Search

While international alliances among research universities are relatively well established, the challenges for the small liberal arts college to execute a meaningful global collaboration can be much more difficult, due both to the much smaller size of the institution, its more limited resources, and its smaller and more intimate culture centered on undergraduate teaching and learning. A new alliance of liberal arts colleges known as the Pacific Alliance of Liberal Arts Colleges (PALAC) was established in 2021 with the purpose to better articulate the global components of liberal arts education, and to collaborate on key projects that will build collective capacity for student-centered liberal arts education that engages with the world's most pressing problems. PALAC contains nine of the best liberal arts institutions from across the Pacific Region, including institutions in China, Hong Kong, Vietnam, Canada, and the United States. This essay describes the origins, motivations, and context of the creation of PALAC, its member institutions, and some of the initial projects planned by the new organization, and goals for global impact for PALAC.

This paper examines how international education (IE) as a tool of government foreign policy is challenged in an era of new geopolitics, where China's growing ambitions have increased rivalry with the West. It compares U.S. and Canada as cases first, by examining rationales and approaches to IE in both countries, second, IE relations with China before conflict and third, current controversies and government policy responses to IE relations with China. The paper concludes identifying contextual factors that shape each country's engagement with IE, but suggests that moving forward, the future of IE in a world of new geopolitics is likely to be far more complex and conflictual.

This paper provides new evidence on educational inequality and reviews the literature on the causes and consequences of unequal education. We document large achievement gaps between children from different socio-economic backgrounds, show how patterns of educational inequality vary across countries, time, and generations, and establish a link between educational inequality and social mobility. We interpret this evidence from the perspective of economic models of skill acquisition and investment in human capital. The models account for different channels underlying unequal education and highlight how endogenous responses in parents' and children's educational investments generate a close link between economic inequality and educational inequality. Given concerns over the extended school closures during the COVID-19 pandemic, we also summarize early evidence on the impact of the pandemic on children's education and on possible long-run repercussions for educational inequality.

This paper describes the current criticisms of academic research collaboration between the US and China and proposes a university-led initiative to address those concerns. The article begins with the assertion that bilateral research collaboration has historically benefitted both countries, citing cooperation in virology as an example. The paper continues with a discussion of the criticisms leveled by several US government agencies against the Chinese government, especially with regard to the Thousand Talents Program (TTP). A close examination of publicly available appointment letters under the TTP suggests that Chinese universities are given wide discretion when it comes to defining the specific terms of scholarly collaboration. Along with additional supporting arguments, the paper concludes that the most significant violations of commonly accepted research norms are owing to the behavior of individual Chinese institutions and are not directed by the TTP or the Chinese national government. The paper then suggests several steps for addressing these issues at the university level, beginning with a convening of campus leaders from both countries.

When the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) came into fruition in the early 1990s, there were high hopes and expectations on what this emerging economic block could achieve. Although the agreement involved extensive conversations that led to regulations that facilitated trade across the region--the main intent of NAFTA--the same was not true for the higher education environment. Critics have argued that NAFTA's heavy focus on trade left little room for similar harmonization on issues like higher education. From this perspective, it is evident that if efforts to improve higher education are to gain traction in the trilateral relationship, they must be linked with regional trade and competitiveness. Yet even though NAFTA was not the vehicle for further cooperation on higher education, colleges and universities across Canada, Mexico, and the United States did embrace the opportunity and enthusiastically engaged in conversations that prompted trilateral collaboration. This article follows the key agreements that influenced and guided the early stages of NAFTA collaboration among higher education institutions, as well as developments that kept engagement across the three countries active. It also provides an initial list of areas in which future collaboration might focus. [The report was published in partnership with the Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs. This working paper will be published as a chapter in the forthcoming book, "North America 2.0: Forging a Continental Future."]

In her April 2010 NILOA paper, "Opening Doors to Faculty Involvement in Assessment," Pat Hutchings called for institutions to involve students in assessment, citing the potential to increase faculty engagement. In Curtis and Anderson (2020), the first author interviewed numerous partnership experts in both the United Kingdom and the United States regarding student-faculty partnerships and the extent to which students currently engage in the assessment process. Findings from the study make it clear that there currently exists little student-faculty partnership in assessment at the program- or system-levels. Combining existing research on partnership and the expert responses from the Curtis et al. study, we present a framework, based on prototyping, for developing student-faculty partnerships in program-level student learning outcomes assessment.

