid to the
consequences of academic capitalism. Despite the advantages that result from
economically beneficial decisions such as the increase in number of higher education
institutions and more opportunities for research, these trends have overbalanced the other
purposes of higher education (Kezar, 2004). Furthermore, yielding to market pressures
compromises the long-term public and democratic interests that have characterized higher
education for centuries (Kezar, 2004). Institutions will need to address the ethical issues
that are brought about by the employment of corporate and commercial forces into higher
51
education (Kezar, 2004). Finding the balance between serving the public good and
sustaining the financial viability of institutions through academic capitalism will be a
challenge higher education will need to address. Despite the negative repercussions of the
capitalistic approaches of higher education administrators, higher education as a whole
can benefit from the some of the elements of academic capitalism. Industry and
capitalism have promise to improve higher education and serve the public good (Kezar,
2008). However, this promise has yet to be reached and may never be achieved. The
industrial markets have not served socially responsible purposes in the past (Kezar,
2008). Because industrial markets have not yielded socially responsible gains, academic
capitalism should be approached with caution by higher education institution
administrators. The negative aspects of academic capitalism have the potential to
adversely affect student culture. Since the US News & World Report college rankings are
a byproduct of academic capitalism, the student culture and the individuals who comprise
it may be negatively impacted by the rankings.
This chapter defined the concepts of student culture and academic capitalism. The
literature helps identify the possible impact that academic capitalism may have on student
culture. By analyzing academic capitalism’s effect on student culture, the possible impact
of the US News & World Report college rankings on student culture has been established.
The potential for significant, adverse repercussions to utilizing the publication’s rankings
supports the need to conduct the research study. The results of the study should determine
whether the US News & World Report rankings have a positive or negative influence on
52
student culture. The study will also reveal whether this impact is large or small. The third
chapter of the study will establish how the research will be conducted.
53
CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY
Introduction
The purpose of this chapter is to describe the design of the research that is used in
the study. This chapter includes the methodology, site and sample information, data
collection and analysis procedures, a description of the protocols that were utilized, a
review of the trustworthiness of data, and ethical considerations and limitations. These
components are being utilized in accordance with the purpose of the study, which is to
determine if and how the US News & World Report college rankings impact student
culture at four-year private higher education institutions. This chapter will be guided by
the following research question:
Does academic capitalism, as represented by the US News & World Report
college rankings, shape student culture? And if so, in what ways are the
rankings producing changes in the student culture at two four-year higher
education institutions?
Methodology
This study seeks to determine how student culture is impacted by the US News &
World Report college rankings. Because of the difficulty in determining specific
influences on student cultures, utilizing both qualitative and quantitative methods of
study is useful. Creswell (2009) believes that the problems addressed by social
researchers are complex and using either quantitative or qualitative approaches by
themselves is inadequate. The subject of student culture and its potential influences is
54
quite complex. Analyzing student culture from multiple perspectives is ideal in order to
describe it and identify its various influences. The bulk of the research conducted for the
study is qualitative in nature. In order to better understand the influences that impact
student culture, interaction took place with those who comprise the culture being studied.
While the quantitative data helps the researcher gain a perspective on the scope of how
student culture is influenced by both internal and external sources, qualitative data can
help to clarify and identify the exact influences. Qualitative research methods yield
studies that analyze issues in depth and detail (Patton, 2002). Qualitative data attempts to
develop a complex explanation of the problem and identify the different factors involved
in a situation (Patton, 2002). The quantitative data also plays an important role in the
study. Unlike qualitative data, quantitative data gives a broad and generalizable set of
findings presented in a succinct, easily digestible manner (Patton, 2002).
When conducting a mixed method study, four important aspects influence the
design of the study’s procedures: timing, weighting, mixing, and theorizing or
transforming perspectives (Creswell, 2009). These four factors help shape the procedures
of the mixed methods study (Creswell, 2009). The timing of the qualitative and
quantitative data collections considers whether one of the data collection procedures will
take place before another, or if data will be collected simultaneously (Creswell, 2009).
For this study, four stages of data collection took place. The data collection consisted of
the following, in chronological order: one-on-one administrator interviews, one-on-one
student affairs administrator interviews, student focus groups, and online student surveys.
The bulk of the data collection was qualitative. The quantitative data collection took
55
place after all of qualitative data was collected. Although no qualitative and quantitative
data collection occurred simultaneously, each data collection stage was used to guide the
subsequent data collection stage. The weight, or priority, of the data collection procedure
is another important element in the data collection process for mixed methods studies. In
some studies, one data collection procedure might be emphasized more than another; in
other studies, the data collection procedures might hold equal weight to the researcher
(Creswell, 2009). The interest of the researcher ultimately determines the weight of the
procedures (Creswell, 2009). While both data collection procedures are important to the
study, the qualitative data collection was emphasized more. Since a significant portion of
the study focuses on defining the intricacies of the student cultures at two institutions, the
qualitative data from student interviews was most relevant. The importance of the
qualitative data is one reason there was three separate instances of qualitative data
collection. The mixing of qualitative and quantitative data is a third aspect of the mixed
methods approach. This aspect of the mixed methods process determines when and how
the qualitative and quantitative data will be integrated in the study (Creswell, 2009). The
qualitative data is the emphasis of the study. However, the quantitative data serves a
significant purpose, as it helps validate or question the qualitative findings. Individual
stories and opinions from students and administrators in the qualitative data collection
stage of the study can be viewed as more than isolated and fringe viewpoints if evidence
from the administered surveys reveals more individuals have experienced or feel the
same as one of the interviewed students. The final aspect of the mixed methods approach
is the theorizing or transforming of perspectives. In a mixed methods study, a larger,
56
theoretical perspective may guide the design of the study (Creswell, 2009). These
theories may be made explicit or they may implicit and not mentioned in the study
(Creswell, 2009). The concept of academic capitalism is the guiding perspective for the
study.
Research Sites
The focal point of the study is the impact that the US News & World Report
college rankings have on student culture at four-year higher education institutions. The
study was conducted at two different private higher education campuses. In order to gain
an understanding of how the publication’s rankings can potentially influence an
institution, studying a university that openly embraces the rankings and widely promotes
its standing to the institution’s various constituents is beneficial. If the rankings do impact
an institution’s student culture, the results should be visible at a site where greater
emphasis is placed on the rankings. To contrast the findings at the previous site, studying
an institution that does not show strong interest in its position in the US News & World
Report’s rankings will also be valuable. This site may not only serve the purpose of
further exemplifying the cultural influences of US News & World Report’s rankings
through contrast, it may prevent misguided conclusions by providing a foundation for
discerning student culture. Similarities between student cultures at the two sites will
indicate that other factors outside of the US News & World Report rankings may be
shaping the two cultures. By studying two contrasting sites, the data can be appropriately
interpreted.
57
The two sites were chosen based upon criteria that are relevant to the study. The
criteria for selecting the sites include:
Institutional emphasis on the US News & World Report college rankings
Institution size
Student population
Institution affiliation and focus of programs
Institution location
The five criteria chosen for the study were selected in order to assist with the
results of the case study. Because two different institutions are being compared, finding
as many similarities between the two institutions is important in order to mitigate
inaccurate conclusions based solely on institutional differences. For this study, focusing
on the universities’ demographics, affiliations, and locations will lessen the outside
influences that cause differences in student culture. The only criterion that contrasts the
two universities is the institutional emphasis on the US News & World Report rankings.
The institutions’ approaches to the rankings are the foundation for the case study and are
purposefully different.
The first institution studied was Beach University (BU). BU is a private,
independent university located in a suburban city of Los Angeles, California.
Approximately 4,300 undergraduate students and 1,700 graduate students are currently
enrolled at the institution. Of these students, sixty-one percent are from California.
Thirty-seven percent of students live on campus. The second institution that will be
58
studied is the University of the Mountains (UM). UM is a private, independent university
located in a suburban city of Los Angeles, California. Approximately 3,000
undergraduate students and 1,500 graduate students are currently enrolled at the
university. Of these students, sixty-seven percent reside in California. Seventy percent of
students live on campus. Both institutions are ranked in the US News & World Report’s
Western regional universities top ten rankings. The respective institutions are ranked
eighth and ninth.
The first and most important factor in the selection of the two institutions was the
institutions’ approaches to the US News & World Report college rankings. Not only did
the two similar institutions need to have different approaches to the rankings, they also
had to not possess radical opinions of the rankings. I was not interested in studying
institutions that outwardly revere or demonize the rankings to extreme extents. In order
for the study to be more applicable, moving away from the extremes is important. The
main goal of the study is to research the student cultures of two similar institutions. The
major difference between the two institutions was the approach the institutions’
administrators adopted with respect to the US News & World Report rankings. The
institutions’ approach to the rankings was determined by researching the institutions’
information sources and speaking with high-ranking administrators who possessed
knowledge of the institutions’ goals and initiatives. Website research was first employed
to narrow the pool of potential institutions. By looking at its official website, BU
appeared to be largely focused on its standing within the publication’s college rankings.
The university’s information section featured numerous mentions of the institution’s and
59
its departments’ rankings and hosts the US News & World Report’s logo prominently on
its website. Additionally, the institution issued press releases about its improvement in
the rankings. The institution’s fundraising staff even promoted the institution’s
involvement with the publication’s rankings since its website claims, “Every gift from
Beach Alumni helps improve our alumni participation rate – a measurement that
organizations like US News and World Report use to rank colleges and universities across
the country” (Beach Fund, 2010). The US News & World Report’s college rankings were
widely presented on the institution’s main information and recruitment resource,
indicating BU’s focus on the rankings. Personal interviews also helped to clarify the
administration’s feelings about the rankings. Administrators at BU confirmed the
findings on the website. The Vice Chancellor of Student Affairs stated, “The US News &
World Report rankings are a major focal point for the university. Almost all major
decisions are made with the rankings in mind” (Smith, personal communication,
September 10, 2010). An interview with the Assistant Vice Chancellor of Student Affairs
confirmed the university’s heavy emphasis on the US News & World Report rankings. In
contrast, UM did not appear to have the same interest in the publication’s rankings. While
the institution mentioned its ranking on the institution’s website, it was not prominently
displayed on multiple pages. The US News & World Report’s college rankings are not
used as a primary marketing tool to recruit students. Several administrators and faculty
members at the institution confirmed the university’s approach to the rankings. The
Associate Vice President of Enrollment, who has been a member of the UM community
for over twenty years, stated, “The university has other priorities. While we do mention
60
the rankings on the website, it is done for those students who care about them. We focus
on other factors when recruiting students, such as whether they are a good match for our
ideal student population” (Young, personal communication, November 8, 2010). The
Vice President of Student Life and Dean of Students, who has been with the university
for 41 years, echoed this sentiment. “We pay attention to [the rankings] because you
cannot be in higher education and not pay attention to them. But it is just one
measurement and a lot of schools get caught up in [the rankings]. It’s just one
measurement.” (Williams, personal communication, December 13, 2010). Even though
the institution takes the rankings into consideration, the decisions of the institution’s
administration are not driven by the rankings (Williams, personal communication,
December 13, 2010). This evident difference in approach to the US News & World
Report rankings by UM made the institution an ideal candidate to be compared to BU in
this study.
Another reason that BU and UM were chosen for the study is the similarities in
institutional demographics. Both institutions have a medium sized population of 6,000
and 4,500 students, respectively. Choosing two institutions with similar populations was
important to the study. Institutions with vastly different sizes are likely to have different
cultures that will not compare well. Another demographic that factored into the selection
of institutions was the institutions’ affiliations. Both BU and UM are private institutions
that do not have major ties to any organizations. While BU is loosely associated with the
Disciples of Christ religious faith, the religion does not play any role in the direction of
the institution. UM is not associated with any religions that might define the mission of
61
the institution or guide its institutional cultures. A final demographic that played a role in
the selection of the institutions was the institutions’ emphases on academics. In
particular, the academic programs and the degrees the institutions offer are important to
the study of student culture. Academics play an important role on campus and contribute
to the student culture. By choosing institutions that possess similar programs and degrees,
the likelihood that an academic program or a type of student shaping one culture but not
another is minimized. The similarity allowed for a better comparison between the two
institutions.
The location of the institutions was a final factor when deciding upon BU and
UM. An institution’s location has an impact on the student populations at the two
institutions. Since both institutions have student populations largely comprised of
California residents, the student populations of the two institutions was more likely to
feature students who come from similar backgrounds. In order to compare the impact of
the US News & World Report’s college rankings on student culture at two institutions,
attempting to find similarities in the populations and cultures helped make the
comparison easier. Another reason both BU and UM were chosen for this study is the
proximity to Los Angeles, California. In order to facilitate the study, the institutions that
were used in the case study were accessible to the researcher. The study involved
numerous on-site interviews with students and administrators. In order to conduct these
interviews, I needed to be able to interact with participants frequently and consistently.
The institutions’ locations allowed for repeated visits to the campuses, as necessary.
62
Sample and Participant Information
In order to gather the necessary data to conduct the study of student culture, two
sites were chosen for the mixed methods study. I collected data from students that
comprise both universities through focus groups and surveys. The study also featured the
input of administrators from both institutions. In order to gain a perspective of the student
cultures at the two institutions, students who were immersed in the student cultures were
selected for the study. In order to satisfy this need, undergraduate students who spend a
large portion of time on the two campuses were the ideal candidates to comprise the
focus groups. They represented the large majority of students who participated in the
study. The undergraduate student populations were also ideal focus group candidates for
this study since the US News & World Report’s undergraduate college rankings garner
the most interest, publicity, and awareness. Despite the large undergraduate focus,
graduate students also played a role in the study. The graduate students contribute to the
student cultures of the institutions and ignoring their perspectives would not give a full,
accurate description of the institutions’ cultures. Additionally, the views of administrators
were considered in the study. Institution administrators contribute to the various cultures
of the institution and they may have greater insight into the historical aspects of the
institutions and their student cultures.
To gain a valuable perspective of the students’ perceptions of the student cultures
of BU and UM, I conducted focus groups with undergraduate and graduate students and
one-on-one interviews with administrators. A total of forty-five students took part in
twelve individual interviews and focus groups. Five focus groups and individual
63
interviews took place at BU while seven focus groups were conducted at UM. All of the
focus groups were held on site at the two institutions. I recruited seventeen students at
BU and twenty-eight students at UM. At BU, fourteen of the focus group participants
were undergraduate students while the remaining participants were graduate students. At
UM, all but one of the students interviewed were undergraduate students. Administrative
interviews were also a part of the qualitative data collection process. Multiple interviews
took place at each institution with administrators who spoke about their experiences with
and perceptions of the student culture. At BU, two student affairs administrators were
interviewed on site. One of these individuals was able to clarify the positions of the
university’s administration due to his important leadership position and involvement with
campus leadership committee. Two student affairs administrators and one faculty
member participated in interviews at UM. Two of these three interviews took place on
the phone due to the difficulty in scheduling. The administrators were able to offer
insight into the leadership’s intentions due to their high-ranking positions. Additionally, I
conducted an electronic student survey at each institution to take the opinions of many
more students into consideration. The goal of the survey was to involve a larger
percentage of the student population and to validate or question the answers reached in
the first focus groups. I surveyed twenty-seven students at BU and twenty-six students at
UM.
The participants of the study were selected based upon willingness to participate.
Significant efforts were made to select the predetermined ratio of undergraduate and
graduate students and higher education administrators. Due to the difficulty in obtaining
64
participants, the participant ratio did not match the desired ratio. The study populations
featured both genders and the ratio of female to male participants skewed towards the
institutions’ gender ratio. Efforts were made to secure equal representation from both
genders. Additionally, finding a study population that was diverse was important to the
study. Studying a homogenous population would not offer a thorough view of the student
culture. All aspects of the cultures needed to be considered and investigated in order to
provide a rigorous analysis of what was occurring. However, the diversity of the
individuals participating in the interviews relied upon the subjects who volunteer for the
study. For the survey, a strong effort was made to reach out to the entire population in
order to gather the perceptions of the largest number of students possible. At both
institutions, the diversity of the participants exceeded expectations. The number of
participants from ethnically diverse backgrounds was comparable to the number of
Caucasian participants. Additionally, students with varying beliefs on religion and sexual
orientation took part in the study. To attract and study the students and administrators
interested in participating, I reached out to board members, administrators, students, and
alumni. I communicated with personal contacts, visited the two campuses to recruit
participants, and asked participants to refer other students, administrators, or groups who
may have had an interest in participating in the study. While most of the interaction with
the participants took place in person, informal emails and phone calls were instrumental
in securing participants for the study. These types of communication played a key role in
the recruitment process. The study largely featured a simple random sample approach.
65
The sample size was a function of the population size and permits generalizations from
the sample to the population it represents (Patton, 2002).
Data Collection Procedures
Table 3.1: The Four Data Collection Phases of the Study
Phase Procedure Process
Phase 1 Administrator Interviews · With high-ranking institution
administrators
· One at each institution
Phase 2 Student Affairs
Administrator Interviews
· With student affairs administrators
· At least two at each institution
Phase 3 Student Focus
Groups/Individual Interviews
· At least five at each institution
· One to seven students
Phase 4 Online Student Survey · Administered via Qualtrics
· 25 students at each institution
After the interview participants were recruited and secured, I began the data
collection process. A mixed methods data collection approach was implemented.
Quantitative data and results were used to assist in the interpretation of qualitative
findings (Creswell, 2009). The data collection process took place in four phases. The first
phase of the data collection was qualitative. In order to determine if the two institutions
chosen for the study were viable options, individual interviews with knowledgeable
administrators was conducted at each institution. The administrators had extensive
knowledge of the institutions’ ideology and direction. The administrators were asked
directly about their institutions’ approach to the US News & World Report rankings.
Their responses confirmed that the two institutions chosen were appropriate for the study.
The second phase of the data collection process consisted of administrative interviews.
66
This phase took place once the institutions were selected. These interviews were
conducted in one-on-one settings at the two institutions. The interviews utilized an
interview protocol, which guided the conversation, encouraged candid discussions about
the topic, and incorporated the study’s research questions and the topic of academic
capitalism (see Appendix A).
The third phase of the data collection was also qualitative. After the completion of
the first two data collection phases, I conducted the student focus groups and individual
student interviews at each institution. Five focus group and individual interviews
featuring one to six undergraduate and graduate students took place at BU. Seven focus
group and individual interviews featuring one to seven undergraduate and graduate
students took place at UM. Each focus group and interview was conducted with a focus
group protocol (see Appendix B), but the meetings were unique and allowed for an open
exchange of beliefs and perceptions. This protocol served as a guide for discussion and
kept the groups from devolving into accounts of unrelated tangents. The protocol helped
the researcher focus on deriving particular information from the participants. The
questions that comprised the protocol incorporated the research question posed in the
study. Furthermore, the protocol integrated the study’s theoretical frameworks. The
questions in the protocol had the students touch upon their interaction with academic
capitalism.
The fourth phase of the data collection process was quantitative. After the focus
groups and individual interviews were conducted at both BU and UM, a survey (see
Appendix C) was administered to the students at both institutions. The results of the
67
focus groups guided the questions used in the online survey. After conducting the first set
of focus groups and interviews, I finalized and administered surveys at both BU and UM.
This allowed for more relevant and directed survey questions that assisted in clarifying
the responses of those who took part in the focus groups. After receiving permission to
distribute surveys to the populations of the institutions, I utilized contacts to circulate
electronic copies of the survey. The survey was created using the Qualtrics online survey
program. This site was also used in hosting the survey. Similar to the focus group
protocol, the survey incorporated both the study’s research questions and the theoretical
frameworks. The questions were carefully crafted with the student in mind. With the high
likelihood that a student would not devote much time to the survey, the bulk of the
survey’s questions were concise and allowed students to state their choices without
requiring written answers. Many of the questions on the survey were closed ended.
Although some questions asked the student to answer with a sentence or paragraph, most
of the survey’s questions required students to rank their experiences on a one-to-five
scale. After compiling the responses, I used the Qualtrics program and Microsoft Excel to
organize the responses of the students surveyed.
Each focus group and interview was tape recorded to allow for transcription. All
students and administrators that participated were assured their identities would remain
anonymous. To allow for a comprehensive exchange of their thoughts, the atmosphere of
the focus groups and interviews was informal. My goal as an interviewer was to create a
setting that encouraged the participants to speak freely about the topic. I attempted to
connect with the participants and maintain a friendly, relaxed environment while
68
remaining professional throughout the meetings. Although I guided the focus groups and
interviews with the assistance of protocols, the responses of the participants dominated
the focus groups and interviews. I allowed the individuals as much time as they needed to
elucidate their opinions on the subject matter. At the end of the meetings, the participants
were given full details on how I would handle their responses. After the meetings ended,
I followed up with each participant via email to allow for final thoughts and questions.
After speaking with the participants, I hired a company to transcribe the answers given at
the meetings to assist with the data analysis process. The data was organized in Microsoft
Word and Excel.
Focus Group Protocol and Survey Design
The focus group protocol was designed to extract relevant information from the
student participants. In order to gather the perspectives of students, the protocol
attempted to gather information in four main areas: students’ decisions to attend their
institutions; students’ opinions of pre-determined student cultural issues; students’
perception of the learning environments provided by the two institutions; and students’
experiences with administrators, faculty, and staff. The students’ decisions on how they
chose their institutions they attend revealed the different factors that students consider
when choosing to attend an university. These sets of questions indicated how the
institution recruited the student and whether the US News & World Report rankings
played a role in the recruitment process. The students’ descriptions of their student
culture experiences not only helped determine their assessments of their student cultures,
69
but also assisted in clarifying what factors influence the cultures. The questions that
assessed the learning experiences the institutions offer from the students’ perspectives
helped confirm whether students believe their institutions are providing environments
that are suitable for optimal learning. If not, the students were able to explain how they
are being shortchanged. Finally, the students’ interactions and experiences with the
institutions’ employees also revealed how the institution is either succeeding or failing in
the students’ opinions. The answers to these sets of questions also indicated where
students feel the interests of their institutions’ leadership lie.
After using the focus group protocol to research the issue, the answers from the
protocol were used to design an effective survey that was taken by a large number of
students at both BU and UM. The survey attempted to establish basic information about
the participants and the participants’ opinions of their experiences at the two institutions.
The results of the survey were used to compare whether the responses of the students in
the focus groups and individual interviews reflect more general opinions held by the
student populations at both BU and UM.
Data Analysis Procedures
The data analysis process began during the data collection phase. After
conducting each focus group and interview, I organized the information that the
participants presented. I downloaded all conversations during the interviews and focus
groups to a computer. After organizing the conversations and data, I followed up with the
participants and thanked them for their participation. I offered the participants the
70
opportunity to share additional information in a private setting in case they wanted to
expand on any thoughts they had during the interviews or focus groups. The interviews
were transcribed by an outside company and organized based upon the answers given. As
I began to notice trends and discover themes, I used computer programs such as
Microsoft Word which allowed me to organize the main points. These themes were coded
to allow for quicker access to the information. The data was grouped into the cultural
indicators: environment, mission, socialization, information, strategy, leadership, student
priorities, competition, diversity, student goals, and satisfaction.
After I received the desired amount of responses for the online surveys, I
imported the data from the Qualtrics website into Microsoft Excel. I used the software to
track the responses to determine the general feelings of the student populations at BU and
UM. After I analyzed the results of the survey, I identified the important themes and
trends I discovered. After these were determined, they were compared to the themes
established in the first set of focus groups and interviews. The results of the surveys, the
focus groups, and the interviews will be used to illuminate if and how the student culture
is impacted by the US News & World Report rankings.
Academic capitalism’s impact on student culture is the foundation for
understanding the US News & World Report rankings’ effect on student culture. In order
to fully analyze the results of the data collected in the four phases, academic capitalism’s
pull on the student populations and the administrators was an integral focus of the study.
Academic capitalism’s effects on student culture were used to inform the analysis.
Actions undertaken by the institutions that are normally associated with academic
71
capitalism was the focus of the data collection. To determine if these actions were taking
place at the two institutions and affecting the student cultures, students were asked to
discuss their institutions’ management approaches. With this information, the impact of
the two institutions’ approaches to management offered clarity as to the impact on
students from individual and group levels. The collective opinions assist in informing
how academic capitalism and the US News & World Report rankings impact student
culture. Academic capitalism’s level of influence at the study’s two institutions was an
important measure. If the rankings are a product of academic capitalism, investigating the
academic capitalism actions at both universities may be worthwhile in establishing the
extent to which the rankings influence higher education.
The information in table 3.2 is an essential aspect of the data analysis process. In
order to interpret how the two institutions are experiencing academic capitalism, the
students and administrators in the study were asked to provide their opinions on the
institutions’ actions and their experiences within the culture of the institution. Table 3.2
was used to interpret the participants’ responses and inform how much of an impact
academic capitalism has on the two institutions on a cultural level. From these
interpretations, conclusions can be formed in regards to the US News & World Report
rankings and student culture.
72
Table 3.2: How Academic Capitalism May Have Impacted the Two Institutions in the
Study
Academic Capitalism Symptoms How Action Will Be Determined
Attempts to save costs at the
expense of important educational
endeavors
Reduction of majors and/or courses; decreased
presence of departments that do not easily connect to
industry
Support for schools or programs
that have the potential to generate
revenue
Presence of specific schools or programs on campus,
in literature, or in school marketing initiatives;
distance education
Attempts to attract larger numbers
of students and revenue
Addition of courses, programs and majors; emphasis
on general education courses, summer programs, and
graduate programs
Connection between industry and
institution
Research the institution emphasizes its graduate
students pursue, if any; corporate presence on
campus; student enrollment in particular
majors/program
Emphasis on professional students The number of students who are professionals
looking to “move up” within profession; creation of
and focus on “cash cow” programs
Increased competition College rankings involvement; rising tuition costs;
school marketing; new facilities and student-friendly
enticements; types of students receiving scholarships
(high quality students desired)
Increased emphasis on research Types of instructors teaching courses; establishment
of research institutes within departments; teaching
quality
Corporate involvement in
education or connections to
industry
Placement programs or corporate scholarships
created with particular corporations; partnerships
between programs, schools, or institutions and
corporations
Increased student marketing School “brand”; recruiting literature; new facilities
and student amenities; appearance of campus;
technology; partnerships with corporations
Push for high quality, high SES
students
Types of students receiving scholarships
While analyzing the data, I was cognizant of different factors that might have
influenced my findings. In attempt to come to a desired conclusion, I may have been
73
tempted to cater my findings to meet a predetermined conclusion. One of the greatest
challenges while conducting this study was remaining open-minded. The results of the
interviews and surveys were not always clear. However, extreme caution was taken and
all possibilities were explored before arriving at a conclusion. The data was not be
oversimplified.
