Neoliberalism, Governance and Development at the Land-Grant

Complex in the Contemporary Era of Higher Education

John Gunn
^^^^ ^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^, Auburn Alabama 36832
334.###.#### *******@auburn.edu

4 December 2014
HIED 7270 Overview of Postsecondary Education
I attempt to synthesize aspects of the Morrill Acts of 1862 and 1890, the Hatch Act of 1887,
and the Smith-Lever Act of 1914 with conditions in late capitalism where neoliberalism dominates
not just in the economic realm but also across the society.
In the interests of space and assuming most readers would be somewhat familiar with the
land-grant legislation, I will not summarize the statutes or the history surrounding their passage and
implementation. 1 I use land-grant complex in the spirit of Wendell Berry and Jim Hightower.
This paper has not the space for a proper fleshing out of their criticisms but each worries about how
agribusiness and other corporate concerns have captured schools of agriculture and related
disciplines. (Berry, 1996; Hightower, 1978)
However, economic concerns were probably the main motivations for the establishment of
the land-grant system. For instance, Stanley Aronowitz claims 2
the land-grant colleges of the post-Civil War period were organized to assist
agriculture and production industries by providing knowledge and trained scientists
and technicians to help farmers and employers make their business more efficient.

Regarding the land-grant system, the scholarship is certainly there. (Anderson, 1976; Eddy, 1957; Geiger &
Sorber, 2013) For a revisionist view of the establishment of the land-grants colleges, Scott Key, in a wellsourced but not necessarily persuasive manner, argues that the Morrill Act was more about revenue from
economic activity than education policy. (Key, 1996) Additionally, Auburn Universitys own Dwayne Cox
has written on the period in examining Auburn University presidents in the early New South era.
(Cox, 2008)
Stanley Aronowitz views higher education as a knowledge factory and generally writes from his roots in
union organization and activism. He, like an increasing number of critics of current education policy, is
influenced by Antonio Gramsci, the Italian Communist dying just before World War II after a multi-year
imprisonment by the Fascists. I continue to find Gramscian theory attractive.
2

HIED 7270

John Gunn

4 December 2014

The broad education functions were almost an afterthought in light of these

economic goals.
Late capitalism equates to roughly the same period Arthur Cohen labels as the
Contemporary Era. 3 Exactly what neoliberalism means might be debatable among more
advanced scholars of the economy and such, but it seems reasonably straightforward to me. In part,
it is the new metanarrative. (Kak & Pupala, 2011, p. 148) In neoliberalism the state seeks to
create an individual that is an enterprising and competitive entrepreneur. (Besley & Peters,
2006, p. 816)
Still, neoliberalism is an unfamiliar word for many people. I believe it, or at least what the
term represents, ought not be. Part of the conclusion to this paper will relay why this is so.
Geographer David Harvey is among the foundational authorities on the construct. He offers:
(Neoliberalism is) a theory of political economic practices that proposes that human
well-being can best be advanced by liberating individual entrepreneurial freedoms
and skills within an institutional framework characterized by strong private property
rights, free markets, and free trade. Furthermore, if markets do not exist (in areas
such as land, water, education, health care, social security, or environmental
pollution) then they must be created, by state action if necessary. But beyond these
tasks the state should not venture. State interventions in markets (once created) must
be kept to a bare minimum because, according to the theory, the state cannot possibly
possess enough information to second-guess market signals (prices) and because
powerful interest groups will inevitably distort and bias state interventions. (Harvey,
2005, p. 2)
Additionally, in the global economy is where neoliberalism operates. In considering the
modern land-grant complex, such as is represented at least in part by Auburn University, anyone

Ernest Mandels late capitalism label is well-established among those who study such things - even if
rarely heard in the popular culture and perhaps in many other disciplines. (Krtke, 2007) However, Max
Veber and Thorstein Veblen are also relevant. (Saram, 1992) Former Harvard president Derek Bok certainly
recognizes how Veblen questioned about the commercialization of higher education in the early twentiethcentury. (Bok, 2003, p. q8)
3

