Monday, November 28, 2011

I Ride the MegaBus





On December 1st, right after Matt Hartley's governance class (which is going to be an elaborate role play that day), I will hop on the MegaBus to Washington D.C. to interview two people for my group's short film on for-profit education. We will be interviewing Barmack Nassirian, the Associate Executive Director of External Relations for the American Association of Collegiate Registrars and Admissions Officers and Diane Jones, Vice President of External and Regulatory Affairs for Career Education Corporation (the holding company for a number of for-profit institutions). Both are very active in terms of speaking out on for-profit education. Diane is for it, Barmack is against it! It is going to be interesting to have the interviews back-to-back with these two very different people. 
 
While on the Megabus, I will probably work on my governance paper for Matt Hartley's class. Because I have always been fascinated by how community college administrators are expected to do so much with so little, I am writing on the purpose of the community college from the president's perspective. How does the president understand and manage the external pressures on the institution and how does that process help articulate the purpose of the community college?

Wednesday, November 30th, the day before I ride the MegaBus to D.C., I will be walking over to the Art Institute of Philadelphia after Marybeth Gasman's History of higher Education class to interview one of the instructors there. I am interested to learn about her perspectives on for-profit education. I hope to create the kind of environment where she can speak freely, because I am genuinely interested, but also because I want our documentary to be very good!

Each day, I get a little closer to that bus (Two days to go)! With every assignment, every course reading and every day that passes by, it gets nearer to the time that I will ride the MegaBus.

On Thursday, December 8th from 8 - 9 pm (EDT), a few days after I have ridden the Megabus, Penn GSE Admissions & Financial Aid will be holding another web chat! This will be our last web chat of the semester and a wonderful way to get to ask questions to some of our current students and Emily Schrag, our Assistant Director of Admissions & Financial Aid! Register for the web chat  here.



Tuesday, November 22, 2011

Book Review Creating The College Man: American Mass Magazines and Middle Class Manhood, 1890-1915


