Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Disneyfication of a University

academeblog.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 268 posts

Re: The Disneyfication of a University

#111

Post by jonas21 »

cs702 wrote: post #24

It's part of the ongoing "corporatization" and "MBA-ization" of US colleges and universities. GW's attempt to institute a "culture" using techniques developed at Disney is just one of many possible examples, although I will admit it is a particularly easy one to mock. (Quoting the OP: "The GW culture initiative can be summed up in two words: Mickey Mouse.") Much of higher education in the US is now controlled by an a…

> Perhaps the most salient example of this ever-expanding bureaucracy is Stanford's shiny new 35-acre campus in Redwood City, which houses only non-academic administrative staff

Is this really a good example of administrative bureaucracy growing out of control?

I mean, if you had to pick a group of people to move off your university campus due to space constraints, it seems like administrative staff would be the logical choice. Moving certain departments off-campus, or letting fewer students live on-campus would both be worse for the academic environment.

In addition, Stanford has consistently ranked near the top of all universities in research output while also providing free tuition to any student whose family makes less than $150K per year. Doing this costs a lot of money. Where do they get that money from? Mostly donations and grants. It takes a lot of people to administer grants (which tend to come with lots of rules on how you account for the money) and to schmooze with donors, etc. But the end result -- funding high-quality research and providing a free education to thousands of students each year seems like a pretty good outcome.

Re: The Disneyfication of a University

#113

Post by odiroot »

Consultant32452 wrote: post #65

The most common reason people leave companies is not compensation. It's usually about relationships, primarily with the boss but also coworkers. I'm on the spectrum, so I function a bit like an automaton which places little value on the social aspects of work, but most people aren't like that. This is how "on the spectrum" I am. One time I was on a team that did a team building exercise where we went to a local chari…

> The most common reason people leave companies is not compensation. It's usually about relationships, primarily with the boss but also coworkers

I can fully agree with that. I have only left one job to pursue "better" opportunities (a move abroad). I also regretted it later, as I left a great team. All the other exits were caused by me being tired of arrogant/ignorant managers.

Two out of three times it was about terrible working conditions and lack of a will to do anything to improve the situation.

Re: The Disneyfication of a University

#114

Post by andrewfong »

notyourday wrote: post #94
hef19898 wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This. Feelings became such a driving force lately, no matter where you look. Politics, business, it's all about how people "feel". And not even really how the feel, but more about the pretending of how they feel. Your example trends a little bit on the extreme end of the spectrum (I totally get your point, so), but the truth is that for a lot of people that is a truly good experience. IMHO companies are abusing this…

When the pay is lousy feelings become important.

When the pay is good, feelings are important too. Consider, if you're well paid, your skill set is (probably) in high demand in the industry and getting a similarly high pay at other places is (relatively) easy.

At that point, feelings play a pretty important role in getting you to stay.

Re: The Disneyfication of a University

#115

Post by Loughla »

chishaku wrote: post #18

AKA the corporatization of higher education. [Corporatization] has saddled us with a higher-education model that is both expensive to run and difficult to reform as a result of its focus on status, its view of students as customers, and its growing reliance on top-down administration. Not surprisingly, those administrators who occupy the highest ranks in our college and university bureaucracies are those who have pro…

I've worked in higher ed for decades, and I can say (anecdotally obviously) that the number one negative change agent was the switch from simply calling them students to 'consumers' or 'customers' depending on which institution you're examining. Many campuses, in my experience, have even just boiled it down to credit hours, instead of even talking about the human people involved.

It has devalued the real purposes of education, and has had the most draining impact on higher education culture that I have ever experienced. It has led to more PR and Marketing dollars, and less dollars for professional development for people who actually impact student success.

I hate it.