1994 through 2009, and presumably beyond, are the years Cohen and Kisker consider as the Contemporary
Era. (Cohen & Kisker, 2009)

Page 2 of 13

HIED 7270

John Gunn

4 December 2014

pondering its future must understand the way capital and commerce moves across borders. As this
movement occurs, social structures change. At times, the changes can be rapid and even violent.
(N)eoliberal globalisation aims to have private capital and the market alone
determine the restructuring of economic, political and cultural life, making
alternative values or institutions subordinate The flip-side of this project, though,
is increasing uncertainty, exclusion, marginalisation, alienation, and even destruction
of the means of subsistence for much of the global population. (Stephen, 2009, p.
486)
Around such negatives of neoliberalism are where the term is most often named. Henry
Giroux is a critical pedagogy-grounded academic whom I have read for several years. He can come
across as somewhat strident (hes no Peter McLaren though) and pedantic at times. 4 Giroux is
among the most valuable and vocal voices on education for the public good. Among the seemingly
innumerable words he has churned out, the following appears:
Within the discourse of neoliberalism that has taken hold of the public imagination,
there is no way of talking about what is fundamental to civic life, critical citizenship,
and a substantive democracy. Neoliberalism offers no critical vocabulary for
speaking about political or social transformation as a democratic project. Nor is there
a language for either the ideal of public commitment or the notion of a social agency
capable of challenging the basic assumptions of corporate ideology as well as its
social consequences. (Giroux, 2005b, p. 10)
Continuing with Giroux, although in another work, he writes:
As the boundaries between public values and commercial interests become blurred,
many academics appear less as disinterested truth seekers than as operatives for
business interests. programs and courses that focus on areas such as critical
theory, literature, feminism, ethics, environmentalism, postcolonialism, philosophy,
and sociology suggest an intellectual cosmopolitanism or a concern with social
issues that will be either eliminated or technicized because their role in the market
For a deep dive into neoliberalism, Arthur MacEwans Neo-liberalism or Democracy? is
recommended. He takes an international view of broad issues and is grounded in economics. (In a possible
inappropriate personal reflection, I found an old bookmark of a discarded unsecure email from Fob Warhorse
in Diyala Province, Iraq when I pulled the book off my shelves.) (MacEwan, 1999)
4

The rise of contingent teaching - just-in-time or lean labor fits also into studying
neoliberalism in higher education but space does not allow a proper exploration. A fine article, however,
should be shared. (Entin, 2005) Giroux has also plowed much ground as to the exploitation of adjunct
faculty.

Page 3 of 13

HIED 7270

John Gunn

4 December 2014

will be judged as ornamental. Similarly, those working conditions that allow

professors and graduate assistants to comment extensively on student work, teach
small classes, take on student advising, conduct independent studies, and engage in
collaborative research will be further weakened or eliminated, since they do not
appear consistent with the imperatives of downsizing, efficiency, and cost
accounting. The new corporate university values profit, control, and efficiency, all
hall-mark values of the neoliberal corporate ethic. (Giroux, 2002, pp. 433-434)
As an examples of these values, or lack thereof, Giroux claims Commercial deals are no
longer just a way for universities to make money. Corporate branding drives the administrative
structure of the university. College presidents are now called C.E.O.s and are known less for their
intellectual leadership than for their role as fundraisers .... (Giroux, 2005a) 5
Channeling the late Margaret Thatcher, perhaps there is no other way. 6 I am not so sure
survival is a stake, but an administrator must operate in the world s/he occupies. Adapting to
challenges and realities while still trying to follow the mission of the institution is no doubt a
difficult task.
Please also accept that I am not suggesting any sort of conspiracy but rather just how
structural forces, cultural shifts and mental frames influence higher education. Furthermore, I accept
that state budgets must be negotiated since resources are finite. As an example of this view of the
absolute need to bring in money, the following might suffice:
As state support for universities has declined very significantly during the last
quarter of a century or more, it is easy to see how attractive this potential new source
of revenue would become. Virtually all major universities across the country jumped
to create new Offices of Technology Transfer to commercialize as much
5