For this study, any topics or themes that were discussed by multiple students were
highlighted. If these were relevant to any of the indicators or conclusions in the study,
their significance to the study was noted. This importance elicits some form of
presentation of evidence in the next chapter. One or more direct quotes from the
participants will be included to exemplify the responses that were given to the questions
posed. In rare cases, an outlying opinion will be included to raise an interesting
counterpoint or show that some responses were not unanimous. While the evidence will
not give the complete story of what was said during the focus groups and interview
sessions, it will offer a general understanding of the types of responses that were shared.
Trustworthiness of the Data
The validity or trustworthiness of the data was a concern when conducting
research. However, the benign nature of the study for the research participants and the
multiple data collection phases produced trustworthy data. The topic of this study did not
require the participants to reveal intimate details that would place them in awkward
positions with their institutions or peers. The data collection phases also lend to
trustworthy data. The multiple phases verified many of the findings that were uncovered
74
in the study. The data was consistent in many cases and was corroborated by students and
administrators in multiple focus groups, interviews, and surveys.
Ethical Considerations
Asking students and administrators to give their opinions on the student cultures
at BU and UM presented minimal risk to the participants. The identities of the
participants have been kept confidential, which allowed the individuals to express their
viewpoints without fear of reprisal. However, particular ethical dilemmas may have
arisen for the participants when conducting both interviews and surveys. The ethical
consideration that causes the greatest concern is the possibility that the recounting of an
individual experience may lead to the discovery of a student’s identity. Because I asked
participants to describe the student culture, specific experiences were shared by the
individuals. The retelling of these experiences may assist in the identification of an
individual by those who read the study. The potential of being identified as a participant
in the study might cause anxiety and fear in the participants. Despite this possibility, the
potential benefits from the study justify the need to move forward with the research.
Limitations
Although the study was as thorough and complete as possible, limitations were
present. First and foremost, the two institutions were not identical. Although extensive
research was conducted and great efforts were made to locate two institutions with as
many similar characteristics as possible, two institutions will never be exactly the same.
75
Differing histories, missions, leadership, and emphases are some of the many factors that
will not allow for exact replication. Because the two institutions in the study are not
identical, the findings may be attributed to other factors such as attracting different types
of students or impacted by their regional culture, for example. Similarly, another major
limitation of the study was the various unspoken factors that could be affecting the
study’s results. In particular, the missions and histories of the two institutions may be
different enough to influence the results of the study. Not all findings can definitively be
traced to academic capitalism, as they may be attributed to these differences. The
differences were not visible in the findings. Additionally, these differences may result in
attracting certain types of students to the institutions. Different types of students are
drawn to particular institutions. The results of the study are unable to account for this
phenomenon. However, the actions and needs of students can possibly be a factor of this.
Another limitation of the study was the small sample size of the quantitative aspects of
the data collection. The goal of the study was to recruit seventy-five students from each
of the two institutions. Only fifty-three total students completed the online surveys at
both universities. Significant efforts were put towards enticing students to complete the
online survey. Multiple approaches were taken to increase the participants, including the
offering of gift cards, but the submitted surveys did not increase significantly. Active
recruitment took place for more than a month at both universities, Another limitation was
the lack of observations. While not part of the research design, observations may have
added another dimension to the research findings. Observations may have offered more
76
insight on decision-making processes, student learning, and the perceptions of the
students at the two universities.
A final limitation relates to three areas that were not explored in more detail in the
study. Transfer students are an important element in the student population. In particular,
transfer students present an interesting loophole for institutions focused on the US News
& World Report rankings. Many institutions can improve diversity numbers by
encouraging students with lower test scores to transfer. This will allow institutions to
maintain higher test score averages and lower acceptance rates to appear more
prestigious. While the study included multiple students who transferred, the issue was not
explored in further detail. The second area that was not explored in the study was a
connection that one of the institutions in the study had to an online venture. BU operates
a mainly online university designed to compete with for-profit institutions. While this
branch university is non-profit, it is operated like a for-profit university. Because
participants did not mention this university in the study, it was not explored. However,
investigating this university may have yielded more information about the strategy and
priorities of BU’s administration. A final area that was not considered in the study was
the culture of the communities surrounding the two institutions. Even though both
universities are located in the suburban Los Angeles-area, they are located in vastly
different communities. The community surrounding BU is an affluent middle-to-upper
class residential area. In contrast, the community surrounding UM is less wealthy, with
residents more likely to feature middle-class families. The cities surrounding the
77
university also feature lower-to-middle class families. The surrounding communities may
also have an impact on the operations of the institutions and the behaviors of the students.
78
CHAPTER FOUR: PRESENTATION OF FINDINGS
Introduction
The purpose of this study is to determine whether the US News & World Report
college rankings have an impact on the student culture and students’ perceptions of the
institutional cultures at four-year, private higher education institutions. This mixed
methods study views the rankings through the framework of academic capitalism in order
to better comprehend how and why the culture is affected. In particular, this study utilizes
a case study approach that compares and contrasts two institutions with similar
characteristics but different approaches to the US News & World Report rankings. The
focus of this chapter will be to describe in detail the institutional and student cultures at
the two participating institutions, exhibit whether key academic capitalism indicators are
present at each institution, and exemplify the impact that academic capitalism and the US
News & World Report rankings have on the institutions’ cultures, particularly the student
culture and institutional culture as perceived by students. Heavy emphasis will be placed
on evaluating the student learning and social environments. This chapter will be guided
by the following research question:
Does academic capitalism, as represented by the US News & World Report
college rankings, shape student culture? And if so, in what ways are the rankings
producing changes in the student culture at two four-year higher education institutions?
The research conducted at both Beach University (BU) and the University of the
Mountains (UM) will be presented in this chapter. The first part of the chapter will
present the cultural findings at the two institutions. The student culture and students’
79
perceptions of institutional culture, as determined by the interviews with students and
administrators and surveys of students, will be presented for each institution. The second
section of the chapter will examine the ten symptoms of academic capitalism from
chapter three in further detail. The symptoms will be viewed within the context of each of
the two participating institutions.
Student Culture and Students’ Perceptions of Institutional Culture
The goal of this study is to assess the level of impact the US News & World
Report college rankings, as measured through the framework of academic capitalism, has
on the student cultures of two private four-year institutions. Due to the vagueness of what
exactly constitutes student culture, measuring student culture can be difficult. However,
certain indicators can be used to gain a better understanding of the concept. For this
study, the student culture indicators will include values such as student priorities,
competition, diversity, student goals, and satisfaction with the university. These
indicators, when coupled with the students’ perceptions of the overall institutional
culture, will be the basis for which the level of impact the US News & World Report
college rankings is measured at BU and UM.
The culture of an institution will heavily shape the subcultures of the institution’s
various constituents. To gain a better understanding of the student culture, defining the
institutional culture and how the students participate in it can be beneficial. In order to
better understand the students’ role within the culture, the students’ perceptions of the
institutional culture will be presented. While the framework was created for analyzing
80
institutional culture, Tierney’s (1988) suggestion that subcultures can be studied with this
framework makes the framework’s use in analyzing the student culture appropriate.
Tierney’s (1988) framework for institutional culture was utilized to provide six tangible
measures of culture: Environment, mission, socialization, information, strategy, and
leadership (Table 4.1). These six measures may yield integral information about both the
institutional and student cultures at BU and UM. The environment is where the student
culture takes place and refers to the spaces and physical areas of campus. The mission of
the institution is a key component of culture, as it has the ability to shape the direction of
the institution. The major elements of the mission will be analyzed, including the
students’ learning experience and the composition of the faculty. These two areas will be
explored within the mission sections of both BU and UM due to the universities’
emphasis on learning and education in the mission statements of the two universities. The
socialization that takes place at the institutions will also be investigated. Socialization is a
key aspect of the institutional culture. Socialization refers to how new members become
socialized within the culture and what needs to take place for success within the
institution will be deciphered (Tierney, 1988). This will be determined by looking at the
students’ roles and experiences on campus. Some examples of the socialization factors
that will be examined include the balance between academics and social life, the level of
student organization involvement, and the characteristics of the student population. Who
controls the information and how this information is disseminated is another important
aspect of culture. The methods that the administration utilizes to communicate with
students will be explored. The strategy the institution’s administrators adopt is a valuable
81
means of defining culture. The strategy of the institution will be further explored by
analyzing the types of decisions and actions being undertaken by administration. Actions
like the institutional approach to managing the institutions, the US News & World Report
college rankings, fundraising, and alumni connections will be beneficial in analyzing the
strategy. Finally, the leadership of the institution is an important aspect of the culture.
The students’ perceptions of the administration and staff will be used to analyze this
element of the culture. From these perceptions, the administration and staff’s roles with
regards to the students and the level of involvement leadership has in student-related
matters may be clarified.
Analyzing the organizational culture through the perceptions of the students on
campus can be useful in not only describing the overall institutional culture of the two
universities, but it may also assist in defining the student culture. The institutional culture
shapes the student culture. Additionally, the students’ perceptions of the overall culture
may give insight into the student culture as well. In addition to Tierney’s framework,
various student culture indicators will be explored. In particular, the student culture
indicators will focus on the values of the student population. The student culture is
comprised of the priorities, values, and norms of the campus. To better understand the
culture, key values will be identified and analyzed. These values will also help pinpoint
priorities and norms of the student culture. The five indicators of student values in this
study include student priorities, competition, diversity, student goals, and satisfaction
(Table 4.2). The indicators will provide measurable elements of student culture.
82
For both institutions, I will present a general overview of key institutional components.
Since the institutional culture has a profound role in shaping and defining the student
culture, the institutional culture will be presented first. Next, I will explore the student
culture indicators that will help define the student culture.
Table 4.1: The Six Institutional Culture Indicators and Examples Found in the Study
Institution Cultural Indicators (Tierney, 1988) Examples (Students’ Perceptions)
Environment Facilities; classrooms; educational
technology; landscape
Mission Mission statement of the universities;
learning experience expressed as values
and norms; faculty priorities
Socialization Academic vs. social balance; student
extracurricular involvement; residential
vs. commuter institution
Information Leadership’s approach to distribution of
information to students
Strategy Strategies institutions utilize to manage
university; approach to the US News &
World Report college rankings;
fundraising initiatives; alumni’s role on
campus
Leadership Administration and staff approach to
change and management at institution;
administration concerns; level of
involvement with students
83
Table 4.2: The Five Student Culture Indicators and Examples Found in the Study
Student Culture Indicators (Values) Examples
Student Priorities The various causes and standards of
students at the institutions
Competition Academic competition in classroom;
student organization competition;
institutional competition
Diversity Students’ perception of ethnic diversity
Student Goals The goals students have during and after
graduating from the institution
Satisfaction The overall enjoyment of the experience
students have at the university both inside
and outside of the classroom
Note: A summary of all of the data on culture is provided at the end of the section on
page 153 (Table 4.3)
Beach University
General Overview
Beach University (BU) is a private, independent university located in a suburban
city outside of Los Angeles, California. The medium size, primarily residential institution
is classified as a more selective master’s college or university by the Carnegie
Foundation. The majority of the institution is comprised of undergraduate students.
Approximately 4,300 undergraduate students and 1,700 graduate students are currently
enrolled at the institution. The undergraduate population largely consists of full-time,
four-year students. The institution features a higher number of undergraduate transfer
students. Sixty-one percent of the entire BU student population is from California. Thirty-
seven percent of students live on campus. A large percentage of the student population
receives some form of financial aid, with over eighty-five percent of the undergraduate
students either receiving need-based financial aid, or need-based scholarship or grant
funding. This percentage is noteworthy due to the fact that the Vice Chancellor stated in
84
an interview that as many as thirty percent of students do not qualify for financial aid. BU
is offering scholarship and grant money to attract students who come from wealthier
backgrounds. Many students taking part in the study received the strongest financial aid
package from BU, which ultimately influenced the students’ decisions to attend the
institution over others. Additionally, the online survey respondents were heavily
influenced to attend BU based upon the financial package they received from the
university. Eighty-three percent of the respondents either agreed or strongly agreed that
the scholarship or financial aid money they received from BU influenced their decision to
attend.
Specific schools and programs heavily dominate the academic studies of the
undergraduate student population. In particular, the business and film schools at BU
receive the most attention from its students. Almost fifty percent of the entire
undergraduate population earns degrees in these two schools. Around 1,300
undergraduate students are enrolled in business school. Approximately twenty-one
percent of BU’s undergraduate students are earning business administration and
management degrees. Additionally, the school’s features a graduate population of
approximately 260 students. The institution’s film school has a high percentage of the
student population, as almost 1,100 undergraduate students are affiliated with the school.
Another 260 graduate film students are earning advanced degrees. The film school also
has the second most popular major with nine percent of students earning degrees in
cinematography and film/video production. Both the business and film schools feature
new and innovative buildings that are attracting students to the institution. The
85
university’s focus on these two major schools is evident in the perceptions of the student
populations on campus. Most of the students who participated in the focus groups
mentioned business and film as the two most dominating academic forces on campus
from academic, economic, and social perspectives. Other academic majors that the
students mentioned as being popular on campus included performing arts programs like
music and theater. The online respondents reflected the dominance of business and film,
as sixty-seven percent represented these two majors.
Student Perceptions of Institutional Culture
The research findings for student culture will be broken into two sections. The
first section will present the institutional culture based upon the perceptions of the student
participants in the study. Administrators’ views on these six indicators will also be
presented when applicable to contrast the institutional viewpoint against the students’
perceptions. The six indicators represent the elements that comprise Tierney’s (1988)
framework to analyze institutional culture: Environment, mission, socialization,
information, strategy, and leadership.
Environment
BU’s campus is situated in a small, quiet residential neighborhood. The campus
blends with the surrounding community, as it is bordered by family homes and small
businesses. The area is slow-paced with few large, busy roads bordering the campus. The
surrounding neighborhood is comprised of antique shops, cafes, restaurants and bars,
86
which attract a large population outside of the university. Many of the buildings in the
area are historic and the city has an old-fashioned feel to it. The neighborhood
surrounding the campus features extensive activity on evenings and weekends, unlike the
campus. The majority of activity that takes place at BU occurs during the morning and
afternoon hours on weekdays.
BU is a school that is in transition. Both administration and students speak of the
growth the institution is currently undergoing. As the institution’s leadership strategizes a
move from a regional master’s-granting university to a national research university, the
institution’s environment has and will continue to be changed dramatically. Because BU
is an institution that is concerned with its standing within the US News & World Report
rankings, administrators are paying close attention to rankings indicators. One of the
more important indicators to the institution’s administration is the student-to-faculty
ratio. According to the Vice Chancellor of Student Affairs, the institution’s leadership
wants to offer more classes with fewer than twenty students. In order to reach this goal,
more respected, full-time faculty and more space is required. Both administrators and
students admit the current campus can no longer handle the growth of the institution. The
institution’s newest facility, the film school building, is not located directly on campus
and is situated multiple blocks away from the institution’s other buildings. With the lack
of physical space on campus, new projects will require BU to purchase land in the area
surrounding the campus to accommodate them. To address this, the university’s
leadership is purchasing residential property in the adjacent neighborhoods to allow for
the expansion. The Vice Chancellor of Student Affairs mentioned that multiple multi-
87
million dollar projects are in progress or are planned. Some of these projects include a
performing arts center, a science center, additions to the already new film school, two
more film studios, an addition to the student union, and two residence halls to
accommodate the influx of students enrolling at BU.
The quality of the facilities at the university appears to vary based upon the
programs and schools. Many of the students reported that the film and business schools
have state-of-the-art facilities that allow for enhanced learning experiences. Projectors,
white boards, and even smart boards can be found within these schools. The film school
also has a large cache of expensive equipment for the students to utilize. However, the
students who do not major in either business or film complained of substandard facilities
and equipment. Multiple students mentioned that they believe the film and business
schools receive the bulk of the institution’s funding. The majority of students not in the
film or business schools complained about a lack of projectors and computers. One
particular student in the science department revealed his experiences with rusted
equipment and a lack of elements with which to conduct necessary experiments. In
speaking with graduated students, he recounted that the former students were shocked
upon hearing the state of the resources and told the student that this was not typical
during their experiences. Additionally, one photography student complained about the
inferior facilities that disrupt her ability to complete photographic assignments. The
frustrated student claimed, “We don’t even have a color processing lab anymore. The
black-and-white lab is underneath the theater that is used for dance and it shakes when
you are trying to use it” (Student, personal communication, November 17, 2010). The
88
two major complaints in relation to substandard facilities could be addressed if the new
science and arts centers that are planned will be used for student purposes and not just
faculty research. However, neither administrators nor students were able to clarify which
programs would benefit from the new centers.
Overall, the students appear to be happy with the learning environment at BU.
Most students who participated in the focus groups and interviews indicated they were
content with their social and educational environments at BU. In addition to being
examined on a qualitative level, the learning environment was explored on a quantitative
level. When asked for their opinions, sixty-eight percent of the online survey participants
strongly agreed that BU provides students with a positive learning environment. The
remaining thirty-two percent agree that the learning environment is positive. An
additional seventy-two percent either agreed or strongly agreed that the institution spends
heavily on expenses that enhance the classroom experience.
The approach to the environment reflects that of an institution driven by academic
capitalism. The desire to build newer and more advanced facilities with state-of-the-art
technology indicates a desire to attract students and faculty. The plans for program
growth, which necessitates the new construction projects, also are indicative of an
institution that is heavily engaged in academic capitalism. The allocation of funding to
the revenue-generating schools also suggests that the institution is highly capitalistic.
89
Mission
The mission statement is an important proclamation that announces the key goals
and values of the institution. The mission of BU is as follows: “To provide personalized
education of distinction that leads to inquiring, ethical and productive lives as global
citizens.” Because of the mission’s focus on the education of students, understanding the
educational aspects of the university can assist in describing the culture at BU. The
students’ perceptions of educational elements like institutional teaching emphasis, faculty
and their roles on campus, learning philosophies, and educational support can help define
both institutional and student culture.
In speaking with both administrators and students, quality teaching appears to be
a major emphasis of the university. BU administrators have focused on quickly
advancing academic progress at the university. Their goals are to turn the institution into
a serious academic force that will be able to move from a regional university to a national
research power and dramatically rise on the US News & World Report rankings list.
Students who participated in the study noticed the staff and administration’s emphasis on
academics, as well. Those students in the focus groups indicated a belief that
administration and faculty both stress the value of teaching at BU. The online
respondents also suggested this was the case. Ninety-six percent of the students either
strongly agreed or agreed that teaching is highly valued by BU’s staff. Eighty-four
percent of those same students either strongly agreed or agreed that the faculty highly
value teaching.
90
Both administration and students praised the faculty of BU. While a small number
of students were quick to mention a bad experience with one or two faculty members
during their time at the university, all of the students had positive reviews of their faculty
as a whole. Some of the students had little to say beyond, “I love my professors.”
Variation of this sentiment was repeated on numerous occasions. However, some of the
students were able to pinpoint what exactly they enjoyed about their faculty. One student
claimed, “The instructors focus on the students, and the students are learning” (Student,
personal communication, November 6, 2010). Another student indicates that she carries
on personalized relationships with her faculty members. “I Skype, I go out to eat, and I
talk about my personal life with my professors” (Student, personal communication,
November 15, 2010). The personal relationships that some of these students carry out
with their faculty members suggests that the faculty may also serving as advisors and
mentors to the students. One student claimed, “[The faculty] push scholarships,
internships, and they are thinking about us” (Student, personal communication,
November 15, 2010). This viewpoint was echoed by another student, who said, “I feel
more comfortable going to my professors if I need help with anything, and not just school
[matters]” (Student, personal communication, November 15, 2010). The faculty at BU
appears to be providing educational experiences both inside and outside of the classroom.
The interaction the students have with their faculty members appears to be
overwhelmingly positive.
One of the goals of BU’s administration, according to the Vice Chancellor of
Student Affairs, is to increase the presence of full-time faculty at the institution. The
91
participants of the study suggest that the school has to make significant progress in order
to achieve this goal. Almost every student who participated in one of the focus groups
was taught by at least one adjunct faculty member. The remaining students were unsure if
they had been taught by this type of faculty member. The students suggested that the
language arts, communications, and film departments all feature a large adjunct
population. Some of the students recognized the value that adjunct faculty members may
be able to bring to the classroom. One student enjoyed the practical skills her faculty
member could discuss inside the classroom. “I have an adjunct professor but he is out
there filming and shooting documentaries” (Student, personal communication, November
15, 2010). While most students reported positive experiences with the adjunct faculty
members, others were less than pleased with the teaching performance. A disgruntled
student claimed, “I had one adjunct professor in French, who was the worst teacher I ever
had at BU” (Student, personal communication, November 10, 2010).
The mission of BU seems to be conveyed to the students, as multiple students
were able to reference the mission unprompted during the focus groups. Based upon the
responses of the participants, the school seems to carry out its mission of a personalized
education that produces well-rounded, global citizens. The small class sizes and the
opportunities to interact with faculty indicate that the students have access to a
personalized education experience. A variety of activities both academic and social
signify the institution’s devotion to a well-rounded student. BU also appears to be
emphasizing the global citizen initiative to a great extent. A student who works as a
campus tour guide stated, “Our mission statement is to become global citizens, and that is
92
what the university is trying to push” (Student, personal communication, November 17,
2010). The institution has developed and promoted its study abroad program to both
prospective and current students. This program was what convinced two of the
participants to attend the university. The students indicated that BU offers exciting
opportunities for student development through global experiences. For those students
who are unable to pursue an international experience, the university is attempting to
increase its international student population. Although the international student
population comprises a very small percentage of the overall student population at less
than four percent, a student at BU sees progress being made. “BU focuses a lot on
international students coming here and making the campus more diverse” (Student,
personal communication, November 15, 2010). The mission statement of BU appears to
be a priority to the administration and faculty of the institution. This devotion to the
mission statement is evident in the responses by the participants.
A major element within BU’s mission statement is a personalized education. Both
the administration and student participants all mentioned the class sizes as a major benefit
of attending BU. The current student-to-faculty ratio is fifteen-to-one, a figure cited by
both students and administrators. When describing the learning experience at BU, the
majority of students positively mentioned the class sizes. The student participants cited
attending classes ranging from twelve to over seventy students, with around thirty-five
students as the average number of students per class. The smaller classes helps the
students connect more with their faculty. Many of the students believe that the smaller
93
class sizes also improve the quality of their education, which is what the administrators at
BU believe, as well.
Overall, the students and the administrators believe the school offers a great
academic experience that honors its mission. The institution’s administration devotes
ample resources to encourage students to become well-rounded, global-minded citizens.
The institution provides support both inside and outside of the classroom that utilizes the
various resources the institution offers.
In terms of the mission, the desire to increase the reputation of the institution
academically, the abundance of adjunct faculty members, and the focus placed on the
institution’s performance in categories measured by the US News & World Report
rankings are indications of the institution’s emphasis on academic capitalism. Academic
capitalism appears to guide many of the decisions of the institution.
Socialization
The socialization patterns of the students at an institution will assist in describing
both the institutional and student culture. Important socialization elements such as the
academic and social life balance, the student body’s background, and the organizations in
which the students are involved were all addressed by the study’s participants.
A significant finding from the focus groups is the fact that students believe a balance
exists between the social and academic aspects of the campus. The majority of the
students in the study felt that both the academic and social elements of the campus were
equally important. One of the students stated, “There is a good balance between academic
94
and social activities” (Student, personal communication, November 15, 2010). This
sentiment was corroborated by the survey, where ninety-two percent of the participants
either strongly agreed or agreed that the university helps students find a balance between
academic and social life. While most of the students in the focus group felt a balance
existed, some of the students believed that the institution is more geared either towards
social or academic life. The Assistant Vice Chancellor thought that students are more
focused on academics. She said, “I think we have more students coming [to BU] who
care a lot more about their academics than [students in the past]” (Davis, personal
communication, October 21, 2010). The administration is striving to create a thriving and
prestigious academic institution, so the emphasis on academics is not surprising. One of
the students who believed academics tend to be a larger emphasis for students at the
university said, “Beach [administrators have] been trying to focus more on getting social
events to happen. The Greek organizations try to put some stuff on, but mostly there are
just academic events going on” (Student, personal communication, November 17, 2010).
Those students who believed that academics were the dominating force on campus were
mainly graduate students or not involved in the more popular student organizations. The
majority of non-academic student socialization appears to take place off-campus at BU.
This may be explained by two key factors: a large number of students live off-campus
and the majority of students are originally from Southern California. BU is not a
residential institution, as only thirty-seven percent of undergraduates live on campus. A
student who felt the BU campus lacked social events mentioned, “The neighborhood
around [BU’s campus] is actually really alive [with activity]. A lot of kids have houses
95
that are really close” (Student, personal communication, November 10, 2010).
Additionally, more than sixty percent of the population is originally from the Southern
California area. While the Vice Chancellor notes that this number has dropped drastically
in recent years, it does not negate the fact that some students still view BU as a commuter
school. One of the students who believed BU was a commuter school said, “A lot of
people go home on the weekends. That is why it is so quiet” (Student, personal
communication, November 6). However, administration is trying to change this by
building new dorms and offering more social events to the campus. Administration is
financially backing more social events like dances and mixers, and is even investigating
building a bar on campus. These actions are designed to counter the academic
programming that dominates campus life.
The students in the study who believed the social environment is more dominant
on campus were directly involved with the overpowering Greek system or the two largest
schools on campus, business and film. Even though the Greek system is comprised of
only thirty percent of the student population at BU, it is clearly the strongest social force
on campus. Both Greek and non-Greek students all attest to the power that the fraternities
and sororities have on campus. “Greek is a small and very vocal minority,” one student
lamented. “They dominate” (Student, personal communication, November 17, 2010).
Another student made a case for joining a Greek organization at BU, claiming, “We’re in
[a quiet city]. There are very few students, and if you are not in Greek life, things are a
little slow” (Student, personal communication, November 17, 2010). Despite the modest
undergraduate student population, fourteen different Greek chapters can be found at BU.
96
Although Greek life seems to be a major emphasis of the social life of the
institution, most of the Greek students are also involved in a variety of other
organizations. One of the BU students noted, “It tends to be the same people that are
involved. If you are with one club, you are involved with twenty clubs” (Student,
personal communication, November 10, 2010). Involvement in the Greek system at BU
appears to encourage involvement in other areas on campus. Overall, the Greek system
appears to shape the social life on campus.
The socialization components of the university do not appear to be heavily
influenced by academic capitalism. Although the results of the study indicate that a
balance between academics and social life largely exists at BU, the fact that academics
seemed to be a larger focus to some of the students suggests a possible link to academic
capitalism. This potential link will be explored in more depth.
