Silber's argument is that private universities and colleges, that he prefers to call 'independent', are really as much public as government-paid universities are since the public factor runs through all of their activities and manifestations. He goes on to laud the qualities of independent universities showing how they show a great record of diversity, how they contribute immensely to public education and professional contributions (in that, for instance, a majority of degrees are accorded to doctors, lawyers, and dentists), how they are careful and prudent in their activities, and, most of all, how so many of these independent institutions are becoming redundant and closing due to inability of expense to keep themselves afloat. Silber argues that in many ways they are more valuable to the public than public-sponsored universities are and that, therefore, it would be worth the...
Or 'public' for that matter.
Silber argues that since the private universities are "open to the public, serve public needs, and are gravely influenced by public deliberations" (158), they are, therefore, public, but here we are dealing with two different connotations of the word. The institutions may be 'public' in that they are affected by
public opinion, and so forth. That is indisputably the case, but the reality still exists in that they are private in that they are sponsored and controlled by private opinions and ownership, and students often have to pay full price or receive scholarships from these private institutions to enter these premises. These private institutions are private by the very premise that they are for-profit rather than non-for-profit institutions and/or that they operate according to personal opinions / beliefs that are shared by a specific population. A religious university, for instance Brigham Young,…