Considering the impact of Bayh-Dole seems to fit here but limits on space prevent. Additionally, the
development of a research park here at Auburn University and its non-profit organizational structure is a
worthy area to explore. Like Auburn athletics, governance seems hardly linear once the financing is
unfolded.
Thatcherism is sometimes used interchangeably with neoliberalism by some critics, especially those in
the United Kingdom or who might have matriculated through their institutions. Margaret Thatcher made her
there is no other way statement operating in her binary view of socialism versus capitalism. Her time as
Prime Minister did see some rather significant shifts away from democratic socialism in Britain.
6

Page 4 of 13

HIED 7270

John Gunn

4 December 2014

intellectual property as possible generated by their individual faculty members. Some

observers opine that these folks are more interested in maximizing their revenue than
transferring good ideas to the public. (Huff, 2006, p. 31)
Then again, this focus on money is not without costs. From the top of the administrative
food chain down to the lowliest faculty member pursuing social engagement in civil, political,
or public ways does not fill coffers. Lip service to the contrary, the present academic industrial
complex typically refuses to reward social engagement in any significant way. (Gunn & Lucaites,
2010) Rather than filling coffers, in some pursuits there is risk of emptying them.
Regarding that risk of funding being hurt, the emerging focus on accountability with
measures and rankings presents its own problems. With pressures coming from Washington, I still
cannot understand how valuable work in higher education is going to evaluated and reported. More
importantly, this is a concern that resonates with others hopefully in a better position to impact
policy. It is critical that people inside the academe push to have a seat at the table when instruments
and templates are being considered. (Kuh, 2007) This pressure about accountability also applies,
perhaps more so, to community colleges as they are also increasingly being entrepreunerialized.
(Levin, 2005) 7 The abuses and fraud that some for-profit (or for that matter some non-profit
outfits as well) schools engaged in cannot be allowed to further elevate mere functionality in
education and what little in learning can/should be measured.
Similarly, politics around increasingly tight funding needs acknowledging. Government
relations specialists (lobbyists) and administrators probably would wish to avoid trying to explain
away a troublesome gadfly to a politician holding the purse strings. A potential benefactor able to

Scott Boyd write from a focus on community colleges, but he shows how neoliberalism in surely there at
the blurring intersections of the public, non-profit and for-profit worlds. The commodification of essential
public services is well established and perhaps irreversible. (Boyd, 2011) On the blurring of sectors, I can
also accept that this may be less market pressures and more from such being a trait of organizations, legal
and regulatory requirements, etc. (Bromley & Meyer, 2014)

Page 5 of 13

HIED 7270

John Gunn

4 December 2014

write a large check might not appreciate criticism of a venture or practice in which he or she has
made their fortune from. At Auburn University for instance, scholarship not suiting the interests of
agribusiness and the forestry industry could risk angering some very powerful players. Woe be unto
any who dares question Alabama Power Company and other Big Mules who have always held
large influence in the state of Alabama. Similarly, tackling some cultural and social issues can be a
controversial choice here in the buckle of the Bible belt.
Returning to land-grant history, and even bringing in some town and gown considerations,
the idea of having an engaged university, with outreach and extension surely a part of todays focus,
applies. (Mayfield, 2001) I would imagine any voice being sent out with scholarship knows the
need to tread lightly around issues of power and economic structures. What is especially interesting
to me is how that may be so with faculty/staff working with poverty, education and
environmental/conservation issues. Do they completely dodge certain issues or just temper any
criticisms/questions?
Then again, this is not necessarily a new problem. In fact, as I hope this paper supports, such
at least date back to the period when the land-grant system was being developed in the
Transformative era. In fact, all of human history demonstrates how confronting power can be
perilous. Yet, we honor those who did so for a righteous cause and dared risk harm.
In a blistering piece from Toby Miller, he delves into Foucaults governmentality and
Marxs commodification to suggest the emergence of neoliberalism is when conditions became
more dire. (Miller, 2003) Governmentality seem to even more matter, however, in a time when the
entrepreneurial learner is increasingly celebrated.
Foucaults theory of governmentality describes the ways in which the state and its
citizenry relate through systems or flows of power. The state does not always
exercise coercive power, nor do state and citizenry always come to fully rational
agreement with respect to governance, as proposed in a social contract theory of
governance. What Foucault argues instead is that much of governance operates

