Research blog Post #1

CU Research Blog #1

Okay. This is the first installment of my thoughts about Corporate Universities and the research I plan to conduct. I have some information about Corporate Universities from a Masters Program group project that I did (with others) a few years ago. The group work evaluated Owens Corning’s CU burgeoning program in its broadest sense, but I found some articles about CU instruction versus higher education. Now, I would like to explore writing instruction programs and packages designed for corporate universities. I know I told you guys some of this information last week via discussion board, but I have since found some information that may help develop a theoretical basis for my research.

To recap, corporate universities are “work-based schools” created by corporations and consultants to increase professional and –for some companies—personal development of employees. Corporate-speak define the CU this way:
“[Corporate Universities] are strategic umbrella[s] for developing and educating employees to meet the organization’s business needs.”

The average CU offers traditional human resource-type training to enhance specific jobs skills and strengthen current performance, as well as offer courses that impart knowledge, skills and other characteristics intended to help employees move to positions that will increase the organizations competitive edge. Those who support CUs believe this “system” is the most fluid and successful method to enhance the skills of the workforce, which, in turn, increases the strength of organizations. Many employers are looking to expanding the training ideal to offer college-style courses that are tailored to an individual organization. Some work with traditional universities, others hire consultants to create a program with classes that may qualify for accreditation. Employers are diverting funds formerly set aside for employees who return to college for degrees to their own training and development programs. As a result, universities are losing these students (and the accompanying funds) to corporations.

But here’s the flip side. Henry Giroux, respected postmodern scholar, and critical pedagogy theorist is one of many in academe who believes that “global business and its agents among university administration and faculty are working to privatize public education and, among other things, marginalize critical practices that question the priority of profit in contemporary society.” Here’s a snippet from Giroux’s “The Corporate War against Higher Education”:

Culture in the corporate model becomes an all-encompassing horizon for producing market identities, values, and practices…public spheres are replaced by commercial spheres as the substance of critical democracy is emptied out and replaced by a democracy of goods, consumer styles, shopping malls, and the increasing expansion of the cultural and political power of corporation throughout the world. As a result of the corporate takeover of public life, the maintenance of democratic public spheres from which to organize the energies of a moral vision loses all relevance. As the power of the state and civil society are reduced in their ability to impose or make corporate power accountable, politics as an expression of democratic struggle is deflated, and it becomes more difficult within the logic of self-help and the bottom-line to address pressing social and moral issues in systemic and political terms.

Although this may sound a bit cerebral, it comes to the heart of why we teach (or our “lollipop dreams” about why we teach. Whichever works best for you.) Those in higher education who believe we teach to encourage independent thought and moral and civic responsibility feel that CUs will eventually taint this mission and create a consumer community devoid of the critical mindset.

Alright. I’m not trying to prove or disprove these arguments with my research at this point. The stuff I wrote above only gives us the deep background for research that could not possibly be covered during a semester, but that could be dissertation fodder. I don’t know.

What I want to do within this semester is evaluate online CU designers’ course offerings in writing. As far as I can tell, no one has done this yet. So, since research shows that Corporate-driven education will soon have more students than traditional universities, I think some reconnaissance is in order. I’m looking for types of courses offered (are they product driven or process? Post process? Collaborative?) , explicit teaching pedagogy, if present, and promised results. I’m investigating the websites of CU designers in order to get the most information I can in a short period. Later, I would like to follow a few employees who take corporate sponsored writing courses and record their experiences and results. To me, there really isn’t a way for me to answer deeper questions until the basic ones are answered. Since I haven’t found any other research in this area (yet) I will begin at the beginning!

Tell me what you think. Do you see a more fruitful angle that I should take? Does it sound as if I’m trying to do too much? Is my theoretical base too broad? To controversial? Any suggestions and or criticisms are welcome. You may make me cry and reconsider my life-path in Rhetoric, but don’t blame yourself! (You know I’m joking here, right?) All opinions are welcome!