Woodson (p.111) states that annually college students visit campuses across the state searching for the best place to spend their college years. As such, several institutions tend to channel a lot of capital into different initiatives trying to entice competitive students into selecting them. Furthermore, they spend these a lot of money on expensive buildings to stay competitive and work tirelessly trying to provide the students with what they want. As such, students may choose a campus based on several components, for instance, students select their reputation and the program’s ranking based on the different tools they may need to research schools. Additionally, Armstrong et al. (p.40) assert that the commodification of campus education is no longer an unknown concept. As such, students tend to influence what they want to achieve out of their higher education due to the abundance of resources and choices, which reflect on the significant declarations, and availability of facilities and amenities. Also, colleges and universities often encourage and promote these choices, which indicates the ongoing consumerism signs in contemporary higher education.
Alternatively, as the higher education field continues to grow from the 1960s, the faculty was no longer able to be the primary guidance source for students. It is crucial to note that before the 1960s, students depended on the institution’s faculty in providing not only instructions inside the classroom but also, providing general guidance and advice (Armstrong et al., p.40). Additionally, after World War II, the students who enrolled in university increased, along with the expectations of the students, which resulted in education getting a partnership from constituencies in multiple fields. For instance, public relations and marketing, which could help in managing the increase in the student population in universities. This resulted in the use of promotional services, which institutions preferred to attract several students, and compete against other institutions. Therefore, due to this growth, there were revisions on the accreditation criteria and tenure review process, which included more emphasis on the evaluation of students, and transitioning from enrollment to the outputs that are based on the assessment. As such, both contribute to the increase in the consumerism in higher education through pressuring the faculty members to conform to the required amenities.
Student Influence
Armstrong et al. (p. 41), focuses on the irony of how the evaluation of the students influences faculty promotions and tenure. Hence, students generally rate their professors on matters that are not relevant to teaching competency. Instead, they rank them based on their feelings and perceptions. Additionally, some of the uncontrollable factors that students occasionally consider significantly influence these evaluations. For instance, the teaching style of the professor, testing procedures, and the degree to which the students feel they should receive a particular grade. Besides, research on students’ perceived their sense of entitlement for selecting higher grades commonly influenced the grade inflation. For example, a study in 2002 was conducted on about 850 sociology undergraduate students, and the results obtained indicate that 73.3 percent of the sampled students would take a course where they would learn less or nothing only if they would receive an A grade.
Furthermore, the grade inflation was awarded and embedded by the institutions. For instance, researchers conducted a study on the teachers at Columbia University show that A grades increased from 7 percent to 26 percent, while the C grade decreased from 25 percent to 9 percent across the population of undergraduates who enrolled in institutions between 1969 and 1993 (Armstrong et al., p.41). As such, the grade inflation could have been due to different factors, though it is evident that it coincides with the increasing consumerism over the past several decades. Moreover, it is a common practice for students who are unable to obtain the required grades to demand incredible degrees even when they failed to achieve them. Hence, institutional and student perpetuation of consumerism have arguably resulted in the social influences as indicated from the market strategies, accreditations, and tenure review process.
Effects of Corporatism
According to Rueda (p.171), the results of the relationship between institutions and political agencies influence the lower half of the wage distribution. As such, there are significant differences in the inequality incidences across OECD countries, which depend on what kind of income is focused on. Furthermore, corporations are not searching for universities for potential intelligent employees, but also a continuous, steady relationship with a profitable demographic. However, both the postsecondary and public education have been invaded by politicians and profiteers. Additionally, the corporate interests are a fundamental transition in the orientation from the liberal welfare concepts to the new world governance system by the market. As such, the marketization and commodification involve the trade barrier reforms, which provides enabling conditions for the transnational commerce in information and capital. Hence, this new system depends on the transitional outsources of production and labor.