This study compares the differences in the mismatch between the education and occupations of immigrants in Canada and the United States, operationalized by over-education. It further explores how the cross-country differences may be related to the supply of and demand for university-educated immigrants and the way they are selected. Using comparable data and three measures of over-education, this study found that university-educated recent immigrants in Canada were much more likely to be overeducated than their U.S. peers. The over-education rate gap between recent immigrants and the native-born was much more pronounced in Canada than in the United States. In addition, while labour market demand was associated with a lower level of over-education in both countries, a greater supply of university-educated recent immigrants was positively associated with a likelihood of over-education among recent immigrants in Canada, but not in the United States. Furthermore, in Canada, the over-education rate was significantly lower among immigrants who were admitted through some form of employer selection (e.g., immigrants who worked in skilled jobs in Canada before immigration) than those who were admitted directly from abroad. Overall, this study provides insight into how the immigration system interacts with broader aspects of the labour market to shape the labour market outcomes of immigrants.

International students are critical to the competitiveness of American higher education in terms of financial, intercultural, and educational contributions. However, recent data indicates that the U.S institutions enrolled 31,520 fewer international students in Fall 2017 as compared to Fall 2016. At average tuition and fees of US$ 25,000, higher education institutions are likely to lose potential revenue of US$ 788 million for the first year of studies alone. This paper examines the shifting landscape of international enrollment from the lens of three overlapping Waves spread over seven years and takes a deeper dive into implications for American universities. Wave I was shaped by the terrorist attacks in September 2001 and resulted in slower overall growth in international student enrollment of 11% between 1999 and 2006. Wave II has its origins in the global financial crisis which prompted universities to search for self-funded students and experienced overall robust growth of 44 percent in international student enrollment between 2006 and 2013. Finally, Wave III is shaped by the new political order and intensified competition from English-taught programs in Europe and Asia which will slow down the pace of projected growth in international enrollment to 18 percent between 2013 and 2020. In this current Wave of intensified global competition, overall international student enrollment is likely to flatten or decline for most universities. While the reputation and quality of American higher education is admired and emulated around the world, resting on its past laurels will not be sufficient for attracting international students in the Third Wave. This means that universities must get proactive and strategic in reaching, engaging and supporting international students throughout their educational lifecycle. Demand for studying abroad among international students remains robust, however, increasing competition and expectations for value for money will requires proactive and concerted efforts to maintain the global competitiveness of American higher education.

At some future point, when a definitive history of the assessment movement is written, one of the most frequently cited, influential publications will be "Assessment Update" ("AU"). Since 1989, this bimonthly newsletter has been published by Jossey-Bass in partnership with Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis (IUPUI). It is no coincidence that the two most frequent contributors to "AU," Trudy Banta--"AU"'s founding editor and intellectual muse--and Peter Ewell, are also among the most prolific thinkers and writers shaping the scholarship and practice of student learning outcomes assessment. In this featured NILOA occasional paper, Banta and Ewell with the assistance of Cynthia Cogswell mine the pages of "AU" between 2000 through 2015 to distill the major themes and advances that characterize the evolution of assessment as a field of professional practice. [Foreword by George D. Kuh.]

