Academic Libraries in For-Profit Schools of Higher Education

Abstract

For-profit schools constitute the fastest-growing sector of higher education institutions in the United States.1 Yet accompanying the phenomenal growth of these proprietary colleges and universities has been considerable controversy over the role that the profit motive should play in higher education.2 The literature of higher education contains increasingly more works about proprietary schools. The library literature, however, offers little in this arena. Through this article, the authors seek to introduce the library readership to U.S. for-profit colleges and universities. We summarize their history and their characteristics, and we explore reasons for their success and present areas in which these schools appear to excel. With regard to their library services and resources, we focus on issues of concern based specifically on our experience with academic libraries in proprietary schools operating in the state of Ohio. Finally, we suggest ways in which these for-profit institutions can address the challenges faced by their libraries.

Proprietary Reference: Do Students Use Library Help?

“…This spotlight on careers has led several authors to draw parallels between proprietary schools and community colleges (Davis et al, 2011;Zamani-Gallaher, 2004). Proprietary schools offer fewer liberal arts educational programs, and as a result classes focus on careers (Zamani-Gallaher, 2004).…”

“…The definition of nontraditional usually encompasses a range of factors, including age, employment status, marital or family status, and educational background. According to Davis, Adams, and Hardesty (2011), proprietary education students have "more social risk factors" (p. 571), such as being a parent or having a gap between high school and college. Students at for-profit institutions also have a higher tendency to be minorities, be considered lower income, or be first-generation college students (Beaver, 2009).…”

Faculty Perceptions on Publishing Research

“…They "seem to be relieved of the necessity for research and publication" (Davis et al, 2011, p. 572). For-profits also tend to provide less support for their libraries than traditional universities do (Davis et al, 2011), which can impede the intellectual growth of its students and faculty. Barandiaran (2011) describes Universidad Andres Bello (UNAB), a for-profit research university in Chile.…”

“…This differs from traditional universities' missions that center around creating new knowledge and performing original research (Hassler, 2006). For-profits develop classes through the use of student learning outcomes and centralized curricula (Davis et al, 2011;Floyd, 2007). Forprofit employees' time centers almost entirely on the student experience, including recruitment, job placement, retention, student services, high instructional quality, up-to-date course content, and convenience (Davis et Ryan, 2012).…”

“…Access to higher education is limited in developing nations (Alemu, 2010;Barandiaran, 2011). Various social factors in America make people with various social factors less likely to earn a college education, such as holding a minority status, earning a low income, being functionally illiterate, or raising children alone (Davis et al, 2011;Ryan, 2012). For-profits cater to people in these disadvantaged groups.…”