Page 6 of 13

HIED 7270

John Gunn

4 December 2014

through discourses, institutions, and practices that construct truth such that citizens
conduct themselves in a manner that serves the needs and interests of the state. This
truth determines how it is possible to think and act and, conversely, what is
unthinkable, impossible, inactionable, or deviant.(Servage, 2009, p. 33)
While Foucault might focus on the coercive power of the state, the way the interests of the
state and corporations increasingly intersect seems significant to me. If the entrepreneurial learner
wants to satisfy the state, they also learn to please what is rewarded in the market. Via another
concept from Foucault, the biopolitic, I submit the following applies:
An entrepreneurial attitude towards ourselves and others permits the appearance
of some qualities of human beings as a form of capital or human capital. It is
something for which investment was/is necessary, it represents a specific value and
is the source of future income. As a consequence, since in education this form of
capital is being produced, the choice for education is a deliberate, entrepreneurial
choice: one expects that the choice will be a valuable investment and that there will
a high return. But this capitalization of life is also at issue in social life. An
entrepreneurial attitude places someone into a position in which she thinks about
norms, relations and networks as social capital that could contribute to the
development of human capital or that could enlarge the productivity of someones
knowledge and skills. (Simons, 2006, p. 532)
Considering commodification is also necessary. This idea, from Marxism, certainly predates
neoliberalism by well over a century. There really does seem to be nothing new under the sun. 8

Continuing with the theme that these concerns do not necessarily need to be couched in
neoliberalism, workerism and Althussers ideological state apparatuses (within limits of forces of
production and understanding ideologies exist or are realized in institutions instead of being produced)
applicable to the reproducing class seem also suitable to describe some current conditions.
What is interesting, at least to me, is how we have continued moved away from industrial production
into knowledge workers. If labour and consequently the class associated with it, is not mainly the result of
social relations, practices, and antagonisms within capitalist production, but is more like a creative and
intellectual potential emerging through cooperative knowledge process, then education and especially
higher education actually is the site of production of labour or of the emergence of labour power as such.
Consequently, educational apparatuses, and especially universities, become the production sites par
excellence of this creative, cooperative and intellectual collective. This is facilitated by the current process of
privatization and or corporate or entrepreneurial mutation of Higher Education. In the words of the edufactory collective: What was once the factory is now the university. (Sotiris, 2012, p. 122)

Page 7 of 13

HIED 7270

John Gunn

4 December 2014

If the market logic of neoliberalism continues to work its way to ascendance in

higher education, increasingly a college education will only be valued strictly in
terms of its commodifiability. Education will be assessed strictly in terms of its
ability to enhance human capital that can be bought and sold on global labor markets.
Any and all education that does not directly contribute to that process of
commodification will be relegated to being seen as a luxury that cash-strapped
colleges and universities can ill afford. The process of neoliberalization makes
education for promoting a democratic citizenry all the more precarious, vulnerable to
further diminution and marginalization if not outright total elimination. The dream of
mass higher education to produce a more critically minded democratic citizenry will
remain further from reach. (Schram, 2014, p. 434)
As to the acceleration of those trends in higher education, I would argue it was the pedal to
the metal in the last few decades. 9 I concur that
academic administrators (have) adopted a more corporate and competitive
mindset, abandoning the old-fashioned pursuit of the common good in favor of a
narrower focus on the well-being of their own institutions. Not only did these
administrators emulate the corporate world, they often came from it, bringing with
them a different time frame and a hierarchical, rather than democratic, management
style. (Schrecker, 2012, p. 44)
In my last reference to Foucault, possibly one of several too many, discourse analysis of the
United States Department of Education (USDOE) supports the speed of the transformation toward
an economic mentality and away from any type of Habemasian public sphere of democratic
deliberation. 10 Considering various speeches about higher education from January 2005 to