This paper is the third in Pioneer Institute's "UMass at a Crossroads" series. This report takes a closer look at the university's growing dependency on increases in tuition and fees and expansion of out-of-state and international student enrollment to support continued expansion of the university. The first report examined whether UMass' continuing strategy of enrollment expansion makes sense given forecasts by the Western Interstate Commission for Higher Education of an 11.4 percent decline in Massachusetts high school graduates over the next twelve years. This study examines more closely the university's strategy of increasing out-of-state and international enrollment as a means of increasing revenue through higher tuition rates paid by this group of students. As this paper explains, UMass-Amherst made offers of admission to more out-of-state and international applicants to its 2015-2016 freshman class than it did to Massachusetts applicants for the first time in university history. Growing out-of-state enrollment is not limited to undergraduate programs at UMass. Overall, in-state students are in the minority in UMass graduate programs, representing 30 percent of the total master's degree student population. This study also examines state funding as measured by state support per full-time equivalent student (FTE), showing that Massachusetts' higher education institutions (including UMass, the state colleges and community colleges) receive the second highest level of state financial support of New England higher education systems by this metric, and also receive more than the national average. Pioneer Institute questions whether UMass' current strategy of increasing out-of-state and international enrollment is consistent with its primary mission of serving in-state students. Furthermore, this report raises the question of whether it makes sense to provide UMass with additional state funding for capital expansion if the intent of the expansion is in large part intended to attract and educate a rising percentage of out-of-state students. The recommendations of this report call for the Governor, state education leaders, the state legislature, and university leaders to consider whether UMass' current strategy of expanding the university's facilities and enrollment capacity in order to serve a growing percentage of out-of-state students serves the financial and educational interest of Massachusetts residents. [For "UMass at a Crossroads Part 1: Is the UMass Enrollment Expansion Plan Sustainable? White Paper No. 145," see ED598651. For "UMass at a Crossroads Part 2: Is UMass' Expansion Fiscally Sustainable? White Paper No. 146," see ED598659.]

Over the past two decades, public higher education has become widely recognized for its contribution to socio-economic adjustment. This paper probes its evolution in two large and affluent democracies, the United States and Germany, whose higher education systems represent distinct ideal types. The analysis argues that public authorities in both countries have liberalized their systems to spur innovation in the provision of higher education. Yet a broad convergence in associated market expansion has coincided with divergence in its modes and consequences. Tracing how the two countries' policy regimes have created path-dependent trajectories of reform, the paper contends that the institutions associated with each state's inherited role in higher education--"enabling" in the US and "constitutive" in Germany--have empowered different social groups to shape state action. Under the influence of investors and managers, institutional drift and conversion have pushed public higher education toward corporatization in the United States. In contrast, interventions by faculty and students have moderated the effects of institutional displacement and layering on the German system's stratification. Given the sector's growing importance, this analysis carries important implications for the comparative study of capitalist evolution. [A bibliography is included.]

Through a historical and comparative analysis of international education policy development in Canada and the U.S., this paper will map the similarities and differences in the two countries. It will highlight the contributions and challenges of the government's involvement in international education (IE) in the two federal states and in particular, explore the implications of the changing contexts, rationales and approaches for international education to the federal role in higher education. It will conclude with observations on the differential impact of the federal government's role in international/higher education on the higher education systems of the two countries and thus contribute to our understanding of how national specificities and characteristics outweigh the commonly stated policy rationales, approaches and outcomes for international education. [A bibliography is included.]

In 2011, the Council for Advancement and Support of Education (CASE) founded the Center for Community College Advancement to provide training and resources to help community colleges build and sustain effective fundraising, alumni relations, and communications and marketing programs. A goal for the center is to collect data on best practices at community colleges. This white paper summarizes the results of a survey on foundation operations at community colleges across the United States and Canada. The purpose of the survey was to help community college staff benchmark their foundation experiences and programs with their peers. Participation in the survey was strong, with representatives from 122 foundations in the United States and Canada having contributed data (approximately 10 percent of the universe of institutions). Their responses revealed that foundations have evolved into significant contributors at community colleges through consistent positive results, service to a variety of stakeholders and leveraging of political capital--all while maintaining a low staff count and limited expenditures. Two appendices provide data tables and the survey questions.

