Neoliberal Rationality

In September of 2015, Harper’s Magazine published William Deresiewicz’s essay The Neoliberal Arts: How colleges have sold their soul to the market. In this essay, Deresiewicz discusses how colleges have changed their mindset over the last century and how the world’s new neoliberal thinking has changed higher education for the worse.

Higher education in modern day America has become a debated topic, with some saying that it is not worth it due to the debt it leaves upon leaving, and some saying that it opens opportunities that surpass the results of obtaining one. A resulting view from this conflict is that certain forms of education aren’t as beneficial as others. A primary example of one of these less valuable educations is the study of Liberal Arts. Author Sanford J. Ungar discredits this view in his article The New Liberal Arts where he discusses the many misconceptions that have come to form this interpretation. To convince the reader of these misunderstandings, Ungar uses the appeals of Ethos, Pathos, and Logos, with heavy appeal to logic (Logos) over the other two. Each misconception uses and focuses on more of one appeal than others, and by doing this, he is very successful in influencing the reader into considering that these misunderstandings are present.

Cureton and John Tagg both look at the bigger picture. In “Collegiate Life: An Obituary,” Levine & Cureton discuss larger reasons for why students behave the way they do in college–hope and fear. From these two emotions, they show how other attitudes–consumer expectations, psychological “damage,” and a utilitarian approach to learning–are a result of these two greater forces (Levine & Cureton 712). On the other hand, Tagg, in “The Decline of the Knowledge Factory: Why Our Colleges Must Change,” places the blame for the failure of higher education on universities. He writes that students’ disinterest and professors’ complaints are both due to the failure of the universities. Edmundson’s essay is given context and an explanation in Tagg’s

Mark Edmundson, the author of “On the Uses of a Liberal Education”, is an English teacher at the University of Virginia who expresses his concerns about the trajectory of the universities and colleges in America. Edmundson depicts how college students today have “little fire, little passion to be found,” towards their classes (4). In an effort to find the source of this lack of passion, Edmundson describes contacting other professors about this issue while refining his own ideas. Ultimately, Edmundson comes to a conclusion. He believes that the consumer mindset of college students has hindered American universities as a whole. My target audience is my professor, Professor Chezik. Looking closely at his wording, formation of sentences, and idea structure, one can see a recurring theme throughout Edmundson’s essay. Edmundson uses fragments, specifically at the beginning of his paragraphs, to start his point, pose counter arguments, and to have a poetic refrain.

Unfortunately, notwithstanding poet Louisa Fletcher's desire to start over, colleges and universities in the United States will not at any time soon access the Land of Beginning Again. Those institutions must enact meaningful change transitions from where they exist today, and there is much change that is needed. To wit, innovator and strategic management consultant Fred Buining asserts that higher education is in the "eye of the hurricane," which means that leaders, scholars, and educators are not doing enough to meet the challenges they face. Buining suggests that there is "no critical mass" in terms of the changes that are needed in higher education. Moreover, he believes that while today's student in colleges and universities are getting younger the professors and instructors are getting older, issues like cultural diversity and commercialization threaten institutions of higher learning. This paper reviews and critiques scholarly sources that address issues of diversity and commercialization on college and university campuses. Thesis: colleges and universities are in many respects becoming very much like corporations, and this is truly the wrong direction for higher education

College, a universal, fundamental concept that the globe utilizes. Through a wide array of variations, countries across the world have developed their own meaning of what higher education is. However, the underlying tone of it all is the same, furthering one’s knowledge. With a vast number of schools from a broad range of locations trying to pull the population in, colleges compete with different tactics ranging from education relevance to evaluation. Consequently, problems have arisen from these approaches, addressed along the lines in an article called “A New Course” by Magdalena Kay, an associate professor of English at the University of Victoria and an educational film, “Ivory Tower” by Andrew Rossi, a graduate of Harvard and Yale University and a filmmaker. Furthermore, these problems change the meaning of college itself, no longer seen as an education, but as a commodity.

