No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the authors.
Unionization in Higher Education: A Scoping Review of the Literature and Suggestions for Future Research
Abstract
Union membership has been in decline in the United States for several decades. According to figures from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, roughly 11% of American workers belong to a union, down from 20% when the data were first collected in 1983 (2016). Among the public-sector workers are educators, and while educators broadly, in all categories, have some of the highest rates of unionization of any profession, unionization has been less-universal within the colleges and universities in the United States. This category of educators has a unique history of unionization and is worthy of renewed examination within the current context of higher education politics. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to conduct a scoping literature review (Mays, Roberts & Popay, 2001; Arksey and O'Malley, 2005), to identify areas of opportunity for future research on unionization within higher education leading to new knowledge and new directions. The results indicate that there exists a number of very intriguing research areas for scholars to examine in the years ahead, using qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods designs, that may result in direct implications for researchers, theorists, higher education futurists, policymakers, and others.
Since its publication in 1990, Clyde W. Barrow’s book, Universities and the Capitalist State: Corporate Liberalism and the Reconstruction of American Higher Education, 1894-1928, has been a touchstone text for generations of scholars studying higher education. This conversation between Barrow, Heather Steffen, and Isaac Kamola examines the book’s legacy in order to explore how the interdisciplinary study of higher education has changed over the past three decades. In doing so, they examine the space and place of academic knowledge and academic labor, offering an interdisciplinary discussion of critical praxis within the university.
Discussion in the literature indicates that worker values are shifting from materialism toward expressivism (personal growth and fulfillment). If this is the case, the question arises as to whether unions are perceived as being able to address these new values. It is hypothesized that individuals scoring higher on materialism are more likely to indicate support for unions than those scoring high on expressivism. This hypothesis is supported. Further investigation indicates that this hypothesis holds for blue-collar workers and for white-collar workers. As values of workers change, unions need to change their goals and strategies in order to attract workers to their ranks.
Drawing on in-depth qualitative interviews and analysis of relevant primary documents, this article explores the 1996 unionization of full-time academic faculty at Brock University, a public and primarily undergraduate university in southern Ontario, Canada. The case study examines both the impetus for unionization and the strategies employed by the faculty association in support of certification with a view to demonstrating how discourses of professionalism and collegiality can be challenged, subverted, and redeployed by academics intent on organizing, mobilizing, and ultimately winning support for unionization.
The past few years have witnessed a dramatic boom in organizing among academic employees, particularly graduate student teachers. This movement has come in response to trends toward corporatization of higher education over the past twenty years, trends including casualization of teaching staff, commercialization of research, and commodification of instruction. The graduate student movement won an important victory in 2001 when the NLRB recognized the employee status of teaching assistants on private sector campuses. Administrators are now working to undo this precedent and hoping for help from a Bush Labor Board. Graduate student successes have helped spur increased organizing among adjunct instructors and faculty. As we look to the near future, the central question is whether the union movement will be able to reverse the trends of corporatization that threaten to fundamentally reshape American universities.
An important component of the employee unionization process is the prediction of the individual's decision to vote for or against union representation. We propose and test a path model that includes the following variables: wage level, extrinsic job satisfaction, satisfaction with administration, perceived union instrumentality, voting intentions, and report on vote. We derived data on the relations among these variables through meta-analyses of the results of 14 individual-level unionization studies. The results of the path analyses suggest that (a) a sequential structure exists among predictors, (b) the relation between intent to vote and report on vote is one of measurement rather than causality, and (c) many individuals do not go through a complete sequential decision process. In view of these findings, we discuss some of the major substantive and research implications for the prediction of the individual's unionization decision. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)
This study analyzes attitudes towards faculty unions and collective bargaining among faculty and administrators in the United States and Canada. This is the first study which compares support for unionization and collective bargaining in American and Canadian universities among faculty members and administrators. The main research question is: Which factors are the determinants of attitudes towards faculty unions and collective bargaining in American and Canadian universities and colleges?
Our hypotheses are that cultural, institutional, political, positional, socio-economic, and academic factors are significant predictors of support for faculty unionization. The academics in Canada are likely to be more supportive of faculty unionism compared to their American counterparts because of differences in national political cultures. Institutional and political factors are also likely to affect such views. This study uses comparative and regression analyses of data from the 1999 North American Academic Study Survey to examine attitudes towards unions and collective bargaining among faculty and administrators in the United States and Canada.