A defining characteristic of current U.S. educational policy is the use of data to inform decisions about resource allocation, teacher hiring, and curriculum and instruction. Perhaps the biggest challenge to data-driven decision making (DDDM) is that data use alone does not automatically result in improved teaching and learning. Research indicates that translating raw data into useable information and actionable knowledge for teachers requires not only adequate technical and social supports, but also an awareness of how educators in real-world settings actually use information to make decisions. Yet, little is known about DDDM in higher education, in general, and how postsecondary faculty make sense of and use data in their instructional decision-making processes, in particular. In this paper, we use naturalistic decision-making theory to generate practice-based descriptions of how 59 STEM faculty at three large public research universities used data as part of their course planning. Interview transcripts and notes taken while observing planning meetings were analyzed using an inductive approach to content analysis. In practice, respondents used different types of data and other information obtained from, for example, student assessments, end-of-semester evaluations, and conversations with colleagues. Results indicate that faculty generally collect and analyze data in informal, ad hoc scenarios ungoverned by institutional policy. Exceptions include disciplines with accreditation pressures and team-taught courses where structured (and supported) opportunities exist for faculty to collect, analyze, and reflect upon data about student learning. Thus, while numeric data are clearly viewed by this population of faculty as the most rigorous, in practice, even those that use quantitative data also use other sources of information. These results suggest an opportunity for educational leaders to design policies and professional development initiatives that facilitate a more formal collection of and reflection on data by faculty. In pursuing such technical solutions, however, policymakers and educational leaders must carefully negotiate the tension between rigor and relevance, and learn from the challenges experienced in the K-12 sector regarding DDDM.

Research suggests which study strategies are effective but little descriptive research focuses on how undergraduate students study in real-world settings. Thus, the mechanisms of students' actual learning remain a black box for the field of higher education, with far more attention paid to inputs and outputs of the learning process. Using a situative theory of cognition and learning, we analyzed data from 22 focus groups (N = 60 students). Results indicate studying is a multi-faceted process that is initiated by instructor or self-generated cues, followed by marshaling resources and managing distractions (or not), and then study behaviors that include selecting time, setting, and specific strategies. Underlying these behaviors are contextual factors including course material and students' personal lives. The results highlight the importance of self-regulation skills, particularly managing digital distractions, and we suggest that the development of these skills should be more frequently incorporated into instructional design and student support services.

This article examines institutional and demographic variables associated with successful joint partnerships between US and Chinese institutions of higher education. Understanding those variables requires an appreciation of overarching issues or catalysts bringing both nations together and, as well, how postsecondary environments differ and the implications of such differences for success. The authors do not assume complete alignment in the interests promoting cooperation between the U. S. and China, but a convergence of mutual interests. The paper discusses different operational realities leading to partnerships between smaller private and larger public institutions and the authors identify factors (forces promoting cooperation, need for alignment in organizational infrastructure, faculty support and what are referred to as "administrative nuts and bolts") associated with meaningful and long term agreements. Although it may sound trite, this paper argues an essential ingredient for success is leadership, but not in the traditional sense of the word as it is often used in academic environments. Leadership in this context entails using power and influence to change the status quo and assign resources to new ventures. The essay further argues that absent faculty support (which goes hand in hand with resources for faculty), partnerships will not flourish. Finally, the role of an "internal advocate" i.e., one who has the requisite organizational authority and stature, who can overcome organizational inertia, petty territorial jealousies and legitimize international cooperation using, in the best and fullest sense of the word, the "support" of the President or Chancellor, and sometimes the governing board, is fundamental to success. Bibliographic sources are provided.

This white paper analyzes the potential effects of requiring income-driven repayment for all federal loans as well as relying on paycheck withholding for loan payments, with particular attention to the implications for low-income students and families. The Institute for College Access & Success (TICAS) also examines the relevance and evolution of mandatory IDR ["income-driven repayment"] systems in Australia and the United Kingdom, and the paper includes specific recommendations to streamline and improve student loan repayment options in the United States. Two appendices are included: (1) Citation List of Figure 2: "Key Comparisons of IDR Systems and Context: U.S., U.K., and Australia"; and (2) Borrower Example Details.

In January 2011, the Lumina Foundation published its Degree Qualifications Profile (DQP) to challenge faculty and academic leaders in the U.S. to think deeply and concretely about aligning expectations for student learning outcomes across higher education. Since then, the DQP has kindled extensive discussions about what the postsecondary degrees granted by American colleges and universities really mean with respect to what graduates know and can do. But the text of the DQP itself provides only limited guidance to stakeholders with respect to assessment. In order to render the Profile's potential real, institutions and their faculties will need to develop consistent and systematic ways to gather evidence that the competencies that the DQP describes are actually being mastered at the levels claimed. In this paper, I explore some of what needs to be done in this area and provide a few tools and techniques (some of which are already in widespread use) that may help us move forward. In offering them, I invite faculties at all our colleges and universities to carefully examine what the DQP asks us to do in designing more aligned and integrated approaches to teaching, learning, and determining student competence--as well as to actively experiment with these ideas and techniques with their colleagues. (Contains 13 footnotes.) [Foreword by George Kuh and Stan Ikenberry and Afterword by Carol Geary Schneider.]

