Students Are Not Customers

Jun 10, 2016 |  Peter Wood

Font Size  

  

Students Are Not Customers

Jun 10, 2016 | 

Peter Wood

Editor's note: A new article in the Atlantic by Columbia professor Jonathan R. Cole argues that a root of the problem with college students today is that they "have been increasingly treated as 'customers.'" We take the occasion to reprint an article by NAS president Peter Wood from 2008 in which he argued that students are not customers. We welcome Professor Cole's views on this and note that Joanna Williams' book Academic Freedom in an Age of Conformity also treats consumerism as leading to closed-mindedness on campus. Since Dr. Wood wrote the article below, the transactional model has gained much more traction. As tuition rises, families are becoming more wary of paying too much for too little. Colleges are worried about enrollment so they market themselves as catering to students' comfort. But this is a vicious cycle in that the more colleges treat students as customers, the more capricious students become and the less likely they are to place their intellectual growth above their personal whims. 

Another recent article published by NAS on this theme appeared in the Spring 2015 issue of Academic Questions, titled "Students Aren't Consumers" (link available to NAS members with valid access code), by Larry Hubbell. He writes, "The college experience should be focused on the pursuit of learning, not customer satisfaction. That pursuit is hindered when professors become purveyors and the students become buyers."
 

I first ran into the claim that colleges and universities should treat students as their customers about fifteen years ago.   I was then assistant provost at Boston University and was confronted with the mother of a student who argued that her son deserved better grades in his courses because he was our customer, and we owed it to him to provide good customer service. I disagreed. I told the mom that her son wasn’t our “customer,” but our student. And what we owed to him as a student was to provide good instruction and an opportunity to learn.                 

Once alerted to the “student as customer” trope, however, I began to notice it frequently. Sometimes it came from dissatisfied students, but more often from tuition-paying parents. But it also cropped up in service areas of the university, such as student life, and as a sales come-on for vendors and consultants, who seemed to grow more and more eager to convince us that, “the students are your customers.” 

The notion that students are customers has been swimming in university waters for a good long time. Is it a constructive way of thinking about the relation between students and college education? I doubt it. 

Students are - to embrace a tautology - students. That’s to say, the relationship between a college and a student is sui generis. It needs to be understood in its own terms, not twisted to fit the needs of a metaphor. It doesn’t need to be modeled on the relationship between merchants and consumers, or any other metaphoric arrangement. (Students are not constructively thought of as “patients” either, despite the urges of residence life and student affairs staff. Nor are students “clients,” “colleagues,” or “partners,” etc.) 

We have a perfectly good idea of what being a “student” entails. It is a hierarchical relationship between someone who seeks knowledge and others who teach knowledge. It requires some degree of humility and forbearance on both sides. Students have to admit that they don’t yet know; teachers have to admit that those who do not-yet-know-but-would-like-to are in a worthy position that deserves its own respect. We have a lot of practice with this, going at least as far back as Plato’s depictions of Socrates. 

Imagine if Glaucon had been infected with the idea of the “student as customer.”

Glaucon: Let me interrupt, Socrates. We’ve been down here at Piraeus most of the night with you gabbling on about an imaginary city. It’s been entertaining up to a point, but I’d like to know the “value-added.” As I see it, Socrates, you are just one more vendor in the agora and I’m a customer with a lot of options. So just a friendly warning. I’d like to see a little more attentiveness to my needs. OK? To start with, I’d like your lecture notes, and please organize them so I can get the main points without getting lost in the details. 

Socrates: What do you mean by “customer,” Glaucon? Am I selling something? 

Glaucon: I don’t want any of your rhetorical tricks. You’ll try to convince me I’m not your customer, but I know I am. Just remember, “the customer is always right.” 

Of course, we do have a pretty good portrait of the student-as-customer in ancient Athens in Aristophanes’ comedy The Clouds. Suffice it to say that the idea doesn’t work out very well for Strepsiades either. 