Information
One of the more successful administration initiatives at BU is the approach that
leadership takes in distributing information to the students. In speaking with the Vice
Chancellor and Assistant Vice Chancellor of Student Affairs, a priority of the leadership
is to create an open dialogue with the students. These two individuals deeply care about
the student experience and want to take the initiative to improve it however possible.
Multiple students who participated in the study acknowledged this effort, praising the
administration’s communication and transparency. The students that mentioned their
satisfaction with the university’s communication initiatives specifically cited the weekly
97
newsletters from the Student Affairs Office, the Twitter account the Vice Chancellor
maintains, and the personal interaction that takes place between the students and the
leadership. A student who was pleased with the level of communication from the Vice
Chancellor said, “He is accessible at any time, whether via Twitter or in person or email.
He sends out weekly emails to students so I feel very connected to him” (Student,
personal communication, November 15, 2010). Another student also expressed her
satisfaction with the administration and their approach to communication. “The faculty
and staff are active [in their desire to assist students] and are really easy to communicate
with” (Student, personal communication, November 17, 2010). Some students even
reported having the institution’s president join them on campus tours with prospective
students. The students seem to feel a connection to the leaders in the school and appear to
be comfortable engaging the administration when they have questions or concerns. The
information distribution system does not suggest a strong tie to academic capitalism.
While the institution’s leadership possesses the important information, they are willing to
share this with the student population.
Strategy
Many of the strategies that BU employs are done in the best interest of the
institution’s financial standing. BU has embraced academic capitalism on multiple levels.
The administration’s approach to managing the institution indicates that BU will continue
its capitalistic strategy as the institution grows. Like many institutions, BU follows the
98
US News & World Report rankings with great interest. The Vice Chancellor of Student
Affairs confirmed his institution’s strong interest in the publications rankings, stating:
There is no doubt about it that we have as an institution adopted [the US News & World
Report rankings] as a valid measure of how we are perceived as an institution… We
invested significant time and resources to understand how the rankings are developed –
the individual factors that influence those rankings and the weights that the different
factors have in determining those rankings. (Smith, personal communication, September
10, 2010).
The Assistant Vice Chancellor of Student Affairs has confirmed this philosophy,
as well. She noted that, “Whenever the [US News & World Report] rankings come out,
there is a big announcement from the president’s office because we continue to progress.
He looks very closely at [the rankings]. It is a big deal” (Davis, personal communication,
October 21, 2010). Even some of the students are aware of the institution’s desire to
focus on the rankings. A student who participated in a focus group claimed, “I think their
goal is to put BU on the map. I feel like they are always striving to get national
rankings… They do make certain decisions that are weird based off of the rankings”
(Student, personal communication, November 10, 2010). The Vice Chancellor of Student
Affairs confirmed the institution’s focus on specific areas that would increase its standing
within the US News & World Report rankings.
We are focusing on the rankings and the individual factors that we would need to
invest and improve in to go up in the rankings... more faculty, smaller classes, those types
of things. We have to make sure that people understand that it's not the rankings
99
themselves so much as that we have essentially conceded that the mechanisms they rank
are academically valid and so we want to improve in those areas (Smith, personal
communication, September 10, 2010).
He was quick to point out that the indicators measured by the rankings are good
investments that academics would not contest. The US News & World Report rankings
appear to significantly shape the direction of the institution.
Additionally, the rankings seem to be driving the administration’s desire to
change and increase the institution’s academic offerings. Many of BU’s strategic
decisions are a direct result of approaches the school is taking in organizing and
strategizing its move from a regional, master’s-granting university to a national
university. The school is looking to expand both academically and physically. The
institution has recruited faculty from various institutions to help build new programs at
BU that are ready to conduct research. With the development of new programs, the
capacity to accommodate the new faculty, schools, and departments is mandatory. The
institution is purchasing as much land as possible around the university in an attempt to
build new facilities for their programs. The students seem to be are aware of the
institution’s intentions. Many of the students mentioned the expansion as the institution’s
main priority. When asked to name the goals of the university, one student said, “I think
BU’s number one goal, as it has been for awhile, is to really expand” (Student, personal
communication, November 10, 2010). Another student pointed to the institution’s
research aspirations. “BU is trying to do more research. They want to become a research-
based university” (Student, personal communication, November 6, 2010). The desire to
100
move from a master’s-granting university to a national university is a result of the
rankings. According to the Vice Chancellor, BU leaders want the institution to be
featured in the more prominent of the two classifications.
Another institutional strategy that BU appears to undertake is recruiting,
marketing, and bolstering the institution’s most successful programs and schools. In
particular, the business and film schools seem to receive the most attention from the
administration. The Vice Chancellor confirmed this when he said, “If we have a
particular program that wins awards or is ranked a certain place, then we highlight that”
(Smith, personal communication, September 10, 2010). While the administrators who
participated in the study indicated that the school does not believe preferential treatment
is given to specific programs, the student participants did not agree. A significant number
of the students claimed that the institution was devoting more money and better facilities
to the two most popular academic units on campus. This was evident to many students
even before they arrived on campus. A student from the film school who works in the
admissions office as a student worker is aware of the institution’s preferences from both
personal and work experiences. “The school puts more emphasis on trying to recruit
people to the film and business schools” (Student, personal communication, November
15, 2010). While more money is being directed to these two schools, an art student has
suffered the consequences. She expressed her disappointment, stating, “It’s a competition
with other schools [at BU], but they are constantly pushing money into the film school to
always keep it state-of-the-art… They did a lot of cutbacks in the art program” (Student,
personal communication, November 17, 2010). The survey responses also suggested that
101
some schools are given preferential treatment. Only forty-four percent of the respondents
indicated that they believe that BU treats all individual schools within the university
equally. Additionally, only forty-eight percent agreed that all individual departments are
treated equally by BU. The inequity in funding may be attributed to the fact that BU is
heavily competitive with other institutions. Many of the students felt that BU compared
itself to larger, more prestigious schools with frequency. Even the most ardent BU
supporters felt that the institutions that administrators identified as competitors were
more affluent and established universities. In order to compete with more prestigious
schools’ business and film programs, the institution will likely need to spend more and
focus greater attention on improvements.
Fundraising appears to be another important strategy BU implements. Although
current students are not explicitly asked to donate, many of the students in the study
reported that the school is concerned with raising money. This strategy makes sense since
the institution is trying to grow its endowment and attract talented students with
appealing scholarships and grants. Some of the fundraising initiatives the students in the
study highlighted included a dinner theater event held on campus, homecoming events,
and an alumni calling program where current students call alumni to ask for donations.
Eighty-three percent of the students surveyed either strongly agreed or agreed that the
university places great value on fundraising. Additionally, fifty-four percent of
respondents strongly agreed that BU aggressively targets its alumni for fundraising
purposes. All but one of the remaining participants remained neutral when asked if
alumni were targeted for fundraising, which suggests the students may be unaware of
102
whether this was taking place. Many students in the focus groups mentioned that the
alumni are a key factor in the donations that BU receives. One student said, “Alumni play
a big part in how much money Beach has” (Student, personal communication, November
6, 2010). The large number of students in the survey who were unaware of alumni
targeting follows a trend at BU. Most of the students in the study did not feel that alumni
presence was strong on campus. One student who believed the institution’s connection to
alumni was lacking said, “Alumni relations is there, but weaker than I would like to see”
(Student, personal communication, November 17, 2010). Another student also claimed,
“I know there are phone calls made to alumni to ask to donate, and there is alumni
weekend, and alumni relations, but I do not think it is anything over the top” (Student,
personal communication, November 17, 2010). The administrators in the study did not
mention the alumni during their interviews, which hints at a reduced alumni role on
campus.
Another strategy that drives the institution is more student-centered, which is a
counter to the largely capitalistic strategies previously outlined. Based upon the
interviews with administrators and students, student persistence and success seem to be
priorities for the administration at BU. The Vice Chancellor takes an active role in
working with students and plays a part in both student persistence and success. “I think
that the notion of institutional commitment is an important part of student retention”
(Smith, personal communication, September 10, 2010). The administration makes active
attempts to connect with students on personal levels and encourages students to
communicate their concerns to administration. Many students cite this availability as a
103
major reason for their satisfaction with the institution. Additionally, several students
referred to the success of an advising program for freshmen students. The program
mandates that new students meet with a life advisor to assist in integrating the students to
BU. One of the students who had a positive experience with this program stated, “You
meet with a coach every week, and [she] gives you advice not just on academics, but
every other aspect at Beach” (Student, personal communication, November 15, 2010).
This program is a positive persistence initiative that can enhance the student experience.
Also, the administration’s focus on student satisfaction appears to be an effective
strategy. The administration wants to offer both academic and social benefits to its
students. The Vice Chancellor stated the Office of Student Affairs has a strategy to
complete this objective. “We first try to develop supportive communities of students that
find each other and then we try to facilitate that growth and development in their
intellectual and academic development” (Smith, personal communication, September 10,
2010). Most students believe that BU is attempting to improve both aspects for its
students. The institution brings impressive speakers and figures to campus, holds
academic events that highlight the various schools at BU, and is actively trying to recruit
more students to campus for social events.
The various strategies adopted by BU suggest that the institution is highly
engaged in academic capitalism. Most of the initiatives and approaches adopted by
administrators appear to have some form of connection to capitalism. The US News &
World Report rankings play a significant role in driving the decisions of the university.
The student marketing and fundraising are other initiatives that point to capitalistic
104
behavior by the administration. Most of the institution’s strategies are in some way
connected to academic capitalism.
Leadership
The leadership at BU appears to be a strong and positive influence on the
institutional and student culture. The responses of the participants indicate that the
students are impressed with the level of attention and support they receive from the
institution’s leaders and staff members. Many of the key leadership figures have built
rapports with the students. Some of the students were impressed that high-ranking
officials like the President and Vice Chancellor of Student Affairs were able to remember
the names and faces of a large portion of the student population at BU. The
administration seems to work closely with the student population. Many of the students
stated the leadership responds to student concerns quickly and gives the students the
impression that administration is willing to work together with the students to resolve any
major issues. Not only do the students feel that leadership is working with students, but
they also feel that they are working for the students. A student who is heavily involved on
campus claimed, “I’m happy with the way [leadership does] things because they work
with the student body. When [the students] do bring something to [leadership’s] attention
and voice our opinions, then I feel changes do get made” (Student, personal
communication, November 10, 2010). The students who completed the survey validated
this reasoning, with almost ninety percent indicating that they either agreed or strongly
agreed that the staff makes decision with the students’ best interests in mind. The
105
sentiment of the participants suggests an overwhelmingly positive experience for the
students at BU. The administration had a particularly positive impact on one student, who
said, “[The administration] is really great. When I need someone to help me, show me,
encourage me, whatever it is, they are there” (Student, personal communication,
November 17, 2010). The administration as a whole, from its most prominent leaders to
behind-the-scenes individuals, seems to be a positive force on campus looking to assist
the student population. The students and the institution’s leadership team appear to
interact often and work well together. The perceptions of leadership do not suggest
leadership and staff’s adoption of capitalistic approaches to the student population. The
institution’s leadership appears to make strong efforts to connect to the individual
students who comprise the institution.
Student Culture
The establishment of the institutional culture indicators and the students’
perceptions of these indicators can help describe the student culture at BU. To gain a
more comprehensive understanding of the student culture, the values of the student
population will be explored. Understanding the values of the student population is one of
the most useful ways to gain insight into the student culture at an institution. Kuh &
Whitt (1988) list values as one of the main components of student culture. The
description of the main values of the student population can clarify what the students
define as important within the context of the institutional setting. To learn about the
values, five more indicators will be explored: student priorities, competition, diversity,
106
student goals, and satisfaction. The five indicators can provide measurable elements of
student culture. These five indicators were chosen because of their ability to describe the
student population, their experiences at BU, and their interactions with the other
constituents of the university.
Student Priorities
At BU, the students touched upon several beliefs that appear to define the student
population. These include academic success, connections and networking, global
aspirations, and campus initiatives such as environmental movements. Although
competition was not prevalent in every program, the responses of the students indicate
that performance inside of the classroom was a concern to many students. A student who
experienced this with frequency stated, “Everyone in my classes is always comparing
themselves to each other” (Student, personal communication, November 10, 2010).
Academic success seemed to motivate several of the students or their colleagues. Their
responses also indicated a strong desire to achieve excellence and success after
graduation. The Assistant Vice Chancellor verified this desire within the student
population when she said, “I think that there are students who are really interested in
connecting around their academics and their career. I mean, our students in the film
school, they live over there. They are there 24/7 and they are incredibly tied to that”
(Davis, personal communication, October 21, 2010).
The second priority that the students in the study displayed was a desire to create
connections and networks. Many of the students lauded the fact that they have been able
107
to connect to faculty and administrators. The students appeared to see these connections
as important not only while they are enrolled at BU, but in the future as they move
forward in their careers. One student highlighted the deep connection she made with her
faculty when she said, “I feel a lot more comfortable going to my professors if I need
help with anything. Not just school stuff” (Student, personal communication, November
15, 2010). The students appeared to enjoy more significant relationships with instructors.
When some students were not given opportunities to foster these relationships, they
expressed disappointment. In particular, one student who was upset with having an
adjunct professor said, “You might have a professor for one semester and never see him
again, which I do not really like because the point is to make a connection” (Student,
personal communication, November 17, 2010). Networking also appeared to be a
significant interest of the student population. Many of the students expressed
disappointment with the lack of alumni connections. Some of the students were hoping to
find alumni who would be able to discuss career aspirations and offer potential internship
and job opportunities during summer semesters and after graduation. One student who
was especially disappointed with the alumni presence on campus said, “Alumni relations
is there, but weaker than I would like to see” (Student, personal communication,
November 17, 2010).
Another priority that many of the students possessed was a desire to be involved
on a more global scale. This is understandable since the institution strongly pushes global
goals as early as the recruitment stage. One of the students said, “[BU] encourages
learning about different cultures and being global citizens” (Student, personal
108
communication, November 6, 2010). Many of the students expressed interest in studying
outside of the United States and interacting more with international students and cultures.
A number of students were drawn to BU because of the institution’s extensive study
abroad programs. These students understood that their worlds will feature a globalized
society and economy, and they want to thrive in this environment. One of the students
said, “There are all of these students going abroad. I definitely think that [administration
and staff] do really well in terms of trying to get students out in the world” (Student,
personal communication, November 6, 2010). Many of the students also mentioned the
growing international student population. This gives students opportunities to discover
new cultures while on campus. A student in the study noticed more efforts to connect its
students to different cultures. She said, “[The institution] just had an event with Indian
dancing for diversity and equity” (Student, personal communication, November 6, 2010).
While this is only one example, the attempt at educating the students about other cultures
suggests an interest in other cultures from around the world. Students appear to be
interested in learning more, so the student organizations and administration are providing
these types of opportunities.
Finally, campus initiatives seem to be a priority to the student population. The
green movement on campus appears to be an important to many of the students. The
environmental initiatives undertaken by students and administration are uniting many on
the campus. As interest in this initiative grows, more of the students on campus are being
galvanized. Recycling programs and environmental awareness days are two of the
initiatives that have been created by students. One student, who majors in environmental
109
studies, would like to see more opportunities to grow the recycling programs. She said,
“There are things that I wish [the administration] would do differently. Mostly in terms of
sustainability, because that is my focus. They do a pretty good job. There are things like
recycling bins… but I am definitely involved and trying to implement my feelings [about
these initiatives on campus]” (Student, personal communication, November 6, 2010). The
work of similar students is enacting change on campus as administration notice and act
on the students’ requests. The Assistant Vice Chancellor claimed,
I think students who look for involvement rally more around an area that
comes from personal ethos. Whether they are connecting around
sustainability or other things they feel a personal passion about. They see
that there are opportunities for them to become really engaged in that
particular involvement [at BU] (Davis, personal communication, October
21, 2010).
Other initiatives, such as those that encompass diversity and international education, are
at infancy stages but show signs of growth potential within the population.
Many of these priorities seem to reflect the influence of academic capitalism. In
particular, academic success, networking, and global connections suggest capitalistic
values. The students appear to appreciate the university’s ability to foster these three
areas.
110
Competition
The competition that takes place at BU is another useful indicator to help describe
the student culture. The competition that will be analyzed will include the academic,
student organizational, institutional competition that takes place. These three components
of competition will portray another side of the student culture at BU. Competition
appears to be a prevalent aspect of the student culture at BU. Seventy-five percent of
students who participated in the survey indicated that they strongly agree or agree that the
students of BU are competitive with one another from an academic standpoint. This
contrasts with the students who participated in the focus groups. The responses of these
students were split. Some students experienced heavy competition while others felt that
competition was absent. One biology student claimed, “In my classes, I sense a lot of
academic competition. Everyone in my classes is always comparing themselves to one
another” (Student, personal communication, November 10, 2010). Another student with
knowledge of the law school’s classes said, “The law school, it is really difficult with
competition between students” (Student, personal communication, November 17, 2010).
However, a film student spoke about a different academic experience. “It seems more
united and everyone wants you [and everyone else] to succeed” (Student, personal
communication, November 15, 2010). Academic competition appears to be more
common in specific schools and programs. Students at BU also mentioned competition
outside of the classroom. Multiple students in the study revealed that the competition
between organizations, especially the Greek organizations, is intense. One film student
who is heavily involved in a sorority claimed, “Greek competition is crazy” (Student,
111
personal communication, November 15, 2010). The competitiveness exhibited by
students both inside and outside of the classroom may also be a result of the institution’s
strategy of outwardly competing with other prestigious institutions. Eighty-two percent of
survey respondents either strongly agreed or agreed that BU as a whole is competitive
with other institutions from an academic standpoint. The institution’s competitive
strategy was evident in the responses given by student participants. One student said, “As
far as against other schools, we definitely compete. I know we are compared to [a
prestigious benchmark institution] far too often” (Student, personal communication,
November 17, 2010). The university’s approach to college rankings also signifies a
willingness and desire to engage in competition.
Competition is one of the most visible elements of academic capitalism. The
results of the study indicate that academic capitalism has a major influence on the student
culture. The students’ competitiveness coupled with the university’s desire to compete
with other institutions exemplifies how strong of a role academic capitalism has at the
university. Competition with regards to academic capitalism will be explored in further
detail.
Diversity
The diversity of the student population at BU is an important factor in the overall
student culture at the institution. The variety of students on campus can change the
experiences for many students and offer new and different elements to the student
culture. For the purpose of this study, diversity is represented as ethnic and
112
socioeconomic diversity. Although BU is attempting to increase its population’s
diversity, the student population is largely homogenous. The student population was
often described by both administrators and students as reflective of the surrounding
neighborhood: largely Caucasian and from middle-to-upper-class socioeconomic
backgrounds. The homogeneity of the campus plays a role in shaping the student culture
at BU. A Latina student who discussed her struggles with the university’s environment
said, “Adjusting has been more of what I have had to deal with…There are a lot of whites
at the school. So [unhappy, ethnically diverse students] are not used to this type of
campus since they may come from more diverse high schools” (Student, personal
communication, November 15, 2010). The interests and activities of those who comprise
the dominating population appeared to be generally adopted by the BU community as a
whole. The interests of students from different backgrounds seem to be stifled to some
extent, according to the non-Caucasian study participants. An African-American student
stated that while she has really enjoyed her experience at BU, “There are not enough
ethnic choices on campus” (Student, personal communication, November 15, 2010).
Different types of organizations that celebrate diversity are available for students, but
their presence was not highlighted by students or administrators. This indicates that the
groups may not be strong contributors to the campus community. Two different students
mentioned that multiple friends have transferred or were looking into transferring due to
the lack of diversity. The students who responded to the online survey also noticed the
institution’s lack of diversity. Only twenty-eight percent of students agreed in some
capacity that BU is comprised of an ethnically diverse student population.
113
The lack of diversity at BU may be partly explained by academic capitalism. One
of the goals of academic capitalism is to distinguish an institution from others. Heavy
competition takes place in higher education in order to attract students to the institution.
Institutions that are ranked higher than others stand a better chance to recruit students that
will improve the institutions’ prestige. Quality students with proven academic success at
difficult secondary schools are more likely to come from more affluent backgrounds, as
they will have access to the schools and resources that champion success. Ethnically and
socioeconomically diverse students may not have these same advantages and could be
overlooked as a result. BU did not appear to have any programs in place that would
improve the diversity numbers on campus.
Student Goals
The student goals at BU are connected to student culture as they provide an
insight into the general student population at the institution. The beliefs and attitudes of
the student population are shown through these goals. Both beliefs and attitudes are key
aspects of student culture according to Kuh & Whitt (1988). The mission of BU is to
create global citizens who will lead inquiring, ethical, and productive lives. The goals that
the students had during their time at BU reflect the institution’s mission statement. The
students at BU are involved with many different organizations in an effort to become
well-rounded. Some of the students revealed desires to excel both inside and outside of
the classroom. One of the students who is heavily involved in student organizations
claimed, “The organizations and clubs cannot exist without [students earning a specific]
114
GPA… There is definitely a foundation of academics [in the social life]… I think it is a
wonderful mix [of academics and social life] to make sure we are growing inside and
outside of the classroom” (Student, personal communication, November 17, 2010). An
additional mission-related goal for many students was to become more global. A student
noticed the emphasis on Internationalization efforts by BU. He said, “We have seen a lot
more International students, a lot more diversity clubs, and [heavier] emphasis on study
abroad” (Student, personal communication, November 17, 2010). Because BU
emphasizes its international programs while recruiting students, many of the students
who decide to enroll are attracted to university because of the broad international study
options. One student, while recounting her reasons for deciding to attend BU, said, “I
knew what I wanted… I knew I wanted to study abroad, what my interests were, and
Beach was the one school that [allowed me pursue these interests]” (Student, personal
communication, November 17, 2010). Many students in the study echoed this desire to
study internationally, which indicates the students at BU likely have a strong desire to
become global citizens. A final goal that was echoed in multiple responses was the desire
to succeed after graduation. While this will likely be a goal for students at any higher
education institution, the students at BU appeared to be career-minded even before
attending BU and were hoping to use their education from the university as a means to
begin a successful career in business, film, or another industry. BU became an option to
many students after learning about the institution’s reputation. An example of this is best
exemplified by one of the film students who participated in the study. She claimed her
reason for attending BU was “the film school. I wanted to start broadcasting right away,
115
right off the bat [after graduation]” (Student, personal communication, November 17,
2010). With so many students enticed by the film and business schools, the desire to
begin a successful career in an industry right after graduation appears to be a priority.
The goals of the students seem to reflect the values of a capitalistic society. The
desire for success both inside the classroom and with their careers indicates that a
successful and lucrative career may be a significant goal for the student population. The
students want to be connected to industry while at BU and after graduation. The desire to
become global citizens may also be a product of academic capitalism. Understanding that
success will be dependent on comfort in a global setting as the global economy becomes
more significant, becoming a global citizen is an advantage as students pursue career
opportunities after graduation.
Satisfaction
Student satisfaction with the institution is a final indicator of student culture for
this study. Students’ happiness with the various components of the institution gives
insight into the various cultural forces that shape the student experience and further
explains the beliefs and attitudes of the student population. The satisfaction may also
provide the interpretation of the culture in which the students engage. Despite any of the
flaws that students emphasized, the overwhelming majority of students who participated
in the study were satisfied with their experiences at BU. Ninety-two percent of the
students who participated in the online survey strongly agreed or agreed that the students
at BU have positive feelings about the university. This satisfaction was reflected in the
116
focus groups, as well. Most students expressed that they enjoyed their experiences at the
institution, showing their enthusiastic adoration for BU, its administration, and faculty.
One of these students said, “I am really satisfied with what it has been like here. It seems
like everyone loves Beach, and they are happy to be here” (Student, personal
communication, November 17, 2010). The students in the focus group also seemed to
enjoy the amount of power the administration gives to the students. A participant stated,
“Academic-wise and student life, the students are pretty satisfied. There is a lot going on
and the students’ voices are heard” (Student, personal communication, November 6,
2010). Another student claimed, “I feel like most people are very happy with their lives
here… the fact that we have so much pull in everything” (Student, personal
communication, November 17, 2010). Almost all of the participants did not have any
complaints nor did they know others who were unhappy. The negative issues that were
mentioned largely pertained to the lack of diversity, the institution’s location, or various
minor concerns that are present at many institutions, such as parking, registration, and
isolated academic dissatisfaction. One of the students who was familiar with the
grievances of unhappy students said, “Most complaints that are heard are either universal
to every university, [such as parking and registration]” (Student, personal
communication, November 17, 2010). Another student claimed, “If people have
complaints, it is because they do not like their teachers of their class” (Student, personal
communication, November 17, 2010). While some of the students alluded to unhappy
student experiences when discussing the diversity concerns at BU, the participants did
not hold this same dissatisfaction. The students’ level of satisfaction seemed to be
117
correlated to the level of involvement in the campus. The students who were satisfied all
were active in organizations and clubs on campus. One student was able to express why
this was the case. “If you choose to put time into the school, then I think you are going to
like it because you are working with [the university] so closely” (Student, personal
communication, November 17, 2010). When students recounted unhappy experiences of
others, the individuals who were frustrated with the university were not involved on
campus.
The overall satisfaction of the institution helps explain various elements of the
student experience. The discussions about satisfaction yielded information about the
disappointment in the diversity on campus and the issues with adjunct faculty. While the
satisfaction of the institution might not directly connect to academic capitalism, the
responses interpret whether the students respond positively or negatively to the academic
capitalism forces on campus.
University of the Mountains
General Overview
The second institution studied is the University of the Mountains (UM). UM is a private,
independent university located outside of Los Angeles, California. The medium size,
primarily residential institution is classified as a more selective master’s college or
university by the Carnegie Foundation. Approximately 3,000 undergraduate students and
1,500 graduate students are currently enrolled at the university. The undergraduate
population largely consists of full-time, four-year students. The institution does not
118
emphasize undergraduate transfer students, as the Carnegie Foundation classifies UM as
having a lower transfer rate. Sixty-seven percent of the entire UM student population is
from California. Seventy percent of students live on campus. A significant percentage of
the undergraduate students at UM receive some form of need-based financial aid, or
need-based scholarship or grant funding. Over seventy-five percent of students at UM
receive some form of financial aid from the institution. Like their BU counterparts, the
students that participated in the study were heavily influenced by the financial aid and
scholarship packages UM offered after they were accepted to the university. However,
UM’s students appeared to be more motivated to attend due to financial incentives.
