Does anyone else find it interesting.... - USM Forum -- Message Board

Date: Jun 7, 2004

Does anyone else find it interesting....

Date: Jun 7, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: truth4usm/AH
"
And now "students" are referred to as "customers?" This is priceless..."

Truth/AH

If my information is correct, the intergration of "business" speak at USM is a growing trend in incorporating the "economical development"concepts into academics. In addition, here is a quote from the University Mission
"The mission of The University of Southern Mississippi includes generating new knowledge, applying knowledge in service to humanity, facilitating an appreciation of artistic creations and performances, promoting cultural understanding, and, most importantly, fostering learning among students in ways that prepare them to become contributing citizens and leaders in a global society. Concisely stated, the university is in the business of helping people learn, and this learning occurs through the discovery, transmission, and application of knowledge. Therefore, Southern Miss can be characterized as a not-for-profit institution that is in the learning business." Notice the last sentence..............

Date: Jun 7, 2004

This used to be called the Office of Admissions. More Orwellian double-speak?

Date: Jun 7, 2004

". . . . And now "students" are referred to as "customers?" This is priceless..."

The term "prospective students" would be more appropriate and to an academic environment than is the term "customers." This business/economic/for-profit model seems to be endless.

Date: Jun 7, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: Angeline
"This used to be called the Office of Admissions. More Orwellian double-speak?"

I'm not sure...I tried to do a search on the USM site for "Office of Enrollment and Marketing," but didn't get anything other than the job posting for this position. I assume that Papa Shelboo will tell us all about this exciting new change in the next installment of "Why USM is so much better now that I'm President"...I mean, his weekly love-letter to us.

(Anyone else remember the old slogan "It's up to U, It's up to US, It's up to USM"??? I used to have a T-shirt with this slogan on it...back when we had real USM Employee Appreciation days, filled with free pizza, crawfish, games for the kiddos, etc.).

Date: Jun 7, 2004

There has been a general trend to separate "enrollment management" (recruitment, mainly) from the admissions/registrar offices. As often as not, "enrollment management" & recruitment wind up being placed under marketing, which in turn is usually part of public relations.

USM is not unique in doing this.

What is happening in the academy today reflects what happened in technology companies before the '90s bubble burst: marketing started making all the key decisions, sometimes with complete disregard for what engineering could produce. The result in technology companies is "vaporware" & I see parallels between computer vaporware & what colleges & universities are starting to offer.

Date: Jun 7, 2004

This is a large part of the reason that Dilbert has such a strong following among the minions toiling in the canyons of Corporate America.

Date: Jun 7, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: Lamont Cranston
"The term "prospective students" would be more appropriate and to an academic environment than is the term "customers." This business/economic/for-profit model seems to be endless. "

Thanks God for the endless business / economic / for-profit model! It is the only one proven to work time and time again!

Date: Jun 8, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: Mike Mader
"Thanks God for the endless business / economic / for-profit model! It is the only one proven to work time and time again!"

The business/economic/for-profit model is just dandy for business and industry as long as those in charge have their heads screwed on straight and retain their integrity, but the for-profit model does not fit a tax-supported institution such a public university. Faculty research and other creative endeavors must remain free of "for profit" benefactors who finance the research and try to influence outcomes. That's why personnel committees at major universities often do not treat "contracts" obtained from industry with the same high regard as they give refereed "grants" from legitimate funding agencies. (The for-profit model, of course, is what gave us the likes of Enron, witness that tape of the Enron folks laughing

at those pour souls who lost their hard-earned life savings and retirement security when the Enron for-profit model ran amuk). I wonder if a university might also stand a good chance of running amuik if it it were to fully incorporate the values of a purely business/economic/for-profit model. Perhaps we will see. Or perhaps we are actually seeing it unfold right now, right before our very eyes.

Date: Jun 8, 2004

Lamont Cranston, have you ever heard of Harvard or Stanford? Neither is a public university yet are viewed by most as representing the Gold Standard of higher education. I think USM will benefit greatly if it adopts the "customer" view toward its students as well as adopting more business practices in its over all management. Welcome to the 21st Century!

Date: Jun 8, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: Curious 1
"Lamont Cranston, have you ever heard of Harvard or Stanford? Neither is a public university yet are viewed by most as representing the Gold Standard of higher education. I think USM will benefit greatly if it adopts the "customer" view toward its students as well as adopting more business practices in its over all management. Welcome to the 21st Century!"

You must be talking about Harvard Community College and South Stanford Tech College.

I'm unaware that either the Harvard or Stanford that I know have trashed years of best practices at "world-class" universities in favor of some "business model" of education (and you'd better believe they both still have tenure in place). If I'm wrong, please point me to substantial evidence to the contrary.

