Dallon J.

Cooper
WRTG 2010
Jennifer Courtney

The Convergence of Higher Education

In this paper I will show that the main point of converge between the last eight
articles is to reform higher education. First, I will show that to solve this problem, the first
question one must ask is, What is the definition of a University?. Then, I will show that
the second question that must be answered is, What is the Meaning of Higher
Education to its Applicants?. Finally I will highlight the third question, that is, What is
the Charter between the University and Society?. Utilizing these three questions allows
me to organize the articles into three groups based on their secondary points of
convergence.
The first question that must be answered is 'what is the definition of a university'.
This question is answered best by the article Out of the Ruins, the University to Come
by Hanke & Hearn, and the video, This Is Water, by David Foster Wallace, best
exemplify the answering of what a University is and its purpose. The Hanke and Hearn
article focused on this by answering the definitional claim of what the University is,
namely by suggesting what it should stand for and from a historical perspective, how it
has changed from that for the worse.
The video by Wallace, he was showing what a liberal arts education means and
how that relates to the University as a whole. To me he was showing why the graduating
class went to college in the first place, what they were supposed to learn while they
were enrolled there, penultimately, what the universitys job was in relation to the
student. In it he seemed to answer what the University is supposed to do, teach us how

Education

to think, the University should be an open place for the free exchange of ideas and
thoughts, promoting open-mindedness, rather than churning out those who have only
been taught one school of thought.
I have explained the first question and then answered it from what I think to be
the answer from the corresponding text. Using this as a foundation, we can move
forward to the second point of convergence, which is, What Higher Education means to
those applying. The three articles that best show this convergence are: Are Colleges
Worth the Price of Admission? (Hacker & Dreifus), Choices of Degree or Degree of
Choice? (Reay et al.), and Linking Diversity with the Educational and Civic Missions of
Higher Education (Hurtado).
The main argument of the first article by Hacker & Dreifus is to ask if colleges are
even worth the price it costs to attend. Stating clearly how big of a decision this was for
a young person to make, "For most Americans, educating their offspringwill be the
largest financial outlay, after theirhome mortgage, they'll ever make." (Hacker & Dreifus,
2010.) And in other stats, they show that "Tuition charges at both public and
privatecolleges have more than doubledin realdollarscompared with a generation
ago." (Hacker & Dreifus, 2010.) This adds just another layer to my original question of
what does college mean to a young person?
The second article by Reay et al. states that its main thesis is higher education
choice processes of a specific segment of higher education applicants. This means
they are analyzing the correlations between applicants class and race, and their
decision-making for college (negotiating process of applications, meaning of higher
education, and affects of existing inequalities). In the third article by Hurtado, her main

Education

argument is to show the practical, theoretical, and empirical rationale that links diversity
with the mission of higher education. She uses empirical tests to show that the
University benefits from increased diversity, and then it should be increased from its
current levels. From these three articles we can see what a higher education means to
those people that are currently applying, even if they take this risk it will be the second
highest financial risk of their entire lives. They are taking this risk because it statistically
proven that the more educated you are the higher class of people you are associated
with (they want to change the current social inequalities), and that if diversity is
beneficial to a University, then to diverse applicants it might mean they stand a better
chance at achieving a degree and changing their current situation.
I have shown the second point of convergence and answered what the University
appears to mean to those prospective applicants. I will now show the third question,
being the Charter between the University and Society. The three remaining papers that
best articulate this question and answering process are: Obtaining Integrity? Reviewing
and Examining the Charter between Higher Education and Society (Kezar), Research
and the Bottom Line in Todays University (Bonewits & Soley), and Deconstructing
Academe: The birth of critical university studies (Williams). The main argument in the
first paper by Kezar is to examine and revise the current charter between higher
education and society. To me this means how the University and society should interact
with each other, and some might wonder why this charter matters in the first place?
"Why does a discussion of the charter between higher education and societymatter? It
matters because the charter is the foundation of the missionsand values of institutions

Education

of higher education institutions." (Kezar, 2004. p. 431) So what is her opinion of how the
charter is looking now? (Back in 2004):
According to critics, higher education is foregoing its role as a social
institutionand is functioning increasingly as an industry with
fluctuating,predominantly economic goals and market-oriented values (Bok,
1982;Gumport, 2000; Kerr, 1994; Rhoades, 1998; Slaughter, 1993; Slaughter
&Rhoades, 1996)
The second article by Bonewits & Soley says that research institutions have become
more dependent on corporate investment, and that this has shaped how research is
conducted on campus. Some changes include: curriculum that is taught to students,
how the university staffs its faculty, and how it makes decisions overall. This is right in
line with Kezars article about how the charter between the University and the private
sector is today, the University cares more about the economic market than its original
mission. If I were to tell you that the University of Michigans "research budgetincreased
five-fold during the last two decades, going from $89.0 million in1980-1981 to $499.7
million in 1999-2000." (Bonnets & Soley, n.d. p. 82), would one agree that this is
intuitively seen as a positive? The problems arises when the corporations that make
donations for research place holds on these funds, meaning that they approve the
research project, as long as it is in accordance with their business/political agenda. In
addition, the way that the University staffs its people has radically changed, with an
increased reliance on part-time professors rather than full-time professors. "At the
University of Michigan, the number of full-timeprofessors has declined while the

Education

number of part-time professors hasincreased over three-fold since 1980-1981 (Table 1

inarticle). (Bonewits & Soley, n.d. p. 85).
The final paper by Williams is about the birth of Critical University Studies in the
1990s and how the rise of corporate managerial policies have change from traditional
faculty governance. This relates to Bonewits and Soleys article in that these policies
have corrupted research, cut full time positing while increasing adjunct positions, and
exploiting students by requiring them to work more and take on more debt. This means
that the current way the University and the private world interact are not beneficial for
the student or the faculty at the school, and something needs to be changed. Just like
Kezar said, we need to examine the charter between higher education and society, and
make it so it is beneficial for us, not the corporate investors.
In conclusion, I have shown that each paper was vital to understand of the
collective argument posed by each author: that reformation of higher education is critical
for a better functioning society. I showed the three secondary points of convergence that
were key to solving the problem of higher education reform, and in doing that showed
what the correct course of action should be for the future of the University.

Education

References
Bonewits S. & Soley L., (n.d.). Research and the Bottom Line in Todays University. p. 81-92.
Hacker, A. & Dreifus, C., (2010). Are Colleges Worth the Price of Admission?. The Chronicle of
Higher Education.
Hanke, B. & Hearn, A., (n.d.). Out of the Ruins, the University to Come. p. 11-20.
Hurtado, S., (2007). Linking Diversity with the Educational and Civic Missions of Higher
Education. The Review of Higher Education, 30(2), p. 185-196.
Kezar, A., (2004). Obtaining Integrity? Reviewing and Examining the Charter between Higher
Education and Society. The Review of Higher Education, 27(4), p. 429-459.
Reay D., Davies, J., David, M., Ball, S., (2001). Choices of Degree or Degree of Choice?.
Sociology, 35(4), p. 855-874.
Wallace, D. F., (n.d.). This Is Water.
Williams J., (2012). Deconstructing Academe: The birth of critical university studies. The
Chronicle of Higher Education.