USSWORD

D'Arcy Hande's Briarpatch article on nuclear power, tarsands extraction, and the co-option of the University of Saskatchewan

2012-02-29T22:12:00.001-08:00

Follow the Yellowcake Road

Nuclear power, tarsands extraction, and the co-option of the University of Saskatchewan

D'Arcy Hande

"After reviewing this brief history of collaboration between industry, government, and the university, one may be struck with a profound sense of the surreal. It is as though, like Dorothy, we are transported to an alternate reality, the Land of Oz. Here, all the talk is about the bright future of nuclear medicine and glittering isotopes. But go down the shady side path into the forest, and one encounters the dark underside of the nuclear agenda and its connection to tarsands extraction."

Read more...

Senate Election 2012

2012-02-15T01:23:00.000-08:00

It's time again for U of S Senate Elections nominations!! Please send in your nominations before March 1, 2012.
Please visit the website of the Office of the University Secretary for more information and nomination forms!

http://www.usask.ca/university_secretary/senate/senate_elections.php

From the website of the Office of the University Secretary:

"An election will be held in the spring of 2012 for seven (7) Senate districts and five (5) member at large positions that expire on June 30, 2012. Elected Senators serve three-year terms beginning July 1 and are eligible for re-election to a second consecutive term.

As a Senator, you are part of the university's tri-cameral governance structure (Board of Governors, Council and Senate), and are responsible for some critical areas of operations, including: Non-academic student discipline; granting honorary degrees; establishment or disestablishment of colleges, schools and departments; examinations for professional societies; and promoting the interests at the U of S."

U of S Senators Demand Action from Board of Governors re: MacKinnon's Political Endorsement

2011-11-06T14:11:00.000-08:00

November 3, 2011

Sandra Finley

656 Saskatchewan Crescent East

Saskatoon, SK S7N 0L1

t 306-373-8078 e sabest1@sasktel.net

Members of the Board of Governors of the University of Saskatchewan

c/o Dr. Lea Pennock

University Secretary

The University of Saskatchewan

105 Administration Place

Saskatoon, SK t 306-966-4632

S7N 5A2 e lea.pennock@usask.ca

cc: Senators Miller, Hande, Fortugno, Schriml (by email)

Dear Members of the Board of Governors of the University of Saskatchewan:

Re: 1. PRESIDENT MACKINNON'S ENDORSEMENT OF ROB NORRIS' POLITICAL CAMPAIGN

See StarPhoenix, Hutton, October 28^th , at http://www.thestarphoenix.com/news/MacKinnon+comment+conflict+prof/5620291/story.html#ixzz1c5BVLoig

“Rob Norris is the finest Minister responsible for post-secondary education that I have been privileged to work with in my thirteen years as President of the University of Saskatchewan” (MacKinnon, September 2, 2011.) Mr. Norris is the Saskatchewan Party candidate in Saskatoon-Greystone provincial constituency and is the incumbent Minister of Advanced Education, Employment and Immigration. The endorsement is re-produced in his election pamphlet, with the permission of Dr. MacKinnon.

We, University Senators, request

- In the exercise of its responsibility for the autonomy of the University, the Board of Governors censure the President for his compromising statement and subsequent authorization to use it in an election pamphlet.

Since Saskatchewan has fixed election dates, President MacKinnon would have known that this quote would be favourable to Norris’ re-election chances. He gave permission for its use after the writ was drawn up. This is an inappropriate use of the position of President of the University.

President MacKinnon and Provost Fairbairn overrode the choice of the Search Committee for the Dean of Law to put in place University of Alberta Law Professor Anand, thesis supervisor of the president’s son. This was also an inappropriate use of the President’s position. It is documented at http://sandrafinley.ca/?p=3366

Censure is warranted.

RE: 2. CHAIRMANSHIP OF PRESIDENTIAL SEARCH COMMITTEE

The U of S Conflict of Interest Policy states that a “Conflict of interest is a breach of an obligation to the University that has the effect of advancing one’s own interest or the interests of others in a way detrimental to the interests of, or potentially harmful to, the integrity of the University. Conflicts of interest and the appearance of conflicts of interest must be avoided.”

