Master of Arts, The Ohio State University, 2011, Arts Policy and Administration

The arts' place in the university is changing in response to the demands of the creative economy. Universities will be responsible for producing creative human capital in their graduates. The 2004 American Assembly provided campus-based practitioners with new language to pursue these goals when it introduced the “Creative Campus” terminology. This comparative case study explores the value of this naming language during policy formulation and implementation of two Creative Campus projects. Qualitative interviews, document analysis, and autoethnography are used to assess the value of a common naming strategy. A critical framework that crosses semiotics and the policy cycle is used to analyze the data from each of the cases. The findings suggest that a symbolically isomorphic naming strategy can be very effective in formulating and implementing a Creative Campus program because the name label provides cultural entrepreneurs with a tool to contextualize their work, frame the issue on the institutional agenda, define their work in juxtaposition to a prototypical schema, and gain legitimacy, understanding, consensus, and control of resources. This thesis concludes by suggesting that the shared signifier also offers an opportunity for a more formalized network of Creative Campus practitioners to learn from and engage in the labeling contests that shape the sign.

Committee: Margaret J. Wyszomirski (Advisor); Wayne Lawson P. (Committee Member) Subjects: Art Education; Arts Management; Cultural Resources Management; Language; Linguistics; Public Policy; Rhetoric