Marx may be have been right in his assertion that matter that if the labor is being done for a
proprietor in teaching factory or a sausage factory, the basic relationship between capital and labor
remains the same. (Smith, 2000, p. 332)
9

For a less hectoring take on the issue of commercialization, Peter Wood, now leading the National
Association of Scholars, wrote in Octopus, Platypus, Sourpuss that he had never met a university
administrator who would trade in the liberal arts for the equivalent of a Gatorade patent. Rather, the
prevailing attitude of university administrators is anxiety over how to keep the university together as some
kind of unified endeavor in which the liberal arts can be saved from their path of hell-bent self-destruction.
(Wood, 2006, p. 57)
10

Revealing some bias here, I was hardly a fan of Margaret Spellings, the final Secretary of Education in the
George W. Bush administration. (Then again, his first one was not much better.) She came out of a world of
administrator spin and was among the worst to ever hold the position. Unfortunately, Arne Duncan in the
Obama administration is nearly as dreadful. Neither are anything close to education scholars. Hoping I am

Page 8 of 13

HIED 7270

John Gunn

4 December 2014

December 2007, half of what was uttered was coded to be about the economy. A fourth dealt with
affordability, access and accountability. A fifth focused on social roles like serving democracy or
promoting the American Dream the latter surely encompassing some economic facets. The
remaining was on the roles and expectations of stakeholders. Overwhelming, the discourse from the
USDOE was dominated by concerns about the economic role of colleges and universities and their
accountability, affordability, and accessibility. (Suspitsyna, 2012, p. 55)
The current condition and way forward in higher education must be considered historically.
Despite how education for educations sake and high purposes has for many generations often
been subordinated to what might favor business and bureaucratic purposes, I fear we are in
relatively dark days. It is a time of esoteric specialization in which more and more indigestible
papers are read by fewer and fewer people and, on the other hand, the mass consumptions, and
regurgitation of gobbets of approved information. (Hayes & Wynyard, 2002, p. 110)
Todays dearth of public intellectuals is I believe highly problematic. I in no way suggest I
am anywhere close to being a proper scholar, but I do try to take what little I know into the public
realm. Then again, I have little to lose. I am reluctant to scold, and doubt this applies to hardly any
professors with whom I am close, but I do think the following fits:
To put it sharply. The habitat, manners, and idiom of intellectuals have been
transformed within the past fifty years. Younger intellectuals no longer want a larger
public; they are almost exclusively professors. Campuses are their homes; colleagues
their audience, monographs and specialized journals their media. Unlike past
intellectuals they situate themselves within fields and disciplines for good reasons.
Their jobs, advancement, and salaries depend on the evaluation of specialists, and
this dependence affects the issues broached and the language employed. Independent
intellectuals, who wrote of the educated readers, are dying out. (Ohmann &
Radway, 2003, p. 65)

not a credentialist in many matters, I cannot fathom appointing people who hold merely undergraduate
degrees in political science (her) and sociology (him) to such a position.

Page 9 of 13

HIED 7270

John Gunn

4 December 2014

I am also quite concerned about Auburn University. I have been around long enough to
remember events from the late 1970s. I suffered through the Bobby Lowder era Reign of Error
might be a more fitting ending and have done some recent research over several of the more
widely covered governing crisis incidents. I am familiar with several of the people in positions of
governance here. I know President Gogues compensation package is generous. Again, this is not a
new trend and applies to many schools. However, who the trustees are and from where development
dollars flow is a legitimate concern. I rarely, if all, hear or read that universities are so directly
influenced by industry and the new corporate trust because they are so directly connected to
business. (Key, 1996, p. 67)
In moving forward, I fear the path is at least paved and perhaps even set in stone. To venture
off it carries risk. In the early years of the twenty-first century, the academic capitalist
knowledge/learning regime is ascendant. It is displacing, but not replacing, others, such as the
public knowledge regime or the liberal learning regimes. Although other knowledge regimes
persist, the trend line in emphasis and investment (is clear.) (Slaughter & Rhoades, 2004, p. 305)
In presenting these quandaries and closing, I reflect on an Executive Officer who posted on
his door something about not bringing him a problem unless you have at least one solution. I
believe promotion of Lawrence Soleys Leasing the Ivory Tower would be a step in the right
direction. 11 Possibly a discussion group and/or coverage in the campus paper of what he raised
would be a positive. That way, there is less need for the faculty to appear as if they alone are
advancing their interests. However, solidarity among the laboring class makes it less likely