The analysis shows that Canadian academics are more supportive of faculty unions and collective bargaining than their American counterparts. These results provide support to the political culture hypothesis. However, the study shows that institutional, political, positional, socio-economic and academic factors are also important in many cases. A faculty bargaining agent on campus is positively associated with favorable views of faculty unions and collective bargaining among American professors and with administrators’ support for collective bargaining in both countries. Administrators’ opposition is also important, in particular, for attitudes of Canadian faculty. Professors are more pro-union than administrators in both countries. Income, gender, race, age, religion, and academic field, are significant determinants of attitudes of faculty and administrators in the US and Canada in certain cases.
We explore whether unionization affects tenure and promotion outcomes. Using data on 4,276 faculty from seven Ohio public
universities, we find that unionization increases the probability that an individual will be tenured. Unionization also increases
(decreases) the probability that an individual will be a full (assistant) professor. Moreover, unionization may standardize
the promotion process across disciplines. The largest effect on the promotion process is related to length of service. Faculty
who are with an institution longer are more likely to be tenured or in higher ranks. This result occurs for two reaization
(1) The tenure and promotion processes are directly related to the number of years an individual works at an institution.
Tenure decisions usually have time limitations, and although promotion decisions are not as directly tied to time, one generally
becomes a full professor after the attainment of tenure and the rank of an associate professor; (2) Controlling for other
factors, senior union faculty are more likely to be tenured or full professors, and they appear to be able to obtain higher
ranks more easily.
An important part of the unionization process is predicting the individual's vote for or against union representation. We proposed and tested a multilevel model based on the relative importance of costs and benefits of representation. Regression statistics from within-person analyses were used to show the influence of perceived costs and benefits on judgment policies about intent to vote in a representation election. Using these statistics as outcome variables, between--person analyses were used to show the influence of decision frame on cost-benefit influences, in which framing a vote as one for or against the union was conceived as a contextual variable in an election. Results were used to extend prior unionization research and to suggest how employers and unions may attend to framing effects in an election.
Since the early 50s, the percent of the workforce organized by unions has declined considerably. In the most recent decade that rate of decline has accelerated sharply. In an attempt to discover what factors can account for the overall decline and the further deterioration during the 70s, we decompose the sources of growth and decline to determine the relative importance of changes in organizing activity, success in certification elections, decertifications, and net growth due to economic causes. We find that all factors except decertifications account for a substantial part of the change. In addition, interactions between the factors are very important. A significant finding is that while organizing activity and success rates have been declining over time, the net growth (or loss) of membership due to economic causes has remained stable controlling for the aggregate level of economic activity. We argue that this finding is inconsistent with the prevailing view that the decline in the percent of the workforce organized is primarily due to the decline of the heavily unionized core industries.
Starting with the question "How have professors and educational institutions responded to pressures to be professional yet act bureaucratically," Philo Hutcheson uses federal and AAUP records and surveys and blends historical research and sociological analysis to develop a full understanding of the problem. With the dramatic expansion of the professoriate following World War II came increasing tensions between the professor's perceived traditional status as an autonomous professional on the one hand and new role as a bureaucrat subject to institutional authority and responsible for departmental and committee assignments on the other. In this increasingly conflicted realm, the AAUP functioned as a key intermediary, dealing with such issues as tenure, salary, contracts, and even faculty strikes. Hutcheson examines how tensions between the requirements of institutional bureaucracies and the norms of the academic profession resulted in contentiousness and conflict within the national AAUP, between administrators and faculty members on individual campuses, within the ranks of faculties themselves, and even deep in the consciences of many concerned individuals. The book analyzes the association's ability to respond effectively and to balance the values of collegial representation with the powers of collective bargaining. It thus offers a detailed and authoritative examination of the AAUP's search for ways to sustain professionalism while dealing with the fundamental changes in the nature of the professoriate in the post-World War II era.
le personnel enseignant, comme tout corps professionnel, a lui-aussi etait touche par des tendances nouvelles : baisse des salaires, temps partiel et travail temporaire. L'A. souligne ce que ces tendances ont modifie au niveau des etablissements concernant notamment la gestion du personnel, l'organisation du travail et la syndicalisation des enseignants
The recent rise of collective bargaining among faculty in higher education has prompted numerous studies of the factors affecting faculty interest in collective bargaining, the competition among various bargaining agents for recognition, the impacts on campus governance and the contract negotiation process. Few studies have recognized the variations in local context as important factors, nor have many sought to assess the role of the administration prior to and during the campaign. This paper presents a case study of one administration's opposition to collective bargaining in an effort to describe the complexity of the situation and the unusual degree and kind of attention required from campus administrators.
