The Effect of a Symbolically Isomorphic Name Label in Implementing a Creative Campus Initiative: A Comparative Case Study Analysis Thesis Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Arts in the Graduate School of the Ohio State University By Kristi Wilcox, J.D. Gradudate Program in Arts Policy & Administration The Ohio State University 2011 Thesis Committee: Dr. Margaret J. Wyszomirski, Advisor Dr. Wayne P. Lawson ii Copyright by Kristi Marie Wilcox 2011 iii Abstract ǯ the creative economy. Universities will be responsible for producing creative human capital in their graduates. The 2004 American Assembly provided campus-based practitioners with new language to pursue these goals when it introduced the DzdzǤ this naming language during policy formulation and implementation of two Creative Campus projects. Qualitative interviews, document analysis, and autoethnography are used to assess the value of a common naming strategy. A critical framework that crosses semiotics and the policy cycle is used to analyze the data from each of the cases. The findings suggest that a symbolically isomorphic naming strategy can be very effective in formulating and implementing a Creative Campus program because the name label provides cultural entrepreneurs with a tool to contextualize their work, frame the issue on the institutional agenda, define their work in juxtaposition to a prototypical schema, and gain legitimacy, understanding, consensus, and control of resources. This thesis concludes by suggesting that the shared signifier ii also offers an opportunity for a more formalized network of Creative Campus practitioners to learn from and engage in the labeling contests that shape the sign. iii This thesis is dedicated to all of those people who are working hard to make the Creative Campus movement truly meaningful, in all of its various iterations. iv Acknowledgements Thank you to my family, especially to Mom, Dad, and Kacie, for your support Ǥ ǯ ǯ ǯ Alphabet Adventure ǡ ǯǢǯ helped me move across country (twice); if you had not taught me to have faith in ǢǯȋȀ my Facebook wall that made me laugh). I am incredibly grateful to my advisor, Dr. Margaret J. Wyszomirski. Her guidance, support, keen intelligence, ability to help me think in different ways, and passion for ideas enabled me to finish this work of authorship. I am also very thankful to Dr. Wayne P. Lawson, my reader, for his thoughts, feedback, enthusiasm, and willingness to be flexible as I pursued a unique dual degree program. I am deeply indebted to Ms. Erin J. Hoppe, a trusted colleague and an even better friend. As someone who had gone through the thesis process ahead of me, she was always willing to share her insights, lend examples of her work, offer editing v services, give encouragement, or just have a glass of wine and listen to complaints. Thank you to the Department of Art Education for giving me a platform to pursue my love for arts policy and for letting me hang around for four years. The faculty of the John Glenn School of Public Affairs added a depth and texture to my education that I will appreciate for years to come. Thanks especially to Kirsten Thomas. I always knew I could go to her with all manner of procedural questions and quandaries and be sure to receive prompt, professional responses. She truly keeps everyone on target. A special thanks goes to Dean Monte Smith, Marc Nawrocki, and all those at the Ohio State Moritz College of Law, who were so professional and kind in constantly helping me navigate the red tape of a dual degree program. This research would not have materialized without all of the founders of the Ǥ ǯ like to extend my heartfelt thanks to Dr. Scott Bridges, Ms. Erica C. Mossholder, Dr. Hank Lazer, and Mrs. Alexis Clark at the University of Alabama for their time in Ǥǡ ǯ participants at Vanderbilt University, including: Dr. Steven Tepper, who met with me on multiple occasions; Dr. Bill Ivey; Dr. Elizabeth Long Lingo; Dr. Mel Ziegler; JoEl Logiudice; and Garrett Morgan. I must extend a very heartfelt thanks to Dr. Scott Bridges, who has been a wonderful mentor to me, not just throughout college but to this day. He has always had a keen ability to ask questions that required my brain to think in different ways. vi His passion, his drive, and his belief in me were the turning point in my decision to pursue arts policy at the graduate level. The mentorship and the friendship he has shared with me over the years cannot be stated enough. The Creative Campus at the University of Alabama truly would not have happened without him, and I certainly would never have gained an academic interest in it were it not for his influence. Thanks to Erica Crabtree Mossholder, who not only served as a research participant, but has been a steadfast colleague and friend. Your passion and spark in founding the Creative Campus at Alabama contributed in large part to my ability to be a Creative Campus practitioner and have the interest and zeal to still be studying it today. Thanks to Katie Eckenrod, who sat up many late nights in college listening to Dz dz Ǥ Thanks to all my friends in the Ohio State Arts Policy program. You all have been wonderful colleagues and companions these past four years and given me insight into the depth and breadth of arts policy, art education, and art-making! Thanks as well to all my friends at the Ohio State Moritz College of Law. Your friendship and support for the past three years has been invaluable. vii Vita December 8, 1984 ............................................... Born Ȃ Tuscaloosa, AL, USA May 2007 ................................................................ B.A., English University of Alabama Tuscaloosa, AL 2005-2007 ............................................................. Founding Intern, Creative Campus University of Alabama Tuscaloosa, AL 2007 ......................................................................... International Affairs Intern, Ohio Arts Council Columbus, OH 2007 ......................................................................... Intern, Urban Arts Space Ohio State University Columbus, OH 2008 ......................................................................... Research Assistant, Prof. Ed Lee Ohio State Moritz College of Law Columbus, OH 2009-Present ......................................................... Graduate Teaching Assistant Department of Art Education Ohio State University Columbus, OH 2010 .......................................................................... Extern, Hon. Jeffrey Sutton U.S. 6th Cir. Court of Appeals Columbus, OH viii 2011 .......................................................................... J.D., Law Ohio State University Columbus, OH 2011 .......................................................................... Litigation Associate Bradley, Arant, Boult & Cummings Nashville, TN FIELDS OF STUDY Major Fields of Study: Arts Policy & Administration, Law ix Table of Contents Abstract ....................................................................................................................................... ii Dedication ................................................................................................................................... iv Acknowledgments .................................................................................................................... v Vita ............................................................................................................................................ viii List of Figures ....................................................................................................................... xvii Chapters: 1. INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................... 1 I. Background Information .......................................................................... 1 II. Brief Overview of the Cases .................................................................... 3 III. Research Significance, Purpose and Objectives .............................. 5 IV. Interview Guide ........................................................................................... 6 V. Scope and Limitations ............................................................................... 8 VI. Researcher Interest ................................................................................. 11 VII. Chapter Overview .................................................................................... 13 2. LITERATURE REVIEW: Part One, The Creative Campus Movement in the Arts Ecology & the Four Driving Inquiries ....................................... 17 I. Introduction ............................................................................................... 17 II. Contextualizing the Creative Campus MovementȄWhy Now? 19 A. The Historical Movement of the Arts onto Campus ............. 20 B. The Historical Next-Step of the Arts into Academe?Ȅ The Creative Campus Brand ......................................................... 24 C. The Many Roles of Higher Education in the Arts Milieu .... 28 1. The University as an Arts Patron ......................................... 28 2. The University as a Provider of Research and Development ....................................................................... 29 3. The University as Producer of Creative Capital ............. 30 4. The University as a Preventer of Brain Drain ................. 32 III. Justifying the Creative Campus MovementȄ