We request

- that the Board of Governors ask Governor Hopkins to permanently stand down as the Chair of the Selection Committee for the next President of the University.

Governor Hopkins is a member of the CAMECO Board of Directors since 1992, she stands to gain through her considerable holdings of CAMECO shares ($1.8 million as at end of 2009) if the University continues its friendly posture towards promoting the nuclear industry. The University has done this in part through its hasty establishment of the Canadian Centre for Nuclear Innovation, CCNI (University Council, 22^nd of September, 2011; Board of Governors, October 14th, 2011).

In defence of the best traditions of the University,

_____"Sandra Finley"________

Sandra Finley, Elected Senator

On my own and on behalf of:

Stefania Fortugno, Elected Senator

Mary Jean Hande, Elected Senator

Jordan W. Miller, Elected Senator

Ronald Schriml, Elected Senator

Counterpunch article on "Casino Capitalism and Higher Education"

2011-11-01T17:52:00.000-07:00

THE POLITICS OF IGNORANCE

CASINO CAPITALISM AND HIGHER EDUCATION

by HENRY GIROUX

OCTOBER 31, 2011

"[H]igher education is increasingly defined as another core element of
corporate power and culture. Public spaces such as libraries are detached
from the language of public discourse and viewed increasingly as a waste of
taxpayers' money. The dominant media is simply an adjunct of corporate
advertising and ideology while also trading in the idiocy of celebrity
culture. No longer vibrant political spheres and ethical sites, public
spaces are reduced to dead spaces in which it becomes almost impossible to
construct those modes of knowledge, communication, agency, and meaningful
interventions necessary for an aspiring democracy. Ignorance is now the
political and cultural currency of choice and provides the foundation for an
ongoing neoliberal attack on the social state, workers, and unions, matched
by a full-fledged assault on higher education."

ScandaloUS Bias

2011-10-29T13:31:00.000-07:00

MacKinnon comment a conflict: prof

By David Hutton, The StarPhoenix October 28, 2011

"A University of Saskatchewan professor says president Peter MacKinnon's endorsement of Saskatchewan Party candidate Rob Norris in a campaign brochure is unprecedented and constitutes an "abuse of power."

read more...

U of S Administration uses legal system to threaten and intimidate.

2011-10-23T14:42:00.000-07:00

Long time U of S Professor likens University administration to the Politburo

2011-10-12T14:58:00.000-07:00

The University of Saskatchewan . . . is no longer the People's University of Saskatchewan that it was intended to be when first chartered near the turn of the century. Governing bodies at the University of Saskatchewan are virtually meaningless in a democratic sense. The “politburo rules”. Members of Council tend to go along with what the Presidents, vice-presidents, deans, vice-deans and administrative advisors come up with, which have been very much influenced by corporate interests and corporate donations of late. Faculty members of Council seem to live in an unconscious and understandable climate of fear—they do not want to oppose administrative plans for fear of keeping their own programs at the departmental level viable and properly funded. They tend to express homilies in support of top-down policies already made. They are constantly intimidated by the cycle of departmental reviews mandated by the former Provost as well as the tedious, time-consuming, ever-present, and incomprehensible Integrated Planning cycles, where the University collectively contemplates its navel rather than getting on with the job of actually serving students and the people of Saskatchewan .

read more . . .

SP Article on Corporate Influence at the U of S

2011-10-11T11:34:00.000-07:00

U of S senators want more public input

Rory MacLean

October 11, 2011

University of Saskatchewan senators who this summer called for the board of governors chair to resign because of her ties to Cameco Corp. are now saying the senate itself has a democratic deficit.

They formed the group University Senators in Saskatchewan Working to Revive Democracy (USSWORD) earlier this year to criticize the corporatization of the university.

The group was created after environmental lawyer Stefania Fortugno penned a letter that accused board of governors chair Nancy Hopkins of having a conflict of interest between her financial interest in Cameco and position as chair of the search committee for the next university president.

Elected senator Mary Jean Hande said a number of senators and faculty have since voiced their support for USSWORD, but are afraid of repercussions if they should be seen as aligning themselves with the group.