Many historians perceive the increase in demand for college education amongst white middle class males in the 1920s as happening suddenly and without discernible cause (Clark, 2010). A college education, something that was thought to inhibit masculinity and be a hindrance to business success in the late nineteenth century, suddenly became highly sought after and connected to success in the twentieth century. By then, American cultural expectations had changed, but how did it happen? Daniel A. Clark sets out to determine what exactly caused the sudden college enrollment boom in his book, Creating The College Man: American Mass Magazines and Middle Class Manhood, 1890-1915. Clark finds that changing notions of white middle class masculinity moving into the twentieth century spurred greater interest in postsecondary educational attainment. In his words, “when the businessman who had long rejected the necessity of any formal education (who had even prided himself on his lack of education) accepted college as a rung on the ladder of success, something clearly had changed” (Clark, 2010, p. 5).
Creating the College Man traces the confluence of growing American middle class male anxiety in an unprecedented national forum, through four popular magazines whose readership was largely white, male and middle class. In an effort to understand how college became a viable path to middle class manhood for white protestant men, Clark scoured articles in Munsey’s, Cosmopolitan, The Saturday Evening Post and Collier’s published between 1890 – 1915 and tracked the subtle, gradual changes in representations of college educated males. Clark argues that imagined notions of masculinity -ones that existed only within the pages of these periodicals- were just as significant and perhaps more significant than the realities of white middle class masculinity at the turn of the century.
Clark calibrates his analysis to several historical themes of the turn of the century: industrialization, urbanization, changing immigration patterns and corporatization. He appropriately acknowledges that increased college enrollments were not necessarily or directly influenced by the pages of magazines alone, but rather by the larger cultural changes happening that are captured in the pages of popular magazines aimed at the middle class. These cultural changes allowed the concept of the self-made man, wildly popular in the stories published in these periodicals, to become compatible with a college education.
Clark is attentive throughout to the ways in which white native-born male protestant masculinity was framed in stark, fearful opposition to the identities of immigrants, non-protestants, working-class men and all women in order to exclude these groups from participation in the American middle class and establish postsecondary education as a vehicle for the perpetuation of white native-born American middle-class masculinity. He includes lengthy discussions of the idea that sending women to college was perceived as race suicide and of the ways in which white middle class men’s path to embracing college education as necessary had to do with highly racialized variations of Social Darwinist theory. Clark makes a compelling argument that the rising popularity of white college athletics in the pages of these publications was, in part, an effort to reinvigorate troubled white Anglo-Saxan masculinity. Interestingly, Clark does not consider sexual orientation.
Daniel Clark uses a unique, practical approach to history that knows no disciplinary bounds. His analysis draws from history, philosophy, education, critical theory, media studies, sociology and psychology. Clark does not acknowledge the historiography that informed his work, though it is clear that at least one work has done so. Creating The Modern Man: American Magazines and Consumer Culture, 1900-1950 by Tom Pendergast, written ten years prior, posits many of the same arguments. In terms of chronology, however, Pendergast essentially begins his analysis where Clark ends his. According to Pendergast, the stories contained in magazines like Munsey’s and The Saturday Evening Post, magazines that Clark also uses in his analysis, “contain the traces of changing cultural notions of masculinity and the anxiety men felt about their changing role in culture, yet they also serve to reinforce and conserve late-nineteenth century notions of manhood . . .” (Pendergast, 2005, p. 43). With notions like this, Pendergast and Clark identify how magazines guided men through new webs of economic relations as America moved from an old, Victorian cultural orientation to embrace a new, emerging corporate sensibility. Clark takes the analysis a step further by investigating how this altered the place and perception of college education.
The specificity of Clark’s work differentiates it from more general works, such as Brutes in Suits by John Pettegrew and National Manhood: Capitalist Citizenship and the Imagined Fraternity of White Men by Dana D. Nelson. Both of those works cover broader historical periods and trace out the development of new white masculinities for the twentieth century using literature and scholarship from the time as well as economic and cultural developments.
Daniel Clark’s Creating the College Man is a welcome supplement to the literature on historical conceptions of masculinity in higher education. Many other works describe masculinity within Greek organizations, such as The Company He Keeps: A History of White College Fraternities by Nicholas L. Syrett and The Lost Boys of Zeta Psi: A Historical Archaeology of Masculinity at a University Fraternity by Laura Wilkie. Others focus on cultural formulations of masculinity within the broader student body, such as Paul R. Deslandes’ Oxbridge Men: British Masculinity and the Undergraduate Experience, 1850-1920 and Robert F. Pace’s Halls of Honor: College Men in the Old South. Clark adds the unique perspective of privileged onlookers to capture the thoughts of men who were not in college to reach the answers to bigger questions: did the status of those with a college education change over this period and did it affect commercial success? What Clark’s approach reveals is that the answer to these questions changed over time. What was in the late-nineteenth century seen as frivolous and perhaps even detrimental suddenly became connected to prevailing notions of white middle class male success. All of the works focus on notions of white middle or upper-middle class manhood and do a relatively good job or better at acknowledging how vital exclusionary notions of masculinity were at propping up white masculinity; all of the aforementioned authors include this discussion in their analysis.
Creating the College Man is less concerned with the factual elements of any lived college experience and more concerned with the realm of ideas and understandings about what a college education might signify and entail for people not actually enrolled in college. How was a college education perceived in white male middle class social circles? Clark’s history is eloquent, abstract, original and at times, repetitive. At certain points, this hurt the readability of the book. His attempt to organize the chapters thematically is convoluted. The content over several chapters overlaps too much and the overall arc becomes somewhat muddled. His arguments are strong, interesting and relevant, but difficult to disentangle. Creating the Modern Man makes a lot of the same arguments in a much more concise and direct manner.
If revised for clarity, this work could secure a central place in higher education historiography because of its one of a kind approach to white middle class manhood in one of the most transformative periods of American higher education history. Clark’s enthusiastic and insightful book does ultimately deliver upon his promise to “illuminate the origins of the place of college education in modern American life” (Clark, 2010, p. 184).



Reference List
Clark, D. A. (2010) Creating the college man: American mass magazines and middle class manhood, 1890-1915. Madison: TheUniversity of Wisconsin Press.

Deslandes, P.R. (2005). Oxbridge men: British masculinity and the undergraduate experience, 1850-1920. Bloomington & Indianapolis: University of Indiana Press.

Nelson, D. D. (1998). National manhood: Capitalist citizenship and the imagined fraternity of white men. Durham: Duke University Press.

Pace. R.F. (2004). Halls of honor: College men in the old south. Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press.

Pendergast, T. (2000). Creating the modern man: American magazines and consumer culture, 1900-1950. Columbia: The University of Missouri Press.

Pettegrw, J. (2007). Brutes in suits: Male sensibility in America, 1890-1920. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins Press.

Syrett,N. (2011). The company he keeps: A History of white college fraternities. Chapel Hill: The University of North Carolina Press.

Wilkie, L.A. (2010). The lost boys of Zeta Psi: A historical archaeology of masculinity at a university fraternity. Berkeley: The University of California Press.

Friday, November 18, 2011

How About You?

In the past couple weeks, there have been so many events, both here on campus and online. I have had the chance to meet and connect with some of you through the web chats and information sessions, but I had not really considered what you are going through right until just now.