Graduate student unionization efforts have made an indelible mark on the higher education milieu, as illustrated by the experiences of students who participated in this movement in recent years.
Using data on individual faculty from seven Ohio public universities, this study analyzes how collec
tive bargaining affects the faculty earnings distribution. An empirical analysis of the variance of log
earnings and earnings regressions by union status reveal that collective bargaining in postsecondary
schools slightly increases the dispersion of earnings in this sample. This result is mainly due to an
increased dispersion of female faculty salaries in unionized schools, which appears to be caused by
unionized females in higher ranks receiving greater returns to rank than their nonunionized counter
parts.
Of the approximately 20 million public employees in the United States, more than eight million are either members of or represented by labor unions—a penetration rate of just over 40 percent. What is remarkable about this phenomenal growth is that most of the expansion of union activity in government has occurred within the last 40 years, and almost mirrors the decline of union strength in the private sector.
The rise and fall of labor in the private sector is a backdrop to the growth of public sector collective bargaining. Explanations for the dramatic increase in government union activity can be explored from a number of different perspectives. Current public policy efforts to reform civil service and allow managers greater flexibility are seen by some researchers as having the potential to impact the ability of public sector unions to represent their members effectively.
The recent split within the AFL-CIO may also have consequences affecting public sector union activity. Costly and self defeating jurisdictional disputes can arise and subsequently lead to a decline in membership strength. On the other hand, increased competition can serve to reinvigorate the entire labor movement in much the same way that the original split between the AFL and CIO resulted in massive private sector organizing efforts and dramatic, if temporary membership gains.
This study investigates predictors of prounion faculty voting intentions in a collective bargaining representational election. The research draws on a dataset developed during the course of the representational election campaign at the University of Vermont. The article explores the current context of higher education organizing in relation to the American labor movement. The literature review shows prounion attitudes, union instrumentality, demographic factors, job dissatisfaction, and active participation in the union campaign to be predictors of voting intentions. A general model of voting intentions emerges. Multiple logistic regression analysis is used to test the general model against assessments of voting intentions observed at four phases of the campaign. Specific models of voting intentions for each phase of the campaign materialize. An exploration of implications for both researchers and organizers follows.
Every year in Canada and the U.S., the share of higher education faculty who teach off the tenure track grows. One might expect that faculty unionization would limit this process, but the data examined here indicate that this is not so. While Canadian universities are significantly more unionized than their U.S. counterparts, they rely at least as heavily on contingent faculty. Similarly, U.S. states with high levels of unionization do not exhibit lower levels of casualization. Union strategies that institutionalize divisions between tenure-track and non-tenure-track, and/or between part-time and full-time faculty, probably play a role in this outcome. They can and should also play a pivotal role in reversing these trends if they develop the political will to do so.
This study analyzes U.S. union organizing activity and membership growth from 1990 to 2004, a period in which an overall pattern of union decline continued and in which organizing achieved renewed prominence as both a union policy and public policy issue. Models for organizing activity and membership growth were proposed and tested. Union decentralization and employer opposition were found to be key predictors of organizing activity differences among unions. These same factors, along with organizing activity, helped explain union differences in membership growth, as did a “Sweeney era” effect.
This paper presents the results of two studies that examine the impact of both social psychological and economic concerns on organizational members' decisions to support or oppose union formation. The studies test the predictions that procedural justice judgments and social identification---two social psychological factors that shape the nature of how people relate to their organizations---have a significant influence on people's support for union certification and on the votes they cast in a union certification election. Importantly, it was predicted that these effects would emerge even after accounting for the influence of people's economic concerns, which have been the primary focus of previous efforts to understand whether people support union formation. The results confirm these predictions and demonstrate that respondents' positions on the unionization issue are shaped by procedural justice (Studies 1 and 2) and social identity (Study 2) even after accounting for economic factors. Furthermore, Study 2 shows that the impact of procedural justice judgments on union certification was partially mediated by social identity. More generally, the results highlight the importance of integrating both social psychological and economic concerns in models designed to explain organizational phenomena such as the formation of unions.