"They're afraid to speak out about these things because they're worried about repercussions," she said. "They're worried about bullying and they're worried about harassment."

Hande wouldn't specify exactly how many senators are involved, but she admitted it is less than half of the 28 elected to the body.

It's been difficult for the group to communicate with the other senators, said Hande, because communication is vetted by the senate secretary and the senate email list has recently been disabled.

Motions submitted by USSWORD to be put on the last senate meeting agenda calling for an investigation into Hopkins' apparent conflict of interest were rejected twice for being out of order.

"They told us there wasn't enough time to discuss these motions at the meeting, so they basically rejected them. They don't have the power to do that," said Hande.

Hopkins earlier denounced the accusations as "absurd," saying they stemmed from the fact that Cameco is in the nuclear business, "which is a big flashpoint for many people."

A recent chart issued by USSWORD outlining different corporate ties at the university reveals a nuclear focus, bearing the title Radioactive Trinity: A study of partnerships of government, industry and the U of S, though it also outlines links to several oil companies among university governors. These connections call the university's autonomy into question, said Hande.

"The university is a public institution. Its role is to serve the university community. That type of influence takes the university away from the influence of the people of Saskatchewan. We're concerned that the university is being transformed into some sort of think-tank for the energy industry."

USSWORD will be bringing three motions to the next senate meeting and is asking any interested members of the public to attend. The Occupy Saskatoon protesters will attend the meeting, which starts at 9:30 a.m. on Saturday in Room 150 in the College of Law building.

PROTEST COMES TO SASKATOON

The growing Occupy Wall Street movement demonstrating against corporate power and economic disparity hits Saskatoon on Saturday.

The Occupy Saskatoon event starts at 9:30 a.m. at the University of Saskatchewan, where the rally will support a group of academic activists and elected officials speaking out against corporate influence at the university.

The rally then marches to downtown Saskatoon and stops at Friendship Park for the day-long demonstration.

Occupy Wall Street is a continuous demonstration that has attracted thousands of people to New York to protest corporate influence in American society and government.

Senators intend to present motions regarding  Autonomy, Corporatization, Transparency and Communication at U of S Senate Meeting

2011-10-10T12:19:00.000-07:00

The following are summarized motions that were submitted to the U of S Secretary, by elected senators, for inclusion in the October 15^th U of S Senate Meeting Agenda. The motions were twice rejected by the Senate Executive on the basis that they were not “in order” and that they would like to “ensur[e] that sufficient time is given to the substantive issues that are on the fall meeting agenda.” As they are currently drafted, the U of S Senate Bylaws do not restrict individual Senators from placing motions on the agenda and the Senate Executive has conceded that these motions can be presented at the Senate Meeting for inclusion in the agenda.

That these motions were rejected by the Senate Executive, is just another example of the impoverished democratic climate on the U of S Senate, and emphasize the urgency of having motions such as these on the agenda. These are substantive issues that deserve proper consideration and discussion at the upcoming U of S Senate meeting and these Senators intend to see them discussed. If you’re concerned about Autonomy, Corporatization, Transparency and Communication at the University of Saskatchewan, we encourage you and all Saskatchewan community members to attend the October 15^th U of S Senate Meeting to show support for these motions.

Summaries of the three motions:

1. In light of an astonishing number of harassment and intimidation cases at the University of Saskatchewan, the senators seek clarification from the Board of Governors around the apparent dysfunctional role of the University administration in matters of dispute mediation and resolution.

2. In the past year alone, it was brought to the attention of the Board of Governors that their chair, Nancy Hopkins, appears to be in a significant conflict of interest by concurrently serving as a Cameco board member; and corporate and government interference has resulted in the inappropriate earmarking of $30 million of public money for the U of S Canadian Centre for Nuclear Innovation. Concerned that these instances represent a growing trend, the senators request clarification of issues regarding the apparent inability of the Board of Governors to protect the university autonomy from corporate and government influences.  

3. At present, communication amongst U of S senators is restrictive and vetted by the University Secretary. USSWORD senators seek the formation of a committee to facilitate communication amongst all senators.