Eighty percent of students who participated in the online survey indicated that
scholarship or financial aid money influenced their decision to attend UM. Sixty percent
of all surveyed students strongly agreed, signifying that financial funding played a major
role in attracting students to campus. This sentiment was reflected in the student focus
groups, where almost every participant cited the financial package as a major factor in
their enrollment.
Like BU, a large number of students at UM study in specific schools and
programs. In particular, the undergraduate and graduate populations are largely
associated with the business school. Around 650 undergraduate students are currently
enrolled in the business school, while another 800 are in one of the business school’s
graduate programs. Both student populations represent large percentages of the respective
populations. Overall, more than forty percent of the undergraduate population is
associated with business, business-related, and support service majors. The remaining
119
undergraduate population, roughly 2,400 students, is associated with the school’s arts &
sciences college. The college is comprised of more than forty programs, including some
traditional business majors like accounting and business administration. The most
popular majors in the college include social sciences at nine percent, health sciences at
seven percent, and psychology at six percent. Despite the heavy focus on business-related
majors, a significant number of students who took part in the study were earning degrees
outside of the business area. The large representation of students fell into the social
sciences, health sciences, and psychology. Surprisingly, only eight of the twenty-eight
students believed that business-related majors were the most popular academic pursuit on
campus.
Student Perceptions of Institutional Culture
Tierney’s (1988) framework for understanding institutional culture will be used to
provide a definition of the culture at UM. The student perception of the six cultural
indicators will give insight into the beliefs, attitudes, and values of the student population.
These three elements comprise student culture according to Kuh & Whitt (1988). The
environment, mission, socialization, information, strategy, and leadership at UM will be
explored using the responses of the study’s participants.
Environment
UM is located in a suburban city outside of Los Angeles, CA. The campus is
situated in an enclosed area in a small, quiet, residential community. The school borders
120
residential neighborhoods, but is separated from the surrounding area. Unlike BU, UM is
not integrated into the surrounding residential community. Shopping and entertainment
can be found nearby, but most non-university attractions are not within a reasonable
walking distance. Because of this, more activity seems to take place on-campus.
As a school that does not place heavy value on the rankings, UM administration
does not seem to be as concerned with growth. Instead of investing in new facilities, UM
administration appears to prefer to renovate the buildings they currently use. Two
possible reasons for this approach include a respect for the institution’s history and a lack
of financial assets to carry out new building projects. The Vice President of Student Life
believes that the UM has a “historic campus” akin to that of an Ivy League institution.
The most recent addition to the campus buildings is a theater arts center. Outside of this
new building, the administration appears to have focused on renovating buildings to
enhance the student experience without creating new facilities. Many of the students
remarked that the university’s buildings and classrooms are well kept and modern. Some
of the recent renovations have included the studio arts building, a campus theater, the
library, classrooms, and the majority of the residence halls. Some of the oldest residence
halls require more renovation in the students’ opinions, but the lack of funding has
prevented this from taking place. The institution’s financial difficulties may be impacting
the work that can be carried out. Multiple students believe that not enough is being done
to maintain the campus. One of these students stated, “Improving the university
structurally and aesthetically is not an overall emphasis [of administration]” (Student,
personal communication, January 12, 2011). Although another student recognized and
121
appreciated the work the institution has done to improve the school’s environment, he
expressed doubt that the improvements would continue. “As far as buildings go for the
school as a whole, I feel like they have pretty much come to an end in improving what
they are going to improve” (Student, personal communication, January 12, 2011). The
students and administration did not discuss any future campus projects on the horizon.
The Vice President of Student Life at UM offered, “Over the last 20 years we’ve had
huge investment in our physical space and the capital of this university and buildings
renovations and just reshaping the entire campus” (Williams, personal communication,
December 13, 2010). The significant projects devoted to UM’s environment appear to be
nearing completion. Despite the fact that new buildings and renovations may not be
taking place in the near future, the majority of the students in the study expressed
satisfaction with the institution’s approach to the environment. A student who approved
of the institution’s approach to enhancing the environment claimed, “The classrooms are
in good shape. The old buildings are well maintained… We have good renovations
(Student, personal communication, January 12, 2011).” Multiple students also conveyed
their satisfaction with the equipment provided to assist in the learning process.
Specifically, students mentioned computers, technology, and science equipment as being
more than adequate for their needs.
The actions taken by UM do not suggest strong ties to academic capitalism. While
the institution has devoted resources to building an arts center and modernizing older
classrooms and resident halls, these areas were largely non-revenue generating. With no
122
new construction plans on the horizon, the institution does not appear to be heavily
influenced by the need to compete with other institutions for the best facilities.
Mission
UM’s mission statement is significantly larger than the mission statement created
by BU, although both focus on a personalized education that will develop students both
inside and outside of the classroom to create responsible citizens. Unlike BU’s mission
statement, UM’s mission statement touches upon other values the institution emphasizes.
Some of these values include community, diversity, both from curricular and population
perspectives, and an understanding of contemporary trends and society. Exploring the
individual components of the mission statement will help define the institution’s culture.
The student population’s perspective of these aspects of the mission will also assist in
exploring the student culture.
The mission of UM is heavily focused on the academic aspects of the university.
The emphasis on academic goals would suggest that the learning experience of the
students should be a priority to the institution. Based upon the responses of both
administrators and students, teaching and the student academic experience is an important
concern to the leadership and faculty of UM. Each of the administrators interviewed
spoke about creating transformative experiences for students through education. The Vice
President of Student Life (Williams, personal communication, December 13, 2010) also
noted that eighty percent of the institution’s budget is devoted to the institution’s labor,
with faculty comprising the majority of this figure. The financial investment appears to
123
be worthwhile, as the large majority of student participants were positive about the
learning environment that institution has provided. Ninety-six percent of the students who
took the online survey either strongly agreed or agreed that UM provides the students
with a positive learning environment. The majority of students also believed that teaching
is a priority at UM. Eighty percent of the students who responded to the online survey
strongly agreed or agreed that teaching is highly valued by both the staff and faculty. The
faculty seems interested in teaching and student learning as opposed to research. The
responses of the students who participated in the focus groups also reflected this
sentiment. Multiple students insisted that the emphasis of the university is on teaching.
The student experience appears to be a focus of those who work at UM. A student who
took part in a focus group claimed, “The whole [staff], professors, advisors, they all cater
to us. They give us their undivided attention, and you don’t get that a lot [at other
institutions]” (Student, personal communication, January 12, 2011). As a whole, the
students at UM appear to be content with the emphasis placed on teaching at the
institution.
The weight placed on positive teaching experiences at UM requires a strong
faculty to successfully carry out the mission. The institution highlights its small
classroom experience and the potential to forge personalized relationships with faculty in
the mission statement. Such bold claims necessitate recruiting faculty who will be
comfortable and able to thrive in such settings. After speaking with the students, the
university appears to be successfully recruiting faculty who cherish the opportunity to
interact with students on a more personal basis. A student who was impressed with the
124
faculty claimed, “Most professors that work here know that it is going to be an intimate
setting and they want that” (Student, personal communication, January 12, 2011). Every
student who took part in the study had positive reviews of the faculty at UM. Even
students who were disgruntled with their experience at UM were still pleased with the
faculty and the level of teaching. One of these disgruntled students said, “The faculty are
very involved with the students, and are very energized and passionate about what they
teach. Their emphasis is definitely on teaching” (Student, personal communication,
January 12, 2011). A common theme that emerged from the responses was the students’
ability to establish relationships with their faculty. Multiple students cited their positive
experiences inside and outside of the classroom. A student who had considered leaving
UM shortly after arriving declared, “I stayed [at UM] because I am close to my
professors” (Student, personal communication, January 12, 2011). The students’ positive
experiences with the faculty at UM suggest that the student-faculty relationship is an
important aspect of the student and institutional culture at UM. The students and the
faculty seem to both value the others’ contribution to the school and the academic
process.
As the faltering economy has become an issue for UM, the institution has to
consider budget cuts that will allow the university to continue its operations. With eighty
percent of expenditures allocated to labor, a reduction in faculty and staff spending has
taken place in order to allow the university to avoid severe financial problems. In order to
reduce the number of high cost faculty salaries, adjunct faculty are used with some
frequency. While some of the students who participated in focus groups indicated that
125
they have not worked with an adjunct faculty member, the majority have been taught by
one or more adjunct professors. Multiple students were aware of the financial struggles at
UM and the level of impact this has on faculty. “For this year, because of budget cuts, I
have seen a lot of adjunct professors” (Student, personal communication, December 13,
2010), claimed one student. “For the previous two years, it was all full-time instructors.
The budget cuts get in the way” (Student, personal communication, December 13, 2010).
Another student stated, “We do have faculty that teach part-time because we have had
budget cuts. And now, we have some positions that they have had to leave [open]”
(Student, personal communication, December 13, 2010). Of the twenty-eight students
who participated in the focus groups, only six students said they were not taught by an
adjunct faculty member at some point during their time at UM. Most students only had
one or two adjunct professors. The online survey also supports the notion that students
are being taught by adjunct faculty. Only forty-eight percent of respondents agreed that
their instructors only teach at the UM. The remaining fifty-two percent either were unsure
or disagreed. The use of adjunct faculty at UM appears to be one way the institution’s
leadership can address the growing financial concerns. Although the presence of adjunct
faculty appears to be increasing, the students seem to have favorable opinions of these
faculty members.
Similar to BU, the mission statement that UM follows promotes the value of a
personalized education. The university has shown its commitment to this value by
maintaining small class sizes. Although budget cuts are leading to increases in the
numbers of adjunct faculty, class sizes are not growing as a result. The institution features
126
a student-to-faculty ratio of eleven students for every faculty member. The smallest class
size mentioned in the study was nine students while the largest class size was only thirty-
three students. Every student who participated in the focus group referenced the small
class sizes in their description of the education experience. Many of the students raved
about the benefits of having such small classes. “People get personal attention compared
to other schools,” one student noted. “[Education at UM is] more personal at the level of
meeting with professors and interacting with other [students]” (Student, personal
communication, January 12, 2011). Students were satisfied with the small class
experience and felt that the learning experience was positively impacted by the
personalized education they receive.
A key word in UM’s mission statement is “community.” The university promotes
the creation and maintenance of a community on its campus. The institution also requires
students to actively contribute to the community both inside and outside of campus, as
students are mandated to complete community service hours during their time at UM.
The importance of community was discussed by both administrators and students a
substantial number of times in the study. The Vice President of Student Life, the
Associate Vice President for Enrollment Management, and a faculty member who is the
program lead all explained that the university places great emphasis on the value of
community. These individuals all noted that prospective students are evaluated based not
only past achievements, but also their ability to actively contribute to and flourish in the
UM community. The discussions that took place with the student participants indicate
that the institution is successfully recruiting individuals who appreciate the community
127
provided by UM and its constituents. A large number of students mentioned the word
“community” when describing their experiences on campus. This reference to community
continued throughout the study, despite the fact that no student discussed the mission
statement of UM. Many of the students had fond words to say about the overall feel of
the institution and those who comprise it. One of the students attended UM at the
insistence of an alumnus. The student recounted, “She told me to go to UM because it is
just such a small community. The community here is really different” (Student, personal
communication, January 12, 2011). The community atmosphere that has been built at
UM appears to be a major factor in drawing students to the university, but also seems to
keep them engaged and satisfied after they attend. One of the students expressed that she
felt overwhelming support from the school since she arrived on campus. “There is a
family here to support you, who will be here no matter what. It is not just a school, it is a
family” (Student, personal communication, January 12, 2011). Of the twenty-eight
students who took part in the focus groups, only one student mentioned that he did not
feel heavy community involvement. While a small contingent of students may feel left
out of the community atmosphere, the overwhelming majority of students appears to
fervently believe in and benefit from the UM community. The focus on community
seems to significantly contribute to the student and institutional culture of the institution.
A final aspect of the mission that may have an impact on culture is community
service. The university’s mission statement addresses the desire to produce responsible
citizens who are able to comprehend current society and the important contemporary
trends that comprise this society. The institution’s approach towards community service
128
appears to address this part of the mission statement. Community service is a requirement
of the university. Because of this, all students are actively engaged in community
projects. One of the students in the study spoke of the requirement’s impact at UM when
she said, “There is a big emphasis on social justice and a big emphasis on volunteering
because of [the community service requirement]” (Student, personal communication,
December 13, 2010). Another student stated, “There is an emphasis to get involved with
the community” (Student, personal communication, January 12, 2011). The social
organizations and even some of the classes at UM are also aligned with community
involvement, according to some of the students. A student mentioned this when she said,
“There are a lot of [community service] programs at this school. There are classes that
incorporate [community service]” (Student, personal communication, January 12, 2011).
In the focus groups, students spoke positively about the service requirement. Many of
them felt they were making a difference both at UM and in the areas surrounding the
campus. Even though the institution mandates community service, multiple individuals
believed the students at the institution were responsible for pushing community service
involvement. One of these students said, “There are a lot of [community service]
programs at this school. There are classes that incorporate [community service]”
(Student, personal communication, January 12, 2011). The Vice President of Student Life
noted that many of the students at UM continue their community service work after their
requirements have been fulfilled. The UM students, staff, and faculty appear to value not
only the community at UM, but the community’s involvement in worthwhile causes
outside of the university.
129
The missions of the institution do not indicate actions driven by academic
capitalism. Many of the missions are contrasts to the actions academic capitalism yields.
Social missions are not lucrative and are often not the focus at institutions highly engaged
with academic capitalism. The presence of adjunct professors is a symptom of academic
capitalism, but their presence at UM is related to financial issues.
Socialization
The UM administration and staff appear to have maintained a campus that allows
students a wealth of opportunities to follow academic and social interests. The student
participants in the study revealed that a balance exists between academic and social life
on campus. The survey respondents especially believed this, as ninety-six percent of
these students strongly agreed or agreed that the university helps students find a balance
between academics and social life. The majority of students who participated in the focus
groups also spoke of this balance. One student stated, “[UM students] tend to be
extremely involved and very committed to organizations, but also academics” (Student,
personal communication, January 12, 2011). Of the students who thought that the school
veered more towards one direction, the social aspects of the campus appeared to be the
larger emphasis. One of these students claimed, “I think there is a pretty good balance
[between academic and social life]… but you do not see a lot of emphasis on academics”
(Student, personal communication, December 13, 2010). Another student mentioned, “To
some extent, [the university] is not really focused on academics. I see a little more
emphasis on social aspects” (Student, personal communication, January 12, 2011). While
130
a strong balance exists, the students appear to believe that the social aspects of the
institution receive more attention. This could be a result of the large residential
population on campus or the wealth of opportunities for student involvement.
With a larger residential population, the university appears to have more social
opportunities for its students. The majority of students at UM live on campus, with over
seventy percent of the student population housed in one of the institution’s many
residence halls. Students are guaranteed housing throughout their time at UM and are
encouraged to remain on campus as part of the collegiate experience. Although housing is
guaranteed, a smaller percentage of the population chooses to live off-campus. A student
who has served as the student body’s president had insight as to why students choose to
live in the surrounding areas. “It is expensive to live on campus. In the last two years,
[UM administrators] have really struggled with having people live on campus because of
the expenses. They have actually struggled with filling rooms” (Student, personal
communication, January 12, 2011). While almost all of the students in the study believed
that an active social scene took place on campus, the two students who disagreed with
this noted the large number of Southern California residents that attend the university
who choose to use their weekend to visit family or explore the larger cities outside of the
area. Despite these feelings, UM appears to be more of a residential university that
encourages interaction on campus.
UM students seem to be heavily involved in non-academic clubs and
organizations on campus. The students in the study reflect this level of involvement. All
but one of the twenty-eight students who took part in a focus group highlighted their
131
involvement in one or more organizations or clubs. Additionally, all but one of the
twenty-six students who completed the online survey indicated that they were involved
on campus. The social aspects of UM appear to be more emphasized by the students.
Multiple students reported that the involvement in the social organizations and clubs was
a fundamental reason in their decisions to stay at UM after being unhappy when first
arriving. One student who grew to enjoy UM stated, “It was hard for me to adjust, but
getting more involved helped me see what the school had to offer” (Student, personal
communication, January 12, 2011). Many of the students in the study mentioned the
abundance of opportunities that are available to the student population. The university
offers a small stipend to create an organization as long as enough interest exists to sustain
the organization. Students who are involved on campus appear to be involved in many
different organizations. While the students had various opinions about what organizations
were most popular on campus, the most frequently mentioned include Greek
organizations, service organizations, and athletics. Even though thirty percent of the
campus is involved in Greek organizations, many students, both Greek and non-Greek,
did not feel that the organizations dominate the social life of the campus. The students
reported encountering a friendly and supportive environment. Many students seemed to
believe that the community service involvement that is mandated by the institution plays
a major role in the organizations on campus, as some of the organizations also require
service. The community service continues even after the requirements have been met.
The socialization at UM factors revealed in the study do not suggest heavy institutional
involvement with academic capitalism. The prominent role of social organizations and
132
community service with the student population indicates that achievement and academics
are not dominating cultural forces. The students appear to value opportunities to interact
with other students and the surrounding community in non-academic situations. The
heavy encouragement of social involvement from the administration also does not reflect
values often associated with academic capitalism.
Information
Based upon interactions with students, leadership’s transparency appears to be
valued by the student population. This is especially true after the university’s previous
president had created an unstable environment before resigning. In the previous
president’s five-year reign, the students and administrators in the study complained of
confusion and a lack of communication and transparency. After the previous president
stepped down in 2010, an interim president took over and will remain in this role until
2012. The current president had retired from the president post after a successful
eighteen-year stint. The previous president was assigned after the current president’s
retirement. With the new president in place, the university appears to have taken a more
proactive approach in conveying information to the individuals who comprise the UM
community. One way that the leadership of UM communicates with the students is
through an event called Pizza with the President. This gives students the opportunity to
communicate directly to the president of the university in a relaxed setting. Many
students positively described the event as a means to register complaints and understand
the administration’s actions. Multiple students said they appreciated the opportunity to
feel the institution’s leadership hears their voices. A student said, “[The president] is very
133
transparent and really wants you to know what is going on [at UM]” (Student, personal
communication, December 13, 2010). Another student who was satisfied with the
direction of the university’s leadership claimed, “[The president] will give you a straight
up answer what he thinks is going on, and if [he does not know the answer], he will guide
you to someone else” (Student, personal communication, December 13, 2010). The
students also welcomed hearing about UM’s strategic plans before they were officially
announced. At one Pizza with the President, a student was impressed with the president’s
candor. “He was really open to talking about potential changes… even though the
[university’s administration] had not officially told us anything” (Student, personal
communication, December 13, 2010). Another way students learn about institutional
information is through meetings and forums. One of the students claimed, “When we
have issues, we have a meeting where students and staff can come and talk and discuss
what we have expected for our school” (Student, personal communication, January 12,
2011). When coupled with the meetings and forums the university holds to discuss
strategic initiatives or university issues, the students seem to believe they are receiving
information from a transparent leadership team. Similar to BU, the information hierarchy
at UM does not suggest a connection to academic capitalism. The leadership and staff
appear to openly communicate the plans and actions of the institution to the student
population.
134
Strategy
The current strategy UM employs appears to be somewhat defined by its financial
situation. The need to reduce the institution’s budget has impacted how the university can
approach its programs and schools and fulfill the goals of its mission statement. Despite
the hardships the institution is facing, UM takes a different approach to the US News &
World Report college rankings. The university’s president has been widely quoted as
saying, “I know [the rankings] are there but they do not really make a difference”
(Williams, personal communication, December 13, 2010). This approach permeates
down to the administration and the students, as well. The Vice President of Student Life
explained,
We pay attention to [the rankings] because you cannot be in higher
education and not pay attention to them… But [the rankings] are just one
measurement and a lot of schools get caught up in the US News & World
Report rankings as an end all, and [they are] really not. [The rankings] are
just one measurement of hundreds and hundreds of measurements… A lot
of senior management’s decisions are not driven by the rankings
(Williams, personal communication, December 13, 2010).
The other two administrators interviewed also believed the institution takes the same
approach to the rankings. This philosophy on the rankings is also reflected in the
students’ responses. Only sixteen percent of students who participated in the online
survey strongly agreed or agreed that UM is concerned with its performance in the US
News & World Report rankings. While the institution appreciates its impressive rank in
135
the publication, the leadership places greater value in other areas, such as community,
service, transformative experiences, and authenticity. The Vice President of Student Life
confirmed this when she said,
We really care about doing what is right and about having a transformative
experience educationally. And we feel if we do all of that, then we will get
good rankings. But if we just do it for the rankings, then it’s not really
authentic” (Williams, personal communication, December 13, 2010).
While the standing UM has in the rankings is impressive and similar to BU’s
rank, the institution utilizes a different strategy when recruiting students. Like BU, UM
has displayed its rank in some marketing material and on its website. However, their rank
in the US News & World Report publication is featured alongside other awards and
designations from other publications that highlight different areas of achievement.
Without a prominent space in the school’s advertising, the US News & World Report rank
does not appear to be a major factor in encouraging students to attend the institution.
Almost every student in the study did not pay attention to the rankings when researching
the university. One student bluntly stated, “[The university’s administrators] really don’t
advertise the rankings to the students” (Student, personal communication, January 12).
The institution’s administration wants to recruit quality students, but administrators want
to attract specific types of students that will be able to thrive in the UM setting. An
administrator justified this approach when she said, “You do not just want bodies, you
want the right bodies. So that is a big part of why you cannot be driven strictly by
136
rankings. Because then you are not going to get the right bodies, you are going to get
rankings-oriented bodies” (Williams, personal communication, December 13, 2010).
The university’s decision to not emphasize the US News & World Report college
rankings is visible in the responses of the students who took part in the study. Even
though twenty-eight students participated in the study, only two students acknowledged
that they consulted the publication’s rankings before deciding to attend UM. The
remaining focus group participants did not review the rankings. In most cases, the
students revealed that they had no knowledge of the publication’s rankings. This finding
was also consistent with the results of the online survey. Only eight percent of students
stated that the rankings had influenced their decisions to attend UM. The findings of the
study indicate that the US News & World Report rankings, both from administration and
student perspectives, do not shape the strategy of the institution.
The university’s need to reduce its costs may have resulted in a strategy focused
on finding ways to save money. Although the administration participants in the study
believed that very few, if any, programs had been cut in their time with the university, the
students communicated a different response. “With the budget cuts recently, I think they
had to cut the Japanese department” (Student, personal communication, December 13,
2010). Another student claimed, “The budget cuts overall, throughout the schools, has
actually impacted a lot. In particular, extracurricular activities and staff [feel the impact]”
(Student, personal communication, December 13, 2010). Other students mentioned
additional programs, such as Creative Writing, that have been negatively impacted by the
lack of funding since the budgets cuts began. The funding of particular programs and
137
schools appears to be comparable. The majority of student responses do not indicate that
one school received an inordinate allocation of funding over another school. Most of the
students in the focus groups did not believe administration was directing large amounts of
available money to particular schools or programs. The surveys verify this finding. Only
twelve percent of students did not believe that UM treats all of the institution’s schools
equally. Additionally, only thirty-two percent of surveyed students either strongly
disagreed or disagreed that UM treats all individual departments equally.
Another concern that is influenced by the budget is the labor force at UM. With
eighty percent of the budget devoted to labor, any reduction in expenditures will have a
direct impact on the employees of UM. Some of the students reported that faculty and
staff were forced to leave as a result of the financial problems of the university. One of
the students said, “Lots of staff members have been fired... It had something to do with
the budget” (Student, personal communication, January 12, 2011). These concerns have
also led to the hiring of more adjunct faculty members.
UM’s alumni appear to play a major role on the university’s campus. The alumni
are a part of the institution’s overall strategy. Both administration and students repeatedly
mentioned the alumni involvement on campus. The institution offers many activities for
alumni and students invite alumni to come back to campus to participate in student
organizations. The university also has a strong alumni organization that encourages
students to reach out to alumni to discuss career and volunteer opportunities. A student
who was assisted by alumni connections said, “I have been in contact with alums and
they have helped me with volunteer opportunities and [other things]” (Student, personal
138
communication, January 12, 2011). Most of the students in the focus groups mentioned
the alumni’s pronounced presence at UM and positive contributions to campus. One of
the students in the study said, “There is heavy alumni involvement in student
organizations” (Student, personal communication, December 13, 2010). Another student
corroborated this involvement when he said, “Groups that I am in, our alums are heavily
active” (Student, personal communication, January 12, 2011). The students seemed to
believe that the alumni groups give back to the campus. This positive view of alumni is
also reflected in the survey results. Seventy-six percent of students strongly agreed or
agreed that alumni are valued by UM and their role on campus is noticed. The alumni’s
level of involvement suggests that the community atmosphere created at UM remains
after graduation. Many students remarked that the alumni tell them that they do not want
to leave the UM community. Administration is comprised of a large contingent of UM
graduates who wanted to stay involved in the community.
Alumni also play an important role in fundraising efforts for the institution. The
students in the study were under the impression that many of the donations that UM
receives are coming from the alumni. One student who believed this said, “A lot of
people are getting scholarships at our school. The scholarships are funded by past alums
who are always giving back” (Student, personal communication, January 12, 2011).
However, outside of the mention of a fundraising phone program that has current students
call alumni for donations, many of the students believed that fundraising was not a major
factor at the university. Based upon the responses of the students and the administration,
the university does not appear to be as aggressive as other schools in their pursuit of
139
donations to support the university’s missions and programs. One student believed that
fundraising was not happening at all. “We do not hear about fundraising on our campus.
It is non-existent” (Student, personal communication, January 12, 2011). Slightly more
than fifty-two percent of students who took the survey believed that the university is
aggressively targeting alumni for fundraising, and only fifty percent believed the
university places great value on fundraising. If assertive fundraising is taking place, the
current students are being shielded from these actions.
Academic capitalism does not appear to play a central role in the strategy adopted
by administrators. However, some decisions made at the administration level suggest that
academic capitalism is present. Although not as aggressive as other institutions, UM
seems to value student marketing initiatives. This is not surprising since marketing is
valued by private institutions, which must rely on student enrollment for the bulk of
revenue. Stronger efforts seem to be made in order to attract students to the campus,
although the institution wants a specific type of student that will be able to fit into the
campus community. Budget issues at the institution might be a driving force to adopt
more capitalistic strategies in the future. At this time, academic capitalism does not seem
to have a strong presence at UM.
Leadership
Although both administrators and students described the leadership team of the
university in depth, the issues surrounding the president’s office dominated many of the
discussions. In the beginning of 2010, the president of UM resigned from his position. He
140
was replaced by the previous president of the university, who served in the role for
eighteen years before retiring. The current president will serve in the role on an interim
basis until 2012, when a successor will be named. The administrators and students who
discussed the change in power described a situation that created confusion and
dissatisfaction that is still being addressed. Some of the students complained about a lack
of communication and transparency with the former president. However, the installation
of the new president appears to be widely favored by the majority of the UM community.