Date: Jun 8, 2004

The best universities do not treat students as "customers." They treat them as STUDENTS who are submitting to a rigorous series of challenges designed to help them master a variety of subjects. They are treated not as customers who dictate important decisions because they have the ability to withhold funds but as apprentices who are serious about learning and who are willing to submit to the demands imposed by those who function not as their servants but as their mentors. Faculty at the best universities do not cater to the demands of customers but are "friendly foes" who challenge their students to help them develop their own capacities to the fullest. If you HAVE to use a business model, think of a faculty member as the trainer at the gym. You do pay that person to put you through your paces, but you realize that it is in your own long-term best interests to be challenged in this way. Please try NOT to think of faculty as "servers" at some all-you-can eat restaurant.

Just my 2 cents!

Date: Jun 8, 2004

I agree that there is a fundamental difference between "student" & "customer" when it comes to the teaching-learning transaction (i.e, the really neat relationship between a good teacher & a motivated student).

But there really are areas at every college that can benefit from adopting the principles of good customer service -- business office, registrar's office, etc. In those areas, students should be treated with the same respect that a good business gives its customers.

But back to teachers & students... That relationship is more akin to that which exists between a physician & patient or a lawyer & client. It is much more complex & as a teacher myself, I think it's more rewarding than a mere "customer" relationship.

I have a sinking feeling that some troll is going to whack this "relationship" business way out of context, but anyone who's ever taught or who's ever had a really good teacher knows exactly what I'm talking about.

Date: Jun 8, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: Invictus
" But there really are areas at every college that can benefit from adopting the principles of good customer service -- business office, registrar's office, etc. In those areas, students should be treated with the same respect that a good business gives its customers. "

Invictus,

I think we must have hit "submit post" at almost exactly the same moment, so your post was not a response to mine. However, I just wanted to say that I agree with the passage quoted above, and I also, of course, agree with what you say about the special relationship between a dedicated teacher and a dedicated student. Some of the most important relationships in my life have been with teachers, and, now that I am a teacher myself, I can say that some of the people who have mattered to me most have been my students, particularly the ones who have been most sincerely devoted to their studies. There are few satisfactions in the world that can compare to those of having bright, devoted students.

Date: Jun 8, 2004

Truth4Usm,

May I suggest the following document as a brief but general introduction on business models for higher education: http://www.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/ffp0101s.pdf

There is far more subject matter available on this issue which I would recommend you study further before making dismissive comments towards others because you find their ideas in apparent opposition to your own.

The word “customer” is not a pejorative term that devalues students when referring to them. Nor are the uses of other business terms bad when discussing education. I agree with Invictus that the teacher-student relationship is a complex one much like the doctor-patient and lawyer-client relationships, but all three of these represent customer relationships. The use of the term “customer” in business is to emphasize the importance and value of the person(s) being identified. In business the “Customer is King.” This importance of the customer is something I know that excellent teachers show in their relationships with their students. Fear less the use of the business lexicon and keep your eye on the customer.

Date: Jun 8, 2004

I disagree with you Curious I but you have a right to your opinion. The shift to more businesslike language appears to depersonalize the interaction of a classroom. "Knowledge" isn't some passive entity to be drilled and poured into our students/customers heads. Seems to me it's all a bogus charade meant to pull the wool over our eyes while they continue to bilk the citizens of Mississippi and others who fund this place while lining their own pockets.

Date: Jun 8, 2004

quote:

Originally posted by: Curious 1
"Truth4Usm, May I suggest the following document as a brief but general introduction on business models for higher education: http://www.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/ffp0101s.pdf There is far more subject matter available on this issue which I would recommend you study further before making dismissive comments towards others because you find their ideas in apparent opposition to your own.

Thanks for the information, Curious 1. What I did notice, though, was just what I stated above: Harvard is not adopting a business model to replace its current model of operation. Instead, it is considering this model in addition to the current "best practices" that govern most top universities (and it seems to be related to on-line education, too. Another interesting point). From reading the article you provided, it seems that this is being done on a trial basis, to see how it will work. That makes perfect sense to me. What does not make sense is to trash the entire system of best practices at top universities that have worked for so long and replace them with this business model which has yet to be proven to really work well in the university setting. I'm all for taking what does work in the business world and using it to enhance what's already working well at universities...just don't throw the baby out with the bathwater (which is what seems to be happening at USM). Shared governance is one of those key practices that needs to stay.

The word “customer” is not a pejorative term that devalues students when referring to them.

Yes, it is. "Customer" implied receiving a good or service in exchange for payment. While many want to believe that this is the essence of the transaction that happens between a student and her/his university, many (including those at Harvard and Stanford, I'm sure) will argue that it is much, much more than that. I'm with Invictus...it makes sense to use this model for what happens between a student and Financial Aid (for example), but not for what happens between a student and a professor in the classroom.

Another question: do you consider the relationship between a minister and her/his congregants a "customer-oriented" relationship?

(snipped) Fear less the use of the business lexicon and keep your eye on the customer. "

What I fear most is the much-newer business model being used to supplant the ages-old pedagogical relationship between student and teacher. When money becomes the focus over knowledge and critical thinking skills, everyone loses.

