<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<item xmlns="http://omeka.org/schemas/omeka-xml/v5" itemId="9156" public="1" featured="0" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:schemaLocation="http://omeka.org/schemas/omeka-xml/v5 http://omeka.org/schemas/omeka-xml/v5/omeka-xml-5-0.xsd" uri="https://caspercollege.cvlcollections.org/exhibits/show/school-of-social-and-behaviora/item/9156?output=omeka-xml" accessDate="2026-04-04T04:47:47+00:00">
  <fileContainer>
    <file fileId="9507">
      <src>https://caspercollege.cvlcollections.org/files/original/79296731ebaba03b19f7237023ccee6b.pdf</src>
      <authentication>7cbb600349f7f7ed4d392968882730e4</authentication>
      <elementSetContainer>
        <elementSet elementSetId="4">
          <name>PDF Text</name>
          <description/>
          <elementContainer>
            <element elementId="92">
              <name>Text</name>
              <description/>
              <elementTextContainer>
                <elementText elementTextId="96972">
                  <text>Why Cant a Firm Be
More Like a College?
by Chad Hanson

hy can’t colleges act more like businesses? For the
past century, legislators, boards of trustees, and pri­
vate sector leaders have been befuddled by academ­
ic traditions. The scions of law-making and industry have scratched their heads and
wondered why institutions of higher learning do not respond to the same prompts
and incentives that work well in the marketplace. In response to the long-standing
issue, Williams College economist Gordon C. Winston published the article “Why
Can’t a College be More Like a Firm?”' in 1997. In the years since, others have taken
up the same question. The Center for American Progress, for example, recently pub­
lished “Disrupting College,”^ wherein the authors suggest that schools
might benefit from a series of radical disturbances, of the type recently
witnessed in the digital economy. This report outlines the difference
between schools and corporations.
From an economic standpoint, important distinctions exist between groups
that pursue profits and those that contribute to the common good. There are also
fair questions about whether it is apt to conceive of education as a product, pur­
chased in the same fashion as a home or an automobile. Over the years, econo­
mists have explained that the mental framework we use to understand the market
may not apply when it comes to improving academics. Even so, I have noticed,
when a discussion of the difference between businesses and schools occurs in the

W

Chad Hanson is chair of the Department oj Sociology and Social IVork at Casper College in
Casper^ IVyoming. He also serves as a consultant/evaluatorfor the Higher Learning Commission,
and is, most recently, the author t^'The Community College and the Good Society
(Transaction Publishers, 2010). He invites correspondence at chanson@caspercollege.edu.

FALL 2012

THOUGHT &amp; ACTION

�field of economics, the tone is often apologetic. An astute reader can discern the
message written in between the lines: “We wish colleges could be more like firms,
but unfortunately, they are different.”
I do not seek to question the work of any particular economists. Rather, my
goal is to extend the comparison between the private sector and non-profit educa­
tion. In what follows, I move the conversation toward an analysis of organization­
al culture: norms, roles, and values. You should also note that I do not apologize.
On examination, it turns out, many of the features that make colleges unlike busi­
nesses should serve as a source of pride. In fact, colleges and universities possess

I do not apologize. On examination^ it turns out,
thefeatures that make colleges unlike businesses

should serve as a source ofpride,
traits the private sector would do well to imitate.

SCHOOLS MAINTAIN TRADITIONAL AUTHORITY
There are few institutions the American people trust and favor more than col­
leges and universities. Studies funded by the Chronicle ofHigher Education suggest
the only sectors of society that we appreciate more are the church and the armed
forces.’ In our culture, we endow postsecondary institutions with high levels of
esteem. The prestige that we afford to higher learning has bred confidence among
students, families, and the communities that play host to campuses. In addition,
schools benefit from the faith we place in not-for-profit groups. Non-profits are
expected to consider whether a course of action is appropriate or ethical, as
opposed to focusing exclusively on quarterly earnings.
Firms do not enjoy abundant trust or cultural authority. As a consequence,
they are often forced to reinvent themselves. Firms rarely rest on a stable founda­
tion of long-term support in the marketplace. Thus, “re-branding” is undertaken
by corporations looking to tack themselves favorably into the shifting winds of
consumer demand. For instance, Walmart changed its corporate logo six different
times between the years 1962 and 2008.'' The technique has proven successful.
Buyers reward businesses that change their image and product lines to match their
interests. By contrast, older universities that maintain a commitment to core val­
ues receive prestige, grant-funded projects, and a flood of eager applicants.
In periods of recession, colleges suffer alongside private businesses.
Nevertheless, in good times or bad, the nation’s schools receive more applications
than they can accept. Any business would envy the moral freedom to decide how
many customers they can serve without compromising their efforts. They would
further envy the chance to choose those customers from a pool larger than they

