Institutions and the individuals therein are influenced by their cultural surroundings, even as they attempt to change or reform the wider society of which they are a part. Pool maintains, correctly I believe, that technology has not always been as much of a determinant in history as its advocates and critics often claim. Competing, often countervailing influences, including seemingly unrelated accidents of history and conservative resistance to change, affect the speed with which technological change can take place, or even whether it will happen at all. The main topic of his book is the nuclear power industry, although the author cites many examples from other technologies.
Colleges attempt to change society, of course, but they are in turn influenced by that society.
Standardization on a few powerful and compatible programs makes good sense for colleges, and makes good money for Microsoft, just as the consolidation of small railroads in the last century lowered some long-distance shipping rates and made very good money for the surviving railroad magnates. Microsoft's marketing strategy is obviously working. Our curriculum committee recently approved a proposal from our information systems faculty to stop teaching some obsolete programming languages like RPG, which were in demand just a few years ago, but for which little need now exists. The argument for the benefits of standardization on one system of hardware and software was also used for many of the examples cited above. Schools and colleges rushed to offer courses keyed to now-defunct technology, much as colleges are lining up today to aid and abet Microsoft's current claim to be the dominant standard.