22
Quality, Profit, and the Public Good Tensions in Cross-Border Delivery of Higher Education Kevin Kinser Department of Educational Administration and Policy Studies University at Albany State University of New York

Quality, Profit, and the Public Good Tensions in Cross-Border Delivery of Higher Education

  • Upload
    nixie

  • View
    25

  • Download
    1

Embed Size (px)

DESCRIPTION

Quality, Profit, and the Public Good Tensions in Cross-Border Delivery of Higher Education. Kevin Kinser Department of Educational Administration and Policy Studies University at Albany State University of New York. Quality. Standard Pre-defined criteria: Implicit or explicit Measurement - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Citation preview

Page 1: Quality, Profit, and the Public Good Tensions in Cross-Border Delivery of Higher Education

Quality, Profit, and the Public GoodTensions in Cross-Border Delivery of Higher Education

Kevin KinserDepartment of Educational Administration and Policy Studies

University at Albany

State University of New York

Page 2: Quality, Profit, and the Public Good Tensions in Cross-Border Delivery of Higher Education

Quality

• Standard– Pre-defined criteria: Implicit or explicit

• Measurement– Data collection and reporting

• Assessment– Judgment: what is good

Page 3: Quality, Profit, and the Public Good Tensions in Cross-Border Delivery of Higher Education

Quality Assurance

• External evaluation• Community norms• Public confidence

• Who is evaluating?• Whose norms?• Which public?

Quality Insurance?

Page 4: Quality, Profit, and the Public Good Tensions in Cross-Border Delivery of Higher Education

Profit

• Revenue – Expenses = Surplus

• Fee-based, unsubsidized = Private

• Shareholder/owner compensation = Profit

Distinction: Home or Cross-Border location?

Page 5: Quality, Profit, and the Public Good Tensions in Cross-Border Delivery of Higher Education

Public Good

• Higher education should contribute to the realization of significant public ends (Kezar, et al, 2005)

• Benefits accrue to society as a whole

• Contemporary Challenges– expanding private sector, privatization– economic, competitiveness rationale

Public benefits in a global market?

Page 6: Quality, Profit, and the Public Good Tensions in Cross-Border Delivery of Higher Education

Endemism

• Natural to or characteristic of a specific place

• Belonging to a particular people or country

• Restricted or peculiar to a locality or region

• Prevalent in a specific field, area, or environment

Page 7: Quality, Profit, and the Public Good Tensions in Cross-Border Delivery of Higher Education

Organizational Endemism

• Organizations are embedded in a physical location and uniquely situated to thrive within its context

• Relationship between the geopolitical environment and the organization– structures, associations, and economic

conditions connected with a particular region

Adapted from Lane & Kinser, 2008

Page 8: Quality, Profit, and the Public Good Tensions in Cross-Border Delivery of Higher Education

Endemic Higher Education

• Higher education has traditionally been geographically focused and state supported

• Borders are important– define the boundaries of institutional service

– define the scope of political sponsorship

• Legally, economically, and culturally linked to their native geopolitical environment.

Page 9: Quality, Profit, and the Public Good Tensions in Cross-Border Delivery of Higher Education

Non-Endemic Academics

• Higher education operating outside of its geopolitical home base

• Requires adaptation to the new environment

• Tests resiliency of existing systems and procedures (e.g., quality assurance)

Cross-border activity

Invasive or Cultivar?

Page 10: Quality, Profit, and the Public Good Tensions in Cross-Border Delivery of Higher Education

Endemic Quality Assurance

• Place of origin matters

• Establish trust in the source

• Regulate the delivery

• Importing higher education– Acceptable, creditable, valuable

• Exporting higher education– Protection of the national “brand”

Page 11: Quality, Profit, and the Public Good Tensions in Cross-Border Delivery of Higher Education

Cross-Border Models

• Branch campus• Foreign ownership• Curriculum supply

• Joint venture• Distance education• Partnerships

Ubiquitously private, increasingly for-profit

Page 12: Quality, Profit, and the Public Good Tensions in Cross-Border Delivery of Higher Education

U.S. Case: Regulatory Triad

• Federal oversight: Accountability

• State registration: Approval

• Accreditation review: Quality Assurance– voluntary– non-governmental– multiple agencies

Page 13: Quality, Profit, and the Public Good Tensions in Cross-Border Delivery of Higher Education

U.S. “Domestic” Cross-Border

• Each state represents a distinctive regulatory environment

• Endemic higher education the norm– Public, private, for-profit institutions typically

operate in a single state

• Relatively permeable borders– U.S. Constitution Commerce clause

• Non-endemic is a private activity

Page 14: Quality, Profit, and the Public Good Tensions in Cross-Border Delivery of Higher Education

U.S. Non-endemic examples

• Public– Troy University: 8 fed, 15 states; SACS– University of Toledo: 1 fed, 1 state; HLC

• Private– Webster University: 1 fed, 20 states; HLC– Western Governors Univ: 1 fed, 48 states; NW, DETC

• For-profit– Strayer University: 60 fed, 15 states; MSA– Kaplan College/Univ: 33 fed, 20 states; HLC, ACICS,

ACCSCT, DETC

Page 15: Quality, Profit, and the Public Good Tensions in Cross-Border Delivery of Higher Education

Quality Confusion

• Triad pressured by non-endemic higher education– States serve as inconsistent regulators

• limited control of exporting

• variable oversight of importing

– Multiple accreditation options provide conflicting standards; compliance concerns

– Feds unconcerned with locations

Page 16: Quality, Profit, and the Public Good Tensions in Cross-Border Delivery of Higher Education

Why Private Matters

• Control separated from geography

• Financial incentives and market pressures encourage expansion

• Public good competes with private benefit

• Quality assurance as operating expense– Argument for legitimacy

Page 17: Quality, Profit, and the Public Good Tensions in Cross-Border Delivery of Higher Education

“A generalized perception or assumption that the actions of an entity are desirable, proper, or appropriate within some socially constructed system of norms, values, beliefs, and definitions.” (Suchman, 1995)

Quality and Legitimacy

Page 18: Quality, Profit, and the Public Good Tensions in Cross-Border Delivery of Higher Education

“A generalized perception or assumption that the actions of an entity are desirable, proper, or appropriate within some socially constructed system of norms, values, beliefs, and definitions.” (Suchman, 1995)

Quality and Legitimacy

Page 19: Quality, Profit, and the Public Good Tensions in Cross-Border Delivery of Higher Education

“A generalized perception or assumption that the actions of an entity are desirable, proper, or appropriate within some socially constructed system of norms, values, beliefs, and definitions.” (Suchman, 1995)

Quality and Legitimacy

Page 20: Quality, Profit, and the Public Good Tensions in Cross-Border Delivery of Higher Education

“A generalized perception or assumption that the actions of an entity are desirable, proper, or appropriate within some socially constructed system of norms, values, beliefs, and definitions.” (Suchman, 1995)

Quality and Legitimacy

Page 21: Quality, Profit, and the Public Good Tensions in Cross-Border Delivery of Higher Education

International Implications

• Permeable borders encourage non-endemic activity

• Public institutions not distinctive from private, for-profit

• Borders remain barriers to state oversight• Endemic quality assurance may not adequately

address non-endemic functions• Even in a robust regulatory environment, non-

endemic institutions can control the process

Page 22: Quality, Profit, and the Public Good Tensions in Cross-Border Delivery of Higher Education

Conclusion