What: University of Saskatchewan Senate Meeting

When: 9:30AM, October 15, 2011

Where: Room 150, College of Law , University of Saskatchewan

Occupy Saskatoon plans to be at Oct. 15 University of Saskatchewan Senate Meeting.

2011-10-10T12:13:00.000-07:00

News Release

OCCUPY SASKATOON — RECLAIM OUR COMMUNITY

Saskatoon people are rallying on Saturday, Oct. 15th, as part of a “people-centred,” international protest movement. We are acting in solidarity with those who “Occupy Wall Street,” and others in hundreds of cities, across Canada and world wide.

The central problem with our economic structure is the impact of corporate power on the lives of individuals, communities, institutions and government. Nowhere are the concerns about corporate influence more troubling than at the University of Saskatchewan. The University, always strapped for cash, takes large donations from large corporations because public funding has remained stagnant. But are these donations shifting the focus of the university away from the needs of students and towards the demands of corporate sponsors? Are sciences getting priority attention, while other programs are neglected?

In the last three years, Cameco corporation, with provincial government backing, has practically taken over new research development at the university. At the same time, programs like the Extension Department, the Department of Languages and Linguistics, and Fine Arts have been eliminated or starved for resources. The administration is openly hostile to any debate or opposition to this drift in priorities. The University Senate is the last chance to voice our concerns. We need YOU, the ordinary citizen, to show up and demonstrate your support for the senators speaking out about OUR issues.

If you are worried about the rising costs of food and gasoline, you’ve felt the effects of corporate power. If you are concerned about how your community is being planned and directed, you’re aware of the influence of corporate power. If you troubled about your children’s education, you’re bothered by the effects of corporate power.

We invite people from across the city, and beyond, to join us on Saturday, October 15th, to reclaim our community.

9:15 a.m. University of Saskatchewan Senate meeting, College of Law

12:00 p.m. March from the University to River Landing

1:00 p.m.. “Occupy” Friendship Park

Infographic Update

2011-10-06T00:27:00.000-07:00

An updated infographic with footnotes has been added to the infographic page. The infographic visually represents what appears to be a high degree of interconnectedness between the university, the government, and industry.

University/Corporate Connections

2011-09-27T10:33:00.000-07:00

UPDATE: A new version of the chart, along with footnotes, is available here!

The following is a draft of a chart that graphically displays some of the connections between the University and the nuclear and oil industries. It requires careful perusal, but raises some questions about the corporatization of the university. A more developed and refined version will be available soon, so stay tuned.

Corporatization at the University of Calgary

2011-09-18T18:38:00.000-07:00

Jonathan Kay: The ‘climategate’ shoe is now on the other foot

Remember “Climategate?” That was the apparent scandal that began in 2009 when hackers downloaded and publicized thousands of emails from the Climate Research Unit of the University of East Anglia. Climate-change skeptics claimed that the emails showed that scientists were engaged in a massive conspiracy to suppress the “truth” that man-made warming was a giant hoax perpetrated by Al Gore, George Soros, the United Nations, and the Sierra Club.

As it turned out, there was no scandal. Six separate investigations into”climategate” all showed that the supposed damning evidence was just cherry-picked, decontextualized sound bites from candid discussions among scientists. As Scientific Americanmagazine reported: “Nothing in the stolen material undermines the scientific consensus that climate change is happening and that humans are to blame.” (In any event, as any thinking person already knew, the East Anglia data set was just one of several showing the massive warming pattern on earth.)

None of this subsequent investigation and exoneration has done anything to reduce the fever pitch of the warming-denier community, who see Climategate in epic terms. As I’ve argued previously, climate-change deniers think in ways that are at best cultish, and at worst conspiratorial. And they are not above twisting the available evidence in eccentric ways in order to blame warming on sunspots or (their new favourite) assorted “cosmic rays from space.”