Soleys Servicing their patrons at Chapter 8 covers endowed chairs with special scorn reserved for
various free enterprise efforts. We have such just down the road at Troy University with the Manuel H.
Johnson Center for Political Economy. They could be Exhibit A in any trial about the crisis in higher
education.
If the Soley book is too edgy or scholarly, Jennifer Washburns University, Inc. book is quite
accessible. I read it shortly after it came out and it was possibly one which influenced me to dig deeper in the
issue of corporate capture of higher education. (Washburn, 2005)
11

Page 10 of 13

HIED 7270

John Gunn

4 December 2014

individual targets will be punished. The effort should be interdisciplinary and extended out into the
local communities.
My main suggestion, however, is to urge people in (or just who care about) higher education
to popularize these issues via informal exchanges. Talking to and writing about these problems to a
lay audience and our neighbors is possible. We need to bring more people down from the Ivory
Tower and engage in more informal exchanges. In drafting this paper, how I can convey some of
this information to people and groups I may be able to influence has been pondered. Citizens must
understand what neoliberalism represents. If not us, who will tell them? The media is seldom
talking about it. Politicians and leaders are often accommodationists or even collaborators.
The late Howard Zinns idea that you cant be neutral on a moving train seems quite
applicable. While higher education may have been becoming bureaucratized and business-oriented
(dominated?) over the decades, we are now in a place where markets and money seem to control
nearly every facet of our lives. There must be resistance to and better yet a reversal of
neoliberalisms reach. We cannot accept excuses that a hyper-competitive economy and tight
budgets excuse demand adaptation. Actually Margaret Thatcher, there was and is another way,
References
Anderson, G. L. (1976). Land-grant universities and their continuing challenge: Michigan State
University Press.
Aronowitz, S. (2000). The Knowledge Factory: Dismantling the Corporate University and Creating
True Higher Learning: Beacon Press.
Berry, W. (1996). The Unsettling of America: Culture and Agriculture: San Val, Incorporated.
Besley, A. C., & Peters, M. A. (2006). Neoliberalism, performance and the assessment of research
quality. South African Journal of Higher Education, 20(6), 814-832.
Bok, D. C. (2003). Universities in the Marketplace: The Commercialization of Higher Education:
Princeton University Press.
Boyd, S. H. (2011). The Spread of Neoliberalism in US Community Colleges: TQM
Accreditation,Consumers, and Corporate Sponsored Non-Profits. Journal for Critical
Education Policy Studies, 9(1), 241-266.
Bromley, P., & Meyer, J. W. (2014). They Are All Organizations: The Cultural Roots of Blurring
Between the Nonprofit, Business, and Government Sectors. Administration & Society.
Cohen, A. M., & Kisker, C. B. (2009). The Shaping of American Higher Education: Emergence and
Growth of the Contemporary System: Wiley.