Re: The Disneyfication of a University

#116

Post by gowld »

RcouF1uZ4gsC wrote: post #23

A good rule of thumb is that the more a corporation talks about "culture", the more the employees should be wary that they are getting fleeced. A lot of companies have realized that they get employees to work harder for less if they are able to get the employees to develop some sort of emotional attachment to the company. If you as an employee are getting a lot of push about "company culture" and the company is tryin…

What is money for? After water, food, shelter, and a few more things, Maslow and I spend our my money on culture. Why work 40hrs/week in hell to get some extra money to use to buy a cultural life outside of work?

Re: The Disneyfication of a University

#117

Post by zweep »

RcouF1uZ4gsC wrote: post #23

A good rule of thumb is that the more a corporation talks about "culture", the more the employees should be wary that they are getting fleeced. A lot of companies have realized that they get employees to work harder for less if they are able to get the employees to develop some sort of emotional attachment to the company. If you as an employee are getting a lot of push about "company culture" and the company is tryin…

That’s a rather cynical view. I think of it more like: “culture” is one of the few ways to control people at scale. If you are a product team on Apple’s Live Photo’s feature and you are thinking about what telemetry to collect, if you look at it just based on your evaluated metrics, you’ll think, huh, I’ll be promoted if this feature is awesome, let me collect everything I can and see if it helps me. But if there’s a cultural commitment to privacy, then everyone will think “that’s not very Appley,” when you present your optimizations to your boss he’ll ask you “where did you get all that data? Why did you log it?” Etc.

Now as with all things it can be used in good and bad ways and it’s far easier to do bad than to do good. But it’s just a tool of control.

Re: The Disneyfication of a University

#118

Post by Loughla »

downerending wrote: post #78
lolc wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In a monetary sense, universities can afford this shit exactly because of the huge loans taken up by students. In an ethical sense, they can afford it because people don't care enough to dump them over it.

So far. Perhaps it's my imagination, but I'm detecting a noticeable decline in the quality of recent graduates, as compared to ten or twenty years ago. You can't water down the booze indefinitely without people noticing.

It is your imagination. And now I'm going to make a wild claim with no citations because I'm on mobile, but. . .

Graduate quality and skill has increased since 1990 [citation here] for each school individually. What you're seeing is an increase in the variety of institutions you are seeing graduates from.

Not everywhere is created equal. Universities and graduates are all mostly getting better, but they're not all as good as one another.

Re: The Disneyfication of a University

#119

Post by odiroot »

brightball wrote: post #85
RcouF1uZ4gsC wrote: post #23

A good rule of thumb is that the more a corporation talks about "culture", the more the employees should be wary that they are getting fleeced. A lot of companies have realized that they get employees to work harder for less if they are able to get the employees to develop some sort of emotional attachment to the company. If you as an employee are getting a lot of push about "company culture" and the company is tryin…

You're on the right track, but I think you're taking a more cynical view of it (just to be frank). Whether you're a business, volunteer organization, sports team or anything else you want the people working with you to be motivated. No matter what. Motivation is the goal. If you get into motivational psychology, especially for people in the software field, studies consistently show that motivation for us boils down t…

> Motivation is the goal.

I cannot speak for everyone but nothing motivates me more than a well defined task/problem, a reasonable amount of time to solve it, and a follow up letting me know how much my solution helped.

No amount of gimmicks is gonna win with that.

Re: The Disneyfication of a University

#120

Post by nothrabannosir »

jedberg wrote: post #76
Consultant32452 wrote: post #65

The most common reason people leave companies is not compensation. It's usually about relationships, primarily with the boss but also coworkers. I'm on the spectrum, so I function a bit like an automaton which places little value on the social aspects of work, but most people aren't like that. This is how "on the spectrum" I am. One time I was on a team that did a team building exercise where we went to a local chari…

> I calculated how much that cost the company and made a presentation to my boss about how much more we could have done by hiring minimum wage workers to perform the same manual labor for the same $ they paid us. This is funny and very self-aware of you, but you bring up a good point. Would people feel worse/better/the same if the company said "you can take a day off today and we're going to give your day's salary to…

If it was a team building exercise, the altruism was not the point, but a vehicle for social cohesion.

Sending people home defeats the purpose.

Post reply on HN