It has been over two decades since the United States Supreme Court handed
down the landmark Yeshiva decision. In that case, the faculty in
a private university was determined to be "managerial" and not
entitled to collective bargaining rights and other protections under
federal labor law. Despite Yeshiva's broad and significant impact
in deterring faculty organizing at private colleges and universities,
successful union organizing drives, though few, have been growing more
frequent on campuses across the United States. In this paper, we examine
the Yeshiva case and analyze its implications for private and
public universities, including current trends such as the increased use
of contingent faculty and distance learning. We also examine successful
organizing efforts and discuss their implications for organized labor.
In the rapidly expanding world of for-profit higher education, there are no faculty unions. It has been predicted that there never will be. These institutions stand ruthlessly by the policy of staying union-free. Nonetheless, there are reports of attempts to organize. A recent email request sent out on the Coalition on Contingent Academic Labor (COCAL), a network of contingent faculty across the United States and Canada listserve, brought in several dozen messages about interest or efforts going on below the radar. Stirrings of organization exist already in such places as Kaplan, the commercial art schools, the ESL schools, and others. The spirit of this organizing is not optimistic, but it is determined.
This is an important issue for all educators because the for-profit sector is huge and growing. It includes the largest institutions of higher education (Phoenix, DeVry, Kaplan) in the country. For-profits employ somewhere between 140,000 and a million faculty. Their business model is overreaching traditional institutions by competing with them, by absorbing populations that would otherwise not have access to them, and by establishing themselves within or linked to traditional institutions (such as Stanford) as for-profit subsidiaries.
Is it possible that faculty in the for-profit sector might succeed in bringing in a union, or something like a union? Briefly, we will outline first why the for-profits can be organized, and second, why they should be organized.
The for-profits can be organized because:
1. The for-profit faculty are "our people" already. Many faculty at the for-profits also work in unionized places currently or recently. They know how different it is to teach under a union contract. They bring an understanding of union practices including organizing and bargaining.
2. The motives that drive these attempts to organize are the same ones that led to the teacher-faculty unionization movements of the 1960s and 1970s: decent pay, power over our work, and better educational conditions for our students. However, there is an additional motive today: desire for job security. This was not a major factor in the 1960s and 1970s, when there was a teacher shortage and tenure was nearly universal.
3. In the for-profits, management tends to be corporate CEOs, not educators. When organizing comes to the attention of these CEOs, their inexperience with labor unions exposes them to foolish moves (like firing the entire faculty, which happened at East-West in Chicago) that get them in trouble with the National Labor Relations Board. Their ignorance of workers' rights puts them at a disadvantage.
4. The majority of teachers in the for-profits are working-class people. In the for-profits, there is no top-level elite faculty with tenure and lifetime pensions and benefits. That top level is occupied by owners and managers. The faculty at for-profits are mostly like the adjuncts and full-time non-tenure track in other institutions—low-income, bottom-level, no job security. In this sense, faculty and students, who are also overwhelmingly working class, usually attending college on government loans or grants, have much in common. For both faculty and students, the ladders of opportunity are disappearing. This is true for both undergraduate and graduate programs.
5. For-profits are weaker politically now than in many years, primarily due to congressional investigations, the Department of Justice suits and other criticisms over their fraudulent recruiting and use of federal student aid funds. In fact, most for-profits are dependent on federal money. This is a substantial source of leverage in organizing especially now since federal expenditures are under such a microscope. It is no longer unusual to hear criticism of the use of public funds to bust unions.
6. The Occupy movement has made all workers, especially precarious ones, more hopeful and willing to fight. It has explicitly targeted the 1% (including Goldman Sachs, which owns part of Argosy and the Art Institute schools), who are the owners of the biggest for-profits.
7. A regional workforce-based strategy is no longer an outlier among organizing strategies. Rising regional organizing strategies already exist to appropriately organize this workforce, both COCALs and other similar formations among contingent faculty. There are already regional...
This book describes the process of unionization among university faculties using case studies of unionization campaigns at three universities. In higher education, faculty unions may have improved the situation of many faculties, but they may have accomplished this at the cost of increasing public skepticism and even antagonism. The chapters are: (1) "Introduction"; (2) "Faculty and Labor"; (3) "Three Decades of Faculty Unionism"; (4) "Faculty Unionization at the University of Rhode Island"; (5) "Failure and Success at the University of Massachusetts"; (6) "Faculty Unionization at the University of Connecticut"; and (7) "Epilogue." (Contains 70 references.) (SLD)
Research studies on the role of the faculty union in higher education and in particular the satisfaction of community college faculty is very limited. This chapter reviews the literature and uses interviews with union presidents to examine the union's changing role.
The relationship between union status and job satisfaction is commonly estimated without recognizing the heterogeneity of non-union members. Many non-union workers have experienced union jobs in the past while others have not, suggesting past estimations of the impact of unions on job satisfaction may miss a critical distinction. After separating non-union members into those workers with and without union experience, this article shows that job satisfaction increases significantly for first-time union workers, but decreases as workers accumulate experience in the union. Finally, after leaving the union jobs, worker job satisfaction recovers but does so only as the time since unionization grows.
Drawing on a large survey of new members, this paper examines the reasons why people join unions and the methods of their recruitment. It shows that collective reasons remain central to union membership and that individual services are secondary in the recruitment process. While there is little variation in reasons for joining across industry, occupation and sex, there are marked differences in the methods used to recruit new members. These findings are used to examine existing explanations of membership decline and to assess the efficacy of the different recruitment policy options available to unions.
The present study attempts to broaden Neumann''s (1979) original study, which included only universities with favorable labor relations, and to assess the role of organizational climate in predicting and explaining faculty attitudes toward collective bargaining at a college facing severe labor problems. The major findings of this study are the following. First, the perceived power structure is the dominant predictor of attitudes toward unionization at the university in a labor dispute. The magnitude of relationships between perceived power and collective bargaining attitudes is noticeably stronger at the university with unfavorable labor relations than at universities with favorable labor relations. Second, inequity is related to some aspects of collective bargaining and is not related to others. Third, perceived goals do not effect faculty attitudes toward unionization. The implications of these findings are discussed and elaborated.
Fordham University faculty members rejected collective bargaining in a National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) supervised election in the spring of 1975. The present study was conducted prior to the election. Relationships between faculty members' attitudes toward collective action and their perceptions of the quality of the organizational characteristics of the University were examined.
The study was based on modern organization theory which contends that the needs of organizational participants must be satisfied and integrated with organizational goals to maximize output and to minimize the potential for dysfunctional behavior of the participants.
The findings supported theory. Faculty members were less supportive of collective action when they perceived administrator-faculty and intrafaculty relationships, motivation processes, and communication processes to be at levels conducive to meeting their needs.
This paper extends recent research on the determinants of the decline in union membership in the United States. Using biennial
state-level data for a set of years between 1958 and 1982, my model tests “union organizing,” “structural,” “management opposition,”
and “public policy” hypotheses concerning union membership and suggests improved specifications of each of these hypotheses.
The paper also examines the relative importance of each factor in explaining the decline in unionization. The results support
each of the hypotheses and confirm previous findings that changes in the structure of the labor force are most important in
explaining union membership decline.
This research examines the factors that influenced voting behavior in two faculty union defeats at New York University. Faculty members'' and librarians'' demographic and professional characteristics referred to in previous research on collective bargaining were not good predictors of how they voted in these elections. However, their satisfaction with conditions at NYU, especially satisfaction with participation in governance, was a strong predictor of how they voted. Furthermore, faculty characteristics were found to influence their satisfaction with conditions. This paper also discusses the importance of the swing votes cast in a run-off election by the members of a previously defeated third party and the influence on the election outcomes of an independent group of faculty members opposed to unionization.
This exploratory study isolated factors useful for predicting faculty attitude toward collective bargaining (CB) in higher education.
Research sought, first, to measure the strength of bivariate relationships between a CB attitude measure and other attitudinal and demographic variables and to investigate the nature of multivariate relationships between the former criterion and the latter predictors. Second, the underlying structure of the most useful predictor was examined.
Results showed that measures of faculty perceptions of potential bargaining issues — including monetary issues, working conditions, participation in institutional decision-making and promotion and tenure policies — as well as individual faculty compensation were the most useful predictors of CB attitudes. Conclusions related these findings to alternatives for higher education faculty and administrators as well as for potential faculty organizers and bargaining agents.
Questionnaire responses of a large educational faculty in a private university were used to examine support for collective bargaining and several propositions about unionism. The little existing research on specific schools within universities suggests that education faculties modestly support unionism, with tenure related negatively to it. Parametric and nonparametric analyses of data from this faculty revealed considerably different results, including far greater union support and tenure''s positive relationship with unionism. This investigation suggests that theorizing about unionism and collective bargaining within the schools of universities, such as schools of education, needs to be reconsidered.
In this paper, we test the Farber/Saks model of why workers join unions. Specifically, we find that their model can be extended to intentions to unionize among university professors. Significant predictors of the intention to unionize include economic variables, job security variables, and other noneconomic variables.
No study has recently examined how unions affect professors’ salaries. In the only studies using micro-level data, both Ashraf
(1992) and Barbezat (1989) used data from 1977. I update earlier work by using data from 1988. In conjunction with data from
1969 and 1977, the effect of faculty unions over a twenty-year period is examined. While faculty at unionized colleges earned
significantly less than their counterparts at nonunion institutions in 1969, they earned marginally more in 1977 and 1988.
A model of faculty unionism that integrates a diverse set of factors representing various perspectives on voting behavior in unionization drives was developed. This model was then tested using data obtained from faculty in three institutions of higher education simultaneously undergoing collective bargaining elections. The study results suggest that work context, socio-political beliefs, general attitudes toward unions, perceptions of union instrumentality at one's own workplace, and pay are strong determinants of faculty voting behavior. Union instrumentality perception was the single largest determinant of the vote. The model had strong predictive power.
Microfilm. Thesis (Ph. D.)--Rutgers University, 1986. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 277-283).
Given falling birth rates, ageing baby boomers approaching retirement age as well as a pension crisis in most advanced economies, understanding the characteristics of the labour supply function of the elderly have taken on a new significance. Even in developing countries, with labour surplus economies, this is a major issue as these poor countries try to build a pension scheme with at least a minimum amount of state provision for the elderly. What motivates retired people to enter or continue in the labour force is the focus of our analysis. We use panel data from Korea which is an interesting country since it transited from developing to developed economy status within the last few decades and therefore exhibits characteristics of both underdevelopment and economic advancement. The econometric methods include probit models of: pooled data; panel data with random effects; and 2SCML, to allow for possible endogeneity bias induced by the self-declared health status of the elderly. We stress the crucial importance of pecuniary and non-pecuniary factors in determining labour supply of the elderly. Contrary to expectations, non-pecuniary factors such as health status are crucial in the decision-making process of whether to work or not to work for the elderly.
Graduate student unions have been attracting considerable academic and practitioner attention recently, especially since the New York University decision in 2000. Given the declining fortunes of the union movement, it seems as if the academic sector has the potential of becoming a vital new organizing frontier. However, there is scant research on this issue. We trace the origins and evolution of graduate student unions in the United States, discuss the relevant statutory and case law, analyze pertinent collective bargaining and strike issues, and suggest avenues for future research.
The author argues that because almost all Israeli wage earners were covered by collective agreements in the early 1980s, neither the "collective voice" hypothesis nor the earnings premium hypothesis-the two prevailing explanations of workers' decision to join unions-was then applicable to Israel. Using 1982 survey data on Israeli workers, he examines four alternative explanations of unionization in Israel: non-work benefits; political ideology; social values, especially workers' attitude toward unions as a means for solidarity; and work and demographic attributes, such as employing unit size, gender, ethnicity, education, and age. He finds that Israeli workers' decision to join the Israeli Federation of Labor-the Histadrut-can be explained in part by non-work benefits of the Histadrut (health insurance and legal aid, for example) and by the workers' social values. (Abstract courtesy JSTOR.)
Reclaiming the ivory tower: Organizing adjuncts to change higher education
- J Berry
Berry, J. (2005). Reclaiming the ivory tower: Organizing adjuncts to change higher education.
New York, NY: Monthly Review Press.