I am certainly aware of the lure of the contemporary version of this conceit. If only we could hold colleges and universities to a standard of responsibility analogous to the standards that rule farmers that try to sell tainted lettuce or bridge-builders who skimp on rivets. But the problem that colleges and universities often act less responsibly than they once did doesn't magically turn the student into a customer. The students is still a student in the profound sense that he arrives at college ignorant of a fair portion of what the college has to teach, and has to put aside his views and opinions long enough to learn. 

This is not to say that students can't or shouldn't stand in judgment of their teachers and their curriculum. Obviously than can and do. But they do so from a position of weakness, in that the college can always claim to know more and better. The asymmetry of this relationship is essential, even when it is grossly abused. Our focus should be on curbing the abuses, not on creating a new model of student who sees himself foremost as a consumer. The "customer service" model of higher education is an illusory path to real academic reform. What it will bring is what the majority of customers want: not an education but a degree with a maximum amount of extracurricular fun, easy academic standards, and programs that simply mirror popular culture. 

Dr Rammohan

| June 04, 2017 - 8:16 PM


Article narrates the reality. Students are being spoiled by calling them customers. Very nice article should be propagated.

DarkHelmet

| August 30, 2017 - 12:02 AM


I love how the academia world loves to make things in their world totally different from the rest of reality.  In the rest of the “real” world, when you pay for something, you are a customer.  Of course, in academia, as many in that world would have you believe, it doesn’t matter that you are paying the school - you are a student and definitely not a customer and therefore not entitled to the protections or benefits that being a customer entails.  And to justify this, lets go back a few thousand years because obviously everything that was done back then is completely correct and should be adhered to nowadays without fail or further examination.  How about this - if you don’t want students to be customers, then find someone else to pay for their education - be it the government or some other entity, but as long as the student pays for their higher education (even if that’s through loans since they will be responsible for paying them back), then students ARE customers.

Nonsense

| September 18, 2017 - 1:54 AM


Author assumes a worst case scenario or slippery slope to make his point. Thus, if/when academia treats students as customers, then academia can’t fulfill it’s mission of educating students because students will ‘demand’ that academia ‘treats the customer as always right.’ And when this is true, the author implies that educational standards wont’ be met. But this is a weak argument. It doesn’t necessarily follow that just because students are treated as customers that academia can’t follow standards that ensure that students receive quality educations. Merchant/customer relations are bound by all kinds of contractual, statutory and regulatory rules that may dictate what a customer may and may not be entitled to in a given transaction. So why can’t academia stand by it’s policies? Why does academia feel that because granting students ‘customer’ status means that they can’t uphold their policies and standards? In the ‘real world,’ if a policy or standard imposed on a customer is felt, by the customer, to be unjust then a customer may ‘discuss’ the issue and,if viable, use law and mediators to go further. Why can’t academia do the same? Academia already has ‘appeals’ setup for many facets of university/student issues.

What academia needs to do is not adhere to, as the previous poster noted, an antiquated mode of relations that robs students of rights but instead, to focus less on competitive marketing, which breeds’students are always right’ or an atmosphere where students are coddled. Academia should differentiate itself not not on ‘making students feel good’ but on providing quality education and it’s perfectly OK that standards of academic performance are expected of students in order to achieve this goal.

When one buys the services of private training companies that provide certification courses, there is simply no question that this is a merchant/customer relationship yet, education is being provided and an organization focused on providing good education, rather than sucking up fees, will fail customers who don’t make the grade.

The article seeks to elevate the ‘service’ of education above what it is- a service and fundamentally no different than any other service. Laws, regulations and statutes govern every aspect of when money is transacted on a ‘commercial’ basis and this includes education, law, medicine and every other sphere of where money is exchanged for a product or a service. It’s downright unjust to treat students as anything other than customers and to suggest it is utterly pompous, quaint and smacks of elitism.  Get over yourselves academia- you may roost in your towers contemplating your navels but you are no different than the rest of the world.