Date: Jun 8, 2004

Curious 1 --- The article that you provide a link to is focusing on asynchronous methods of teaching -- Yes, online education does seem to treat the student as a customer. In my mind, most of the online programs and courses are concerned with profit, not learning and are operating more as a business. I don't want to start a whole debate about whether online courses equal courses taught in a classroom with a teacher -- but I see your example as treating the student as a customer (and giving the example of technology-based asynchronous methods) unrelated to face-to-face course instruction. Yes, the Business Office, Food Services, Book store, etc. should treat the student as a customer --- but not the teacher!

Date: Jun 8, 2004

Curious I, when someone says they're gonna turn faculty members into millionaires, something is very, very wrong. And by the way, Curious I, regarding Harvard and Stanford (the two schools you cited in your recent posting), the faculty at neither of those institutions would tolerate what is happening at USM - not even for a little bit.

Date: Jun 8, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: Lamont Cranston
"Curious I, when someone says they're gonna turn faculty members into millionaires, something is very, very wrong. And by the way, Curious I, regarding Harvard and Stanford (the two schools you cited in your recent posting), the faculty at neither of those institutions would tolerate what is happening at USM - not even for a little bit. "

Gotta agree with LC, here. Thanks for speaking up!

Date: Jun 8, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: dave
"In my mind, most of the online programs and courses are concerned with profit, not learning and are operating more as a business."

This is a common fallacy about online courses. The truth is that they are more expensive for students, more time-consuming (to do right) for instructors, and require significant outlays by the institution for software, training, maintenance, and yes, tech support. I teach online & I'll testify that it takes a lot more work to do it right than a traditional in-the-classroom course.

But there is a big market for online classes right now.

The rub is that online classes are not appropriate for a lot of students. To succeed in an online class -- and by that I mean learning something -- a student has to be self-motivated & have good time-management skills. Here's where most colleges fail from a "customer service" standpoint: they do not properly screen students before the students are enrolled (and failing). They sell a "product" to "customers" who can't use it. Invariably, the withdrawal rates in online classes are much higher than those in comparable traditional classes.

<CYNICISM>
Who cares about whether a student withdraws if their tuition check clears the bank?
</CYNICISM>

Date: Jun 8, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: Lamont Cranston
"Curious I, when someone says they're gonna turn faculty members into millionaires, something is very, very wrong."

Wouldn't it be more advantageous all 'round if it were our GRADUATES who became millionaires?

Date: Jun 8, 2004

"Wouldn't it be more advantageous all 'round if it were our GRADUATES who became millionaires?"

One of the most pernicious and detrimental things Shelboo has done to the environment at USM is promote the notion that everything is about money. And I have no doubt that he is entirely sincere in pursuing this idea. For him, life IS about money. But it is an ignoble goal to attempt, in any direct way, to make millionaires out of faculty. Ditto students. People--faculty or students--can have all the money you could ever imagine they might want and still not have the slightest idea of what is worth living for. Since the purpose of "business" is to turn a profit, we need go no further to see why the whole business trope is enimical to what an educational insitution is all about.

Date: Jun 8, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: Invictus
" Wouldn't it be more advantageous all 'round if it were our GRADUATES who became millionaires? "

Hear! Hear! You bet it would be more advantageous, Invictus. Faculty members at USM, and all over the nation, have willingly devoted their careers to providing students such opportunities, while at the same time sacrificing the economic beneifits they (the faculty members) could have received had they gone into business or industry instead of academics. Underpaid and overworked faculty members provide their undergraduate students with the critical thinking skills and other requisites which enable them to enter medical school, law school, and other areas of endeavor which can put them on easy street rather early in life. This seems to be one thing the writers of those vicious letters-to-the-editor seem to forget when they complain about the faculty whom they describe in terms such as lazy, contemptuous, and, whining.

Date: Jun 8, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: not Mammon
""Wouldn't it be more advantageous all 'round if it were our GRADUATES who became millionaires?" One of the most pernicious and detrimental things Shelboo has done to the environment at USM is promote the notion that everything is about money. And I have no doubt that he is entirely sincere in pursuing this idea. For him, life IS about money. But it is an ignoble goal to attempt, in any direct way, to make millionaires out of faculty. Ditto students. People--faculty or students--can have all the money you could ever imagine they might want and still not have the slightest idea of what is worth living for. Since the purpose of "business" is to turn a profit, we need go no further to see why the whole business trope is enimical to what an educational insitution is all about. "

You are right on the money, "not Mammon." This whole business/financial/economic troupe, which we now see permeating USM, is enimical to what an educational institution is all about. Many years ago, while on one of those now-defunct Piedmont Airlines, I read an article in their house magazine. The author pointed out that one does not "strive to be happy." On the contrary, he continued, one "strives to be responsible." If one is responsible, happiness will not be far behind.