I THE NEA HIGHER EDUCATION JOURNAL

�WHY CAN'T A FIRM BE MORE LIKE A COLLEGE?

could accommodate.
In our culture, we value tradition. Unlike corporations, often pushed to reset
their identities, postsecondary schools are at their best when they preserve their
practices. In so doing, we take advantage of the traditional authority granted to
educational institutions. For example, even the faculty of the most business-ori­
ented schools don mortar boards for commencement. The ritual confers dignity
and respect. If we lost or gave up on our traditions, we would also lose our posi­
tion of privilege in society.

Our institutions appear staid and inflexible^ but in
practice^ they have produced the most important

innovations of the past three centuries,
HIGHER EDUCATION PRODUCES INNOVATIONS
For good reason, colleges work to safeguard their norms and conventions. As
a nation, we applaud groups that hold onto their values, but in the case of educa­
tion, the attention to history also creates an opening for detractors. Critics charge
that colleges are stodgy and unchanging. Such an assessment can make traditions
seem more like burdens. In our fast-changing world, we developed an appreciation
for dexterity, and we assume that businesses are nimble and innovative. That
assumption is questionable, however.
On the surface, firms in the private sector appear agile and inventive, but at
the heart of their enterprise, they are averse to taking risks. The reverse is true in
education. Our institutions appear staid and inflexible, but in practice, they have
produced the most important innovations of the past three centuries. Our most
significant advances in physics, astronomy, mathematics, and bioscience were not
attained in business. They were achieved in schools.’ There are at least two reasons
for the success of postsecondary researchers. The first is linked to organizational
goals, and the second relates to the terms of a professors employment.
Institutions of higher learning enjoy the luxury of pursuing the objectives
associated with pure science. The aim is to ask big, basic questions about the
nature of the world, and answer them as best we can. Business goals are different.
Because they focus on profitability, the employees of businesses practice applied
science. Corporations take the knowledge that we create in the academy and turn
it into goods and services. The result is that product lines are advanced, incremen­
tally, from one year to the next. We all benefit from these efforts, but the level of
innovation is lower than you find in education. The breakthroughs that change our
understanding of the world and our place in it occur in the not-for-profit sector.”
One reason for the success of university-based scholars relates to the job secu-

FALL 2012

THOUGHT &amp; ACTION

�rity that we afford to faculty. In education, we grant tenure, an institutional com­
mitment to long-lasting employment. That practice contributes to a culture of
innovation.' Tenure is liberating. We free professors to follow questions wherever
they lead. Regardless of the outcome, livelihoods remain secure. Albert Einstein
enjoyed the benefit of tenure when he produced the theory of relativity. James
Watson and Francis Crick used the non-profit facilities at Cambridge to discover
the double helix, and a group of mostly tenured faculty from the U.S. completed
the Human Genome Project."
Businesses do not grant tenure. To the contrary, for the alleged purpose of

The truth

businesses are risk averse. The real

breakthroughs occur in the laboratories ofstodgy old

universities.
increasing flexibility, businesses fight measures that would limit their ability to fire
personnel. In such a setting, scientists are discouraged from taking risks. Under the
threat of dismissal, private sector employees have an incentive to ask safe questions
and undertake projects with predictable results. For all of our talk about risk tak­
ing in the private sector, the truth is, businesses are risk averse. The real break­
throughs occur in the laboratories of stodgy old universities.

