In a recent electronic discussion, provoked by a student researching "customer satisfaction" in Universities, Professor Jim Macbeth, objected arguing that:

QUOTE
The fitness centre is an apt analogy for a university, better than a supermarket or a factory. The fitness centre provides facilities, assessment, counselling and coaching. It invites you to put in considerable effort for your own improvement; you can’t blame the fitness centre if you don’t work hard enough to get fit. The centre does not sell you fitness. Likewise, a university does not sell you learning. It provides libraries, resources, counselling, lectures, tutors, assessment and a program of study. You make choices; you make commitments; you do the learning.



I agree with the Professor's viewpoint and objections, however there is a key difference between a fitness centre and a university (although, caveat lector, it is some time since I last visited either).

The latter offers a degree, certifying in a way that the student has been taught and more or less learned something, and then s/he uses that certificate/guarantee to find employment.

Beyond a handful of reputable institutions, it is sad to see quite a few schools, especially private ones, being reduced to fitness centres, or even supermarkets and factories (or being attached to those - for example higher institutions operating within hotels, clinics etc.) brandishing "employability" statistics and successful star graduates in career fairs.

We should not confuse what *should* happen, with what is unfortunately happening around the world: some universities are indeed selling certificates. Even in "life-threatening" sciences such as medicine. Many MBAs programs are also selling lucrative certificates, failing very few people. Others are selling visas and cheap labour (aka hotel 'trainees')

I agree that students should not *buy* education and learning, but many are,
or think they are, at least in "fashionable", "applied", or "employable" knowledge sectors
with tuition fees rising, academic wages standing still, and government funding falling.

Philosophically, I am one of those who believes education should be free for all,
and free of charge, but that would require a sea change in many countries
(or, as a pessimist would say, on planet utopia or at least "pandora").

Otherwise, you can not have the cake and eat it too. If you are paid (indirectly) by the student to offer services to the student, he/she is your (indirect) client, and 'the client is always right' hence the valid - sign of the times - if offending, demand (and budding industry) for client satisfaction surveys in academia?

The good news is that, as all such 'scientific' surveys, they can be manipulated at will...
The bad news is that they can be used by ruthless managers to ease out 'non-cooperative' academics.

Maybe all academics who object to being reduced to client satisfiers, should consider creating the equivalent of open access journals:
Open Access Universities!