Furthermore, the primary issues shifting from one system another has been the creation, maintenance, and training of an elite class, which is tasked with managing modern societies. As such, this system involves public fund expenditure on higher education, which influences the production of each new generation of engineers, thinkers, politicians, and doctors. Thus, this elite class is believed to provide a good ground that may benefit the society. As such, there has been an increased number of students who have joined university- thus increasing the demand for higher education. Hence, this has convinced many people to join university education because it is considered valuable. Unfortunately, the increase in the need for higher education had put pressure on the governments because the funds are retracted or where there is state-subsidized education. This has resulted in the universities developing even more difficult exams and various sorting mechanisms to manage this increase in demand for higher education. Furthermore, the illusion that universities are the key to success contributed to convincing more people to join the university. This has led many people to believe that universities provide people with access to well-paying jobs and upward social status. Therefore, university education is considered to give the people access to a better social class. However, this is true to some limited cases because the upward mobility by the successful few has influenced marginalization of the multiple people who have undergone the same lengthy but expensive process.
Nevertheless, the increased outcome in demand for university education has had an impact on the financial policies in universities. This has been emboldened by the ideology of neo-liberal combined with the concept that higher education does not need public funds, which could be invested elsewhere. As a result, there have been strict budgets located for higher education, which has caused numerous universities to be run probably by corporations, which provide financial assistance and run business slogans. As such, universities are put in a situation of ‘survival for the fittest’ where only universities that can raise funds can continue running and managing their university’s operations. According to Azra, and Progler (p.92), this has identified as a transition from the traditional university research which considered university excellence to the current notion that university is a corporation’s mindset. Hence, the university has lost track in focusing on academic excellence and prioritized on corporate mindsets on students. In spite of this, the shift may have been attributed to the entrepreneurial ethos that governs the corporate universities.
Are College Sports too High a Priority on Campuses?
According to Kiley (n.p), the amount of athletics spending time as university athletes has drastically increased by about 50 percent from 2005 to 2010. As such, college sports has been a point of focus for most campuses. Furthermore, the growth in per-athlete athletics has outgrown the growth of per-student’s academic in subdivisions of Division I athletics. Generally, the Division I universities and colleges tend to spend about three to six times on athletics per athlete, while academics per student exceeded 12 times in the South Eastern Conference. As such, many of the University Division I athletics argue that their participation in athletics benefits the entire institution. For instance, in applications, donations, and regional economic returns. Moreover, the expenditure by institutions tends to have increased drastically due to a growth in students participating in athletics. This has resulted in a financial strain of most athletic departments because the number of athletes has increased compared to the available resources. Therefore, from research conducted, only one out four institutions in the FBS was able to raise enough capital from 2005 to 2010, though there was none that made any profit from athletic participation.
Conclusion
Consumerism and corporatism have had an adverse effect on the educational system and sporting activities. This is because the increase of students in universities and athletes has resulted in a financial strain on the available resources in the university and athletic department. Furthermore, the social belief that university is the key to success has pushed more people to enroll in the university and different sporting activities.
Works cited
Armstrong, Amanda, et al. "Consumerism and Higher Education: Pressures and Faculty Conformity." The William " Mary Educational Review 3.2 (2015): 10. https://scholarworks.wm.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=https://www.google.com/"httpsredir=1"article= (Accessed 13 Dec 2018)
Azra, Kianinejad, and Progler, Joseph. “Elitism and corporatism in Higher Education.” International Conference on International Higher Education, 2011. Retrieved from: https://www.academia.edu/30102165/ELITISM_AND_CORPORATISM_IN_HIGHER_EDUCATION (Accessed 13 Dec 2018)
Baker, Jalelah, A. “The Good and Bad Sides of Consumerism.” The Straitstimes, 2016. https://www.straitstimes.com/opinion/the-good-and-bad-sides-of-consumerism (Accessed 13 Dec 2018)
Grimit, Nicole. "Effects of student athletics on academic performance." The Journal of Undergraduate Research 12.1 (2014): 5.
Kiley, Kevin. “Playing Different Games.” Inside Higher ED, 2013. Retrieved from: https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2013/01/16/universities-spend-more-athletics-athlete-academics-student- (Accessed 13 Dec 2018)
Rueda, David. "Political agency and institutions: Explaining the influence of left government and corporatism on inequality." Democracy, inequality, and representation: A comparative perspective (2008): 169-200.
Woodson, Cornell F. "The effects of consumerism on access to higher education." The Vermont Connection 34.1 (2013): 13.