POSTSECONDARY INSTITUTIONS SUPPORT
DIVERSE LINES OF INQ_UIRY
In the time of the Roman Empire, the collegium provdded a place for scholars
to ply their various abilities. Colleges were created with the intent of bringing a
diverse group of specialists into a single location. Today, we often accuse academ­
ics of working in “silos,” but there is scant evidence to suggest that faculty work in
isolation. In fact, all over the country, colleges and universities teach freshman
seminars that blend a range of approaches to critical issues.^ Educators routinely
form learning communities that demonstrate how problems can be solved through
the application of multiple perspectives and methods; and increasingly, institutions
organize themselves around interdisciplinary departments.'”
In my own field of sociology, much of the innovative work is conducted at the
crossroads of multiple disciplines: social psychology, political sociology, and socio­
biology, for example. On occasion, academics wage feuds between disciplines. But
the overriding tendency is toward collaboration in pursuit of new, diverse branch­
es of knowledge. Interdisciplinary teams routinely break ground in both the arts
and sciences."
American businesses, on the other hand, have demonstrated a stubborn form
of single-mindedness. Oil companies, for example, have been reluctant to diversi­
fy their interests and expertise in alternative forms of energy. Some have gone so

a

THE NEA HIGHER EDUCATION JOURNAL

�WHY CAN’T A FIRM BE MORE LIKE A COLLEGE

far as to fund studies that cast doubt on the threat of climate change?* As a result,
American businesses have accepted defeat in an important new sector of the econ­
omy. China is now the largest producer of wind and solar power equipment.”
The American automobile industry has shown a similar reluctance to diversi­
fy its fleet. For the first widely available electric car, the American consumer must
look to a Japanese company, Nissan. Of course, there are economic reasons for the
reluctance to reach into new markets. Some of the reasons include capital invest­
ments in oil drilling equipment, and factories tooled up to produce internal com­
bustion engines. But there are also cultural reasons for our inability to extend

Faculty pursue knovjledge in all of its variousforms,
including the undiscovered. Some ofthe most

successful corporations havefollovoed this example.
beyond our historic focus. American oil companies think of themselves as oil com­
panies, auto manufacturers as auto manufacturers.
By contrast, universities have managed to avoid the constraint of a single pur­
pose. On campuses, faculty pursue knowledge in all of its various forms, including
the undiscovered. Some of the most successful corporations have learned from this
example. Companies like Apple and SAS gave up the office complex and the silo,
and have built campuses to house and motivate their employees.”

SCHOOLS PROMOTE DEMOCRATIC SOCIAL
RELATIONS
For close to half a century, American firms have struggled to make themselves
humane and democratic. Such efforts started sooner in Japan. Beginning in the
early 1950s, Japanese companies began to make use of the practices advocated by
W. Edwards Deming, management scholar and New York University professor.”
In a series of consultations, Deming challenged the top-down hierarchy of the
Japanese corporation. He urged managers to use the expertise possessed by
employees at every rung of the ladder. Deming suggested the formation of “qual­
ity circles,” social arrangements where a wide range of people come together to
discuss how their work can improve. Businesses learned a good deal about them­
selves through the use of quality circles, but more important, they discovered the
process made employees feel empowered, and in turn, those conditions led to
increased productivity.
In the 1970s and 80s, the concern with quality and participatory involvement
moved to America. Deming’s approach remained intact, but a new literature incor­
porating his techniques also grew up in the U.S., under the title of Total Quality
Management (TQM). Corporations such as Xerox and Motorola were among the
first and most successful practitioners of TQM. More recently, business organiza-

FALL 2012

THOUGHT &amp; ACTION !

�tions have been involved in pursuit of the Malcolm Baldrige National Quality
Award, a program of recognition for groups that engage their employees in
attempts to enhance quality."’
For the most part, higher education institutions have not been forced to go
through the same series of management revolutions—nor do they need to.
Postsecondary schools already practice shared governance. Compared to the hier­
archy of the corporation, the structure of authority and responsibility in schools is
relatively flat.'" Faculty senates and employee unions signify our commitment to
recognizing the value of broad participation in decision making. At the bargaining

Firms ought to consider creating a meaningfulform

ofemployee senate^ or better stilly they could support
collective bargaining.
table, educators have ensured their way in matters of promotion, academic free­
dom, and course management.
I will concede that the tradition of shared leadership has been undermined as
schools have begun to think and act like businesses, but the heart of the enter­
prise—the curriculum—is still the responsibility of the faculty. In the future, as
firms work to find a means to allow rank-and-file employees to control the nature
of their work, they ought to consider creating a meaningful form of employee sen­
ate, or better still, they could support collective bargaining.