American universities, we are often told, are the best in the world. Rankings of schools worldwide done by organizations in both China and Great Britain consistently are dominated by U.S. institutions. More than half of the top 100 schools (and eight of the top 10) in the Shanghai rankings, for example, are American schools. A huge portion of Nobel Prize award winners are individuals with close associations with American universities. Foreign students flock to America to derive the benefits of U.S. institutions of higher education. College graduates, on average, command significant pay premiums over those with lesser education. On the surface, it seems like we have a great high education system that works beautifully. But below the surface, there are a large number of flaws in the system. In this paper, the author addresses what can be called the "12 inconvenient truths about American higher education." These truths are: (1) High Costs; (2) Not Engine for Growth; (3) College Degrees Don't Guarantee Success; (4) College Students Work and Learn Little, Party Hard; (5) Undergraduate Students Are Often Neglected; (6) Most Students Do Not Graduate On Time; (7) Colleges Hide Vital Information from Consumers; (8) Freedom of Expression Is Curtailed; (9) Colleges Are Not a Force for Income Equality; (10) Colleges Are Run to Benefit Staff, Not Students; (11) Federal Student Financial Aid Doesn't Work; and (12) Intercollegiate Athletics Is Costly and Corrupt. (Contains 2 tables, 5 figures, and 14 notes.)

This paper traces the history of two reform movements organized more than two decades ago to improve teaching and learning in U.S. colleges and universities: the teaching reform movement, led by the liberal philanthropies, and the accountability movement, led by the states and, later, the regional accreditors. The paper concludes that the teaching reform movement helped to dislodge research as the accepted center of academic life and helped to spread progressive education methods throughout academe. Both of these changes are consistent with continuing low levels of student effort and limited student learning in college. The accountability movement, by contrast, has had little impact thus far due to frequent changes in accountability and institutional assessment mechanisms, and the tendency of universities to comply only minimally with the demands of accreditors for increased accountability and institutional assessment. (Contains 18 notes.)

In the United States, developing "human capital" for both economic and social benefit is an idea as old as the nation itself and led to the emergence of world's first mass higher education system. Now most other nations are racing to expand access to universities and colleges and to expand their role in society. Higher education is growing markedly in its importance for building a culture of aspiration and, in turn, the formation of human capital, the promotion of socioeconomic mobility, and the determination of national economic competitiveness. This paper outlines a convergence of approaches toward building what I call "Structured Opportunity Markets" (SOM) in higher education--including diversified providers and expanding enrollment and program capacity. Increasingly, higher education systems in developed and developing nations, and in some cases, supranational entities such as the European Union and emerging cooperation among nations in South East Asia, will move to most if not all of the components of SOM, in part influenced by a global process of policy transfer. Those nations and regions that do not pursue major components of SOM will be compelled to present rational arguments in both domestic and international forums as to why they are not adopting some aspects of the model. The paper concludes by arguing that while the US offers structural and operational models for many evolving national higher education systems, the EU offers important insights on how to pursue higher education reform in the modern and increasingly competitive global context. (Contains 6 footnotes.)

Stagnant earnings and growing inequality in the US labor market reflect both a slowdown in the growth of worker skills and the growing matching of good-paying jobs to skilled workers. Improving the ties between colleges, workforce institutions, and employers would help more workers gain the needed skills. Evaluation evidence shows that training programs linked to employers and good-paying jobs are often cost-effective. Helping more states develop such programs and systems would help raise worker earnings and reduce inequality. (Contains 1 table and 41 endnotes.)

