CHI TIẾT NGHIÊN CỨU …

Tiêu đề

Predator or Proprietor? Challengers to the Liberal Education Throne

Tác giả

Wittnebel L.

Năm xuất bản

2012

Source title

Journal of Continuing Higher Education

Số trích dẫn

DOI

10.1080/07377363.2012.687295

Liên kết

https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-84863823220&doi=10.1080%2f07377363.2012.687295&partnerID=40&md5=2dd8087e9514cda60fb6689182ad26c2

Tóm tắt

The nature of the changing economic climate has resulted in drastic changes in the postsecondary education landscape. With record numbers of adult learners seeking to further their education, they are faced with numerous outlets, including traditional liberal universities and a variety of for-profit colleges and vocational schools that have shifted from their historical practice of operating primarily as certificate-granting programs to the practice of awarding degrees. While models of operation and sources of funding are largely different between the two educational models, similarities do exist, and staunch criticism and defense has arisen from both sides in regard to approach, results, and legitimacy. This article seeks to examine whether proprietary models of higher education are indeed legitimate alternatives to traditional institutions within the constraints of the current capitalist system, and it presents arguments from both sides while examining implications for students and society at large. © 2012 Copyright Taylor and Francis Group, LLC.

Từ khóa

adult learning; higher education; proprietary education; vocational learning

Tài liệu tham khảo

Alemu D., Expansion vs. quality: Emerging issues of for-profit higher education institutions in Ethiopia, International Review of Education, 56, pp. 51-61, (2010); Armstrong R., An investigation of how faculty learn to teach at a distance with technology: Their strategies for solving the problem, (1999); Bailey T., Badway N., Gumport P., For-profit education and community colleges, (2001); Bassey M., Education toward a sustainable society, Management in Education, 16, 4, pp. 12-17, (2002); Cox A., None of your business, Steal this university: The rise of the corporate university and the academic labor movement, pp. 15-32, (2008); Dawson J., A history of vocation: Tracing a keyword of work, meaning, and moral purpose, Adult Education Quarterly, 55, pp. 220-231, (2005); Donavant B., The new, modern practice of adult education online instruction in a continuing professional education setting, Adult Education Quarterly, 59, 3, pp. 227-245, (2009); Elias J., Merriam S., Philosophical foundations of adult education, (2005); Floyd C., Know your competitor: Impact of for-profit colleges on the higher educational landscape, New Directions for Higher Education, 140, pp. 121-131, (2007); Fried V., Hill A., The future of for-profit higher education, The Journal of Private Equity, 12, 4, pp. 35-53, (2009); Gibson C.C., Distance education for lifelong learning, Handbook of adult and continuing education, pp. 423-437, (2000); Grove W., Wasserman T., The life-cycle pattern of collegiate GPA: Longitudinal cohort analysis and grade inflation, Journal of Economic Education, 35, 2, pp. 162-174, (2004); Hassler R.P., The flogging of for-profit colleges, Academic Questions, pp. 63-74, (2006); Jarvis P., Holford J., Griffen C., The theory and practice of learning, (2003); Kinser K., From Main Street to Wall Street: The transformation of for-profit higher education, (2006); Kinser K., What Phoenix doesn't teach us about for-profit higher education, Change, 38, 4, pp. 24-29, (2006); McKie J., Ageing with technology: Adult viability in a technological world, Lifelong learning, pp. 276-288, (2000); Miller N., The politics of access and communication: Using distance learning technologies, Power and practice: Adult education and the struggle for knowledge and power in society, pp. 187-205, (2001); Morey A.I., Globalization and the emergence of for-profit education, Higher Education, 48, pp. 131-150, (2004); Noble D., Digital diploma mills, Steal this university: The rise of the corporate university and the academic labor movement, pp. 33-48, (2003); Rampell C., College enrollment rate at record high, The New York Times, (2010); Seiden M., For-profit colleges deserve some respect, The Chronicle of Higher Education, 55, 41, (2009); Shaw J., The future is for profit: Education entrepreneurs are poised to upset the complacent higher-ed establishment, Education, pp. 40-44, (2009); Strosnider K., For-profit education sees booming enrollments and revenues, The Chronicle of Higher Education, 44, 20, pp. 36-38, (1998); Summer J., Governance, globalization, and political economy: Perspectives from Canadian adult education, Adult Education Quarterly, 59, 22, pp. 22-41, (2008); Swenson C., Warren D., Boggs G., Point/counterpoint: For-profit institutions in the higher education reauthorization, Change, 37, pp. 20-29, (2005); Thayer H., Vocational education for adults, Adult Education Quarterly, 2, 6, pp. 192-197, (1952); Tinto V., Limits of theory and practice in student attrition, The Journal of Higher Education, 53, 6, pp. 687-700, (1982); Wilson R., For-profit colleges change higher education's landscape: Nimble companies gain a fast-growing share of enrollments, The Chronicle of Higher Education, (2010)