GRADUATES IDENTIFY WITH THEIR ALMA
MATERS
The human mind likes metaphor. We like to think of things in terms of some­
thing else. Analogies are often illuminating, but on occasion, they are only partial­
ly appropriate. Other times they cloud and reduce our understanding of issues. As
a case in point, for years we have been trying to conceive of students as customers
but the student-as-customer metaphor is problematic. It nearly always leads to a
discussion of whether students are customers? Or products? Then the discussion
devolves into absurdity, because, of course, they are neither. Even so, we are a busi­
ness-oriented nation. That means we try to think of higher education as a busi­
ness. It also means that we treat students as if they were customers, but students
are superior to customers.
Students identify with their alma maters. They display school logos on sweat­
shirts, ball caps, and automobiles. Corporations like Nike and Adidas have
achieved similar levels of success in convincing customers to pay for the chance to
advertise their symbols. But most firms have a hard time convincing consumers to
advertise on their behalf The relationship between colleges and students is a rela-

THE NEA HIGHER EDUCATION JOURNAL

�WHY CAN'T A FIRM BE MORE LIKE A COLLEGE

tionship that businesses covet.
Students become attached to their institutions, and in some cases they are so
grateful for the opportunity to have been associated with a school, they make sig­
nificant donations to college foundations. They do so with the hope that their
alma maters will use the funds to make sure future students can enjoy the same
experience. I am not aware of people being so grateful for a pair of sneakers that
they have made a philanthropic contribution to Adidas.
The relationship between a college and its students is precious. It is a relation­
ship that should be respected and appreciated on its own terms. Attempts to con-

1 am not aware ofpeople being so gratefulfor a pair

ofsneakers that they have made a philanthropic

contribution to Adidas.
ceive students by means more familiar to business only reduce our understanding
of the role that colleges play in the development of undergraduates. If anything,
businesses should look for a new metaphor to help them understand their relation­
ship with customers.
Such efforts are in the works. Service-oriented companies have taken to refer­
ring to customers as “guests.”’’ The hope is that the new term will change the way
their employees relate to the public. If they knew what was good for them, busi­
nesses would aspire to hold a place in the minds of customers similar to that of the
place that colleges hold in the minds of graduates. Their performance would
likely improve if they thought of and treated their customers as if they were
students. (ED

ENDNOTES
1.

Winston, “Why Can’t a College be More Like a Firm,” 1997.

2

Christensen et al.. Disrupting College, 2011.

3

Selingo, “U.S. Public’s Confidence in Colleges Remains High,” 2004.

4

Accessed from http://walmart8tore8.com/aboutus/8412.aspx.

5

For example, see Davies’, Cracking the Genome. Op cit.

6

For a discussion of the differences between education and industry, wnth respect to long-term
goals and organizational structure, see Miller and Le Boef’s, Developing University-Industry
Relations: Pathways to Innovation Jrom the West Coast. Op cit.

7

Ibid., 4-5.

8

Accessed from www.genome.gov/10001772.

9

The most well-known interdisciplinary approach to the freshman and sophomore curriculum is
the case of Columbia University. See Bell’s, The Reforming of General Education. Op cit.

10

See Beachboard et al., “Cohorts and Relatedness: Self-Determination Theory as an

FALL 2012

THOUGHT &amp; ACTION

�Explanation of How Learning Communities Affect Educational Outcomes," 853-74 and
Jacobs, “Interdisciplinary Hype.”

11

12

Thorp and Goldstein, Engines ofInnoaation, 2010.

Roosevelt, “Critics' Review Unexpectedly Supports Scientific Consensus on Global Warming,”
2011.

13

Scherer, “The Solyndra Syndrome," 42-5.

14

Musil, “Jobs Stumps for Spaceship-Like Apple Campus," 2012; and, SAS, “SAS Incorporates

Green Principles into New Construction on Campus,” 2008.

15

For a thorough account of Deming’s work on the Asian continent, see Aguayo's 1991 volume,
Dr. Deming.' The American Who Taught the Japanese About Quality. Op cit.

16

A rendering of Baldrige Award history can be found on the National Institute of Standards and
Technology’s website at: www.nist.gov/baldrige/about/history.cfin.

17

Meyer, John W. and Brian Rowan. “The Structure of Educational Organizations," 1978.

18

Carroll, The Hidden Power of^our Customers, 2011.

