Summary the readings and compare the authors

Marginson Simon transformed academic research at public institutions by directing the transformation of smaller universities before World War II into larger institutions that upheld their social position and dedication to high standards. His research was focused on the multiversity concept's organizational structure and social justification. Additionally, through the 1960 California Masterplan for Higher Education, he established a larger system of higher education based on the ideas of social equality of opportunity and regulated division of labor (Simon3). Simon bargained for an amalgamation of well-organized state colleges and the University of California, which wanted to become one fully-fledged university, and it was noted that later on, these two institutions became one. His plan led to the growing demands of funding for new college campuses and academic research. It comprised of educational policy as well as a major innovation, which had economic impacts that are long term in the California state. Whereas



Article two

Clark Keer argues that a university is series of activities and communities which are combined by a common governing board or a common name. However, the concept of the university has changed commonly and profoundly in the direction of social evolution whereby the term modern did no longer exist.

There were a number of colleges in America which were developed along the Cambridge and oxford model and that paved a way for creation of modern American university in 1825 with Professor Ticknor George at Harvard. This lead to the establishment of academic journals, research institutes, prominent departments of influence which used an elective system although it’s argued that it did not benefit the students as it was expected but rather the professors gained more from it(Clark3). Whereas

Article three

The dream is over by Marginson Simon evaluates higher education social distribution specifically looking at the association between social inequality and economic inequality through higher education, which is illustrated by the inequality equation. Moreover, since the master plan of the 1960s, this practice has worsened with persisted cultural resources and irreducible differences between families in the socio-economic aspects.

In Simon's article, there some researchers like Vikki who carried out a large-scale study in the year 2013 in the UK concerning dramatic and continued differences that existed in elite university social groups. The results were generated using measures of inequality, Lorenz curves, and Gini coefficients that compare financial resource allocation across four institutions in US and Canada over a period of thirty-five years. Whereas,





Article four

The unmaking of the public university by Newfield Christopher was about the strike supporters executed by the former college graduates who wanted to change the university setting so that it could fit in the outside environment like the amount of money being paid at work (Ian Dew and Robert 58).

There has been the restoration of the college-educated economic majority, which has been simplified because of the economic and cultural wars. The above was also escalated by the very mainstream arrival of related business values that are traditional among the young individuals who were starting college or universities. Whereas

Article five

The unmaking of a public university by Newfield Christopher, in chapter four talks about the market substitute for cultural information which stresses the capitalist logic of cultural and social practices which are challenged by the conservative dogma in higher education. Under this chapter, dissemination, and pursuit of information was reflected as activities of non-market whereby they are crucial in market mechanism in the economy with efficiency management and price signals believed to interrupt the development of information creation.

Under this chapter, there was the necessity of social discrimination, which is financial by replacing business with financial factors and economics, combined with a wide range of wars that are meant to minimize the academic cultural information.







In a separate paragraph, (5-6 sentences) how do these authors argument/insights complement or contradict each other? What other connections do you see?

Both Newfield in article four chapter one and Keer Clark in article two chapter one had a similar view about the direction of college or university education was taking. These two authors noted that there was a need to make changes in the education, which would help graduates to fit into the outside environment. This was adopted by different institutions of learning in the later years.

In article four chapter one by Christopher Newfield, it talks about how economic claims of target group can be reduced with cultural and economic wars in the process of discrediting the overall cultural framework in the growing of college education. The above assertion is similar to what is stipulated in article five-chapter four still the same author that talks about a market substitute for cultural information. Which stressed that academic cultural information was downsized by cultural wars, which were attacking market dynamics and socio-economic aspects of people’s lives,

The above is different from Marginson Simon article one chapter 3 who revolutionized university research of public institution whereby he oversaw the transition of universities that were modest before WWII to that bigger institution that maintained social status and high-quality commitment. He based his studies on organizational form and social rationale in the multiversity concept. Moreover, based on the principles of social equality of opportunity and managed division of labor, he located a larger system of higher education through his Masterplan for Higher Education in 1960 California.

In article three chapters one Simon bargained for an amalgamation of well-organized state colleges and the University of California which wanted to become one fully fledged university and it was noted that later on, these two institutions became one. His plan led to the growing demands of funding for new college campuses and academic research. It comprised of educational policy as well as a major innovation, which had economic impacts that are long term in the California state. This also similar to what is stipulated by Clark Keer in the article.

Works cited

Clark K.The uses of the University. Harvard University press, Cambridge, Massachusetts.p.5 1963

Ian Dew B. and Robert J. Gordon, "Where did the productivity Growth go. Inflation Dynamics and the distribution of income (National Bureau of Economic Research Working paper11842), pp.58-59, and http://www.nber.org/paper/w11842 (accessed April 2, 2006.

Simon. M.The Dream Is Over: The Crisis of Clark Kerr’s California Idea of Higher Education p.3 2016