Higher education systems in Europe are currently undergoing profound transformations. At the macro-level, there is an increase in the number of students enrolled, subjects of study offered, and university missions that have gained legitimacy over time. At the second level changes are evident at the level of university governance. New Public Management reforms have put into question the traditional mode of governance that was based on the interplay of strong state regulation and academic self-governance. Under the current regime, new actors like accreditation and evaluation bodies or boards of trustees are emerging. At a third institutional level, profound changes can be observed at the university level itself. The university as an organization is transforming into an organizational actor, i.e. an integrated, goal-oriented, and competitive entity in which management and leadership play an ever more important role. In the following paper empirical evidence for social inclusion, new modes of governance and the organizational actorhood of universities will be presented. Furthermore, I will outline an agenda for comparative research. Although the United States is in all three respects a forerunner of what we are observing in Europe, the label "Americanization" is misleading. Instead, a global frame of reference as well as national path-dependencies need to be taken into account. (Contains 3 figures.)

Research universities throughout the world are part of a larger effort by nation-states to bolster science and technological innovation and compete economically. The US remains highly competitive as a source of High Tech (HT) innovation because of a number of market positions, many the result of long term investments in institutions such as research universities and in R&D funding, and more broadly influenced by a political culture that has tended to support entrepreneurs and risk taking. In essence, the US was the first mover in pursuing the nexus of science and economic policy. The following essay places universities within this larger political and policy environment by discussing market factors that have influenced knowledge accumulation and HT innovation in the US, their current saliency in the face of globalization, and the growing market position of competitors, such as the EU. The paper also provides observations on major US state-based HT initiatives intended to create or sustain Knowledge Based Economic Areas (KBEAs). Thirteen variables are used to assess the overall comparative ability for creating KBEAs, including the vitality of regional and national research universities, patterns of R&D investment, access to venture capital, intellectual property laws, educational attainment levels of the workforce, access and retention of global labor force, and political interest and forms of government support for promoting science and technology. Among the papers conclusions: There is a large disconnect in US policy related to promoting KBEAs and national competitiveness. Few policymakers, or even the higher education community are aware of stagnant and, in some states, real declines in higher education access and graduation rates relative to economic competitors, that the US is no longer a net importer of high tech goods, or that the US is no longer the number one destination for international students. Combined with global changes in the market for S&T talent, and the significant and increasingly successful effort of competitors to increase the educational attainment of their population, the US's HT advantage is eroding--although there remain a number of strengths, chiefly related to an entrepreneurial culture, more conducive tax advantages for business, a cadre of elite research universities, and the highest concentration of venture capital in the world. But even here, these advantages may wane over the next decade as the world becomes more economically, and educationally, competitive. The US generally lacks a broadly conceived strategy for retaining America's high tech advantage. "A Sample of the Frenzy of State Initiatives: 2007" is appended. (Contains 17 figures and 37 notes.) [A version of this working paper was presented at the OECD conference, "Globally Competitive, Locally Engaged: Higher Education and Regions" (Valencia, Spain, September 20, 2007).]

This paper builds on earlier reviews by the author of the changing roles and identities of contemporary professional staff in UK higher education (Whitchurch, 2004; 2006a; 2006b), and describes an empirical study that was undertaken between 2004 and 2007. It progresses the argument that the generic terms "administration" and "management" no longer do justice to the activities of these staff, and uses the concept of identity to develop four categories of "bounded," "cross-boundary," "unbounded" and "blended professionals." Via these categories it is shown how individuals are not only interpreting their given roles more actively, but are also moving laterally across boundaries to create new professional spaces, knowledges and relationships. The paper goes on to introduce the concept of "third space" as an emergent territory between academic and professional domains, in which "unbounded" and "blended professionals," particularly, are likely to work. It considers the implications of these developments for both institutions and individuals, and makes some comparisons with parallel groups of staff in Australia and the United States. Finally, it proposes that "third space" working is suggestive of future trends in professional identities, which may increasingly coalesce with those of academic colleagues who undertake project- and management oriented roles. (Contains 3 figures.) [An earlier version of this paper was presented at the Conference of the Society for Research into Higher Education (Brighton, UK, December 11-13, 2007). The study it describes was supported by a grant from the UK Leadership Foundation for Higher Education.]

