In this concise and informative book, higher education policy expert Rebecca S. Natow explores the how and why of the federal regulatory policymaking process as it pertains to higher education, financial aid, and student loan debt. Drawing on in-depth interviews with policy and higher education actors, as well as an extensive review of specific regulations and documents, Natow explains who influences higher education rulemaking and how their beliefs and surrounding contexts guide the policies they enact. She also examines the strategies and powers employed during the process, reveals how technology affects the creation of higher education rules, delves into the multifaceted implications of regulation for students and institutions, and discusses future prospects for higher education rulemaking.
The first comprehensive, research-based account of this important policymaking process, Higher Education Rulemaking will serve as a valuable resource for scholars, researchers, policymakers, and higher education professionals.
Rebecca S. Natow is a senior research associate with the Community College Research Center at Teachers College, Columbia University. She is coauthor of The Politics of Performance Funding for Higher Education: Origins, Discontinuations, and Transformations and Performance Funding for Higher Education.
This new completion agenda puts increased pressure on institutions to promote student success and improve institutional productivity in a time of declining public revenue. In this volume, scholars of higher education and public policymakers describe promising directions for reform. They argue that it is essential to redefine postsecondary education and to consider a broader range of learning opportunities—beyond the research university and traditional bachelor degree programs—to include community colleges, occupational certificate programs, and apprenticeships. The authors also emphasize the need to rethink policies governing financial aid, remediation, and institutional funding to promote degree completion.-- Jane Wellman, Delta Project on Postsecondary Costs, Productivity, and Accountability
Refining and expanding ideas Keller developed over his fifty-year career, this book is a clarion call for change. In the face of a transformed American society marked by population shifts, technological upheavals, and a volatile economic landscape, Keller urges leaders in higher education to see and confront their own serious problems.
With characteristic forthrightness and inimitable wit, Keller targets critical areas where bold thinking is especially important, taking on such explosive issues as the configuration of academic disciplines, the runaway problem of big-time sports, the decline of the liberal arts, and the urgent problems of finances and costs.
Keller expected this book to ignite discussion and controversy within academic circles, and he hoped fervently that it would also lead to real thinking, real analysis, and urgently needed transformation.
The growing gap in the rate of participation in higher education for low-income groups compared to upper-income groups over the past three decades, St. John finds, has been a direct result of the decreased availability of federal grants, even after taking into account such factors as an increased emphasis on strengthening high school graduation requirements. To reverse this trend, he suggests that policymakers refocus the debate over the public financing of higher education from taxpayer costs to principles of social responsibility and justice, along with economic theories of human capital. He then shows how improved coordination between state and federal agencies, expanded use of loans, and better targeting of grant aid can maximize access for low-income students while minimizing increases in taxes.
Making higher education accessible to low-income students is one of the crucial challenges for citizens and policymakers in the early twenty-first century. Refinancing the College Dream offers a theoretical and practical foundation for boldly rethinking the financial strategies used by colleges and universities, states, and the federal government to accomplish this essential goal.-- Joseph M. Cronin
Of the thirty-six states that have ever adopted performance funding, two-thirds discontinued it, although many of those later re-adopted it. Even when performance funding programs persist over time, they can undergo considerable changes in both the amount of state funding and in the indicators used to allocate funding. Yet performance funding continues to attract interest from federal and state officials, state policy associations, and major foundations as a way of improving educational outcomes.
The authors explore the various forces, actors, and motives behind the adoption, discontinuation, and transformation of performance funding programs. They compare U.S. programs to international models, and they gauge the likely future of performance funding, given the volatility of the political forces driving it. Aimed at educators, sociologists, political scientists, and policy makers, this book will be hailed as the definitive assessment of the origins and evolution of performance funding.-- Donald E. Heller, College of Education, Michigan State University
Written by leading authorities and drawing on extensive interviews with government officials and college and university staff members, this book · describes the policy instruments states use to implement performance funding; · explores the organizational processes colleges rely on to determine how to respond to performance funding; · analyzes the influence of performance funding on institutional policies and programs; · reviews the impacts of performance funding on student outcomes; · examines the obstacles institutions encounter in responding to performance funding demands;· investigates the unintended impacts of performance funding.
The authors conclude that, while performance funding clearly grabs the attention of colleges and leads them to change their policies and practices, it also encounters major obstacles and has unintended impacts. Colleges subject to performance funding are hindered in posting good results by inappropriate performance measures, insufficient organizational infrastructure, and the commitment to enroll many students who are poorly prepared or not interested in degrees. These obstacles help explain why multivariate statistical studies have failed to date to find a significant impact of performance funding on student outcomes, and why colleges are tempted to resort to weakening academic quality and restricting the admission of less-prepared and less-advantaged students in order to improve their apparent performance.
These findings have wide-ranging implications for policy and research. Ultimately, the authors recommend that states create new ways of helping colleges with many at-risk students, define performance indicators and measures better tailored to institutional missions, and improve the capacity of colleges to engage in organizational learning.