This time for me last year was difficult. I was an undergraduate at the University of California, Santa Cruz with two jobs and a wedding to plan. Filling out graduate applications with all of the writing and rewriting of personal statements was tiring. It was the bane of my existence. I just wanted the applications to magically be complete so I could continue doing what I love most. I am almost one-hundred percent sure that I submitted a few of my applications at once-at 4:37 in the morning from my laptop while laying on my living room floor after pulling an all-nighter to complete them! I empathize strongly with you who are working on those applications right now.

There is something else on my mind: it is time to make this blog a little bit more interactive! to start, here is what I would like to do. I would like to know a little bit about you! How you are doing? What would you would like to see in my blog? Please leave comments in the comments section and I will respond.I may even post about one of your suggested topics!

I have the infamous Friday song stuck in my head. It is not ok.

Also, I wanted to share the birthday card my husband bought me.
Yea. I'm 22.

Sunday, November 13, 2011

Information Session

It was amazing seeing so many of you at the information session yesterday.

If you didn't get a chance to come and will be in the New York City area on Tuesday, you can attend the New York Information Session at the Penn Club Room, 30 West 44th Street, New York, NY 10036 from 7-9 pm. Register here. The Assistant Dean, Director of Admissions and alumni will be there to talk to you about our university, programs and Philadelphia!

If you won't be in the New York area, check out where else we will be here or join us for a web chat on November 17th, from 8-9pm (EST). Register here.


Wednesday, November 9, 2011

The Most Busiest Time of the Year

Alright! I know it isn't correct grammar to say, "the most busiest time of the year," but hey, I said it. Also, I can't get the opening quotation mark to face the right way on this darn blogger, so don't hold it against me.

Yesterday, I gave a presentation in Higher Education Finance on designing higher education finance policy at the state level and capacity issues in higher education. I was SO nervous, but it actually went really well. Then, we got our midterms back and I did so much better than I had expected. Some friends from the cohort and I grabbed a beer at the Tap House after class. We talked about Higher Ed. while we were there! Even fun is business here. Or maybe, that's just me. I've been known to be an all business all the time --or at least most of the time-- kind of girl.

Okay. It's official! I'm swamped! Though I knew this was coming, I underestimated just how busy I would be. I am currently working on:

a policy memo for my Faculty and Academic Governance course
a longer final paper on community college presidents for the same course
a short documentary on for-profit colleges and universities for my Contemporary Issues course
a paper to go with that documentary
a group project in professional development
a short book review on Creating the College Man, 1890-1915 by Daniel Clark for history

and there is a lot going on in admissions right now too!
Lindsey is planning our On Campus Information Session for this Saturday, November 12th!
I am working on our General Information Web Chat for November 17th!
and we are both planning campus visits!

This Friday, our cohort is going in style to the Graduate And Professional Student Assembly's Black and White Formal at the Ritz! We will start at the home of  one of our cohort members and go form there! It is going to be amazing!

I am pretty sure that with all this going on I am going to forget that it is my birthday on Tuesday! Honestly, I do not think I will have time to celebrate it, which is very unusual for me. I LOVE birthdays! One of the cohort members, Doug, has a birthday near Thanksgiving and has offered to do a dual celebration with me later, so I am going to look into doing that.

There has been so much going on that there is hardly time to reflect. Good thing I have this blog!

Friday, November 4, 2011

Guest Post, Dalyn Montgomery

On one of my first days as a graduate assistant to the director of communications at GSE, I sat in on a meeting with a Philadelphia marketing firm that had just completed a study on what our school is both good and bad at doing.

Turns out we are mostly bad at letting the public know what we are good at; which is a lot of things. What we are mostly good at is creating a "supportive environment fostering teamwork." Their words, not mine. They were supposed to be an objective third party, which is why we hired them, but then the fact that we HIRED them makes me skeptical.

I like the word skeptical. Its like optical and spectacle mixed together, but doesn't mean any of that, and the fact that I would make such a relation would make one skeptical of my ability to think critically and logically. Which would make you skeptical which is why I like the word.

We are half way through the semester, by now we know each other, we are in the thick of it, and opinions are likely formed. That meeting with the marketeers seams long ago and by the GSE master's program schedule it is. At this point we have had submitted papers returned with grades with varying degrees of success, which is normally when nerves get worked and supportive environments that foster teamwork get tested.
Funny thing about that. If anyone was upset it either didn't show or I'm just that far out of the grapevine, either is possible, but what I did see were classmates asking each other for help. stranger still was that I saw classmates give help when asked.
Perhaps being grad school we are all a little more mature. Not likely. Perhaps being ivy we are all just inherently great people; maybe but I don't think there is a causation happening there. Perhaps GSE is good at selecting the type of student, or shaping the ones they select, in a way that helps us realize that while this may be a competitive world, our classmates aren't really our competition.

Those independent third party folks can go ahead and cash that check now.