WORKS CITED
Aguayo, Rafael. Dr. Deming: The American Who Taught the Japanese About Quality. New York;
Touchstone, 1991.

Beachboard, Martine and John Beachboard, Wenling Li, and Stephen Adkinson. “Cohorts and
Relatedness: Self-Determination Theory as an Explanation of How Learning Communities
Affect Educational Outcomes.” Research in Higher Education, 52 no. 8, (2011): 853-874.
Bell, Daniel. The Reform of General Education: The Columbia Experience in its National Setting. New

York: Columbia University Press, 1966.
Carroll, Becky', The Hidden Power of Your Customers: Four Keys to Growing Your Business Through
Existing Customers. New York: John Wiley and Sons, 2011.

Christensen Clayton M., and Michael B. Horn, Louis Caldera, Louis Soares. Disrupting College:
How Disruptive Innovation Can Deliver Quality and Affordability to Postsecondary Education.
Center for American Progress. February 30,2011. Retrieved from: www.americanprogress.org/
issues/2011/02/pdf/disrupting_college.pdf. Accessed March 5,2011.

Davies, Kerin. Cracking the Genome: Inside the Race to Unlock Human DNA. Baltimore, MD: Johns
Hopkins University Press. 2002.

Jacobs, Jerry. “Interdisciplinary Hype.” http://chronicle.com/article/Interdisciplinary-Hype/49191/ .
Accessed January 14,2012.
Meyer, J.W. and Brian Rowan. “The Structure of Educational Organizations.” In Marshall Meyer
and Associates Ed., Organizations and Environments. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1978.

Miller, Robert and Bernad Le Boeuf. Developing University-Industry Relations: Pathways to
Innovationfrom the West Coast. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2009.
Musil, Steven. “Jobs Stumps for New ’Spaceship'-Likc Apple Campus." Retrieved from:
http://new8.cnet.eom/8301-13579_3-20069915-37/jobs-8tump8-for-new-8pace8hip-like-

apple-campu8/?tag=mncol;txt. Accessed January 4, 2012.
National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST). Retrieved from: www.nist.gov/baldrige/
about/history.cfm. Accessed December 12,2011.

National

Human

Genome

Research

Institute

(NHGRI).

Retrived

from:

www.genome.gov/10001772.
Roosevelt, Margot. “Critics' Review Unexpectedly Supports Scientific Consensus on Global

,

THE NEA HIGHER EDUCATION JOURNAL

1

�WHY CAN'T A FIRM BE MORE LIKE A COLLEGE?

Warming,”
Los
Angeles
Times,
April
4,
2011.
Retrived
from:
http://articIc8.latimcs.eom/2011/apr/04/local/k-me-climate-berkeley-20110404/2. Accessed
November 9,2012.
SAS. “SAS Incorporates Green Principles into New Construction on Campus.” Retrieved from:
www.8as.com/news/preleases/greenbldg.html. Accessed January 4,2012.

Scherer, Michael. “The Solyndra Syndrome: The Solar Company’s Failure is More Than a Political
Scandal. It’s a Sign of the Times.” Time, 178 no. 14, (2011)':42-45.
Sclingo, Jeffrey. “U.S. Public’s Confidence in Colleges Remains High.” The Chronicle of Higher
Education, 50 no. 35 (2004):l,10.

Thorp, Holden and Buck Goldstein. Engines of Innovation: The Entrepreneurial University in the
Tvuenty-First Century. Chapel Hill, NC: The University of North Carolina Press, 2010.
Veblen, Thorstein. The Higher Learning in America: A Memorandum on the Conduct of Universities hy
Business Men. New York: Hill and Wang, 1957.

Walmart. Retrieved from: http://walmart8tores.com/aboutus/8412.aspx. Accessed January 19,
2012.

Winston, Gordon C. “Why Can’t a College be More Like a Firm?” Change, 29 no. 5 (1997):32-38.

