University, Inc.: The Corporate Corruption of Higher Education

5 Responses to “University, Inc.: The Corporate Corruption of Higher Education”

1. Thoughtful Citizen says:

   December 21, 2009 at 6:36 am

   A great book! It’s a pointed critique of how universities have lost their way by involving themselves too closely with the business world. The author does a great job of weaving interviews, anecdotes, history, and economics together.

   It reminds me of Fast Food Nation: with both books I had to stop reading several times along the way–not because I didn’t enjoy it, but simply to keep from getting too angry. (A complement to the authors in both cases!) Although I was able to quit eating fast food altogether, I won’t be able to give up my relationship with higher ed…

   So I can only hope that students, parents, university administrators, scientists, government regulators and business executives read this book–and demand changes.
   Rating: 5 / 5
2. A. Wilson says:

   December 21, 2009 at 9:29 am

   I had high hopes for this book due to the Amazon reviews that seemed overwhelmingly positive.

   This book is really just a list of examples of how corporations tried to influence academia to their own end. For a while it’s good, since this would provide a nice setup for a deep analysis of corporations’ funding incentives and how best to balance them with the University’s own goals. Unfortunately, the entire book was a list, save for the last few pages which provided little actual insight into how to solve the problem.

   These few pages were nowhere near enough to address such a complex issue as sources of University funding and the preservation of academic independence. Washburn exhibited extensive knowledge of occurrences of conflicts of interest, but that’s about it.

   The writing style was generally boring. Occasionally it sounded like a high school student attempting to be poetic when describing emotions, etc.

   I can’t recommend wasting time on this book.
   Rating: 1 / 5
3. Rolf Dobelli says:

   December 21, 2009 at 12:17 pm

   Jennifer Washburn’s investigation inside U.S. universities is disturbing. She paints a portrait of colleges that have forgotten their primary mission and societal role. That is upsetting enough for readers who cherish fond memories of free-thinking college days, but its implications reach far wider. She cites restraints on free inquiry and free speech that should alarm civil libertarians. Her reports of far-reaching attempts to generate profit through patents and technology transfers should concern businesspeople. The most perturbing element of Washburn’s analysis covers how drug and medical trials have changed, as their control has shifted from the impartial hand of traditional science to the vested authority of pharmaceutical companies. She even implies that anyone using a drug developed in such trials is at risk. The issues in higher education are so sweeping that, at times, Washburn’s treatment is more a foreboding sketch than a complete analysis. That aside, We recommend it to anyone interested in a well-articulated, strong point of view about higher education, or anyone who follows the issues involved in having a well-functioning civic society, including quality higher education.
   Rating: 5 / 5
4. John Harpur says:

   December 21, 2009 at 1:24 pm

   Over the past twenty years a flash flood of books has appeared which are critical of the intrusion of business models into the University. Washburn’s book is striking the same vein – a cynic might sneer that the debate is beginning to have a ‘burnt over’ look to it. However, Washburn’s book is unique in several respects. In the first instance it is very well written, well-paced, and the narrative fairly gallops along. Secondly, the examples of corporate contamination that she focuses on clearly illuminate the ambiguities that the University is prepared to live with, well at least the ambiguities that an Administration will live with. Moreover, Washburn identifies the tension between good old professor X receiving his state salary and good old entrepreneur professor X receiving huge sums of money from his privileged access to the social capital floating in the University environment. There are several very telling quotes from academics who believe it unwise to speak about their research too publicly lest a ‘colleague’ harness it to his or her own commercial enterprise. Thirdly, Washburn is balanced in her analysis. While acknowledging that corporatism can threaten many traditional values in the University, she is phelgmatic enough to acknowledge that some level of corporatism is both desirable and unavoidable (Roger Geiger in his book ‘Knowledge and Money’ refers to this nexus as the ‘paradox of the marketplace’). The dilemma for Washburn and all who wish to espouse a both/and position on Business and the University, rather than an either/or position, is how to turn a seemingly sensible policy into a set of sensible procedures. Almost all books in this genre grudgingly accept the policy but few have ever laid out procedures to make it credible. Washburn goes some way towards closing the circle here (for instance, her proposal for an ammended Bayh-Dole Act and the setting up of specialist research contact points for industry). In conclusion then, Washburn’s book is more grounded in the realities of the political economy than most. This is a debate that won’t end soon. Every age has looked to the fruits of knowledge and discovery to oil the wheels of commercial progress. In the past much of this debate was hidden or disdained largely because participation in the University was for the elite – meaning those that had some money in their background. The opening of education and communication in the past thirty years however and the rapid growth of economies due to globalisation has created a new set of arguments to toss into the debate. Washburn’s book is part of this new movement. A welcome breadth of fresh air.
   Rating: 5 / 5
5. J. Wellington says:

   December 21, 2009 at 1:55 pm

   This has to be one of the saddest books I’ve read in a while. It’s beautifully ironic. This book comes along and laments of the conflicts of interests with the marriage of universities and business while I am learning to embrace that I can love to have money.

   I graduated from the University of Southern California and had a sense that something was amiss in the university system. Back then, I saw a university that catered strongly to the football program and felt like I was getting the scraps. The football program brought in the money and with the latest successes some immeasurable advertising.

   However, there was an uneasy truce of advancing education and earning money. A university gets all excited about a new corporate sponsor giving millions to a department. But what if the corporate sponsor stipulates that the money be spent on research for the advancement of the sponsor’s own products? Or that any breakthroughs from the research would be considered the assets of the sponsor’s? And what happens when a professor mentoring graduate students is an owner of a private company?

   In the former scenario, the research would have a STRONG affinity toward saying something positive about the sponsor’s product. What department would say something bad about their sponsor even if research says so? There’s statistics that would be some bias. In the second scenario, the spirit of research/education in a university environment is stymied and looks more like competing departments in a business or competing businesses. Instead of open sharing of ideas at the local coffeehouse, students are making fake notes to disguise their research from each other. In the final scenario, we may have a professor who only supports a thesis that supports his stock portfolio.

   I recommend the book for anyone who is in the process of higher education or thinking of going in that direction. It could turn your head. There’s a whole lot of research and data in this book that began to numb my brain. I give the book 4 stars because it was difficult to read – perhaps more because of the revelation of the corruption of higher education. It will make a lot of you sick.
   Rating: 4 / 5