In addition to Mark Edmundson, Danielle Weiner-Bronner, a young reporter with a history in The Wire and has made appearances in The Huffington Post and Rueters , wrote, “What’s Wrong with American Higher Education” published by Huffington Post in 2011. Bronner, like Edmundson, highlights changing expectations of the American student which consists of developing into a highly regarded, intellectual thinker to financial security (Bronner). At last, while many professionals focus on the flaws of administration’s business pursuits, Greg Lukianoff, tPresident of the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education, and Johnathan Haidt, a professor at New York University’s Stern School of Business wrote, “The Coddling of the American Mind” where authors

In Simon Young’s essay “Universities, Governments and Industry: Can the Essential Nature of Universities Survive the Drive to Commercialize?” Young implies many universities increase their focus on commercializing rather than focusing to increase a higher branch of learning for university students. Throughout the essay Young voices his concern for this issue through the use of statistics, concrete facts, research and by acknowledging the issue Young is able to inform his readers about the increase rate of commercialization from universities which he believes is a universities purpose. Young notes 40 years of his life were spent at Universities and this allows the gain of credibility. Young’s audience are members of psychiatry and

In the essay “On the Uses of Liberal Education,” Mark Edmundson discusses how unhappy he is with the current education system. Most students today are very influenced by other activities like watching movies, football matches, fraternity parties, and a lot more. The students today prefer doing these fun activities and not studying. They expect a simplified education system where they do not have to struggle and everyone passes their classes. Mark Edmundson attempts to shed light on the issue of universities becoming more consumers driven, and how this is affecting the education system negatively.

In the article, “College is a Waste of Time and Money”, Caroline Bird explains why higher education is not always the right choice for students after high school. The author believes that students do not come to the decision to attend college on their own but they are expected to and pressured by parents, advisors, and society. In the beginning of the article the author argues that colleges use techniques to sell themselves just like any other product on the market. They advertise what they have to offer and tell students what they want to hear. She also feels that campuses, stemming from the riots in the 1960’s, have started to

Faculty and administration coming together on one accord in support of an agreed upon mission is key to success. The article speaks about how the university of UNC worked together to come up with a classroom space problem they were having trying to accommodate the growing student population. The faculty worked on a schedule and the administration was able to provide funding needed to pay for technology upgrades rather than spending it on a new building, which resulted in saving the university $800,000 (Denneen, 2012). In addition, keeping in mind that each faculty member and administrator must share accountability and understand his or her role in this process or it can ultimately fall

The modern university system as a whole is an exploitative, capitalist construction. Those within it, whether they be undergraduate or graduate students, tenured or nontenured professors, researchers, etc. To exist within the university system and survive, one is essentially placed in a system that very closely resembles the free market economy of the United States. Academia exists to make one successful in whatever career path one chooses, including careers in the academic world. Specific to academic careers, a cycle of oppression and exploitation of labor exists to prevent any one person from getting too successful, lest they challenge the system and destroy it. Academia forces its participants to work in a very individualistic, neoliberal manner which encourages exploitation of other participants and perpetuates abusive labor practices, all in an effort to preserve a structure which encourages the professionalization of knowledge. And despite being detrimental in various ways to all involved, no one, whether due to inability or unwillingness, makes motions to break down the system because of how completely encapsulating and powerful the university has become.

‘Neo liberalism is responsible for most of the global economic problems we are experiencing today’

promoted a half way approach to liberal ideas while they incorporated parts of a social

(B. Kamiński 225). However, the package was met with a flurry of criticism from prominent economists and journalists. Echoing the key principles of neoliberalism, the economist Tomasz Jeziorański argued that the principal weakness of the package consisted in granting the full responsibility for economic performance to the central administration. The free enterprise characterized by responsibility and autonomy, he insisted, was incompatible with economic coercion by the state (B. Kamiński 226). As a consequence of protests of similar nature, the government eventually withdrew the package in question from further consideration.