ABSTRACT
The past ten to twelve years have brought sweeping changes to the post-secondary marketplace with the increasing popularization of online platforms where learning occurs regardless of time and space constraints. At the same time, the educational landscape has become increasingly competitive with the number of private enterprises and MOOC providers emerging as a force commoditizing education and offering cheaper and faster degrees at all levels, including doctorates! In fact, doctoral programs in business and management grew from 46,000 in 2008 to 52,000 in 2009, with an online program share of about 13.3 percent. These online programs manifest the same quality and rigor as onsite programs. Public institutions that comprise about 88 percent of all provider schools account for 59 percent of the enrollments. Candidates typically are professional adults looking to advance their careers in business, government, and education. They are looking for flexibility and convenience in access and location; relevance and currency in terms of needs and interests; and quality and rigor in terms of curricular design, mentoring, and course offerings. The top ten schools – all for-profit institutions (e.g., Capella, Walden, UOP, Regent, and Argosy) – compete in a relatively undifferentiated market (i.e., offering similar degrees) and attract about 41 percent of available online doctorate degrees. Private schools account for about 12 percent of market share. These schools experience an annual increase in online enrollments of about 30 percent, giving rise to emerging programs and schools that are now entering the playing field. What this means is that students have now more choices as programs and courses appear less differentiated and more mainstreamed, giving rise to greater competition among schools and more financial incentives to capitulate to wrongdoing and corruption. The IIEP defines corruption in education broadly as a “misuse of public office for private gain that influences access, quality, and equity in education” (Osipian, 2008). We will explore several opportunities for corrupt behaviors and outcomes in higher education including outright fraud in the example of the proprietary colleges, or “for-profits,” and the problem of unsustainable student loan debt. In both of these cases, the emphasis on “college for all,” or college as a kind of social value, is directly contrasted with the effect that pursuing a college degree can have in terms of the misuse of public funds for private gain, as well as perhaps even more fundamentally, the erosion of trust in education as a universal social good. In this chapter we explore the different ways that corruption can impede the social good by compromising the basic social values and trust in public office. In light of the Carnegie model of Community Engagement Classification, which recognizes higher education’s commitment to community engagement, we draw on its criteria and indicators to reaffirm higher education’s commitment to deepen the practice of service and to further strengthen the bond between universities and communities. The Community Engagement Classification “is an elective classification for which institutions may voluntarily apply to be listed. Carnegie defines Community Engagement as the collaboration between institutions of higher education and their larger communities (local, regional/state, national, global) for the mutually beneficial exchange of knowledge and resources in a context of partnership and reciprocity” (Campus Compact, 2008).