I thought of this crowd today when I saw news that oil-industry-funded research accounts at the University of Calgary have been used to pay for anti-warming propaganda:

The records showed that the strategy was crafted by professional firms, in collaboration with well-known climate change skeptics in Canada and abroad, allowing donors to earn tax receipts by channelling their money through the university. All of the activities and $507,975 in spending were organized by the Friends of Science, an anti-Kyoto Protocol group founded by retired oil industry workers and academics who are skeptical about peer-reviewed research linking human activity to global warming observed in recent decades.

Hmmm … An academic institution’s ostensibly neutral fact-finding mission being scandalously compromised by ideologues with an axe to grind on the subject of climate science? It’s almost as if there is some kind of climate-themed Watergate-style scandal at work here …

A sort of “climate-gate,” if you will.

No doubt, we will be hearing lots of firm denunciations of this real scandal from all the same fellows who still find space in their newspaper columns to decry the fake scandal of Climate-gate. Following the latter episode in 2009, a Financial Post colleague wrote that the controversy “requires a full investigation by competent scientists and official bodies.” In his next column, I expect he will be demanding that UCalgary gets the same treatment.

National Post
jkay@nationalpost.com

Jack Jensen's Letter to the Editor, published in the Prince Albert Daily Herald

2011-09-15T08:57:00.000-07:00

Letter to the Editor re. maximum exposure limits to radioactivity

September 6, 2011

The Editor,

Forget about the Saskatchewan government/Hitachi-GE memorandum of understanding to develop small nuclear reactors. What is needed is fundamental research into the allowable exposure to radioactivity, regulations that have not fundamentally changed since 1958 - long before the discovery of DNA. The nuclear industry has actively attacked such research by Eastern European universities, hence the need for a western university that wants to establish itself amongst pre-eminent universities to take up this research. The existing exposure limits were based on radioactivity on the skin, a relatively simple health problem compared to exposure through inhalation or ingestion. In the body, ‘hot’ particles created by nuclear fission are treated like their non-radioactive counterparts, radioactive iodine concentrating in the thyroid, strontium in the bones etc. The ‘hot’ particles then continuously bombard the surrounding tissue, disrupting the DNA, which can lead to cancer.

A short youtube video (www.youtube.com/watch?v=oBEipg81uLw) by Arnie Gundersen, Chief Engineer for Fairewinds Associates, illustrates the extent of airborne ‘hot’ particles from the meltdown of the Hitachi-designed Fukushima nuclear reactors. Air was drawn through filters which were then examined for ‘hot’ particles. The conclusion was that residents of Tokyo and its suburbs (population 30 million) inhaled an average of 10 ‘hot’ particles per day in April and that residents closer to Fukushima (population 2 million) inhaled 400 ‘hot’ particles per day! How will this affect the health of these people and their descendants? Who knows, but someone should be doing this research.

If you agree that research into and acceptance of radiation exposure limits based on inhalation and ingestion be funded before money is expended on creating more nuclear wastes, please advise Premier Brad Wall (premier@gov.sk.ca), Innnovation Minster Rob Norris (minister.aeei@gov.sk.ca) and U of S President Peter MacKinnon (peter.mackinnon@usask.ca).

Jack Jensen

Neil Jones' response to SP article "Senators want board chair to step aside"

2011-08-29T15:21:00.000-07:00

President for all

BY NEIL JONES, THE STARPHOENIXAUGUST 23, 2011

In the story, Senators want board chair to step aside (SP, Aug. 17), University of Saskatchewan president Peter MacKinnon says "Universities' relationships with corporate donors are long term, and typically involve university staff, not board directors."

I see this as intentional obfuscation.

The issue here is that Nancy Hopkins, in chairing the Presidential Search Committee, plays a central role in the selection of the most powerful member of university staff. She also has a pecuniary interests in Cameco of more than $1 million. As such, she has a clear interest in serving the corporation through her committee's eventual choice.

Mackinnon and Hopkins also seem to have given up on the idea of the university as a primarily publicly funded institution. Hopkins calls this vision "unrealistic," and MacKinnon insists that serving corporations (his "communities") is "inevitable."

This is liable to be a selffulfilling prophecy. When a university stops lobby-ing for public funding and opts instead for corporate "donations," the door is open for governments to withdraw support.

