Governmentality in higher education : a critical analysis of the National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE)

In this dissertation, the National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE) serves as a nodal point through which to examine the power relations shaping the direction and practices of higher education in the twenty-first century. Theoretically, my analysis is informed by Foucault’s concept of governmentality, briefly defined as a technology of power that influences or shapes behavior from a distance. This form of governance operates through apparatuses of security, which include higher education. Foucault identified three essential characteristics of an apparatus—the market, the milieu, and the processes of normalization—through which administrative mechanisms and practices operate and govern populations. In this project, my primary focus is on the governance of faculty and administrators, as a population, at residential colleges and universities. I argue that the existing milieu of accountability is one dominated by the neoliberal assumption that all activity—including higher education—works best when governed by market forces alone, reducing higher education to a market-mediated private good. Under these conditions, what many in the academy believe is an essential purpose of higher education—to educate students broadly, to contribute knowledge for the public good, and to serve as society’s critic and social conscience (Washburn 227)—is being eroded. Although NSSE emerged as a form of resistance to commercial college rankings, it did not challenge the forces that empowered the rankings in the first place. Indeed, NSSE data are now being used to make institutions even more responsive to market forces. Furthermore, NSSE’s use has a normalizing effect that tends to homogenize classroom practices and erode the autonomy of faculty in the educational process. It also positions students as part of the system of surveillance. In the end, if aspects of higher education that are essential to maintaining a civil society are left to be defined solely in market terms, the result may be a less vibrant and, ultimately, a less just society.

Critical evaluation of diameter increment modelling in the Great Lakes region

Simulations of forest stand dynamics in a modelling framework including Forest Vegetation Simulator (FVS) are diameter driven, thus the diameter or basal area increment model needs a special attention. This dissertation critically evaluates diameter or basal area increment models and modelling approaches in the context of the Great Lakes region of the United States and Canada. A set of related studies are presented that critically evaluate the sub-model for change in individual tree basal diameter used in the Forest Vegetation Simulator (FVS), a dominant forestry model in the Great Lakes region. Various historical implementations of the STEMS (Stand and Tree Evaluation and Modeling System) family of diameter increment models, including the current public release of the Lake States variant of FVS (LS-FVS), were tested for the 30 most common tree species using data from the Michigan Forest Inventory and Analysis (FIA) program. The results showed that current public release of the LS-FVS diameter increment model over-predicts 10-year diameter increment by 17% on average. Also the study affirms that a simple adjustment factor as a function of a single predictor, dbh (diameter at breast height) used in the past versions, provides an inadequate correction of model prediction bias. In order to re-engineer the basal diameter increment model, the historical, conceptual and philosophical differences among the individual tree increment model families and their modelling approaches were analyzed and discussed. Two underlying conceptual approaches toward diameter or basal area increment modelling have been often used: the potential-modifier (POTMOD) and composite (COMP) approaches, which are exemplified by the STEMS/TWIGS and Prognosis models, respectively. It is argued that both approaches essentially use a similar base function and neither is conceptually different from a biological perspective, even though they look different in their model forms. No matter what modelling approach is used, the base function is the foundation of an increment model. Two base functions – gamma and Box-Lucas – were identified as candidate base functions for forestry applications. The results of a comparative analysis of empirical fits showed that quality of fit is essentially similar, and both are sufficiently detailed and flexible for forestry applications. The choice of either base function in order to model diameter or basal area increment is dependent upon personal preference; however, the gamma base function may be preferred over the Box-Lucas, as it fits the periodic increment data in both a linear and nonlinear composite model form. Finally, the utility of site index as a predictor variable has been criticized, as it has been widely used in models for complex, mixed species forest stands though not well suited for this purpose. An alternative to site index in an increment model was explored, using site index and a combination of climate variables and Forest Ecosystem Classification (FEC) ecosites and data from the Province of Ontario, Canada. The results showed that a combination of climate and FEC ecosites variables can replace site index in the diameter increment model.