Hi there!
I have been reading Jennifer Rippner’s The American Education Policy Landscape (2016), and just finished reading her chapter on higher education. This is a wonderful read on who the stakeholders are in educational policy, as well as the current state of policy decisions in our nation’s community and 4-year colleges. One of the major stakeholders is our federal government, and the policies they enact are far-reaching and are backed with money. These policies go as far back as the Morrill Land-Grant College Act of 1862, the 1965 Higher Education Act, and of course, one of the more recent ones that is familiar to all educators, the 2002 No Child Left Behind Act. But one problem with any legislation is that without a champion for the cause, there is a chance that the next administration could scrap the program; these champions could include politicians, and Rippner states that “as of 2013, almost half of state system leaders had been in their positions for two years or less” (Rippner, 2016, p. 126). Fortunately, most schools are autonomous enough that they can wait out these continual changes in governance, but how are schools going to get enough traction to actually make progress and focus on big-picture issues? Rippner also points out that public governing boards show a “relative lack of diversity” (p. 127), meaning that educational leaders are most likely not representative of the students or faculty that they are supposed to be helping. Is there another way out of this mess other than hoping that status quo will lead to a miraculous improvement in higher education?
There is only brief mention in The American Education Policy Landscape of the role of private foundation in setting academic policies, but this was enough to spur me on to more research. One foundation that reader may be most familiar with is the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, in particular their Postsecondary Success program, ”whose goal is to dramatically increase the number of young people who obtain a postsecondary degree or certificate with labor-market value” (Gates Foundation, 2018). This program is funded by the Gates Foundation, in partnerships with colleges and universities as well as industry. The Koch brothers also donate millions of dollars to universities to support research and to “encourage students to engage with the ideas of free societies” (Charles Koch Foundation, 2018).
These two foundations both have clear overall goals supported by specific objectives, and they have long-term leadership that is not subject to replacement by voters or political leaders. In this way they are set up to set and maintain educational policies in ways that the government and publicly funded education just cannot accomplish. But at what cost? These foundations are both run by wealthy families, with some describing the Gates foundation as a shell for tax evasion (Drobny, 2006), and others saying that the aim of Charles Koch is to prepare “bright, libertarian-leaning students to one day occupy the halls of political power” (The Center for Public Integrity, 2018). I am not trying to diminish the efforts and results of these private organizations, but it is important to keep in mind that there might be other goals of organizations other than what is stated on their websites and press releases.
So, who should be setting policy for post-secondary education? There is no easy answer, but I imagine that it is going to fall on a coalition of both the government and the private sector. It will be interesting to research this more to see what other links I can find.
Thank you for checking in!
Rex
Resources:
Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation (2018). Postsecondary success strategy overview. Retrieved from: https://www.gatesfoundation.org/What-We-Do/US-Program/Postsecondary-Success#OurStrategy
Charles Koch Foundation (2018). Supporting scholars and students at more than 300 colleges and universities. Retrieved from: https://www.charleskochfoundation.org/our-giving-and-support/higher-education/
Drobny, S. (2006). The Gates and Buffet foundation shell game. Retrieved from: http://web.archive.org/web/20130912101039/http://www.commondreams.org/views06/0823-26.htm
Rippner, J. (2016). The American education policy landscape. New York, NY: Routledge.
The Center for Public Integrity (2018). Why the Koch brothers find higher education worth their money. Retrieved from: https://www.publicintegrity.org/2018/05/03/21730/why-koch-brothers-find-higher-education-worth-their-money
Hi Rex, I’m glad to see that your blog post highlights the influence by private donors and corporations into education, even if there was only brief mention in Rippner’s (2016) chapter 6. I think many of us would like to believe that corporations who donate to educational institutions are doing so for purely altruistic reasons, but unfortunately that isn’t always the case. As Rippner points out, there are many stakeholders involved in funding higher education, including federal, state and local governments, private donors or alumni. As individuals in a doctorate program in higher education leadership, I think most of us, if not all, believe that education for most everyone is always the answer, but unfortunately it’s a constant debate and struggle. Rippner states, “who pays for what tends to be a reflection of discussions about whether higher education is primarily a public and/or a private benefit” (p. 129).
ReplyDeleteI also appreciate your point about administrative turnover, and how it can have a significant impact on an educational institution and progress already made. My campus has been seeing a lot of turnover lately at the top administration level, some are even joking about it being the “interim university” due to short term appointments as bandaids until a permanent replacement can be found. Unfortunately, these top level appointments can take months to complete a hire, and as you mention, they may not stick around for the campus to reap the benefits of that investment. Those in the interim appointments may not feel confident in making large decisions, which stalls progress to a project, new policy or to the department or college as a whole even further.
Hi Rex,
ReplyDeleteIt's interesting that you brought up the issue of turnover with regards to policy making. I asked a similar question in last week's lecture - what happens when they money runs out. But we've seen entire programs cut because of a change in administration - and, on the other side, we've seen entire programs added because of a change in administration. Some educators that I know decide not to participate in new initiatives because they think they can just "wait it out."
I also picked up on the brief mentions of private partnerships, but I noticed Rippner (2016)'s mention of endowments and how they're used to pay for specific things. It's another way that policy is being made/changed - when people choose to donate and to what specific things can really change the campus culture.
Thanks for the thoughts.
Tracy