FALL 2012 I

THOUGHT &amp; ACTION |

�</text>
                </elementText>
              </elementTextContainer>
            </element>
          </elementContainer>
        </elementSet>
      </elementSetContainer>
    </file>
  </fileContainer>
  <itemType itemTypeId="1">
    <name>Text</name>
    <description>A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.</description>
    <elementContainer>
      <element elementId="7">
        <name>Original Format</name>
        <description>The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data</description>
        <elementTextContainer>
          <elementText elementTextId="96983">
            <text>Print Journal</text>
          </elementText>
        </elementTextContainer>
      </element>
    </elementContainer>
  </itemType>
  <elementSetContainer>
    <elementSet elementSetId="1">
      <name>Dublin Core</name>
      <description>The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.</description>
      <elementContainer>
        <element elementId="50">
          <name>Title</name>
          <description>A name given to the resource</description>
          <elementTextContainer>
            <elementText elementTextId="96973">
              <text>Why Can't a Firm Be More Like College?</text>
            </elementText>
          </elementTextContainer>
        </element>
        <element elementId="47">
          <name>Rights</name>
          <description>Information about rights held in and over the resource</description>
          <elementTextContainer>
            <elementText elementTextId="96974">
              <text>&lt;div id="dublin-core-rights" class="element"&gt;&#13;
&lt;div class="element-text five columns omega"&gt;&#13;
&lt;div id="dublin-core-rights" class="element"&gt;&#13;
&lt;div class="element-text five columns omega"&gt;&#13;
&lt;div class="element-text five columns omega"&gt;&#13;
&lt;div class="element-text"&gt;&#13;
&lt;div class="element-text"&gt;&#13;
&lt;div class="element-text"&gt;&#13;
&lt;div class="element-text five columns omega"&gt;&#13;
&lt;div class="element-text five columns omega"&gt;&#13;
&lt;div class="element-text five columns omega"&gt;&#13;
&lt;div class="element-text"&gt;&lt;a href="http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/"&gt;http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&#13;
&lt;/div&gt;&#13;
&lt;/div&gt;&#13;
&lt;/div&gt;&#13;
&lt;/div&gt;&#13;
&lt;/div&gt;&#13;
&lt;/div&gt;&#13;
&lt;/div&gt;&#13;
&lt;/div&gt;&#13;
&lt;/div&gt;&#13;
&lt;/div&gt;&#13;
&lt;/div&gt;</text>
            </elementText>
          </elementTextContainer>
        </element>
        <element elementId="56">
          <name>Date Created</name>
          <description>Date of creation of the resource.</description>
          <elementTextContainer>
            <elementText elementTextId="96975">
              <text>2012</text>
            </elementText>
          </elementTextContainer>
        </element>
        <element elementId="51">
          <name>Type</name>
          <description>The nature or genre of the resource</description>
          <elementTextContainer>
            <elementText elementTextId="96976">
              <text>Text</text>
            </elementText>
          </elementTextContainer>
        </element>
        <element elementId="39">
          <name>Creator</name>
          <description>An entity primarily responsible for making the resource</description>
          <elementTextContainer>
            <elementText elementTextId="96977">
              <text>Chad Hanson</text>
            </elementText>
          </elementTextContainer>
        </element>
        <element elementId="44">
          <name>Language</name>
          <description>A language of the resource</description>
          <elementTextContainer>
            <elementText elementTextId="96978">
              <text>ENG</text>
            </elementText>
          </elementTextContainer>
        </element>
        <element elementId="70">
          <name>Is Part Of</name>
          <description>A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included.</description>
          <elementTextContainer>
            <elementText elementTextId="96979">
              <text>Chad Hanson Journal Publications, CCA 04.ii.e.2025.01 WyCaC US. Casper College Archives and Special Collections.</text>
            </elementText>
          </elementTextContainer>
        </element>
        <element elementId="43">
          <name>Identifier</name>
          <description>An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context</description>
          <elementTextContainer>
            <elementText elementTextId="96980">
              <text>CCA 04.ii.e.2025.01_ChadHansonPapers_19</text>
            </elementText>
          </elementTextContainer>
        </element>
        <element elementId="42">
          <name>Format</name>
          <description>The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource</description>
          <elementTextContainer>
            <elementText elementTextId="96981">
              <text>Searchable PDF</text>
            </elementText>
          </elementTextContainer>
        </element>
        <element elementId="45">
          <name>Publisher</name>
          <description>An entity responsible for making the resource available</description>
          <elementTextContainer>
            <elementText elementTextId="96982">
              <text>&lt;em&gt;The NEA Higher Education Journal&lt;/em&gt; is published by the National Education Association</text>
            </elementText>
          </elementTextContainer>
        </element>
      </elementContainer>
    </elementSet>
  </elementSetContainer>
</item>