This paper examines how higher education can contribute to Africa's transformation, reviews the challenges and priorities for higher education institution building, and introduces a proposed partnership program among African and U.S. higher education institutions to strengthen African higher education. In July of 2007 the National Association of State Universities and Land-Grant Colleges (NASULGC) and the Partnership to Cut Hunger and Poverty in Africa, and the Forum for Agricultural Research in Africa (FARA) in partnership with Higher Education for Development (HED), and the American Distance Education Consortium (ADEC) came together to form an initiative to strengthen African higher education capacity in science end technology for development in partnership with U.S. institutions of higher education. At this stage, the Initiative has identified several broad goals and capacity building priorities based on initial research and stakeholder consultations with leaders in Africa and the United States. The primary goals of the Africa-U.S. Higher Education Collaboration Initiative are to enhance and empower higher education institutions in Africa and the U.S. to contribute more effectively to African development and transformation and to increase the competency of U.S. higher education institutions in global affairs related to Africa. (Contains 2 tables and 11 footnotes.)

The idea of creating a national university is not new. More than two centuries ago, George Washington, James Madison and Thomas Jefferson advocated for a national university. Today--energized by concerns about the performance of civil servants and the need to recruit a new generation of talent into key federal, state, and municipal positions--a new proposal to launch a U.S. Public Service Academy has drawn much attention The proposal for a federally funded Academy is modeled on the existing military academies and would offer students a free four-year college education in return for five years of public service. In light of the need to recruit a new generation of talent into key federal, state, and municipal positions, two scholars debate the merits of a Public Service Academy. In "The Case for a U.S. Public Service Academy," Chris Myers Asch, a cofounder of the Academy, makes the case for the Academy by addressing seven critiques that are commonly raised against the idea. In "How Not to Fix the Civil Service," Philip I. Levy, a resident scholar at AEI and one of the Academy's skeptics. raises broad questions about the value and feasibility of tackling the public service challenge by launching a new institution. (Contains 33 footnotes and 2 figures.)

In the midst of the global recession, how have national governments viewed the role of higher education in their evolving strategies for economic recovery? Demand for higher education generally goes up during economic downturns. Which nations have proactively protected funding for their universities and colleges to help maintain access, to help retrain workers, and to mitigate unemployment rates? And which nations have simply made large funding cuts for higher education in light of the severe downturn in tax revenues? This essay provides a moment-in-time review of the fate of higher education among a number of OECD nations and other countries, with a particular focus on the United States, and on California--the largest state in terms of population "and" in the size of its economy. Preliminary indicators show that most nations have not thus far resorted to uncoordinated cutting of funding for higher education that we generally see in US state systems. Their political leaders see higher education as a key to short-term economic recovery, long-term competitiveness, and often their own political viability--particularly in nations with upcoming elections. Further, although this is speculative, it appears that many nations are using the economic downturn to actually accelerate reform policies, some intended to promote efficiencies, but most focused on improving the quality of their university sector and promoting innovation in their economies. One might postulate that the decisions made today and in reaction to the "Great Recession" by nations will likely speed up global shifts in the race to develop human capital, with the US probably losing some ground. The Obama administration's first stimulus package helped mitigate large state budget cuts to public services in 2009-10 and to support expanded enrollments largely at the community college level. But it was not enough to avoid having universities and colleges lay off faculty and staff, reduce salaries and benefits, often eliminating course offerings that slow student progress towards a degree, or making sizable reductions in access in states such as California. States have very limited ability to borrow funds for operating costs, making the federal government the last resort. "In short, how state budgets go, so goes US higher education; whereas most national systems of higher education financing is tied to national budgets with an ability to borrow." Without the current stimulus funding, the impact on access and maintaining the health of America's universities would have been even more devastating. But that money will be largely spent by the 2011 fiscal year (Oct 2010-Sept 2011), unless Congress and the White House renew funding support on a similar scale for states that are coping with projected large budget gaps. That now seems unlikely. The Obama administration announced its proposed 2011 budget in February, including $25 billion in state aid targeted for Medicaid. This is a modest contribution to states that face projected cumulative budget deficits of $142 billion in 2011, and there is uncertainty regarding the final federal budget. This is because Obama's proposal will be debated and voted on in a Congress increasingly focused on stemming the tide of rising federal budget deficits. Without substantially more federal aid to state governments, many public colleges and universities will face another major round of budget cuts. There is the prospect that higher education degree production rates in the US will dip in the near term, particularly in states like California that have substantially reduced access to higher education even as enrollment demand has gone up. (Contains 49 footnotes and 4 figures.) [A version of this paper was presented at the Beijing Forum, University of Peking, November 7, 2009.]