Every participant spoke highly of the current president and his new approaches to not
only running the university, but also cleaning up the problems that the previous president
created. One of the satisfied students professed, “[The new president] coming in and
stepping up to be our president after the stuff that happened last year has made a really
big difference” (Student, personal communication, January 12, 2011). Many students
mentioned that they enjoyed the level of transparency and connection that the president is
bringing to the leadership. One student claimed, “This president walks in and eats in the
[students’ dining area], and he will just sit down at a random student’s table and just get a
feel for what is going on with the students” (Student, personal communication, December
13, 2010). Another student who enjoyed the efforts being made by the new president
said, “I have had dessert with the president in one of my classes and he was really
amazing. He talked about his personal life and connected with the students” (Student,
personal communication, December 13, 2010). In order to ease the transition and reassure
the student population that the mismanagement of the institution would not continue, the
interim president has interfaced directly with the student population through events like
141
Pizza with the President and open forums. The interim president appears to be popular
with the UM community and has reached out to the students.
With the previous president no longer at UM, the students seem to be pleased
with the leadership and staff at the university. The administration and student participants
frequently spoke about the relationships that take place between the two populations. The
administration and staff appear to have the philosophy that they are working at the
university to serve the student population. The students in the study largely noticed this
philosophy and made comments about the staff’s concern for the students’ well being.
The staff and administration seem committed to the students and heavily involved with
their lives. One student said, “[The administration and staff] really do try to take care of
the students as much as possible. [They} are putting in a lot of time, so it is really nice to
see them get involved so much” (Student, personal communication, January 12, 2011).
Numerous students in the study echoed this sentiment. Another student claimed, “I think
the entire administration and staff really care about who we are and what we do”
(Student, personal communication, December 13, 2010). The administrators are also
looked at as models to some students. One of the students who felt this way said, “I look
up to the administration… I have a very high opinion of them” (Student, personal
communication, January 12, 2011). The positive views of administration and their
willingness to help were also reflected in the survey. Sixty-four percent of the students
agreed or strongly agreed that the staff makes decisions with the students’ best interest in
mind. Only one respondent did not feel this way. The only negative comments in relation
to the administration not associated with the previous president were as a result of budget
142
cuts. One student mentioned, “I think there are certain individuals who have a lot of
responsibilities and a lot of power. There needs to be more people doing multiple things
instead of just one person handling a lot of different things” (Student, personal
communication, January 12, 2011). Some of the students also expressed their displeasure
in seeing beloved staff members leave the university due to the institution’s inability to
fund the positions. An unhappy student said, “The school is undergoing some changes, so
that can be frustrating because we are losing people that we care about that influenced us
and have helped us” (Student, personal communication, January 12, 2011). Despite these
concerns, the students’ perceptions of the administration and staff were positive. Almost
every student was complimentary of the administrators’ and staff members’ devotion to
the student population at UM. The leadership and staff of the university do not suggest
any significant ties to academic capitalism. The students were happy with the efforts
made by staff and administration to connect to the student body and improve the student
experiences on campus.
Student Culture
To assess the student culture, the values of the institution will be examined in
further detail. The student culture indicators that focus on the values include student
priorities, competition, diversity, student goals, and satisfaction with the institution.
These indicators suggest that the university is more driven by the community and civic-
minded actions. The goals of the students are in line with this reasoning, as students seem
to be more interested in personal development and growth, which will result in positive
143
contributions inside and outside of the community. The level of competition within the
student population appears to be relatively low, which is to be expected since the
institution is not outwardly competitive. Although the student population is not very
diverse, the administration seems to be making efforts to address this concern. Despite
this concern, the students seem to be satisfied with the institution.
Student Priorities
The students’ priorities will be the first and main indicator used to describe the
student culture at UM. The priorities of the students seem to be largely in tune with the
overall values of the university. Speaking with the students, the students’ priorities
appeared to be focused on community, service, and relationships. The most important
priority to the students appeared to be community. Most of the students described UM as
a community. The community atmosphere is what seemed to be the most impressive
aspect of UM to the student participants. One of the students said, “I love the people here,
and it is a lot about community. There are no cliques here” (Student, personal
communication, January 12, 2011). Another student claimed, “It is the community of
Mountains that makes [the experience] so special… It is just a really nice, big
community, with little communities within” (Student, personal communication, January
12, 2011). The students spoke about forging lasting connections with their fellow
students, alumni, faculty, and administration. Many of the students mentioned that the
campus served as a home away from home, providing a safe and friendly environment to
allow for self- and group-discovery. One student stated, “The atmosphere of Mountains is
144
friendly and [like a] family. You actually get to grow. Not only in academics, but also as
a person” (Student, personal communication, January 12, 2011). Another student said,
“There is a family to support you who will be here no matter what. [UM] is not just [an
institution], it is a family” (Student, personal communication, January 12, 2011). The
community appears to be a key component to life at UM. The students enjoy the
community atmosphere and believe it benefits their growth.
Another important priority at UM is service. As previously mentioned,
community service is a requirement for all students at the institution. Even though
community service is a requirement, the students appeared to enjoy the service work. The
students play an active role in the service projects. One student stated, “Community
service is pushed by the students and the school and it really helps a lot” (Student,
personal communication, December 13, 2010). Most of the students in the study seemed
to enjoy their work in the community and have found new and interesting ways to
contribute. This includes inside the classroom and in student organizations. One student
stated, “Our [student] organizations require community service” (Student, personal
communication, December 13, 2010). Community service appears to have a social
component, as well. Students reported greater satisfaction with the university due to their
ability to meet like-minded individuals at the community service outings. One student
claimed, “You actually get to socialize and get to know other people by doing community
service work” (Student, personal communication, December 13, 2010). The students
seem to enjoy helping others and want to contribute to the community. A student said,
“People [at UM] like all of our exciting community service” (Student, personal
145
communication, January 12, 2011). This is especially evident when a large portion of the
population continues to contribute to the community after they have completed their
required service hours. One student stated, “Students keep up with their community
service after the requirement is done” (Student, personal communication, January 12,
2011). This was also corroborated by the administration.
Finally, relationships appear to be a strong priority to the students at UM. With so
much emphasis on community, the valuing of relationships is understandable. The
residential campus gives students a greater opportunity to interact with others at UM. A
student summarized the feelings of many in the study when he said, “Most people just
want to stay here and don’t want to leave. So [more people live on campus]” (Student,
personal communication, January 12, 2011). Additionally, the active social life on
campus seems to allow students more opportunities to bond with their fellow classmates.
With so many opportunities for students to participate on campus, they have the ability to
forge relationships with others. “The people who are involved do everything,” claimed
one student (Student, personal communication, January 12, 2011). Students appreciate
the connections they make with the other community members at the university. The
relationships that the students make seem to define their experiences at UM. The students
appear to value the relationships they create with faculty, staff, and other students. The
university provides students with many opportunities to forge relationships. Overall, the
priorities of the students at UM do not seem to align with academic capitalism.
Community, service, and relationships are not symptoms of academic capitalism.
146
Competition
The next indicator that will be useful in describing the student culture of UM is
the competition that takes place at the university. The academic, student organizational,
and institutional competition that takes place at UM can help to describe student culture
in further detail. While competition does appear to play a role on campus, it does not
seem to be an integral part of the institutional or student cultures at UM. Most of the
students who took part in the focus groups claimed that academic competition is almost
non-existent on campus. One student summarized the competitive environment at UM
when he said, “The cutthroat atmosphere is literally absent here” (Student, personal
communication, January 12, 2011). Only three students from the focus groups mentioned
that academic competition takes place at UM. These students were quick to point out that
the competition was friendly. One of these students claimed, “I feel like there is
competition, but in a good way. I feel like each student pushes another student to just do
better in class and do better overall” (Student, personal communication, January 12,
2011). When contrasted to the survey responses, a difference appears. Sixty-two percent
of students who took the survey either strongly agreed or agreed that the students of UM
are competitive with one another. While this does not match the results of the focus
groups, the students in the survey could be considering the competition that takes place
between student organizations. A student from the focus group said, “The only real
competition on campus would be amongst the different groups. That would be Greek and
non-Greek groups” (Student, personal communication, January 12, 2011). Even those
students that mentioned competition between organizations reported that it is friendly and
147
healthy. Some students even noted that competition over community service was the only
type of competition they have seen on campus. The lack of competition within the
student population at UM is not consistent with academic capitalism.
Diversity
The next indicator that will be used to investigate the student culture at UM is
diversity, which refers to ethnic and socioeconomic backgrounds in this study. One of the
key findings in the study pertaining to the student culture is that a large portion of the
student population is not satisfied with the diversity on campus. Multiple students who
took part in the study were from ethnically diverse backgrounds. Many of these students
reported having a difficult time adjusting to the university. A Latina student recounted
her and other Latino students’ perceptions of their first semester at the university. “We
felt out of place… You are surrounded by nothing but white people and you don’t have
diversity” (Student, personal communication, December 13, 2010). Another Latina
student and her friends had similar experiences. “Some people are really shocked about
the campus because they come from a high school with their ethnicity and race, and then
here it is different than what they expected” (Student, personal communication, January
12, 2011). From a socioeconomic standpoint, some students felt that the school did not
offer much diversity. These students noted that a large percentage of the student
population seem to come from affluent backgrounds. While the students interviewed
during the study came from a variety of backgrounds, both ethnically and
socioeconomically, the perception is that UM is comprised of a white, mostly affluent
148
student population. One student mentioned, “[UM] is an elite, affluent campus
community” (Student, personal communication, January 12, 2011). Despite the
individual concerns of particular participants, many of the students appeared to appreciate
that more efforts are being made to increase diversity. With less emphasis on
competition, administrators can make stronger efforts to recruit diverse student
populations. Students from diverse backgrounds have better opportunities to be accepted
since achievement measures such as high school GPA and standardized testing scores are
not as valuable to the institution. One student in particular had knowledge of the
advances the university has been making to increase diversity. “The university has been
doubling CAL grants and giving a lot more full rides to students with CAL grants. So that
has been definitely increasing our diversity” (Student, personal communication,
December 13, 2010). However, the responses of the students indicate that students
believe the institution needs to do more to diversify its student population and ease the
transition of its ethnic minority populations. The lack of diversity at UM is consistent
with institutions that are highly engaged with academic capitalism. However, the
initiatives that the institution is undertaking are designed to counteract this concern. This
approach indicates that academic capitalism may not be a major emphasis at UM.
Student Goals
The student goals of the UM student population is another student culture
indicator. The goals will assist in defining some of the beliefs and attitudes of the UM
student population. The university’s mission statement explicitly lists its institutional
149
goals. Based upon its mission statement, the institution appears to place an emphasis on a
total education beyond just academics. The university’s administration wants its students
to be successful inside and outside of the classroom in order to assist in the development
of the student. The goal of the institution is to produce civic-minded and responsible
citizens that will contribute positively to the world. The responses of the students who
took part in the study largely mirrored the mission statement’s goals. Self-discovery,
growth, and personal development seem to be the goals that the students are striving to
reach. Many of the students believed that university has given them the opportunity to
learn more about themselves through the education they have received. Some of the most
positive comments about UM centered on the institution’s ability to allow students to
develop more complete self-perceptions. One student claimed, “You get to learn who you
are. You get to be challenged and grow more… There is so much room for self-
discovery” (Student, personal communication, January 12, 2011). Another goal that is a
product of personal growth is the desire to create organizations on campus. Many of the
students expressed appreciation for the institution’s support in creating student
organizations. One of these student said, “Our campus makes it easy to start a club. The
university will give you $100 to start your club. They encourage you. With that money,
they encourage you to fund [the club] in a way that you [sustain it]” (Student, personal
communication, January 12, 2011). The students in the study believed they were going
to make a difference upon graduation. One student said, “Mountains prepares you for life
after college” (Student, personal communication, January 12, 2011). The experiences that
the university offers seems to have allowed the students to grow and positively contribute
150
to the communities both inside and outside of UM. The goals of the student population do
not appear to be connected to academic capitalism.
Satisfaction
The final indicator that will be used to gauge the student culture at UM is the
student population’s satisfaction with their experience at UM. The students at UM appear
to be largely satisfied with the university. The majority of students who participated in
the focus groups proclaimed their admiration for the university. Many of the comments
centered on the community, the opportunities to get involved on and off campus, and the
smaller size of the institution and the classes. A content student participant proclaimed,
“Everyone loves this place. It is such a tight community. All of the people know each
other” (Student, personal communication, December 13, 2010). Another student said, “I
feel really blessed that I found such a great school with great people. I have really good
friends and feel smarter. I feel that I have grown a lot and it has been a really cool
experience” (Student, personal communication, January 12, 2011). Some students even
mentioned that the university feels like a second home. One student of these students
mentioned, “I really like the life on campus here. It is really nice. I feel like this is really
home for me” (Student, personal communication, January 12, 2011). The student
participants who completed the survey indicated their satisfaction with the university.
Ninety-two percent of the survey participants indicated that they strongly agreed or
agreed that the students of UM have positive feelings about the university. The students
who were unhappy with the institution or knew other students at UM who were unhappy
151
cited the lack of diversity and the small campus size as reasons for their dissatisfaction.
Multiple students who were unhappy in their first semesters at UM noted that their
feelings about the institution changed once they became involved with an organization or
club. A student who at first disliked UM but grew to enjoy the university said, “You kind
of don’t have diversity. So at first, you are really unhappy” (Student, personal
communication, December 13, 2010). Another student mentioned, “I personally feel that
the students who are on campus enjoy [UM], and the people who are off campus do not”
(Student, personal communication, December 13, 2010). Multiple students share this
opinion. One of these students claimed, “I do know that there are individuals [who] are
not satisfied [with UM], but those individuals have not really looked for what thrills them
and have waited for things to come to them” (Student, personal communication, January
12, 2011). More so at UM that BU, satisfaction appears to be directly related to the level
involvement a student has on campus. Similar to BU, the satisfaction of the students
helps explain various elements of the student experience. The satisfaction of the students
suggest that academic capitalism does not play a major role at UM
Conclusion
Despite the universities’ many similarities, the institutional and student cultures at
BU and UM are different in a variety of ways (See table 4.3). BU appears to features a
culture that emphasizes growth and success while UM’s culture seems to be based more
in community and history. The different cultural indicators give a thorough depiction of
each of the two universities. The two institutions have distinct cultures that will allow for
152
thoughtful comparison. While similarities are bound to exist due to the similar physical
and ideological characteristics of the institutions, the differences will be most glaring in
this study. The next section of this chapter will consider the presented elements of the
student culture within the context of academic capitalism framework. Specifically, the
cultural elements will be viewed within the ten academic capitalism symptoms provided
in chapter three. By analyzing the cultural indicators in the context of these ten
symptoms, the impact that academic capitalism and the US News & World Report college
rankings have on student culture can be further explored.
153
Table 4.3: Summary of the Eleven Cultural Indicators and Examples found at both Beach
University and the University of the Mountains
Culture Indicators Beach University University of the Mountains
Environment - Academic and student growth
- New facilities for revenue-
generating programs
- Quality of facilities dependent upon
program and department
- Stagnant
- New arts facility
- Renovations to residence halls and
academic buildings
- Well-received classroom facilities
Mission - Education-related mission
- Faculty and teaching highly praised
- Large adjunct faculty population,
although desire to increase full-time
faculty
- Personalized education – small
classes
- Global citizens
- Education and civic mission
- Faculty and teaching highly
praised
- Growing adjunct population due
to budget cuts
- Community is heavy emphasis of
students and administrators
- Community service is required
and highly valued
Socialization - Balance between academic and
social life
- More emphasis on academics
- Greek is dominating minority
- Non-residential campus
- Balance between academic and
social life
- More emphasis on social
- Residential campus - Non-Greek
organizations more popular
Information - Leadership is accessible – Twitter,
email, walk-ins
- Weekly newsletters to students
- Leaders are accessible – Pizza
with the President & open forums
Strategy - Heavily invested in US News &
World Report rankings
- Looking to switch from regional
master’s university to national
research university
- Expansion of academic departments
and programs
- Specific schools receive more
attention & support from
administration
- Arts program cut
- Fundraising is significant
- Student connections to positively
influence indicators like persistence
and graduation
- Budget concerns driving the
strategy of UM
- The US News & World Report
rankings are not a major focus – do
not drive decisions
- Maintain current majors and
degrees
- Budget costs – Faculty, staff, and
Japanese program cut
- Alumni have major presence on
campus
- Fundraising not a priority
Leadership - Leadership works closely with
student population
- Heavy involvement of students in
campus decisions
- Leaders build rapport with students
- President shake-up in 2010 caused
concerns
- New interim president is in place
and well –received
- Administration and staff
committed to students
154
Academic Capitalism and Culture
In order to understand possible ways that academic capitalism and the US News &
World Report college rankings shape student cultures at both BU and UM, evaluating
how academic capitalism affects the institutions is important for this study. Determining
how academic capitalism is shaping an institution presents unique challenges. To address
these challenges, ten symptoms of academic capitalism were identified using literature
presented in the second chapter of this study. The level in which the two institutions are
motivated by academic capitalism was revealed through the research conducted at both
BU and UM. Table 4.4 shows some of the ways that academic capitalism impacts an
Table 4.3: Continued
Student Beliefs - Academic Success
- Global aspirations
- Connections & Networking
- Environmental Issues
- Community
- Service
- Relationships
Competition - Heavy institutional competition
taking place
- Significant academic and
organizational competition between
students
- Little institutional competition
taking place
- Small amount of competition
occurring between students
Diversity - Lack of diversity in student
population from ethnicity and
socioeconomic standpoints
- Losing students due to lack of
diversity
- Lack of diversity in student
population from ethnicity and
socioeconomic standpoints
- A cause for dissatisfaction
amongst students
- Institution taking initiative in
adding diversity
Student Goals - Success-minded students looking to
thrive both inside and outside of the
classroom while at BU and after
graduation
- Become more global
- Self-Discovery
- Growth
- Personal Development
- Contribute to community
Satisfaction - While some complaints, the
students appeared to be very happy
with their experience
- No first-hand complaints during the
study
- Satisfied with experience at
institution, student culture
- While some complaints, the
students appeared to be very happy
with their experience
- Satisfaction may be tied to
organizational involvement
- Satisfied with experience at
institution, student culture
155
institution. This table also indicates how to determine whether or not the symptoms of
academic capitalism are observable on the campus and if they are shaping the student
culture. Additionally, the table indicates whether the symptoms were visible at the two
institutions. If any of the symptoms were evident, the examples were entered into the
chart.
Table 4.4: Presence of Academic Capitalism at Beach University and the University of
the Mountains
Academic
Capitalism
Symptoms
How Action Will Be
Determined
Beach University University of
the Mountains
Attempts to save
costs at the
expense of
important
educational
endeavors
- Reduction of majors and/or
courses
- Decreased presence of
departments that do not easily
connect to industry
- Lack of funding to non-
industry majors
- Studio art program
discontinued
- Heavy adjunct faculty
population
- Japanese
program
discontinued
- Adjunct
faculty – due to
budget cuts
Support for
schools or
programs that
have the potential
to generate
revenue
- Presence of specific schools
or programs on campus, in
literature, or in school
marketing initiatives - Distance
education
- Business and film schools
strongly supported and
advertised
- Offers university college
for non-traditional student
under a different name –
online and in locations
throughout California
- Schools not
favored over
others
- Regional
branch
campuses in
different areas
of Southern
California
Attempts to attract
larger numbers of
students and
revenue (See note)
- Addition of courses, programs
and majors
- Emphasis on general
education courses, summer
programs, and graduate
programs
- New programs and
departments planned
- New graduate programs
- Planning to create
multiple doctor-level
programs
- Budget cuts
preventing
growth
- No plans to
create revenue-
generating
programs
Connection
between industry
and institution
- Research the institution
emphasizes its graduate
students pursue, if any
- Corporate presence on
campus
- Student enrollment in
particular majors/program
- Enrollments largest in
business and film, which
are the two most
marketable degrees
- Research heaviest in
business school
- Largest
enrollment in
business
156
Table 4.4: Continued
Emphasis on
professional
students
- The number of students who
are professionals looking to
“move up” within profession
- Creation of and focus on
“cash cow” programs
- Undergraduate students
career-driven
- Graduate programs in
Business, Film, Law,
Education, Psychology and
Counseling, Therapy
- 28% graduate students;
large majority are in Film,
Law, and Business
- Graduate
programs in
Business,
Education,
Music,
Communicative
Disorders
- 33% graduate
students;
majority of
graduate
students in
Business
Increased
competition
- College rankings involvement
- Rising tuition costs
- School marketing
- New facilities and student-
friendly enticements
- Types of students receiving
scholarships (high quality
students desired)
- Heavy administrative
competition with other
institutions
- Heavy focus on rankings
- Heavy marketing to
prospective students,
especially for revenue-
generating schools
- New facilities and large-
scale plans for more
growth
- High SES students
receiving aid
- Little outward
competition
with other
institutions
- Minor focus
on rankings
- Some new
facilities, but
mostly
renovations
Increased
emphasis on
research
- Types of instructors teaching
courses
- Establishment of research
institutes within departments
- Teaching quality
- 15 research centers and
institutes on campus
- Moving away from
master’s granting to
research-oriented
institution
- Heavy adjunct population
- Push for student research
- High teaching quality
- 1 research
institute on
campus
- Adjunct
population
- High teaching
quality
Corporate
involvement in
education or
connections to
industry
- Placement programs or
corporate scholarships created
with particular corporations
- Partnerships between
programs, schools, or
institutions and corporations
- None found - None found
157
Note: While the desire for an increase in students is a quality of academic capitalism, this contradicts how
an institution can improve in the rankings. An institution would be more likely to reduce the number of
students admitted and enrolled in order to lower acceptance rates, a key measure of the rankings. Despite
the US News & World Report rankings connection to academic capitalism, there are some cases where the
two are not aligned.
Attempts to Save Costs at the Expense of Important Educational Endeavors
One of the major hallmarks of academic capitalism is a school’s desire to connect
to industries that are thriving. Institutions that are concerned with this aspect of academic
capitalism may seek out corporations or individuals involved with a lucrative industry
and find various mutually and financially beneficial ventures. The connections between
profitable industries and institutions can yield grants, donations, and current and future
connections to leaders within the industry. Schools also may be interested in connecting
the students to the profitable industries due to student interest and potential connections
to wealthy alumni in the future. If schools are more interested in serving students who are
interested in industries where wealth and profit seeking are the highest priorities, their
Table 4.4: Continued
Increased student
marketing
- School “brand”
- Recruiting literature
- New facilities and student
amenities
- Appearance of campus
- Technology
- Partnerships with corporations
- Multiple new facilities
with more planned
- Extensive technology in
some schools
- Well maintained campus
- Marketing is focused on
promoting revenue-
generating schools
- New facility,
but no plans for
future
construction
- Renovations
- Technology
- Well
maintained
campus
- Budgeting
concerns with
marketing
Push for high
quality, high SES
students
- Types of students receiving
scholarships
- 85% receiving aid, but
only 70% qualify for need-
based aid
- Some students from
higher SES background
may be receiving aid
- Heavier emphasis on
academic quality of
students
- 75% receive
financial aid
- Student fit
most important
factor in
admission
process
158
ability to properly offer and manage other departments and programs may be adversely
impacted. Programs, degrees, and courses in non-industry areas such as the social
sciences and liberal arts may be reduced or phased out to make room for larger industry-
related programs. The potential impact this may have on the campus and student
population at a school is noteworthy.
Beach University
As BU looks to make move from a master’s granting regional university to a
national research university, the institution is looking to build new academic programs
while maintaining its current offerings. The Vice Chancellor acknowledged the heavy
emphasis on academics when he said, “I support the decisions that [our university makes]
to allocate resources disproportionately towards the academic experience” (Smith,
personal communication, September 10, 2010). The university’s administrators are
hoping to grow the number of program offerings to assist with its reputation once it
makes the transition. The university has already taken steps to increase the academic
departments and programs. BU is taking an aggressive approach to building programs.
The Vice Chancellor described the process in detail. “We went out and just brought in a
department. We went and brought in five or six faculty members. We said [to the
faculty], ‘We want to start this program here and we are excited about this. We want you
and your colleagues to all come over’” (Smith, personal communication, September 10,
2010). The logic behind this bold move is driven by the administration’s desire to switch
the university’s status. The Vice Chancellor mentioned, “We know that we essentially
159
need twenty doctorates a year to be ranked as a national university, and how would we go
about doing that? These programs that we [pulled together] are more than likely going to
be considered for these doctoral program” (Smith, personal communication, September
10, 2010). Because of this approach, the university is not looking to cut its current
programs unless considered necessary. Speaking with administration, the only programs
that are being discontinued at BU are related to the arts, such as the studio art program.
The discontinuation of the studio arts program was a maneuver by the university to save
on expensive program costs for a program that did not have large enrollment numbers.
The institution’s administration has a desire to keep such programs in existence, but they
acknowledged the expensive costs of maintaining programs with such personal attention
required for student success. The Vice Chancellor said, “The truth of the matter is [the
arts] are very expensive to operate. The classes tend to be small so you have almost one-
on-one time. So I think we have to be selective on which programs we can sustain”
(Smith, personal communication, September 10, 2010). Additionally, the arts programs
that were discontinued do not offer connections to any lucrative industries.
The students at BU do not possess the knowledge that administration has for the
future direction of the school. Due to their lack of history with the institution, the BU
student participants were unaware of the decisions to remove academic departments or
programs. However, the students had strong feelings about which programs appear to be
receiving the majority of the university’s financial resources. The students in the study
frequently mentioned the uneven funding between programs and schools within BU. The
business and film schools in particular were often cited by the students as receiving the
160
most attention and university money. One student involved in the study said, “The film
school and the business school are the two bigger schools here that [university
administrators] are really trying to push for” (Student, personal communication,
November 10, 2010). Both of these schools feature programs that are connected to
profitable industries. Many of the students believed that other programs, such as the
remaining non-film arts programs, were suffering from a lack of proper funding. When
asked how the university could improve, one frustrated student stated, “Give proper
funding to our art department” (Student, personal communication, November 17, 2010).
Another student said,
One issue for me is I feel like [administrators] devote too much money to
the film school. And I understand why. Because… we are trying to build
that reputation and recruit more people into the film school. But when I go
to labs, it is like half the things do not work, and things are rusty and they
run out of chemicals… [When I] talk among my peers, they are like “No it
shouldn’t be like this” (Student, personal communication, November 10,
2010).
The students expressed disappointment and frustration that the seemingly
unprofitable programs were struggling to receive the financial support necessary to carry
out fundamental actions that assist the educational process. As a whole, the major
industry-related schools like business and film dominate on campus from both funding
and attention standpoints. Students from other programs felt that the non-industry
programs were being shortchanged by administration.
161
University of the Mountains
Administrators at UM are taking a different approach to how it manages its
institution in comparison to BU. The schools and programs that comprise UM have been
stable. The Vice President of Student Life claimed, “Virtually every major that was [in
existence fifteen years ago] is still in place at the institution” (Williams, personal
communication, December 13, 2010). The institution would like to continue to follow
this philosophy as it moves forward. This may be difficult due to the financial problems
that UM is currently experiencing. The institution strives to create opportunities to take
advantage of its large major offerings through an integrative studies program, which
allows students to create unique and custom majors. Even though the school has a large
business school that houses a significant portion of its students, many of the students also
integrate other majors and courses into their degrees. The school does not identify
success by connections to industry. Every administrator who took part in the study
mentioned community, traditions, and history with frequency. The administration appears
to value its history and believes that its students and alumni stand to benefit from these
similar experiences. The Vice President quickly summed up the administration’s stance
when she said, “We are very much about being authentic” (Williams, personal
communication, December 13, 2010). Although the financial health of the institution is a
concern and will continue for years, administrators are united in wanting to maintain the
academic integrity of UM.
Like the students at BU, the student participants at UM were unaware of the
academic history of the programs and majors at the institution. However, the students in
162
the study identified multiple adverse effects of the university’s financial problems. One
of these effects is the discontinuing of the Japanese program. While the students did not
have much background information on the reasons behind this decision, the students
believed it was motivated by the need to reduce the institution’s budget. This decision
suggests that the administration cut the program due to program’s lack of popularity.
Based on the responses of administrators and students, the discontinuing of the Japanese
program does not appear to be at the expense of more popular programs on campus. The
majority of study participants did not feel that specific programs or departments received
more attention or funding from the administration. Overall, the students appeared to
believe that the institution is being greatly impacted by financial concerns. One student
summarized the words of many when she said, “The budget cuts overall, throughout the
schools, has actually impacted a lot” (Student, personal communication, December 13,
2010).
Support for Schools or Programs that have the Potential to Generate Revenue
As institutions focus on programs and degrees that are connected to profitable
industries, leaders at the institutions will be more inclined to attract prospective students
who wish to prepare for careers within these industries. In order to harness this
effectively, institutions will promote their connections to the desired industries to the
students. Another signifier of a school’s alignment with academic capitalism beliefs is
through the support of schools and programs that have the ability or potential to generate
revenues for the institution. This can be seen in how administration promotes its
163
institution. The school literature and marketing initiatives will suggest which schools and
programs are considered the priorities of the institution. The overall presence a specific
school has within the institution also will help indicate the type of support it receives
from the institution. Finally, the presence of distance education programs can be
considered an indicator of high academic capitalism presence on a college campus.
Online and off-campus degree offerings, especially in the areas of graduate programs,
have the potential to generate large revenues for institutions without some of the
expensive overhead costs associated with holding courses at the institution.
Beach University
BU appears to offer significant support to particular programs and schools that
have the potential to generate revenue for the institution. The students in the study
asserted that the business and film schools receive support from the administration that
no other schools experience. The two schools feature new facilities that give students
access to new and useful technology that other schools at the university lack. The film
school especially seems to garner the most attention from the administration. One student
claimed, “It seems like [BU] puts more resources into the film school than any other
school on campus” (Student, personal communication, November 10, 2010). Another
student said, “One of the main emphasis and focuses of Beach is the film school”
(Student, personal communication, November 3, 2010). The schools’ students also are
given perks, such as free printing inside of the school’s building, that other university
students do not receive. Additionally, multiple students indicated that the institution
164
seems to put more effort into recruiting students to the business, film, and law schools.
The three schools are prominently featured in the recruiting literature and represent a
large percentage of the overall student populations, both from undergraduate and
graduate student perspectives.
While not discussed in detail during the study, the university also offers a separate
university for non-traditional students. The university utilizes a different name but is run
by BU. The university offers both online classes and traditional campus learning in
various locations throughout the state of California. Administrators mentioned that the
university has been receiving more attention from BU administration and hopes to see
continued growth. This university is competing for students with various for-profit
institutions.
University of the Mountains
The results of the study indicate that the UM is not as engaged as BU in terms of
creating or supporting revenue-generating programs. Although a large percentage of the
students are in the business program at UM, the institution does not have the same desire
to showcase the school to its incoming students. The responses of the students in the
study indicated that individual schools and programs do not seem to be given preference
over others. The students’ responses also suggested that they did not notice an emphasis
of specific schools or programs in the university’s recruiting literature. Students failed to
consistently identify the largest and most industry-friendly majors as the most popular on
165
campus. The students also did not identify any schools at UM that receive inordinate
attention or funding from the administration.
The university has regional branch campuses in seven different Southern
California cities, but this does not appear to be a major strategic venture. Both
administrators and students failed to acknowledge these branch campuses during
interviews and focus groups. The branch campuses all offer undergraduate and graduate
degrees for the business school, which indicates a desire for the school to reach students
who may have otherwise not been able to attend the university. This decision suggests a
desire to capitalize on revenue-generating programs through distance education.
However, neither students nor administrators could confirm that this was the strategy of
the university.
Attempts to Attract Larger Numbers of Students and Revenue
Another sign of academic capitalism is the desire to attract a large number of
revenue-generating students to the institution. Once at the institution, the students can
connect to profitable industry-related programs and courses that will be useful to students
in their post college industry-related careers. With more emphasis being placed on
graduate degrees to advance within some industries, an increased push for graduate
degrees is also symptomatic of academic capitalism. This institutional desire to add
courses, programs, and majors in industry-related areas is one way to gauge a school’s
involvement in capitalistic actions. The creation and emphasis of new graduate and
summer programs may also exemplify a desire to attract more students. Finally, a greater
166
emphasis on general education courses may also assist in distinguishing a school’s desire
to attempt larger numbers of students. With greater focus on these types of courses,
institutions may be able to attract more prospective students.
Beach University
The economic hardships that have gripped the United States in the late 2000’s
have been felt throughout higher education. Administration at both BU and UM
acknowledge that the two institutions are no different than many of the other institutions
that have endured financial difficulties as a result. Based upon the research conducted at
both universities, BU appears to be in better shape of the two institutions. BU is
successfully navigating through difficult financial times while seeing unprecedented
growth. The university has sizeable aspirations for the future as the administration looks
to expand. The school has seen its population and space grow dramatically, as it is
pushing to outgrow its current location. The incoming freshman class for the 2010-2011
academic year was significantly higher than expected. The Vice Chancellor claimed, “We
just had a ridiculously large freshman class [join us]. We were expecting about a three-
and-a-half percent increase in enrollment, but we may be closer to nine [percent]” (Smith,
personal communication, September 10, 2010). As the institution has grown, its student
population has moved from largely regional to national. As recently as ten years ago,
forty percent of the institution’s population was comprised of students from the local
area. This number has dwindled to twenty percent with roughly forty percent of its
population coming from out of state. The university is looking to expand its residential
167
structure to house these students. The Assistant Vice Chancellor mentioned multiple
residential projects that are currently being planned. In addition to a traditional dormitory,
one of the next projects incorporates academic and social life. “We are going to be
building a 400-bed filmmakers village for film students down by the film school. There
will be some mixed purpose pieces in there that could be retail” (Davis, personal
communication, October 21, 2010). This benefit for the students is also aligned with the
academic changes the university is undergoing. The institution has positioned itself to
move from a regional to a national university. Currently, administration is evaluating how
to go about this transition for the purposes of the US News & World Report rankings. In
order to move to the national university classification, the institution is looking to
maintain current schools and programs while expanding its academic standing through
new departments, schools, and programs, including a large increase in doctorate degree
offerings. This desire for institutional growth and expansion of its academic programs has
manifested itself through the creation and importation of entirely new departments, as
previously discussed. BU has brought complete faculty teams from other institutions to
start quality academic programs. The university has plans to create new majors,
programs, and schools. The growth in academic offerings will allow for the university to
make a transition to a national university while reaching a broader student population.
New academic programs and schools will increase the interest in the university and
attract larger numbers of students and revenue. In addition to the academic growth, the
university hopes to attract students through new facilities for various academic programs
168
University of the Mountains
Regardless of the financial health of UM, the administration is not focusing on
expansion. The Vice President said, “With a lot of institutions struggling financially,
there is usually a movement towards cutting programs that don’t make much money and
[establishing] programs that generate a lot of interest and money. Mountains is not one of
those schools” (Williams, personal communication, December 13, 2010). However, UM
appears to be experiencing severe financial constraints, which are stagnating its student
enrollment numbers. The administrators and students who participated in the study
revealed the degree in which the university is experiencing financial hardships. The
university has been struggling to maintain its traditional operations due to the lack of
revenue. Many students mentioned that faculty, staff, and programs have been cut in
order to balance the university’s budget. The university’s administration has taken pride
in the fact that its program offerings have remained stable for decades. The financial
struggles of the university will test UM’s ability to continue to offer its programs. The
lack of capital available to the university may necessitate further cuts and will cause
difficulties if administration wants to create new programs or majors. The university will
not be able to attract larger numbers of students and revenues through new academic
offerings.
Connection between Industry and Institution
As previously mentioned, academic capitalism signifies a connection between
industry and higher education institutions. How motivated an institution is to take part in
169
actions that drive academic capitalism can be determined by how the institution
approaches outside industries. This can be seen in the type of presence corporations have
at an institution. If corporations are strongly represented on campus through successful
businesses chains and brand names, the level of acceptance for industry will be high. An
industry’s acceptance on campus will also be visible in the type of research in which the
faculty and graduate students engage. Finally, the connection between an industry and the
institution will be evident by evaluating particular schools and their ties with industries.
The type of faculty teaching in these schools, the student enrollment numbers within
particular programs and majors, and the types of degrees and courses offered will all
indicate just how closely an institution is associated to particular industries.
Beach University.
The study conducted at BU did not suggest the presence of strong ties between
corporations and the university. Research also does not have a dominating presence at
BU. While the university has multiple research centers and aspirations for growth in the
area of research, the only current research revealed during the study was more scientific
in nature. Where BU’s connection to outside industry can be seen is through the
university’s most visible programs. The students at BU named business, film, and law as
the dominating schools at the university. A large majority of the students at BU are
located in these three schools. Most of the university’s graduate programs can be found
within these schools, as well. Additionally, the schools’ instructors are comprised of
many adjunct faculty members who are currently involved within the business,
170
entertainment, and law industries. Industry members also play an important role in
shaping the directions of these schools, as all three feature successful individuals from the
respective industries on the schools’ board committees.
University of the Mountains
Like BU, UM does not feature strong ties to corporations nor does the university
place heavy emphasis on research. However, the university’s largest program does have
ties to a successful industry. The business school accounts for large percentages of both
undergraduate and graduate student populations. The students in the study did not
mention whether the business program had a large adjunct population, as the students
indicated that the adjunct professors were largely teaching in the liberal arts school with
emphasis on the languages. With the exception of business, the other programs at UM do
not seem to have strong industry ties. One of the most frequently mentioned majors in the
study was communicative disorders. Despite featuring smaller enrollment sizes than the
business school, many of the students felt that this was the most popular program on
campus. This may be due to larger business enrollment taking place off campus at one of
the seven regional locations.
Emphasis on Professional Students
Academic capitalism at a higher education institution may also take the form of
institutions encouraging and facilitating professionals to “move up” within their
profession through furthering their educational backgrounds and bolstering their resumes.
171
The strong presence of graduate and credential programs aimed at serving professionals
in areas like business will help clarify if such actions are taking place at institutions.
Additionally, the presence of online graduate programs, which some may believe are
more revenue-oriented, can help distinguish if specific schools are creating “cash cow”
programs.
Beach University
BU does not currently offer many graduate programs. The graduate programs the
university has include degrees in business, film, law, education, psychology and
counseling, and therapy. The graduate student population currently comprises around
twenty-eight percent of the university’s overall population. The graduate programs the
university does offer focuses largely on professional students looking for advancements
within their professions. This is especially the case within business, film, and law. The
education school also offers a variety of credential programs that are designed for
professional students. Many of the graduate programs focus on students who hope to
advance within their professions. The university will be able to capitalize on these desires
by marketing their programs to these students, selling them the professional benefits of
more schooling. These “cash cow” programs offer the university more revenue. With
plans to move from a master’s granting regional institution to a national university, BU
will be able to offer more programs that appeal to professional students. The university
also offers many of their graduate degrees online through their branch university and
online program. While the graduate programs were not an emphasis of conversations
172
during the focus groups and interviews, a small number of participants acknowledged the
focus that some of these students receive.
University of the Mountains
Similar to BU, UM offers a limited number of graduate programs. The graduate
opportunities are even less plentiful than BU. The university only features graduate
programs in business, education, music, and communicative disorders. However, the
graduate student population makes up around thirty-three percent of the overall
population, which is a slightly larger percentage than BU. The majority of these students
are in the business program, which is tailored to professional students. These students can
attend classes at the main campus or in any of the seven branch campuses. The locations
allow for easier access to programming. The university also offers education credential
programs for students. The remaining graduate courses do not appear to be revenue-
generating programs designed for professional students. The large presence of the
business programs indicates that the university does place some emphasis on the graduate
programs to provide revenue. However, the students and the administration did not
mention any institutional emphasis or promotion of the graduate programs during the
various focus groups and interviews.
Increased Competition
Another major element of academic capitalism is the increased presence of
competition both within an institution between its various schools and outside of the
173
institution, as colleges and universities compete with one another for students. The
emphasis on competition is visible in a variety of ways, including the institution’s level
of involvement with college evaluators like the US News & World Report rankings,
tuition costs, marketing initiatives, the creation of new facilities, and the offering of
various student-friendly enticements. These potential competitive indicators may be
outwardly displayed or hidden by the institution. Additionally, the types of students who
receive scholarships may also indicate whether institutions are competitive with others.
Scholarships aimed at attracting the highest quality students from academic standpoints
as opposed to students who come from underrepresented backgrounds and can offer
unique viewpoints suggest that the academic standing of the institution compared to
others matters.
Beach University
The presence of significant competition was evident at BU after interacting with
administrators and students. Both administrators and students asserted that the US News
& World Report college rankings were a driving force behind the university. This
emphasis on the rankings has instilled a competitive nature in administrators as they hope
to surpass other institutions to improve the university’s standing. One student in the study
proclaimed, “The university as a whole is obviously competing [with other institutions]
in terms of rankings” (Student, personal communication, November 17, 2010). Another
sign of the competition that takes place is the administration’s desire to compare the
institution to other benchmark universities. The students in the study mentioned that the
174
administration has repeatedly compared the institution to other more prestigious
universities as administrators attempt to compete for similar students. A student
mentioned, “There is more of an emphasis on academics [at BU]. The school is pushing
for Ivy League status” (Student, personal communication, November 17, 2010). This
push for prestige led another student to say, “[The president of BU] has made far too
many comparisons to [a local, prestigious university]” (Student, personal communication,
November 17, 2010). The competitive nature of the university also was present within the
student population. Many of the students in the study reported academic competition
taking place inside of the classroom. In addition to the previous student comments about
the competition, another student claimed, “In my classes, I sense a lot of academic
competition” (Student, personal communication, November 10, 2010).
Additionally, BU’s engagement in competition can be seen in other non-obvious
ways. The heavy amount of student marketing that takes place signifies that the
university is hoping to attract students who may be interested in other institutions. Many
students in the study admitted that they were deciding between multiple universities
before choosing BU. The university’s use of scholarships and grants are also another
competitive action. The university hopes to attract desirable students to the institution by
offering more financial incentives than other universities. Most of the students ultimately
made their decision to attend BU based upon the amount of financial awards they
received. The university can use this to lure prospective students from other similar
institutions. One of the students best summarized the feelings of the participants when
she said, “I chose Beach because out of all of the schools I got into… Beach gave me the
175
nicest scholarships. They gave me a good chunk of money” (Student, personal
communication, November 17, 2010). Another way that BU is showing its competitive
nature is through its facilities. The university is devoting large amounts of money into
constructing new buildings with state-of-the-art amenities that will attract students to the
university. New technology is also an important tool to compete with other universities.
Being able to offer students the best technology available will distinguish the university
from others or allow the university to keep pace with other more prestigious universities
that students may be interested in attending. While some students complained about the
outdated resources, the business and film students raved about the technology available to
them. One student said, “In the business department, all of my classrooms have
PowerPoint and white boards, and they seem to have all of the materials needed to teach
the class” (Student, personal communication, November 17, 2010). As a whole,
competition plays a major role on campus on multiple levels at the university. BU
appears to be an institution that relies on competition to advance its standing within
higher education.
University of the Mountains
While competition was present at UM, the level of competition was much less
than what was found at BU. Unlike BU, administration does not appear to be strongly
competing with other institutions. The university’s lack of devotion to the US News &
World Report rankings reduces the outward signs of competition from the administration.
The students in the study did not notice any competition at the university-level. The
176
administrators also failed to mention an institutional desire to compete with other
universities. Like the university itself, the students at UM showed a less competitive edge
inside of the classroom when compared to BU. A student said, “I have never felt
competition… It has been a really friendly atmosphere” (Student, personal
communication, January 12, 2011). Despite the findings of the study indicating less
competition taking place at UM, the institution still engaged in some competitive
behavior. The university has built a new arts center and renovated many buildings on
campus to appeal to students. The amenities are being implemented with the students’
desires and needs in mind. The university hopes to attract and retain its students. The
Vice President stated, “The campus’ physical spaces and buildings are a big initiative”
(Williams, personal communication, December 13, 2010). Also, a large percentage of the
students at UM receive financial aid. Like the student participants at BU, most of the
individuals at UM who took part in the study chose to attend UM because of the financial
awards offered. One student recounted, “I just applied here. I didn’t really know anything
about the school. And then I got in with the most money here, and so this is where I came
to college. Because of the financial aid” (Student, personal communication, January 12,
2011). Overall, UM engages in slight competitive behavior. However, the university is
much less connected to competition than BU.
Increased Emphasis on Research
The research that key individuals within an institution champion or conduct can
also provide insight as to the level of involvement schools have with academic
177
capitalism. This will be visible by gaining a better understanding of not only what is
being valued from a topical standpoint, but also the amount of research that is being
conducted within an institution. To gain this insight, studying the area of research focus
will be beneficial. Determining which types of instructors are teaching the schools’
courses will also be an important measure of the level of research that is being conducted.
If a large number of courses are being taught by adjunct faculty members or graduate
students, the emphasis that an institution places on research can be determined by
understanding how the full-time faculty’s work load is being allocated. If the full-time
faculty are not devoting time to teaching, the faculty are more likely to be involved in
research. Finally, the quality of the teaching may be useful in determining the level of
research that is taking place at an institution. Not only does the increased use of adjunct
faculty and graduate student instructors indicate a greater likelihood of faculty
involvement in research, but also lower quality teaching may indicate that the school
rewards faculty for research efforts as opposed to instruction quality. Various factors can
influence poor teaching, so analyzing the teaching quality is not the only measure that
should be used for assessing research involvement.
Beach University
As BU looks to move from a master’s granting regional institution to a national
university, the institution will likely increase its areas of research. Currently, the amount
of research being conducted at the university appears to be moderate. Many students in
the study revealed that the university is attempting to increase its research from both
178
faculty and student perspectives. One of the students in the study claimed, “The school is
trying to expand research-wise, trying to get more students to do research” (Student,
personal communication, November 10, 2010). Another student also noticed the
administration’s push for more research. “[The university] is trying to [encourage] more
research. BU wants to become a research-based university” (Student, personal
communication, November 6, 2010). Students reported instances of faculty research in
the social and applied sciences, law, and business departments. These schools feature
multiple research centers. The business school offers the most research centers with five
actively contributing. Despite the increasing research taking place at BU, the level of
research does not appear to be impacting the quality of teaching. The administrators
stressed the emphasis the institution has for teaching. The Assistant Vice Chancellor
claimed, “Teaching is still a big focus in [the faculty’s tenure process]” (Davis, personal
communication, October 21, 2010). This is evident in the positive responses the student
participants had about the teaching and faculty at BU. A student in the study said, “There
is a large emphasis on teaching at BU” (Student, personal communication, November 6,
2010). Although students acknowledged that they have had a significant number of
adjunct instructors teach their courses, the students were generally complimentary of
these individuals. Some students even believed the experience possessed by adjunct
faculty who work in the field can be more beneficial to the learning experience.
179
University of the Mountains
Based upon interactions with students and administrators, research does not seem
to be an emphasis of the university. The student participants did not know any faculty
members who were engaged in research. The university only appears to have one
research institute. While the university employs a growing adjunct faculty population,
this is not a result of giving full-time faculty more time to engage in research. Budgetary
concerns are forcing the university to reduce its faculty numbers. Despite the large
presence of adjunct faculty, the students reported overwhelming satisfaction with the
teaching quality at UM.
Corporate Involvement in Education or Connections to Industry
One of the more glaring examples of academic capitalism is the direct association
between a school and a corporation. Some of the various ways an association between an
institution and a corporation exists includes the creation of corporate-funded
scholarships, career and intern placement programs for higher education students, and
direct partnerships. In terms of partnerships, programs, schools, or institutions can be
proactive in recruiting corporations for opportunities such as endowed chairs and
program construction. This could be something more minor along the lines of
sponsorship-like opportunities or something considerable like the implementation of a
company’s infrastructure to build a new program. Administrators and students at both BU
and UM did not indicate if corporations were directly funding any scholarships or
programs. Corporate involvement appears to be minimal at both universities.
180
Increased Student Marketing
A distinct characteristic of schools driven by academic capitalism is the operation
as a business entity instead of a traditional higher education school or institution. One of
the more visible ways to determine how driven a school or institution is driven by
academic capitalism can be seen in the approaches administration takes towards
attracting students. The marketing material that institutions distribute to prospective
students will indicate what an institution or school values and how it hopes to position
itself. The message administrators send to prospective students entails more than just
what is being written or conveyed. The marketing and recruiting literature will offer
insight into the school’s branding initiatives and the aspirations for the future direction of
the school or institution. A subtle way a school or institution markets to students may
include the amount of money allocated to aesthetic improvements. Some administrators
are successful in attracting students by convincing them that they will have access to
comfortable and advanced amenities while at the institution. Student marketing can be
seen through the building of new, state-of-the-art facilities, maintenance and upgrades of
its current facilities, and the improvement of the campus’ and schools’ appearance. The
improvements made to the facilities also may include upgrades and improvements to
current technological infrastructure. Providing students with access to advanced
technology inside and outside of the classroom may be a draw to some of its targeted
students. Finally, some institutional marketing initiatives may center on the partnerships
schools or institutions have with corporations. Students may be more inclined to enroll at
an institution where they feel they have a better opportunity to connect to a successful
181
company after graduating. Schools that play up partnerships with corporations may be
interested in marketing to a particular student population that is career-oriented.
Beach University
Student marketing is an important initiative at BU. While the institution makes a
strong effort for all of its programs, students in the study noticed a stronger marketing
push for its business, film, and law programs. These programs are the revenue generating
degrees at BU. The participants corroborated this in the study. One of the students said,
“When I first heard about [BU], I heard most from their film and business programs”
(Student, personal communication, November 15, 2010). Additionally, the university has
made building new facilities a priority. Multiple schools have recently built new facilities
while other schools on campus are planning to erect new buildings, according to the
administrators at BU. The students and administrators also noted the beautification
initiatives by campus maintenance staff to keep the campus clean and presentable at all
times. The university has also made efforts to provide students and faculty with advanced
technology in certain schools like film and business. Such state-of-the-art technology will
help keep the university on a level playing field with its competitors. This will assist in
the marketing initiatives of the individual schools and the university as a whole.
University of the Mountains
Although UM has taken similar actions as BU, the marketing initiatives
undertaken by UM do not appear to be as intense. The Vice President of Student Affairs
182
also indicated that marketing budgets might be a concern at UM. “The biggest challenge
we have is putting enough money in the marketing so we can get our name out there”
(Williams, personal communication, December 13, 2010). The students in the study did
not indicate that individual schools received preferential treatment by the university. The
students also did not mention any prevalence of specific programs in the marketing
literature the university sends to students. Like BU, UM has invested in their facilities
and technologies. The university has constructed a new arts building and has renovated
many other buildings on campus. From the conversations with students and
administrators, the university appears to not have any future building projects on the
horizon. One of the students said, “I feel they have pretty much come to an end in
improving [the campus]” (Student, personal communication, January 12, 2011). This
could be due to its financial struggles. The students also reported that the university’s
classrooms are equipped with technology that assists with the educational experience.
One student was impressed with the setup of the university’s classrooms. “A lot of the
classrooms have computers and then we also have smart classrooms, which have entire
sets of computers depending on the teacher’s needs” (Student, personal communication,
December 13, 2010). However, the technology was not a major emphasis of the
discussions and appears to not be as strong a focus to the university as it is for BU. The
Vice President of Student Affairs indicated there might be budget constraints that will
prevent technological growth. She stated, “It is challenging to hire to update technology.
To pour resources into [technological advancements and maintenance]” (Williams,
personal communication, December 13, 2010).
183
Push for High Quality, High SES Students
Institutions entrenched in academic capitalism look to recruit high quality
students that would positively influence the student’s perception of the institution. A
student population with impressive academic performance numbers can improve the
perception of the institution to students, other institutions’ administrators, and
publications. These positive advancements have the potential to attract more students,
better quality faculty, and corporate money through research grants or program
investments. While high-performing students can be found in various backgrounds, the
benefits of coming from a wealthier socioeconomic background can increase the
likelihood of better academic performance. A higher performing student may be a result
of the various benefits that wealthier students have access to, such as higher quality
instructors and tutors. In order to determine whether a school is looking for higher quality
students from a higher socioeconomic background, evaluating which types of students are
receiving scholarships and grants can clarify the institutions’ priorities. If more students
from underprivileged backgrounds lacking the most impressive academic statistics are
represented at the institution, the institution would appear to be interested in students who
have other attributes to offer. The focus may not be solely on areas that improve the
worth of the institution from the perspective of academic capitalism.
Beach University
As a university that focuses heavily on the US News & World Report rankings,
BU values student performance indicators that will assist in improving the institution’s
184
rank. Because of this, administration hopes to recruit top quality students and bring them
to the university. Most of the student population receives some form of financial aid, with
over eighty-five percent of the undergraduate students either receiving need-based
financial aid, or need-based scholarship or grant funding. The Vice Chancellor of Student
Affairs stated in an interview that as many as thirty percent of students do not qualify for
financial aid. This indicates that a number of the wealthier students at BU are being
offered scholarship and grant money to attend the university. The students from higher
socioeconomic backgrounds have access to better schools and academic assistance that
other students may not be able to afford. The university appears to have a desire to attract
high quality students from wealthier socioeconomic backgrounds.
University of the Mountains
Similar to BU, a large percentage of the UM population receives some form of
financial aid. At UM, this percentage is around seventy-five percent of the student
population. While some of the students in the study indicated that the institution features
a heavy middle-to-upper class student population, the students and administrators were
not able to provide solid estimates of the socioeconomic breakdown of the students.
However, the study featured a highly diverse population largely from middle-to-lower
class families. The administrators emphasized that the types of students the institution
hopes to recruit is based more on fit with the institution’s goals and values and not on
academic performance. The Vice President said, “We want to get the proper students here
but in a way that is not going to sacrifice our mission. Fit is the key. [We] don’t just want
185
bodies, [we] want the right bodies” (Williams, personal communication, December 13,
2010). This response suggests that the university does not necessarily value high quality
and high socioeconomic students.
Conclusion
Both BU and UM displayed that academic capitalism plays a role at each
institution. The actions that the universities undertake as a result of academic capitalism
appear to shape the institutional and student cultures at both universities. These
approaches to academic capitalism differentiate two similar institutions. Based upon the
results of the study, BU appears to be the institution that is most heavily engaged with
academic capitalism. The university openly embraces many of its capitalistic approaches,
which are visible when evaluating the actions and decisions of the institution’s
administration. BU displayed symptoms of academic capitalism in almost every category
evaluated in the study. In contrast to BU, the level of involvement in academic capitalism
is significantly reduced at UM. While the university engages in actions and decisions
based upon academic capitalism, the institution seems to be far less involved than BU.
Actions driven by academic capitalism were much more difficult to determine at UM.
Both administrators and students did not appear to prioritize the elements that define
academic capitalism. Although the university displayed some symptoms of academic
capitalism, its presence at UM was limited or non-existent in many of the categories
evaluated by the study. The final chapter of this study will discuss the implications of the
study’s findings in further detail.
186
CHAPTER FIVE: CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS
Introduction
Extensive research suggests that the US News & World Report college rankings
have an influence on the admissions processes of specific higher education institutions.
However, the literature is lacking significant information on how these rankings impact
enrolled students and their culture. The purpose of this study was to explore the level of
impact the US News & World Report college rankings have on the student culture at four-
year, private higher education institutions. Due to the lack of research on the impact
rankings have on enrolled students, a framework of academic capitalism was utilized to
comprehend how and why student culture is influenced by the publication’s rankings. It
was established that institutions that are heavily engaged in academic capitalism were
heavily invested in the US News & World Report rankings. The following research
question guided the study:
Does academic capitalism, as represented by the US News & World Report
college rankings, shape student culture? And if so, in what ways are the
rankings producing changes in the student culture at two four-year higher
education institutions?
In order to determine the level of impact the US News & World Report college
rankings had on student culture at four-year, private higher education institutions, a
comparative case study was conducted at two similar non-profit institutions but with
different focuses on the US News & World Report college rankings: Beach University
(BU) and the University of the Mountains (UM). The two institutions were chosen based
187
upon similarities that included location, size, degree offerings, and student populations.
However, the schools varied on the administration’s approaches to the US News & World
Report college rankings. The administration at BU is heavily invested in the rankings and
uses them as a foundation for many of the institution’s key decisions. UM’s
administration possesses a different viewpoint. While administrators understand the
implications of performing well in the rankings and appreciate the benefits they may
bring to the institution, the administration does not use the rankings to guide key
decisions. The rankings are just one of many tools used by administrators to drive the
institution’s direction. The qualitative and quantitative study consisted of four data
collections phases. The first phase included personal interviews with high-ranking
administrators at each institution to confirm the approaches the institutions adopt with
respect to the US News & World Report college rankings. The second phase of the data
collection consisted of personal interviews with administrators who work closely with the
student populations at the two institutions. The third phase encompassed meeting with
students through focus groups and personal interviews at both institutions in order to
obtain key cultural information. The final phase of the data collection process involved
having students at both institutions complete an online survey to either confirm or deny
the information obtained in the student focus groups.
In this chapter, I will provide an overview of the key findings and discuss how
these findings relate to the literature. The findings will be examined in the context of the
research question. I will also explore the findings’ implications for future practice in
188
higher education. Finally, I will highlight the future opportunities for research based upon
the results of the study.
Research Findings and Discussion
The research question that was posed to be answered by the results of the study is as
follows: Does academic capitalism, as represented by the US News & World Report
college rankings, shape student culture? And if so, in what ways are the rankings
producing changes in the student culture at two four-year higher education institutions?
The study’s data indicates that academic capitalism and the US News & World Report
college rankings do appear to influence culture at four-year higher education institutions.
The particular cultural areas in which academic capitalism and rankings appeared to have
an influence include the students’ environments, the socialization of the student
populations, institutional approaches to strategies that directly correlate to the student
populations, the level of fundraising and alumni involvement, student priorities,
competition, and overall financial health. The differences in culture help formulate
conclusions about the research. BU and UM are regional master’s-granting universities in
Southern California that share many similarities, such as population and campus sizes,
locations, and even institutional missions. The differences found in the study can reveal
how culture is influenced. From these differences, the conclusions can be determined.
Academic capitalism and the US News & World Report college rankings seem to have
helped shape student culture. The comparative case study at BU and UM has shown
various ways in which the student culture may be impacted. The findings of the study
189
previously explored in detail are largely supported by literature. These findings have
helped produce four major conclusions in regards to the impact the rankings and
academic capitalism have on student culture. The first conclusion is that rankings and
academic capitalism seem to create a competitive student culture both inside and outside
of the classroom. The second conclusion is that rankings and academic capitalism appear
to create differences in student values. The third conclusion from the study is that student
culture may be impacted by the rankings and academic capitalism due to the financial
ramifications associated with administrations’ approaches to these subjects. The final
conclusion is that following the US News & World Report rankings and emphasizing
academic capitalism appears to not have an impact on the student culture from the
perspective of the students’ satisfaction with the learning experience.
Competitive Student Culture
In the study, one of the most evident repercussions of the US News & World
Report rankings and academic capitalism was an increased presence of competition both
from student and institutional standpoints. The rankings and academic capitalism both
appear to create more competitive student cultures. Students may be more likely to
engage in competitive behavior both inside and outside of the classroom. Of the two
institutions involved in the study, the students at BU reported a much greater presence of
both academic and social competition than at UM. While some of the students at both
institutions claimed that academic competition was non-existent in their experiences, a
much larger percentage of the students at BU encountered some form of academic
190
competition. Additionally, competition between specific student organizations existed at
both institutions. Similar to the academic competition, the students at BU appeared to me
more involved with social competition than the students at UM. Overall, the study
indicates that the student culture of an institution may be more competitive if the
institution exhibits a greater commitment to academic capitalism. While the literature did
not specifically touch upon this finding, the competitive approaches adopted by the
universities may play a role in this. If administrators at an institution engage in highly
competitive activities to attract sought-after students, this approach may filter down to the
student population. This appeared to be the case within the study. Both the administrators
and students at BU overwhelmingly indicated the administration is heavily competitive
with other institutions. This is different than the approach UM takes, where the majority
of students and administrators either denied or failed to mention that the administration is
competitive with other institutions. The lack of competition at UM appears to reflect the
non-competitive measures the administration took in attracting students to the university.
The heightened level of competition from an institutional standpoint is validated by
literature that asserts the amount of competition rises as institutions become more
engaged with academic capitalism. As more institutions become motivated by academic
capitalism, competition increases in most higher education markets (Brewer, et. al, 2002).
BU appeared to be highly competitive with other institutions, both similar and dissimilar.
This approach is vastly different than that adopted by UM, which did not seem to be
engaged in competition with other institutions. Administrators who are concerned with
prestige and reputation are likely to engage in competition (Brewer, et. al, 2002). Because
191
UM did not seem to be as interested in these two areas, less competitive activity may
have taken place.
The competitive nature of institutions can also be seen in the higher education
arms race. This arms race is best exemplified through dedicated improvements made to
the student environment. A major example of the arms race includes the construction of
new student-friendly facilities (Slaughter & Rhoades, 2004). Both universities have
undertaken projects to build new or update existing facilities. From the responses of
administrators and students, administration at both universities seem to understand the
value that more comfortable buildings can bring from marketing, satisfaction, and
learning standpoints. The scope of these projects is where the differences in the
environments of the two institutions are exemplified. The construction of new facilities at
BU points to a possible increase in participation in the higher education arms race.
Administrators at BU appear to allocate more funding to new construction in efforts to
entice students to attend the institution over others and to accommodate the university’s
growth plans. Many of the new projects focus on student dormitories or buildings for
programs that house significant numbers of students. These expensive buildings and
equipment are mainly allocated to the revenue-generating programs like business, film,
and law. New building projects are on the horizon as the university looks to expand its
academic offerings, student population, and campus size. In contrast, the administration
at UM has just completed a large renovation project on many of its outdated buildings.
While a new building was constructed for the arts program, no other buildings or
renovations are planned at this time. Although these projects are designed to bring many
192
of the facilities up-to-date, the institution does not appear to be implementing projects for
competitive reasons. UM does not seem to be heavily involved in the student arms race.
The increased presence of academic capitalism at a university appears to influence not
only the frequency in which facilities are erected or renovated, but also which schools
and departments benefit from newer facilities. Based upon a level involvement in
academic capitalism by their universities, students of revenue-generating schools will
likely be provided with a comfortable and technologically advanced environment to
learn. Additionally, institutions that are heavily invested in academic capitalism will
likely provide more modern and student-friendly living facilities for its students.
The student arms race drives up student costs and tuition, makes the admissions process
complex for students, creates access problems for underrepresented students, causes
integrity problems in research, and raises the costs for the institutions (Hoxby, 1997;
Kezar, 2008; McPherson & Schapiro, 1998; Slaughter & Rhoades, 2004; Zemsky, et. al,
2005). Issues with diversity, research, and costs do appear to be more prevalent at BU
than UM. These issues either directly, as in the case of diversity, or indirectly have an
impact on student culture.
Another way in which competition can be seen in the student culture is through
student marketing. A strategic finding was the level of marketing that the institutions
utilize to attract and keep students. The US News & World Report college rankings are
just one tool used to market students to the institutions. Other marketing tools seen in this
study included competitive initiatives, the construction of new facilities, marketing
literature, and the growth and promotion of industry-related schools and programs. BU
193
appeared to be much more aggressive in its approach to marketing students. The
difference in approach is consistent with Slaughter & Rhoades’ (2004) assertion that
heavy student marketing is an example of the student arms race. BU seems to be a full
participant in this race, while UM administrators appear to be distancing the institution
from this approach.
Overall, academic capitalism and the US News & World Report rankings appear
to contribute to a student culture that is more competitive. Students may be more
competitive with each other if the institution engages in highly competitive activities.
Institutions that do not focus on the rankings may be more likely to have students who
display less competitive behavior with other students. With more institutions indicating a
desire to implement more capitalistic-driven actions, competition within the student
culture will likely increase.
Values of the Students
The values of the students who comprise the student culture are another area
where academic capitalism appeared it might have an impact. The findings of the study
indicate that institutions not heavily engaged in academic capitalism may have students
who possess more social and civic-minded values. The students of UM appeared to value
community, relationships, and responsibility and service. The students in the study
viewed the university as a community, which permeated the social aspects of the
university. Forging meaningful connections with current and former students appear to be
an important element of the student experience. Both students and the administrators also
194
seemed to place great value on conducting service that will benefit the university and the
surrounding neighborhoods. Service seemingly plays a large role in the socialization that
takes place at UM. This differed greatly with the students at BU, whom appeared to value
more individual goals and beliefs. Such priorities as academic and career success,
connections and networking, and global integration seemed to be the most important to
the students. These appear to be more capitalistic in nature, as the focus is on personal
success and goals. The contrast in priorities signifies one of the most important
arguments in the literature pertaining to academic capitalism. The results of this study
may indicate that current market forces that promote commercialization and capitalism
have moved higher education away from its mission and threatened its integrity (Kezar,
2008; Stecker, 2003; Zemsky, et. al, 2005). The findings may produce a conclusion that
in an institution where academic capitalism and rankings are valued by administration,
the students’ personal goals and achievements could be more valued than the
commitment to the advancement of society as a whole. The students at UM showcased
the more human elements of the university instead of the more academic and career-
minded facets. Additionally, the findings from the study also may validate research that
claims academic capitalism has shifted the emphasis of higher education away from
serving missions within the local community in favor of pursuing global opportunities
(Slaughter & Rhoades, 2008). At BU, the students’ and administration’s desire for global
integration and outreach supports this conclusion. In contrast, the students and
administrators at UM focus largely on the surrounding community and local initiatives.
The results of the study might suggest that the institution that was less involved with
195
academic capitalism had a student culture that is less focused on academics and success.
Instead, the students valued and appreciated the significance of creating, maintaining, and
forming a community focused on building strong relationships both inside and outside of
the university. This indicates that academic capitalism may be one of the factors in
determining the focus on academics and success.
The socialization differences between the two institutions also highlighted the
impact that academic capitalism may have on student culture. Previous literature did not
touch upon the socialization patterns of students in higher education in relation to
academic capitalism, which is a reason this study was conducted. The findings of the
study indicate that an institution that is highly engaged with academic capitalism might
have students who are more inclined to focus on academic achievement over the social
aspects of the university. More students at BU appeared to believe that the student
population is more interested in their academic life than social life. The focus on
academic life may be a result of the university’s greater emphasis on performance and
achievement. The study indicates that academic capitalism may be a factor in the
emphasis on academic life. However, other factors such as mission and academic vision
may also contribute to this focus. It is important to note that both institutions featured a
significant number of students who believed that a balance between academic and social
lives existed. Another social finding indicated that students enrolled at a university that
does not focus on academic capitalism may feature students who stress the values of
community and service. The UM students appeared to be more interested in building and
maintaining a civic-minded community, as opposed to the students at BU who seemed to
196
be more focused on achievement and personal interests. This is also visible when
reviewing the students’ organizational involvement. While students at both institutions
were heavily involved at both universities, the types of organizations in which the
students participated differed. Greek organizations dominate the social landscape at BU
while service organizations are the most popular at UM.
The valuing of community was also visible in the difference in institutional
treatment and incorporation of alumni. While BU administration appeared to focus on the
alumni as potential donors, UM administrators looked to incorporate the alumni into
various aspects of the university beyond fundraising. Students and administrators noted
alumni’s heavy participation at UM. Students often welcomed back alumni to the student
organizations and valued their contributions. The approach UM took in the treatment of
its alumni may point to the valuing of a traditional mission focused on community. The
student participants at BU felt that the presence of alumni on campus was minimal. This
suggests that academic capitalism may move higher education away from its mission and
threaten its integrity (Kezar, 2008; Stecker, 2003; Zemsky, et. al, 2005). The heavier
involvement in academic capitalism appears to have reduced the role of the alumni on
campus.
The rankings and academic capitalism appear to shape the student culture in
significant ways from social standpoints. The social values of the students at an
institution that does not emphasize the rankings or engage heavily in academic capitalism
appear to be more community-driven. Greater emphasis seems to be placed on forging
relationships with fellow students and making strong contributions to the community
197
both inside the university and in the surrounding areas. A more civic-minded approach
appears to be adopted and implemented by the students. In contrast, the values of the
students at an institution that is driven by rankings and academic capitalism may be more
aligned with capitalistic values. Achievement and success seem to be important elements
of the students’ lives at BU. With the strong desire to interact globally, the students
appear to be displaying traits that will define capitalism in the future.
Financial Implications on Culture
One of the most important findings of the study is the degree to which academic
capitalism impacts the student culture through revenue. The implications of a university’s
financial health significantly influence all aspects of an institution, including the student
culture. Failing to generate revenue can lead to the dismissal of faculty and staff, the
cutting of both academic and social programs, and a decline in student support, among
many other ramifications. These adverse repercussions can all have an influence on the
student culture and the experience. The financial standings of BU and UM signified an
important distinction created as a result of academic capitalism. The findings of the study
indicate that institutions immersed in academic capitalism may be in much better shape
financially than universities that are not heavily involved. As a university that is heavily
immersed in capitalistic behavior, BU appears to be in a comfortable financial situation.
The university is looking to expand its operations and offerings and is finding new means
of generating revenue. The effects of a faltering economy do not appear to hinder the
plans the university has for the future. Very few programs and departments have been
198
discontinued, although some of the non-revenue-generating programs do not appear to
have received adequate funding. This is in direct contrast to UM, which appears to be
experiencing a significant budget shortfall. The university is not defined by its capitalistic
behavior. However, the university appears to be struggling from a financial standpoint.
The university is losing a significant amount of money, which is necessitating budget
cuts. Faculty and staff positions and programs have been discontinued due to the
budgetary concerns. Involvement in the US News & World Report rankings and academic
capitalism may give institutions a competitive advantage over institutions that do not
focus on rankings or engage in capitalistic behavior. Making strong efforts to improve in
the rankings and increase institutional revenue may allow universities opportunities to
grow in a variety of areas, including facilities, academic offerings, and research. The
literature that asserts the benefits of academic capitalism aligns with this finding (Brewer,
et. al, 2002; Mendoza, 2007; Mendoza & Berger, 2008; Subotzky, 1999; Ylijoki, 2003).
One of the most important benefits academic capitalism provides is allowing institutions
options to either expand or maintain their current operations despite the lack of traditional
funding sources. The financial pressures administrators encounter loom large as they are
expected to consider alternatives to knowledge area commitments (Gumport, 2000). The
prospects of success and growth within this difficult environment may largely depend on
administration’s ability to generate revenue for the institution.
Another important research finding was the extent to which academic capitalism
impacts fundraising efforts. The fundraising initiatives an institution undertakes may
have implications for the student culture not only through the allocation of money to
199
student-centered programs, but also in terms of how the visibility of funding might
communicate the priorities of institutional administrators to the students. Institutions that
are heavily invested in academic capitalism seem to place greater emphasis on
fundraising initiatives. The study suggests that BU administration made great efforts to
increase its funding from alumni and other private donations. This approach contrasted
with UM, where administrators did not appear to actively engage in extensive fundraising
initiatives. Fundraising is one of four main revenue markets for higher education
institutions, according to Brewer, et. al (2002). Institutions that value academic
capitalism appear to heavily push for the growth of donations. The money that the
institution is receiving can offset the dwindling funding and increasing costs that could
potentially hurt the ability to support expansive missions and values (Breneman &
Finney, 2001; Johnstone, 2001; Slaughter & Leslie, 1997). The lack of fundraising efforts
may be hurting UM administration’s ability to carry out all of the desired actions that
support the institution’s mission and values. These contributions can be used to grow the
institution’s endowment, fund facility projects, and provide financial aid to students.
The findings of the study indicated that the universities in the study appeared to be
moving in two different directions. BU appears to be currently thriving and seems poised
to make further advancements. The administration is rapidly growing the institution and
exploring ways to increase its size, population, and prestige. In contrast, UM appears to
be struggling financially. Significant budget shortfalls are mandating the dismissal of
faculty and staff while degree programs are being discontinued. The repercussions of
such actions can be just as damaging to student culture and learning as similar decisions
200
driven by academic capitalism. Additionally, institutions that display less capitalistic
prowess might not have the financial resources to fund major upgrades to the
environment, if needed. The level of engagement in academic capitalism may bring
positive and negative elements to a campus. However, failing to adopt capitalistic
principles within higher education can be just as harmful since the institution will have
difficulty improving its financial health. The long-term ramifications of not engaging in
academic capitalism may even be more damaging to the student culture. In the current
higher education environment where funding from traditional sources is not as reliable,
finding new ways to generate revenue is important to the vitality of the institution.
Student Learning Experience
A significant finding of the study was that the students’ satisfaction with the
learning process did not seem to be largely impacted by the US News & World Report
college rankings and academic capitalism. The students at the two institutions were for
the most part satisfied with their learning experiences. Despite the fact that students at
both institutions appeared to be equally satisfied with their learning experiences, this does
not mean the experience was entirely similar. Students and administrators in the study
recounted similar institutional approaches to teaching, faculty roles, and class sizes.
However, the results of the study indicate that some differences in the learning
experiences may exist. The first major difference can be seen in the discussion about the
higher education arms race. The classroom and building environments appear to be
different due to the funding allocated by each institution. The resources available to the
201
students can vary because of this. Additionally, the institutional treatment of students by
both administrators and faculty indicate that UM appears to takes a more holistic
approach to learning than BU. The emphasis appears to be more on the whole student at
UM. Although the motivation behind academic capitalism and the rankings may conflict
with some of the goals of academia, some researchers find that academics remain
unaffected by the infusion of capitalism into higher education (Mendoza & Berger,
2008). The results of the study are not able to prove this, as it is unclear if the learning
experiences are the same or different. However, the study’s findings indicate that a
successful learning experience for students is taking place inside the classrooms at both
institutions. Academic capitalism may not affect student satisfaction in regards to
learning.
Implications for Practice
The significant findings and conclusions from the study may assist in guiding
practices at four-year, private higher education institutions. One of the most interesting
discoveries was that the institution with a heavier emphasis on academic capitalism and
the US News & World Report college rankings appeared to be in a significantly better
position for growth and stability than the university that was not as focused on the
rankings. With the dire financial state of higher education in the United States,
institutions may not be able to offset the exorbitant costs associated with the traditional
management and maintenance that has been in place for years without incorporating
some elements of capitalism. In order to expand the academic offerings and programs and
202
maintain many of the current services, offerings, and experiences found on campus,
capitalistic behavior might be a necessity. While the incorporation of academic
capitalistic principles and actions has the potential to intrude on any civic goals or values
that integrate higher education’s original social mission, the livelihood of an institution
may depend on it. Rising costs and dwindling funding sources can limit the investments
administrators can make towards improving their institutions. The results of the study
suggest that institutions will need to find a balance between maintaining socially mindful
values and pursuing revenue-generating opportunities. This approach is validated by the
work of Zemsky, et. al, (2005). By not pursuing socially minded goals and values, the
student culture may miss essential elements that have defined higher education in
previous years. The students might be a part of a student culture that thrives on
achievement and personal goals as opposed to community and civic duties and
responsibilities. However, administration’s failure to produce the financial funding
necessary to manage an institution may drastically hurt the institution’s ability to offer
high quality learning opportunities to students. Budget concerns can produce a potential
domino effect where student enrollment dwindles, full-time faculty decreases, faculty
quality erodes, administration is reduced, the overall environment suffers, and quality and
satisfaction deteriorate. Rankings and academic capitalism do have a presence in higher
education and should be acknowledged. Balance and moderation should be emphasized
when deciding how important the rankings will be in making future decisions.
The values of the student population at UM appeared to be more in line with the
traditional goals of higher education from previous generations. The emphasis on
203
community, relationships, and social responsibility create an exemplary environment
where learning can take place both inside and outside of the classroom. While it has been
established that the emphasis of higher education should be a balance between capitalistic
and civic-minded approaches, institutional staff should make efforts to emphasize the
values found at UM. By doing this, institutions can create socially responsible students
who can represent the institutions well from career and community standpoints. The
institutions may also benefit from a more community-based student atmosphere that can
yield higher satisfaction and persistence. The study revealed that many students who
were unsure about their experiences at UM changed their perceptions of the institution
once they became involved in the community.
As private institutions, BU and UM rely on student marketing as an important part
of maintaining the institutions’ viability. The need to attract students who will contribute
tuition dollars to the institutions may outweigh pursuing more worthy causes. However,
continuing to participate in the student arms race for students may lead to adverse
consequences and financial shortages (Zemsky, et. al, 2005). While the investment in
new construction, maintenance, and other marketing initiatives can be worthy ventures,
spending should be done wisely and in moderation. Attempting to outspend other
institutions in marketing may not yield high enrollment nor will this guarantee student
persistence. Failing to enroll and keep students could potentially lead to financial losses
and budget cuts that impact the faculty, staff, and academic offerings. Spending to attract
students is a necessity, but the spending needs to be intelligent. Extensive research should
be conducted to accurately portray the institution and target appropriate students.
204
The ramifications of budgetary concerns are far-reaching in higher education.
These financial issues may impact student culture. In order to minimize the impact that
financial issues may have on the student culture, a greater emphasis should be placed on
fundraising and alumni relations. The two institutions in this study contrasted with one
another. One university had a strong alumni relations department but weak fundraising
initiatives, while the other university had a strong fundraising campaign but weaker
alumni program. Strong alumni relations can assist in instilling a more community-
oriented student population that connects alumni to the institution after graduation. This
may make requesting donations easier, as alumni could have a stronger connection and a
desire to help the institution. Revenue is a necessity for institutions as administrators
struggle to offset the significant costs of operating a higher education institution.
Institutions could benefit from investing money into creating or bolstering alumni
relations and development offices.
Another important finding from the study was the fact that students at both
institutions were satisfied with their learning experiences. This finding was interesting
due to some literature indicating that academic capitalism could have an adverse impact
on the learning environment (Slaughter & Rhoades, 2004). While some of the faculty-
related concerns the literature highlighted (Ehrenberg & Zhang, 2005; Rhoades, 2005)
were evident at times in the study, students believed that the universities offered positive
learning experiences. Any of academic capitalism’s adverse impact on the learning
experience from the students’ perspectives did not appear in this study. However, it is
unclear if the learning experiences at the two institutions are the same or different. Some
205
of the responses indicate that differences may exist, such as the approach faculty and
administration takes in regards to students. UM appeared to incorporate a more holistic
learning approach compared to BU. The positive viewpoints of the students lead to an
implication that other institutions that are heavily invested in the US News & World
Report rankings should consider. Zemsky, et. al (2005) argue that teaching and learning
need to be the central focus of institutions. Despite BU’s strong emphasis on rankings
and academic capitalism, the university’s administrators appeared to also value the
educational experience for the students. This value may be a result of the university’s
background as a master’s granting regional institution where teaching is the greater focus
of faculty as opposed to research. The university is looking to move classifications, from
a regional university to a national research university. Such a move may shift
administration’s focus from teaching to research. The emphasis on research has increased
at the university as this shift draws closer. While research is a vital revenue-generator for
institutions, maintaining this commitment to teaching and the learning environment may
be important to maintain a positive learning environment for students.
