In chapter 20, Athanasiou and Butler discuss the rendering of universities into marketable and profitable goods. Because critical thinking is becoming "unfundable within institutions driven by market values," students are forced to perceive post-secondary education as a commercial asset, as an investment (189). The "substituability" of professors who teach the humanities, languages, or critical thinking is reflected in the fact that the number of academic workers in the United States has grown "exponentially" in recent years (191). Butler very poignantly argues that when universities are unaffordable, the university becomes a "site that reproduces and hardens rigid class stratifications."
I was particularly interested in this chapter because I see this phenomenon happening at Emory. Though Emory claims to focus on the liberal arts, and often uses it as a selling point for prospective students, I think that the hard sciences and the business school are typically more "respected" by the students and the administration. Besides the cuts made in the journalism and visual arts departments two years ago, business school activities and events are often more well-known than events for humanities departments, even though the majority of undergraduates are in the college. I think that this can be attributed to the fact that the administration makes the business program a priority through funding, but it also has to do with what majors are "fundable"and which are not. The problem is inherently cyclical: Emory puts funding into the business school and sciences because those departments are perceived to be the best investments for their money. The high price on tuition only urges students to choose a marketable career that will allow them to spin a profit off their expensive education.
Andrea,
ReplyDeleteI completely agree with you! I can't remember a point in my life when I thought of college as a space for open thinking more than a space for professional training. Even as a student specializing in the humanities, I am constantly thinking about my career after college, which take away from my ability to immerse myself in what I'm studying. As you said, "when universities are unaffordable, the university becomes a 'site that reproduces and hardens rigid class stratifications.'" I would add on to this that by putting privileged youth into communities defined by class, universities in a way take away from the democratic element of socialization. Students either compete with classmates from similar backgrounds as them or from more/less privileged backgrounds, but ultimately universities encourage students to compete. In this way, parents can be seen to be spending money to isolate their children from reality and deter them from breaking the status quo. At the end of the day, a student's main incentives at college are getting good grades and getting a good job, and any positive social work or political activism they do is mainly just a positive externality, but not necessarily sustainable.