Under MacKinnon the U of S has effectively taken the stance that public funding is no longer valued. We need a new president who will reverse this stance, and insist upon a restoration of public funding for academic institutions.

The next U of S president should be someone who values public say in the direction of research and education and who sees the university as primarily serving the interests of all Saskatchewanians - not just corporations.

Neil Jones

More USSWORD and Nuclear Research in the Starphoenix

2011-08-28T20:41:00.000-07:00

Last week, in response to Janet French's article about USSWORD and the potential conflict of interest on the presidential search committee, the StarPhoenix published an editorial criticising USSWORD's stance:

The StarPhoenix: Hopkins seeks open process

Then earlier this week, the StarPhoenix also revealed the details of a research partnership between Hitachi and the government of Saskatchewan, including plans for the University of Saskatchewan:

The StarPhoenix:Saskatchewan, Hitachi partner on nuke research. By Jeanette Stewart

Nuclear Research Centre, Cameco, and the Next President of the U of S

2011-08-28T20:23:00.000-07:00

The following is a link to the update posted by Sandra Finley earlier this year, summarizing the government contribution of funding to the university for a nuclear research centre, the involvement of Cameco, and the search for the next president of the University. It includes a summary of the situation up to that point, as well as analysis and commentary:

The Battles: Discussions by Sandra Finley

USSWORD in the Starphoenix

2011-08-19T17:22:00.001-07:00

On Wednesday, the Saskatoon StarPhoenix published an article outlining the presidential search controversy. The following is an excerpt:

"Senators want board chair to step aside
By Janet French, The StarPhoenix August 17, 2011

A handful of University of Saskatchewan senators are calling on the chair of the board of governors to step aside because of her ties to one of the world's largest uranium producers.

The senators also say lawyer Nancy Hopkins's position as a board member for Cameco Corp. puts her in a conflict of interest chairing a search committee for a new university president."

Selling Out: Academic Freedom and the Corporate Market by Howard Woodhouse

2011-08-17T18:20:00.000-07:00

Check out the following book by a faculty member at the University of Saskatchewan :

Selling Out: Academic Freedom and the Corporate Market by Howard Woodhouse
How Canadian universities are abandoning their intellectual independence by capitulating to the interests of big business.
McGill-Queen’s University Press (2009)

In a powerful defence of the values that define education, Howard Woodhouse uses concrete and vivid examples to show how universities in Canada have been engulfed by the market model of education and how administrators have done little to resist this trend.

Selling Out demonstrates that the logics of value of the market and of universities are not only different but opposed to one another. By introducing the reader to a variety of cases, some well known and others not, Woodhouse explains how academic freedom and university autonomy are being subordinated to corporate demands and how faculty have attempted to resist this subjugation. He argues that the mechanistic discourse of corporate culture has replaced the language of education - subject-based disciplines and the professors who teach them have become "resource units," students have become "educational consumers," and curricula have become "program packages." Graduates are now "products" and "competing in the global economy" has replaced the search for truth.

Challenging the current orthodoxy that the market model is the only way forward, Woodhouse argues that governments have a responsibility to fund universities, recognizing that they are the only places in society where the critical search for knowledge takes precedence.

Cloth (0773535802) 9780773535800
Release date: 2009-09-01
CA $39.95 | US $39.95

Order by mail / fax : Order form

Professor Woodhouse is a professor of educational foundations, University of Saskatchewan.

To read an excellent synopsis of the salient arguments in Professor Woodhouse's book, from a review by Patrick Keeney in THE NATIONAL POST, December 26, 2009, click on the link below:[http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/afterword/archive/2009/12/26/book-review-selling-out-by-howard-woodhouse.aspx]

Welcome to the USSWORD blog!

2011-08-10T23:25:00.000-07:00

USSWORD is concerned to the point of taking action against the corporatization of the University of Saskatchewan.

We believe that the University is the knowledge base for the Saskatchewan community. It is intended to serve all of society; it should be funded and supported publicly without strings attached.

The gradual reduction in public funding in recent years has opened the door for the University to seek out, and thereby become beholden to, corporate funding and corporate interests.