A final finding from the study that will be useful in practice pertains to the
faculty. With the study revealing a growing adjunct faculty population, these individuals
may require attention and support. The study indicated that students as a whole were
happy with their experiences at both institutions. However, the students who were
unhappy with faculty largely had poor experiences with the adjunct faculty. If this trend
should continue as the study’s findings suggested, institutions can benefit from investing
in adjunct faculty training programs. The faculty should learn about the campus’ culture
206
and be integrated into it in order to positively contribute to the institution’s culture and
subcultures. Full-time faculty members should also play a role in the training process to
assist with the adjunct faculty’s development. If institutions will need to rely upon more
adjunct faculty in the future, the institutions may benefit from having prepared and well-
liked individuals interacting with the students. Institutions should consider providing
more resources for its growing adjunct faculty populations.
Future Research
This study has assisted in exploring the US News & World Report rankings’ and
academic capitalism’s influence on culture and enrolled students. The study’s findings
will be useful in gaining a better understanding of effects that capitalistic behavior has on
higher education. The results of the study lead to other questions and concerns that merit
consideration for future research. First and foremost, future research should be done to
replicate the findings of this study. By conducting similar studies, the findings presented
in the study can either be corroborated or disputed. Similar results can better inform
practice within higher education.
One of the most interesting topics for future research that is worth pursuing
pertains to the financial status of institutions that do not engage heavily in the US News &
World Report rankings and academic capitalism. The goal of this study was to determine
what type of impact the rankings may have on culture. This goal did not allow for
significant exploration of the financial situations of the two institutions. A worthy and
interesting investigation would be to examine the extent to which a university’s failure to
207
improve its rank or pursue other capitalistic-driven actions harms the university’s budget
situation. Such a study would provide valuable information about the financial viability
of maintaining more traditional goals in line with higher education’s social missions. The
research may also clarify the direction of higher education as a whole. If institutions that
try to shun the current rankings systems and academic capitalism cannot operate from a
financial standpoint, higher education in general will need to evaluate how to continue
operations in the future.
Another area related to the US News & World Report rankings that merits further
exploration is the effect that the rankings may have on institutional missions. As rankings
continue to have a greater influence in higher education, administrators may be more
inclined to target improvements in areas measured by the rankings. Institutional missions
may be altered to reflect this administrative targeting. As this becomes a real possibility,
determining whether missions are being changed and what impact changed missions may
have on higher education will be an interesting and valuable undertaking.
One of the elements that was explored in this study was the role of the faculty.
The faculty at both institutions appeared to play a major role in instilling a positive
learning environment for the students. Beyond this aspect, other elements of the faculty
can be examined in further detail. The most significant element that can be useful is
determining in greater detail the hiring practices of faculty at both institutions that
emphasize and do not emphasize the rankings. The results of the study indicated that both
institutions were relying on more adjunct faculty members. Determining the reasons
behind the larger adjunct population can be useful to understand the direction of the
208
faculty profession and learning environments in the future. The role of the faculty
member at different institutions will be a valuable undertaking.
Transfer students, institutions within larger universities that compete with for-
profit institutions, and the surrounding community’s culture were mentioned as
limitations of the study. Future research should factor these three aspects of higher
education into any similar studies. In regards to transfer students, institutional
administrators may adopt specific approaches that allow institutions opportunities to
manipulate data in only beneficial ways. Future research should investigate how transfer
students are utilized by various institutions, depending on their involvement with
academic capitalism and the rankings. Another limitation that merits future research is
the trend where university branches aim to compete with for-profit institutions. With the
proliferation of for-profit institutions and online programs, it is reasonable to expect that
these branches will continue to grow. Future research should investigate whether these
branches have an impact on student cultures and institutional missions. A final limitation
of the study was the lack of consideration for the culture of the surrounding community.
BU and UM are both located near Los Angeles, California. However, they are located in
vastly different suburban areas. The influence of the surrounding communities may have
an impact on the institutions. Future research should be conducted to determine the level
of influence that the culture of the surrounding communities may have on a higher
education institution. To determine this, an ethnography based on the region of the
institution can be pursued.
209
Another element of the study that merits further research is the learning
environments. In this study, interviews in one-on-one and focus group settings were the
only qualitative methods utilized. While this approach uncovered useful information
relevant to the student culture, the method did not yield as much information on the
learning environments. The learning environment is a significant aspect of the student
culture at higher education institutions. The academic aspects of the university play a
large role within higher education and their presence should not be ignored when
attempting to understand the various cultures. Knowing more about the learning
environment can lead to a greater understanding of the impact the rankings and academic
capitalism may have on the student culture. Utilizing observational techniques in future
studies may be able to assist in the comprehension of the learning environments found at
universities.
Future research should also be conducted at other types of institutions. The two
universities chosen for this study were regional Master’s granting institutions. While one
of the institutions was preparing for a shift to a new university status, the type of
institution both universities are classified usually possesses a focus on teaching. More
interesting results may be uncovered at institutions with stronger research commitments.
Also, the level of competition for students might increase for national research
universities. A heavier emphasis on rankings tends to exist for these types of institutions.
Additionally, the fact that the study was conducted at Master’s-granting
institutions limited the number of graduate students who were available to participate in
the study. While the graduate populations at both institutions comprise a considerable
210
percentage of the overall students, very few graduate students contributed to the study.
This could be due to the fact that many graduate classes are held off-campus and in the
evenings. Future researchers should look to remedy this problem by collecting research at
abnormal times or at institutions with larger graduate populations. By not doing this, the
results of the research will mainly consider the undergraduate populations.
Another interesting approach for future research would be to increase the number
of institutions considered in the case study. For this study, only two institutions were
chosen. By increasing the number of institutions, more drastic findings that are produced
as a result of the US News & World Report rankings and academic capitalism might be
evident. These findings may also be easier to connect to the influence of college rankings
or academic capitalism.
Future research should also consider alternative approaches to conducting the
research. For this study, four phases were used to conduct research: one-on-one
interviews with high-ranking administrative professionals, one-on-one interviews with
student affairs professionals, and student-completed online surveys. The qualitative
aspects of the research collection were useful and informative in helping to understand
the culture. However, using an online survey should be optional unless a larger sample
size can be obtained. In this study, only twenty-seven and twenty-six students completed
the online survey. While the figures helped bolster the findings from the qualitative
research collection, the support would have been more compelling had more students
participated. Recruiting students to take the online survey proved to be challenging.
Offering incentives seems to be a necessity in order to attract students to take surveys
211
with numerous questions. Additionally, incorporating observations into the data
collection process would be beneficial. Observations can be a useful way to gain a better
understanding of the culture. Specifically, more information can be gained about the
learning experiences and environments through classroom observations.
Conclusion
This study was conducted to determine whether the US News & World Report rankings,
through the framework of academic capitalism, shape student culture. After verifying that
academic capitalism had an effect of student culture, the various ways the rankings
produced changes in the student culture at four-year higher education institutions was
investigated. By completing a comparative case study of two similar institutions with
different approaches to the handling of college rankings, the ways in which the rankings
and academic capitalism influenced the two institutions was apparent. The mixed
methods study yielded significant findings that can be useful in higher education practice.
The findings suggest that an institution that does not highly value the US News & World
Report rankings when making decisions about the direction of the institution may have a
more civic-minded student population whose culture values community. However, the
research also indicates that the institution that does not value the rankings may have a
less stable foundation. The university that valued rankings was experiencing wide growth
and financial stability while the institution that did not value rankings was stagnant and
less effective due to budget cuts.
212
The results of the study exemplify both the positive and negative outcomes of
academic capitalism and the US News & World Report rankings. Despite the negative
implications associated with the rankings and academic capitalism, their presence may be
a necessity in higher education with shrinking state funds, competition for students, and a
need to remain viable. The missions and values of higher education are being tested by
rankings and academic capitalism. Even though they are harming aspects of the student
culture, failing to accept and implement actions that respect the power they wield is
detrimental to the student culture. To be able to succeed and advance in higher education,
institutions should attempt to find a balance between honoring important missions and
values that have defined higher education in the past and accepting the capitalistic
management approach that is necessary to thrive in the future.
213
REFERENCES
Albert, M. (2003, March). Universities and the market economy: The differential impact
on knowledge production in sociology and economics. Higher Education, 45(2),
147-182.
Anderson, M.S. (2001, March/April). The complex relations between the academy and
industry: Views from the literature. Journal of Higher Education, 72(2), 226-246.
Astin, A.W. (1993). What matters in college: Four critical years revisited. San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Avery, C., Fairbanks, A. and Zeckhauser, R. (2003). The early admissions game:
Joining the elite. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Bok, D. (1982). The corporation on campus: Balancing responsibility and innovation.
Change, 14(6), 16-25.
Boyer, E. (1987). College: The undergraduate experience in America. Princeton, NJ:
The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching.
Breneman, D.W. and Finney, J.E. (2001). The changing landscape: Higher education
finance in the 1990s. In J.L. Yeager, G.M. Nelson, E.A. Porter, J.C. Weidman, &
T.G. Zullo (Eds.), ASHE reader on higher education (pp. 162-178). Boston:
Pearson Custom Publishing.
Brewer, D.J., Gates, S.M. and Goldman, C.A. (2002). In pursuit of prestige: Strategy
and competition in U.S. higher education. New Brunswick: Transaction
Publishers.
Chan, A.S. and Fisher, D. (2008). The exchange university: Corporatization of academic
culture. Vancouver, BC: UBC Press.
Beach Fund. (2010). Retrieved from http://www.Beach.edu/giving/annual/.
Clark, B. (1987). The academic life: Small worlds, different worlds. Princeton, NJ:
Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching.
Clark, B.R. (1998). Creating entrepreneurial universities: Organisational Pathways of
Transformation. New York: Elsevier.
Cooke, R. A., and Lafferty, J. C. (1987). Organizational culture inventory. Plymouth,
MI: Human Synergistics.
Creswell, J.W. (2009). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods
approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
214
Duderstadt, J.J. (2001). Fire, ready, aim! University decision-making during an era of
rapid change. In W.Z. Hirsch & L.E. Weber (Eds.), Governance in higher
education: The university in a state of flux (pp. 26-51). London: Economica.
Ehrenberg, R.E. (2002, Winter). Reaching for the brass ring: The US News & World
Report rankings and competition. The review of higher education, 26, 145-162.
Ehrenberg, R.E. (2003, November). Method or madness? Inside the USNWR college
rankings. Paper presented at the Wisconsin Center for the Advancement of
Postsecondary Education Forum on the Use and Abuse of College Rankings,
Madison, WI.
Ehrenberg, R.E. and Zhang, L. (2005, Summer). Do tenured and tenure-track faculty
matter? The Journal of Human Resources, 40(3), 647-659.
Etzkowitz, H. and Stevens, A.J. (1998). Inching toward industrial policy: The
university’s role in government initiatives to assist small, innovative companies in
the United States. In H. Etzkowitz, A. Webster, and P. Healy (Eds.), Capitalizing
knowledge: New intersections of industry and academia (pp. 21-46). Albany,
NY: State University of New York Press.
H. Etzkowitz, A. Webster, and P. Healy (Eds.). (1998). Capitalizing knowledge: New
intersections of industry and academia. Albany, NY: State University of New
York Press.
Feller, I. (1997). Technology transfer from universities. In J.C. Smart (Ed.), Higher
education: Handbook of theory and research (pp. 1-42). New York: Agathon
Press.
Gallagher, K.S. and Holley, K.A. (2003). The influence of the US News & World
Report rankings on the decision-making behavior of professional school deans.
Los Angeles, CA: USC, Rossier School of Education.
Grewal, R., Dearden, J.A. and Lilien, G.L. (2006). The university rankings game:
Modeling the competition among universities for ranking. American Statistician,
62(3), 232-237.
Guiner, L. and Strum, S. (2001). Who’s qualified? Boston: Beacon Press.
Gumport, P.J. (2000). Academic restructuring: Organizational change and institutional
imperatives. Higher Education, 39, 67-91.
Hossler, D. (2000). The problem with college rankings. About Campus, 5(1), 20-24.
215
Hoxby, C. (1997). How the changing market structure of U.S. higher education explains
college tuition. Working Paper 6323. Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of
Economic Research.
Johnson, B., Kavanagh, P., and Mattson, K. (2003). Steal this university: The rise of the
corporate university and the academic labor movement. New York: Routledge.
Johnstone, D.B. (2001). Financing higher education: Who should pay? In J.L. Yeager,
G.M. Nelson, E.A. Porter, J.C. Weidman, & T.G. Zullo (Eds.), ASHE reader on
higher education (pp. 3-16). Boston: Pearson Custom Publishing.
Kezar, A.J. (2004, Summer). Obtaining integrity? Reviewing and examining the charter
between higher education and society. The Review of Higher Education, 27(4),
429-459.
Kezar, A.J. (2008, Feb). Is there a way out?: Examining the commercialization of higher
education. Journal of Higher Education, 79(4), 473-481.
Kuh, G.D. (1993). In their own words: What students learn outside the classroom.
American Educational Research Journal, 30, 277-304.
Kuh, G.D. (2001/2002). Organizational culture and student persistence: Prospects and
puzzles. Journal of College Student Retention, 3, 23-39.
Kuh, G.D., Schuh, J., and Whitt, E.J. (1991). Involving colleges: Successful approaches
to fostering student learning and development outside the classroom. San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Kuh, G.D. and Whitt, E.J. (1988). The invisible tapestry. Culture in American colleges
and universities. ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Reports, No. 1, Washington,
D.C.: ASHE.
Machung, A. (1998). Playing the rankings game. Change, 30(4), 12-16.
McPherson, M.S. and Schapiro, M.O. (1998). The student aid game: Meeting need and
rewarding talent in American higher education. Princeton, NJ: Princeton
University Press.
Melguizo, T. (2008). Quality matters: Assessing the impact of selective institutions on
minority college completion rates. Research in Higher Education, 49(3), 214-
236.
Mendoza, P. (2007, January/February). Academic capitalism and doctoral student
socialization: A case study. The Journal of Higher Education, 78(1), 71-96.
216
Mendoza, P. and Berger, J.B. (2008, December). Academic capitalism and academic
culture: A case study. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 16(23), 1-27.
Meredith, M. (2004, August). Why do universities compete in the ratings game? An
empirical analysis of the effects of the US News & World Report college
rankings. Research in Higher Education, 45(5), 443-461.
Minsky, L. (2000). Dead souls: The aftermath of Bayh-Dole. In G.D. White (Ed.),
Campus, Inc. (95-105). Amherst, NY: Prometheus Books.
Monks, J. and Ehrenberg, R. (1999). US News and World Report’s rankings: Why do
they matter. Change, 31(6), 43-51.
Morse, R. and Flanigan, S. (2009, August 19). “How we calculate the college rankings.”
Retrieved from http://www.usnews.com/articles/education/best-
colleges/2009/08/19/how-we-calculate-the-college-rankings.html.
Mowery, D.C. (1998). The changing structure of the U.S. National Innovation System:
implications for international conflict and cooperation in R&D policy. Research
Policy, 27, 639-654.
Neave, G. (2001). Governance, change and the universities in western Europe. In W.Z.
Hirsch & L.E. Weber (Eds.), Governance in higher education: The university in a
state of flux (pp. 52-67). London: Economica.
Parker, M. and Jary, D. (1995). The McUniversity: Organization, management and
academic subjectivity. Organization, 2(2), 319-338.
Pascarella, E.T. and Terenzini, P.T. (1991). How college affects students. San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Patton, M.Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods. Thousand Oaks,
CA: Sage Publications.
Pinellas County Schools. (1994). Superintendent’s quality challenge. Largo, FL:
Author.
Renchler, R. (1992, February). Student motivation, school culture, and academic
achievement: What school leaders can do. ERIC Clearinghouse on Educational
Management, 1-22.
Rhoades, G. (2005). Capitalism, academic style, and shared governance. Academe,
91(3), 38-42.
Rhoads, G. and Slaughter, S. (1997). Academic capitalism, managed professionals, and
supply- side higher education. Social Text, 51(2), 9-38.
217
Ruscio, K. (1987). Many sectors, many professions. In B. Clark (Ed.), The academic
profession: National, disciplinary and institutional settings (pp. 331-368).
Berkley: University of California Press.
Schultz, M., Mouritsen, J. and Gabrielsen, G. (2001). Sticky reputation: Analyzing a
ranking system. Corporate Reputation Review, 4(1), 24-41.
Scott, W.R. (2001). Institutions and organizations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
Publications.
Slaughter, S. and Rhoades, G. (2008). The academic capitalist knowledge/learning
regime. In A.S. Chan and D. Fisher (Eds.), The exchange university:
Corporatization of academic culture (pp. 19-48). Vancouver, BC: UBC Press.
Slaughter, S. and Rhoades, G. (2004). Academic capitalism and the new economy:
Markets, state, and higher education. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins Press.
Slaughter, S. and Leslie, L. (1997). Academic capitalism: Politics, policies, and the
entrepreneurial university. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University
Press.
Standifird, S.S. (2005). Reputation among peer academic institutions: An investigation
of the US News and World Report’s rankings. Corporate Reputation Review,
8(3), 233-244.
Steck, H. (2003, January). Corporatization of the university: Seeking conceptual clarity.
Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 585, 66-83.
Stuart, D. (1995). Reputational rankings: Background and development. New
Directions of Institutional Research, 88, 13-20.
Subotzky, G. (1999). Alternatives to the entrepreneurial university: New modes of
knowledge production in community service programs. Higher Education, 38(4),
401-440.
Taylor, B.C., Irvin, L.R. and Wieland, S.M. (2006). Checking the map: Critiquing
Joanne Martin’s metatheory of organizational culture and its uses in
communication research. Communication Theory, 16, 304-332.
Tierney, W.G. (1988). Organizational culture in higher education: Defining the
essentials. The Journal of Higher Education, 59(1), 2-21.
Tinto, V. (1993). Leaving college: Rethinking the causes and cures of students attrition.
Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
218
Tudiver, N. (1999). Universities for sale: Resisting corporate control over Canadian
higher education. Toronto: James Lorimer and Company.
Valimaa, J. (1998, September). Culture and identity in higher education research.
Higher Education, 36(2), 119-138.
Van Maanen, J. (1984). Doing old things in new ways: The chains of socialization. In J.
Bess (Ed.), College and university organization: Insights from the behavioral
sciences (pp. 211-247). New York: New York University Press.
Weidman, J.C. (1989). Undergraduate socialization: A conceptual approach. In J.C.
Smart (Ed.), Higher education: Handbook of theory and research, Vol. V (pp.
289-322). New York: Agathon.
Weisbrod, B.A., Ballou, J.P., and Asch, E.D. (2008). Mission and money:
Understanding the university. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Winston, G.C. (2001). Subsidies, hierarchy and peers: The awkward economics of
higher education. In J.L. Yeager, G.M. Nelson, E.A. Porter, J.C. Weidman, &
T.G. Zullo (Eds.), ASHE reader on higher education (pp. 25-42). Boston: Pearson
Custom Publishing.
Ylijoki, O.H. (2003, April). Entangled in academic capitalism? A case study on
changing ideals and practices of university research. Higher Education, 45(3),
307-335.
Zemsky, R., Wegner, G., and Massy, W. (2005). Remaking the American university:
Market smart and mission centered. Piscataway, NJ: Rutgers University Press.
Ziman, J. (1996). “Post-academic science”: Constructing knowledge with networks and
norms. Science Studies, 9(1), 67-80.
219
APPENDICES
Appendix A: Administrative Interview Protocol
1. Please describe your role with the institution.
a. How do you work with the student population?
b. How long have you worked at your institution?
2. Would you be able to describe your institution for me?
a. Would you be able to offer up any insight into the student culture?
b. What are some of the longstanding traditions of the university’s students?
3. What would you say are the goals of student affairs at your institution?
4. How involved are the senior administrators in the direction of your office?
5. Does your institution pay attention to the US News & World Report rankings? In what
ways?
a. Do the students seem to pay attention to the US News rankings?
6. Does your institution make any decisions with the US News & World Report rankings
in mind?
7. What are the financial priorities of the institution?
8. Have you noticed the addition or subtraction of programs at your university? If so,
what contributed to this?
9. Do you believe the student culture of the institution is impacted by the financial
decisions of the university?
220
Appendix B: Focus Group Protocol
1. Why did you decide to attend your institution?
a. What was the process you used to determine which schools you would apply to?
b. After applying to these schools, how did you narrow your choices down?
c. Did the US News & World Report college rankings play a role in your decision?
1. Describe student culture issues
a. Student morale/Satisfaction
b. Peer culture – Social vs academic life
c. Sense of competition
d. Student interests from both academic and extracurricular standpoints
e. Student perceptions of administrative actions
f. Student awareness of their institutions’ participation in US News & World Report
rankings
i. Do students discuss the rankings on campus?
g. Alumni role?
h. Fundraising initiatives?
i. Describe your university to an outsider.
3. Does your school provide you with a positive learning environment? Why or why not?
a.Does the institution emphasize teaching?
b.Do you have good classroom experiences?
4. Describe interactions with administration, faculty, staff
221
a. Do administrators and staff appear to care about you and your experience?
b. Do administrators and staff have the resources to provide what the students
desire/require?
c. Do faculty teach well? Are faculty fulfilling teaching duties?
d. What are your thoughts on faculty as a whole?
e. Did you have any experiences with adjunct faculty members?
222
Appendix C: Survey Design
Student Background Information
1. What type of student are you? (Freshman/Sophomore/Junior/Senior/Graduate Student)
2. What is your age? (Open-ended)
3. What is your current major or degree focus? (Open-ended)
4. Do you live on campus? (Yes/No)
5. Do you participate in extracurricular activities? (Yes/No)
a. If you answered yes to the previous question, what activities do you participate
in? (Open-ended)
College Experience
Please read the following statements and rate them based on your experiences at
[institution]. All questions in this section will have answer choices of: Strongly Disagree,
Disagree, Neutral, Agree–and Strongly Agree.
1. The student experience is a priority at [institution]
2. [Institution] is comprised of an ethnically diverse student population
3. [Institution] provides you and your peers with a positive learning environment
4. Faculty make decisions with the students’ best interests in mind
5. Staff make decisions with the students’ best interests in mind
6. Teaching is highly valued by the staff (emphasis is placed on teaching at [institution]
by the staff)
7. Teaching is highly valued by the faculty (the faculty seem interested in teaching and
student learning as opposed to research)
223
8. [Institution] uses instructors employed only by the university (they do not teach at any
other institution)
9. [Institution] treats all individual schools (examples of schools: Business School, Film
School, etc.) within the university equally (the university does not favor some schools
more than others)
10. [Institution] treats all individual departments (examples of departments: Physics,
English, etc.) equally (the university does not favor some departments over others)
11. The institution spends heavily on expenses that enhance the classroom experience
12. The students at [institution] are competitive with one another (from an academic
standpoint)
13. [Institution] as a whole is competitive with other institutions (from an academic
standpoint)
14. The university helps students find a balance between academics and social life
15. Alumni are valued by [institution] and their role on campus is noticed
16. Alumni are targeted aggressively by [institution] for fundraising purposes
17. The university places great value on fundraising
18. Scholarship or financial aid money influenced your decision to attend [institution]
19. The US News & World Report college rankings had influenced your decision to
attend [institution]
20. Once you started attending [institution], you stopped caring about the US News &
World Report college rankings
21. [Institution is concerned with its standing in the US News & World Report college
rankings
22. The students at [institution] have positive feelings about the university
224
Please feel free to share any thoughts you may have about your experience at [institution]
(Open-ended)
Abstract (if available)
Linked assets
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
Conceptually similar
PDF
Community college transfer student involvement experiences at a selective, private four-year university
PDF
Community college transfer student involvement experiences at a selective, private four-year university
PDF
The impact of cultural capital on advancement via individual determination students from two southern California high schools
PDF
The academic integration and retention of Latino community college transfer students at a highly selective private four-year institution
PDF
The relationship of model minority stereotype, Asian cultural values, and acculturation to goal orientation, academic self-efficacy, and academic achievement in Asian American college students
PDF
Teacher management style: its impact on teacher-student relationships and leadership development
PDF
The impact of learning communities on the retention and academic integration of Latino students at a highly selective private four-year institution
PDF
Undocumented college students: pursuing academic goals against the odds
PDF
Non-academic factors affecting sense of belonging in first year commuter students at a four-year Hispanic serving institution
PDF
A study of Pacific Islander scholarship football players and their institutional experience in higher education
PDF
College academic readiness and English placement
PDF
Enrollment and financial aid decisions of first-year students at a private institution
PDF
Community college education for the incarcerated: the provision of access, persistence and social capital
PDF
First-generation, low-income Latina students and cultural capital: a case study for academic advisors
PDF
Examining the relationship between Latinx community college STEM students’ self-efficacy, social capital, academic engagement and their academic success
PDF
Plugging the leaky pipeline: how academic deans support the persistence of underrepresented minority students in science and mathematics
PDF
The impact of student-faculty interaction on undergraduate international students' academic outcome
PDF
The conceptualization and development of a global community college: a case study examining the perspective and roles of Pasadena City College leadership and management
PDF
Oppression of remedial reading community college students and their academic success rates: student perspectives of the unquantified challenges faced
PDF
Doubling student performance through the use of human capital at high-performing high-poverty schools
Asset Metadata
Creator
DeMark, Rocke
(author)
Core Title
The relationship between academic capitalism and student culture at two four-year higher education institutions
School
Rossier School of Education
Degree
Doctor of Education
Degree Program
Education (Leadership)
Publication Date
06/14/2011
Defense Date
05/24/2011
Publisher
University of Southern California
(original),
University of Southern California. Libraries
(digital)
Tag
academic capitalism,Capitalism,college rankings,Higher education,OAI-PMH Harvest,rankings,student culture,us news
Language
English
Contributor
Electronically uploaded by the author
(provenance)
Advisor
Kezar, Adrianna (
committee chair
), Melguizo, Tatiana (
committee member
), Robison, Mark (
committee member
)
Creator Email
demark@usc.edu,rocke031@yahoo.com
Permanent Link (DOI)
https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c127-617759
Unique identifier
UC1398599
Identifier
usctheses-c127-617759 (legacy record id)
Legacy Identifier
etd-DeMarkRock-24.pdf
Dmrecord
617759
Document Type
Dissertation
Rights
DeMark, Rocke
Type
texts
Source
University of Southern California
(contributing entity),
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
(collection)
Access Conditions
The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the a...
Repository Name
University of Southern California Digital Library
Repository Location
USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA
Repository Email
cisadmin@lib.usc.edu
Tags
academic capitalism
college rankings
rankings
student culture
us news