There is an extensive literature on the productivity of universities. Little is known, however, about how different types of leaders affect a university's performance. To address this question, this paper blends quantitative and qualitative evidence. First, I establish that the best universities in the world are led by respected scholars. Next, by constructing a new longitudinal dataset, I show that the research quality of a university improves some years after it appoints a president (or vice chancellor) who is an accomplished researcher. To try to explain why scholar-leaders might improve the research performance of their institutions, I draw from interview data with twenty-six university heads in the United States and United Kingdom. These findings have policy implications for governments, universities, and a range of research and knowledge-intensive organizations. (Contains 7 figures and 27 footnotes.)

Is public tertiary education really in a crisis, and, if so, what is the crisis about? This paper analyses international aggregated data and examines to what extent there has been a crisis of public tertiary education in OECD [Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development] countries in the past decade. It first focuses on relative enrolments in the public and private sectors to show that enrolments in the public sector have not significantly declined, and only marginally benefited the private for-profit sector. It then analyzes changes in the funding of tertiary education from the perspectives of tertiary education institutions, students and governments. It shows that only students can (to some extent) complain about a recent crisis of funding and of public funding of tertiary education. Finally, the paper points to other possible reasons for the perceived crisis. Throughout the paper, the differences in the structure of public/private enrolments and funding in the United States and other OECD countries are emphasised to help better understand the differences in tertiary education policy debates in the United States and most other OECD countries. (Contains 5 tables, 5 footnotes, and 9 figures.)

As the Latino population grows, the number of Hispanic-Serving Institutions (HSIs) in the US is expected to increase (Santiago & Andrade, 2010; Torres & Zerquera, 2012). HSIs are typically defined as 2- or 4-year, accredited, degree-granting, not-for-profit colleges and universities that enroll at least 25 percent full-time Hispanic students (Santiago, 2006, 2007). These institutions appear to play an important role in broadening access to postsecondary opportunities for Hispanic students, particularly in states where access to public flagship institutions is limited (Perna, Li, Walsh, & Raible, 2010). HSIs might alternatively be called "Hispanic Enrolling Institutions," as they are defined by enrollment, not by mission (Gasman, 2008). Thus, the extent to which HSIs are intentionally serving Hispanic students could be called into question, because most HSIs do not foreground their identities as HSIs (Contreras, Malcom, & Bensimon, 2008; Bensimon, Malcom, & Davila, 2010). Studies show mixed results as to whether faculty attitudes and Hispanic student experiences differ between HSIs and non-HSIs (e.g., Bridges, Kinzie, Nelson Laird, & Kuh, 2008; Crisp, Nora, & Taggart, 2009; Hubbard & Stage, 2009; Nelson Laird, Bridges, Morelon-Quainoo, Williams, & Holmes, 2007). To better understand how HSIs affect faculty, student, or administrator experiences, it is necessary to understand the characteristics by which HSIs meaningfully vary. This study addresses the research questions: What are the organizational characteristics, framed as structural-demographic, peer context, and organizational behavior factors, that differentiate among HSIs and make them heterogeneous? What, if any, of these factors distinguish among 4-year HSIs in relation to Hispanic student degree completion? Although about half of HSIs are 2-year institutions, the authors focus on 4-year HSIs in an effort to distinguish among factors related to bachelor's degree completion, defined in this study as the proportion of Hispanic students who graduate within six years of beginning college. Moreover, given the limitations in studies of Puerto Rican HSIs, they address the organizational characteristics of Puerto Rican as well as U.S. mainland HSIs. This study has research implications for differentiating among HSIs in future analyses and policy implications for understanding institutional factors related to degree completion in HSIs. Appended are: (1) Hispanic-Serving Institutions (HSIs) in 2008 according to Geographic Location and State (N = 141); (2) Hispanic-Serving Institutions (HSIs) in 2008 Used in the Study According to Geographic Location and State (N = 86); and (3) Description of Variables and Measures. (Contains 2 tables.)