Introduction
Education tries to adapt flexibly to the needs of society, and the global market economy determines how students learn and the knowledge they want to acquire. Therefore, it is logical that modern higher education institutions try to satisfy the demand of the market economy in general and their students in particular. The curriculum is adapted to the market’s needs because students will only pay for the relevant information. Educators have to check whether the competencies they develop among their students will help them find decent jobs after graduation. Contemporary universities limit the number of courses that cannot be applied in the market economy and introduce practically relevant ones, which leads to a significant change in education.
Discussion
The post-industrial approach to higher education in the market economy is characteristic of the Anglo-American organizational culture model. It supposes a realistic view of education enhanced by high tuition fees (Howard et al., 2022). As a result, students do not want to receive knowledge they cannot apply in their careers, which determines the choice of courses. University education in the United States reflects these characteristics and can be regarded as a vivid example of the Anglo-American model of organizational culture.
Introducing a new way of teaching in universities is associated with social change in the post-industrial knowledge economy. The global market requirements determine the skills students should develop, their competencies, and the level of professional preparedness they should have after graduation (Hord & Hall, 2019). Therefore, changing the curriculum is the logical way for universities to attract students. For example, traditionally, higher education was associated with a high level of knowledge in humanitarian subjects (Fullan & Ballew, 2020). The ability to read in Latin and knowledge of ancient Greek literature was regarded as required courses for all university students (Fullan & Ballew, 2020). Nowadays, students will not pay for these courses because they are not related to the profession they receive, and they need to understand where they will apply these skills in practice (Fullan & Ballew, 2020). From the global market economy perspective, this change is natural, but it affects the quality of higher education students receive.
The attempts of the officials to adapt education to the needs of the market economy change the teaching approach and the choice of subjects. For example, many students choose their specialization at school and study the subjects they will need in their profession. It is especially evident in public colleges where students receive the profession from the first year (Tienken, 2020). For instance, a student will learn nursing from the first year in college, and all subjects will be connected with specialization (Tienken, 2020). It is more characteristic to the colleges for students from working class and low-income families, while those colleges where middle-class and wealthy students study receive a more thorough education (Aggarwal et al., 2020). It leads to the aggravation of the segregation of students based on their family background and income. Financial inequality leads to significant injustice in educational opportunities because students from public schools cannot afford prestigious universities (Aggarwal et al., 2020). These distinctions lead to the differences in the educational level students in different institutions receive and to the polarization of society.
Higher education is difficult for many families to afford, which makes it a privilege for young people from working and middle-class families. They need to take the loan for an education they pay for years after graduation and find work (Howard et al., 2022). As a result, the number of students who enter the university is limited by students from affluent families who do not have to support themselves while studying and who can afford all tuition fees (Jones, 2020). It leads to economic and racial social inequality that has long-term negative consequences. For example, white and Asian families tend to give their children higher education more often than African American and Latin-American families (Jones, 2020). At the same time, the number of poor people among racial minorities and the level of criminal assaults is disproportionately higher among Latin Americans and African Americans (Jones, 2020). This information shows that the market economy does not only change the curriculum of the universities but also leads to a reduction in social mobility.
Another peculiar detail is the competition between universities for applicants that corresponds to the context of the global market economy. The universities are financed by applicants who choose to study there, and higher education institutions focus on attracting the most affluent students (Jennings, 2020). It means that the focus of the universities is on something other than the quality of the education they provide (Jennings, 2020). Instead of it, colleges choose the most profitable variants to cover their expenses, which also leads to significant economic segregation within society (Jennings, 2020). In all cases, this process is natural to the market economy, but it dramatically changes the essence of higher education. In this context, it is impossible to discuss equal opportunities for all students regardless of their racial background and social and economic status (Jennings, 2020). Only a small number of talented students will receive grants for free education in this case, while others will be restricted by their life situations.
Implementing changes in education is a challenging process that requires much time and effort. It is impossible to reform it instantly because not all universities will adopt the changes, and not all students will positively evaluate these reforms. The primary concern in the market economy is the cost-effectiveness of the university and the quality of education it provides to students (Howard et al., 2022). When students have to pay significant sums and take education loans to graduate from college, they aspire that they will earn more after they start working (Howard et al., 2022). Therefore, the skills, competencies, and certificates they receive in the university should help them in the market competition for the most prestigious jobs. These requirements justify the changes in the curriculum of the universities and the approach to higher education, even though there is no unanimous opinion on whether these reforms are positive.
Conclusion
The processes determine the changes in higher education in society and the global economy. Students are motivated to receive relevant information in the university that will help them win in the competition for decent employment and find a well-paid job and. As a result, studying classical languages and philosophy is not relevant to most students who do not specialize in these spheres. From one point of view, it limits higher education and restricts students’ worldviews. From another point of view, the changes in the curriculum and the focus on the practical application of the acquired knowledge at the workplace make this slant useful. In addition, the financial accessibility of higher education has decreased in recent decades, and fewer young people can afford to attend university. It also contributes to the critical situation in higher education and makes it nonprofitable from the market economy perspective. These changes make graduates more prepared for employment, but the number of students who can receive education decreases, aggravating inequality. The consequences of these educational reforms are vague at this moment.
References
Aggarwal, U., Picower, B., & Mayorga, E. (2020). What’s race got to do with it?: How current school reform policy maintains racial and economic inequality. Peter Lang Publishing.
Fullan, M., & Ballew, A. C. (2020). Leading in a culture of change. Jossey-Bass.
Hord, S.M., & Hall, G. E. (2019). Implementing change: Patterns, principles and potholes. Pearson.
Howard, C., Senior, C., Stupple, E. J., Corcoran, A., & Igarashi, A. (2022). Editorial: The marketization of higher education: The state of the union between the student as consumer and the free market. Front. Psychol. 13: 932122. Web.
Jennings, J. (2020). Fatigued by school reform. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.
Jones, O. (2020). Market economics has driven universities into crisis – and we’re all paying the price. The Guardian. Web.
Tienken, C. H. (2020). The school reform landscape reloaded: More fraud, myths, and lies. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.