The challenge for the University is to develop a base of support among citizens that will lobby for more satisfactory public funding and a University that serves the public interest.

This USSWORD blog site is your opportunity to get actively involved with us on these important issues.

Please take just ten minutes right now with a few simple actions that will start the process of immediate, meaningful change at the University of Saskatchewan:

Familiarize yourself with the fundamental issues by reading the pages in this blog site
Write a letter to the University Presidential Search Committee expressing your concerns and your vision for future leadership at U of S [must be submitted by August 31, 2011]
Consider letting USSWORD post your letter to the Search Committee on our blog site

Drop USSWORD a few lines (confidentially if you wish) letting us know about your experiences, both positive and negative, at the University. (Your input will greatly help us Senators to raise issues in future Senate meetings.)

Corporatizing the University

2011-07-20T20:26:00.001-07:00

The Corporatization of the University: Part I — Guest Post By Agnes Larson

Published by Briggs at 7:52 am under Culture

Agnes Larson is a long-time university insider. This article is Part I of a three-part series. Read Part II, Part III

Background

As early as 1918 Thorstein Veblen bemoaned the fact that the American university had been taken over by businessmen. No longer was a college a place of higher learning, but a specialized jobs-training workshop to prepare people for ready-made careers. Such specialization, argues Veblen, widens “the candidate’s field of ignorance while it intensifies his effectiveness within his specialty.”¹ Veblen would not be astonished to see today’s university, which is run for a most part, like a corporation. He expected nothing less.

For our purposes, the phrase “corporatization of the university” means that the university is taking on forms and structures that hitherto had been in the realm of for-profit organizations. American universities have always worked hand in hand with wealthy supporters. Often successful businessmen were sought after and appointed to the board of trustees. Walking through any campus one is bound to encounter the equivalent of Cornell University’s Sage Chapel and McGraw Tower—not named for notable faculty but for notable funders. Up for grabs these days are auditoriums, stadiums, and individual programs. Another dimension of what is loosely defined as corporatization is that presidents of universities profitably sit on boards of directors of corporations.²

Globalization

One feature of the 21st-century corporation is its often transnational nature. Universities are traditional brick-and-mortar institutions with typically one location. Land-grant universities frequently maintain some kind out outreach activity that supports their core mission, but it is not typical for these outposts to offer degree programs. This kind of university presence is different from the satellite campus—miles away from the alma mater, such as University of Michigan-Dearborn or UM-Flint. In sparsely populated areas, the community college is increasingly becoming the home of the four-year degree. The community college itself does not issue the diploma, but one of their partner schools. A student in Petoskey, Michigan can earn a bachelor’s degree in information technology from Southfield-based Lawrence Technological University without leaving town.

Another feature of the modern university is its international reach. According to the Chronicle of Higher Education, 671,616 international students, both graduate and undergraduate, were enrolled in American institutions for the 2008-09 school year. US institutions desire international students because they will pay full tuition and not require/be eligible for financial aid. As a bonus, the home school has no obligation to provide job placement. The understanding is that the students will go back home upon completion of their coursework and their job prospects are someone else’s problem.

Universities are reaching outside of the US, with mixed results. Michigan State had to close its campus in Dubai in the summer of 2010. Originally, the plan was to enroll 100-200 students into each graduating class. Cornell has more success with its outpost of the Weill Cornell Medical Center in Qatar. In 2001, President Hunter Rawlings announced that Cornell would establish the Weill Cornell Medical Center in Qatar. Cornell has made many partnerships with colleges in China. Former Cornell president, Jeffrey Lehman, is chancellor and founding dean of an American-style law program at Peking University.

There is a quieter debate than in the past regarding should an American university pursue and agenda in another country. Some try to say that the homegrown academic offerings will be diluted. Others see opportunity and more tuition dollars—through both credit and non-credit certificate programs

——————————————————–

¹Tellingly, the title of Veblem’s work is The Higher Learning in America: A Memorandum On the Conduct of Universities By Business Men, 1918.

²Goldschmidt, Nancy P. and James H. Finkelstein. “Academics on Board: University Presidents as Corporate Directors.” Academe. 2001. URL: