Processes of Legitimation: the University of Phoenix and Its Institutional Environment
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Processes of Legitimation: The University of Phoenix and Its Institutional Environment Item Type text; Electronic Dissertation Authors Hughes, Martin David Publisher The University of Arizona. Rights Copyright © is held by the author. Digital access to this material is made possible by the University Libraries, University of Arizona. Further transmission, reproduction or presentation (such as public display or performance) of protected items is prohibited except with permission of the author. Download date 01/10/2021 19:31:40 Link to Item http://hdl.handle.net/10150/196111 PROCESSES OF LEGITIMATION: THE UNIVERSITY OF PHOENIX AND ITS INSTITUTIONAL ENVIRONMENT By Martin David Hughes ___________________________ Copyright © Martin David Hughes 2006 A Dissertation Submitted to the Faculty of the DEPARTMENT OF SOCIOLOGY In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements For the Degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY In the Graduate College of THE UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA 2 0 0 6 2 THE UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA GRADUATE COLLEGE As members of the Dissertation Committee, we certify that we have read the dissertation prepared by Martin David Hughes entitled Processes of Legitimation: The University of Phoenix and Its Institutional Environment and recommend that it be accepted as fulfilling the dissertation requirement for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy. June 24, 2005 Dr. Joseph Galaskiewicz, Co-Chair Date June 24, 2005 Dr. Elisabeth Clemens, Co-Chair Date June 24, 2005 Dr. Ronald Breiger, Committee Member Date June 24, 2005 Dr. Celestino Fernández, Committee Member Date Final approval and acceptance of this dissertation is contingent upon the candidate’s submission of the final copies of the dissertation to the Graduate College. I hereby certify that I have read this dissertation prepared under my direction and recommend that it be accepted as fulfilling the dissertation requirement. June 24, 2005 Dissertation Co-Director: Dr. Joseph Galaskiewicz Date June 24, 2005 Dissertation Co-Director: Dr. Elisabeth Clemens Date 3 STATEMENT BY AUTHOR This dissertation has been submitted in partial fulfillment of requirements for an advanced degree at The University of Arizona and is deposited in the University Library to be made available to borrowers under rules of the library. Brief quotations from this dissertation are allowable without special permission, provided that accurate acknowledgement of source is made. Requests for permission for extended quotation from or reproduction of this manuscript in whole or in part may be granted by the copyright holder. SIGNED: Martin David Hughes 4 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Mercifully, creative projects such as this are never truly “finished” before time expires. Nor are they ever as solitary an effort as they seem. I gratefully acknowledge all who have given so generously of themselves to help me, to try valiantly yet vainly to deliver me from my own deficiencies and excesses. I’ve depended on the kindness of strangers, acquaintances, friends, and intimates: Strangers. The National Science Foundation; the Corporation as a Social Institution program of the Social Science Research Council, funded by the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation; and the Social and Behavioral Sciences Research Institute at the University of Arizona were generous in their financial support. Acquaintances. Staffers at the California Bureau of Private Postsecondary and Vocational Education; the California Postsecondary Education Commission; the Colorado Commission on Higher Education; the Illinois Board of Higher Education; the Massachusetts Board of Higher Education; the North Central Association and the Higher Learning Commission; and the U.S. Department of Education assisted ably and willingly. Friends. Many members of the Arizona and IUP sociology departments gave me emotional, intellectual, and logistical support during my graduate career. There were also many other kind souls, both in academia and in civilian life. Since most of these people were spared from having to read my dissertation I won’t name them here. They know who they are, and I’ve told them how much I appreciate them. Then there are those few who were not so lucky. You were forced to endure me and my work. If there’s anything of value in this dissertation it’s only because of your insistent guidance and insight. I deeply regret that I was too dim-witted, lazy, and stubborn to make better use of what you gave me. I didn’t deserve as much from my dissertation committee, and you certainly didn’t deserve as little from me. So to Ron Breiger, Celestino Fernández, Lis Clemens, and especially Joe Galaskiewicz, I offer my apologies along with my thanks. You have the patience of saints. Intimates. Of course, I owe everything to my wife, Bethany Hughes. She worked far harder and sacrificed much more for this dissertation. My sons Gabriel, Mark, and David Hughes were a daily inspiration and distraction. My wife and sons, along with my parents, John and Ann Hughes, can take much of the credit for whatever good I have accomplished on this earth. The rest of the credit must go to all my teachers and mentors, especially the four members of my committee. For as long as I live I’ll never be able to pay back my debt of gratitude to you; I can only hope to pay it forward. I recently saw a small film that changed my life: Joe Gould’s Secret. It’s a story about the dynamic tension between writing and living. Put this wretched thing down and go watch it—or read the book by Joseph Mitchell on which it’s based. Afterward you’ll know exactly how I’ve felt for the past four-odd years. Finally, I believe that everyone is called to be faithful stewards of whatever resources, many or few, that God has entrusted to them. My hope is that this document is evidence of my faithful stewardship. My fear is that it isn’t. 5 DEDICATION To my family and To my teachers and To Joseph Ferdinand Gould (1889-1957) 6 TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES...............................................................................................................9 LIST OF FIGURES...........................................................................................................10 ABSTRACT.......................................................................................................................11 1. INTRODUCTION.........................................................................................................12 1.1. THE PHENOMENON: UNIVERSITY OF PHOENIX’S EXTRAORDINARY SUCCESS........12 1.2. THE PUZZLE: ORGANIZATIONAL LEGITIMATION IN AN INSTITUTIONAL ENVIRONMENT.......................................................................................................15 1.3. THE PROJECT: THE PLAN OF THE DISSERTATION...................................................16 2. THEORIZING ORGANIZATIONAL LEGITIMATION.............................................18 2.1. INTRODUCTION......................................................................................................18 2.2. EXISTING THEORIES OF LEGITIMACY: RESOURCE VS. RULES.................................19 2.3. A RULES APPROACH TO ORGANIZATIONAL LEGITIMACY AND LEGITIMATION......22 2.4. INSTITUTIONAL THEORY: FOCUSING ON RULES.....................................................24 2.5. BUILDING A THEORY OF ORGANIZATIONAL LEGITIMATION...................................31 2.5.1. What Is Legitimation? Cognitive Comprehension.....................................32 2.5.2. Who Are the Agents of Legitimation? Key Audiences...............................33 2.5.3. How Does an Organization Undergo Legitimation? Classification or Negotiation....................................................................................................36 2.6. CONCLUSION.........................................................................................................38 3. THE UNIVERSITY OF PHOENIX AND ITS INSTITUTIONAL ENVIRONMENT....................................................................................................... 41 3.1. INTRODUCTION......................................................................................................41 3.2. THE UNIVERSITY OF PHOENIX: BECOMING A PHENOMENON.................................41 3.3. U.S. POSTSECONDARY EDUCATION: A CHANGING INSTITUTIONAL ENVIRONMENT.......................................................................................................54 3.4. FOR-PROFIT PROVIDERS OF “CAREER EDUCATION”: ORGANIZATIONAL INNOVATION IN A STRUCTURED FIELD...................................................................70 3.5. CONCLUSION.........................................................................................................77 4. DISCUSSION OF THE RESEARCH METHODS, ANALYSIS, AND EVIDENCE..................................................................................................................82 4.1. INTRODUCTION......................................................................................................82 4.2. SELECTING THE CASE STUDY METHOD.................................................................82 4.3. SELECTING THE CASES..........................................................................................84 4.4. THE UNIT OF ANALYSIS: THE CASE FOR EPISODES AS CASES................................86 4.5. CONDUCTING HISTORICAL RESEARCH...................................................................88 4.6. THE EVIDENCE.......................................................................................................90 4.7. CONCLUSION.........................................................................................................98