|
Education
as a Business
Whenever the economy is weak, business values begin
to compromise educational values as administrative powers
increase. During recent years there has been an inclination
among regents, legislators and administrators that universities
should operate like businesses, selling education as a service
to the public.
Application
of business values generally is destructive to educational
objectives. In 1968, the Cox Commission on the Columbia University
Student Riots concluded, Any tendency to treat a university
as a business enterprise with faculty as employees and students
as customers, diminishes its vitality and communal cohesion.
The
academic system defines teachers as professionals working
under contract with educational institutions. Teachers as
professionals are responsible for curriculum, student evaluation,
educational requirements and academic planning. They are separate
from management. They have their own governance system and
responsibility for retention, promotion and tenure of faculty.
When educational institutions operate as businesses, teachers
become employees and administrators become bosses.
It is doubtful that educational integrity can exist when teachers
are treated as employees. This practice equates public universities
with proprietary schools where teachers are employees.
While some vestiges of the academic system remain, such as
contracts, rank and tenure; they have become perfunctory gestures
at most state universities. For example, not long ago teacher
contracts were issued no later than March 30th of each year.
Today, in state universities, contracts often are distributed
well into the academic year. In hiring Deans and Department
Heads, upper administrators sometimes offer academic rank,
teaching status and tenure as benefits. This is usually done
without faculty participation in the academic process. Legislators
and regents consistently identify teachers in state universities
as employees, which is demeaning to the professional status
of faculty.
A
major contrast between corporate and educational values is
an appropriate distinction between efficiency and effectiveness.
Efficiency is measured in time, cost, manpower, space and
productivity. It is viewed as desirable in the management
of university operations, while effectiveness is more important
to educational goals. Efficiency in operations that fail to
meet institutional objectives is false efficiency. There are
numerous facets of instruction which to be effective are not
especially efficient, dedicated space, duplicate facilities,
small classes, more teachers, and greater decentralization
of responsibility within departments and colleges.
Centralization
is a management maneuver directed toward efficiency, but it
has limited value in terms of meeting educational objectives.
Duplication of facilities and services become cost-effective
when measured against achievement of institutional goals,
presumably a higher quality of educational experience for
students.
Some
centralized facilities are necessary. What would be advantageous
is greater latitude for individuals and departments to incorporate
technical or other facilities tailored to the needs and objectives
within their own disciplines. In the instance of expensive
equipment, that has only occasional use, centralization is
the logical choice. Central labs at the college and university
level are useful to handle overflow requirements from the
university at large during peak use periods.
Multi-use
space is another example of institutional efficiency. Multi-use
space is appropriate for lecture classes, and it is necessary
for some studio courses. However, in professional programs,
it is essential to have a combination of multi-use space and
dedicated studios, such as assigned workspace for upper level
students. There needs to be a better understanding by administrators
of how the student's educational experience is benefited from
having dedicated facilities and studios.
Administrators
continue to seek efficient ways to educate students
with fewer teachers and less resources. Over a period of time,
this inevitably leads to deterioration of educational quality.
State legislators and university administrators in a number
of states are currently studying teacher performance. The
apparent aim of these studies is to determine the feasibility
of faculty assuming larger teaching loads as a means for reducing
educational cost. The irony of this concern is that it has
not been that long ago that the same people pressured faculty
for research, professional development and national or international
recognition. These demands led to reduction of faculty instructional
time, participation in academic matters and working with students
outside of class. The new demands for more teaching hours
might well prove to be as counterproductive to educational
quality as undue pressure for research and professional development.
The
size of state universities and the present degree of centralization
are discouraging to many students. Students have difficulty
identifying a homebase. Student activities are scattered
over large campuses, and they are pulled between department,
college and central administrative offices. Many European
universities recognize these problems and organize colleges
within the university as self-sustaining units down to, and
including, dining halls and dormitories. More decentralization
of academic matters, facilities, and some university services
would greatly improve the quality of student life.
It
is readily apparent that state universities still put more
emphasis on size than on quality. It is easier to justify
budget increases to the state legislature with large enrollment
figures. Even though administrators deny it, internally, the
"numbers game" is still over-emphasized in establishing
faculty lines, budgets and in decision-making. It is better
for students and the educational process to establish semi-autonomous
branch campuses than to continue expanding a single university
beyond a reasonable size. In comparison to most private schools,
state universities are large–a state university of 20,000
students is considered relatively small. Size in itself impacts
on educational quality. Universities with large enrollments
and excessive centralization depersonalize students' experiences
and reduce educational quality. Periods of financial pressure
are a good time to reexamine the institution's operation,
goals, and organization. If the institution continues to operate
the same as in the past, it is improbable that cost containment
can be achieved by efficiency alone. The existing problems
demand either change or more money and, under present conditions,
change appears to be a more reasonable approach.
|