Page 11 of 13

HIED 7270

John Gunn

4 December 2014

Cox, D. (2008). Academic Purpose and Command at Auburn, 1856-1902. Alabama Review, 61(2),
83-104.
Eddy, E. D. (1957). Colleges for Our Land and Time: The Land-Grant Idea in American Education:
Harper.
Entin, J. (2005). Contingent Teaching, Corporate Universities, and the Academic Labor Movement.
Radical Teacher(73), 26-32.
Geiger, R. L., & Sorber, N. M. (2013). The Land-Grant Colleges and the Reshaping of American
Higher Education: Transaction Publishers.
Giroux, H. A. (2002). Neoliberalism, Corporate Culture, and the Promise of Higher Education: The
University as a Democratic Public Sphere. Harvard Educational Review, 72(4), 425.
Giroux, H. A. (2005a). Academic Entrepreneurs: The Corporate Takeover of Higher Education.
Tikkun, 20(2), 18-28.
Giroux, H. A. (2005b). The Terror of Neoliberalism: Rethinking the Significance of Cultural
Politics. College Literature, 32(1), 1-19.
Gunn, J., & Lucaites, J. L. (2010). The Contest of Faculties: On Discerning the Politics of Social
Engagement in the Academy. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 96(4), 404-412.
Harvey, D. (2005). A brief history of neoliberalism: Oxford University Press.
Hayes, D., & Wynyard, R. (2002). The McDonaldization of Higher Education: Bergin & Garvey.
Hightower, J. (1978). Hard Tomatoes, Hard Times: The Hightower Report: Schenkman Books,
Incorporated.
Huff, T. E. (2006). The Big Shift. Society, 43(4), 30-34.
Kak, O., & Pupala, B. (2011). Governmentality - Neoliberalism - Education: the Risk
Perspective. Journal of Pedagogy / Pedagogick Casopis, 2(2), 145-158.
Key, S. (1996). Economics or Education. Journal of Higher Education, 67(2), 196-220.
Krtke, M. R. (2007). On the History and Logic of Modern Capitalism: The Legacy of Ernest
Mandel. Historical Materialism, 15(1), 109-143.
Kuh, G. D. (2007). Risky Business, Promises and Pitfalls of Institutional Transparency. Change,
39(5), 30-35.
Levin, J. S. (2005). Faculty in the U.S. community college: corporate labour. Management in
Education (Education Publishing Worldwide Ltd), 19(3), 8-11.
MacEwan, A. (1999). Neo-liberalism Or Democracy?: Economic Strategy, Markets, and
Alternatives for the 21st Century: Pluto Press.
Mayfield, L. (2001). Town and Gown in America: Some Historical and Institutional Issues of the
Engaged University. Education for Health: Change in Learning & Practice (Taylor &
Francis Ltd), 14(2), 231-240.
Miller, T. (2003). Governmentality or commodification? US higher education. Cultural Studies,
17(6), 897-904.
Ohmann, R., & Radway, J. (2003). Politics of Knowledge: The Commercialization of the
University, the Professions, and Print Culture: Wesleyan University Press.
Saram, P. A. (1992). Veblen and Weber, on the Spirit of Capitalism. Journal of Historical
Sociology, 5(2), 234-238.
Schram, S. F. (2014). The Future of Higher Education and American Democracy: Introduction. New
Political Science, 36(4), 425-437.
Schrecker, E. (2012). Academic Freedom in the Corporate University. Radical Teacher(93), 38-45.
Servage, L. (2009). The Scholarship of Teaching and Learning and the Neo-Liberalization of
Higher Education: Constructing the "Entrepreneurial Learner". Canadian Journal of Higher
Education, 39(2), 25-43.

Page 12 of 13

HIED 7270

John Gunn

4 December 2014

Simons, M. (2006). Learning as Investment: Notes on governmentality and biopolitics. Educational

Philosophy & Theory, 38(4), 523-540.
Slaughter, S., & Rhoades, G. (2004). Academic Capitalism and the New Economy: Markets, State,
and Higher Education: Johns Hopkins University Press.
Smith, N. (2000). Afterword: Who Rules This Sausage Factory. Antipode, 32(3), 330.
Sotiris, P. (2012). Higher Education and Class: production or reproduction? Journal for Critical
Education Policy Studies (JCEPS), 10(3), 95-143.
Stephen, M. D. (2009). Alter-Globalism as Counter-Hegemony: Evaluating the 'postmodern Prince'.
Globalizations, 6(4), 483-498.
Suspitsyna, T. (2012). Higher Education for Economic Advancement and Engaged Citizenship: An
Analysis of the U.S. Department of Education Discourse. Journal of Higher Education,
83(1), 49-72.
Washburn, J. (2005). University, Inc: The Corporate Corruption of American Higher Education:
Basic Books.
Wood, P. (2006). Octopus, Platypus, Sourpuss. Society, 43(4), 53-58.

Page 13 of 13