PART ONE-- Book Reflection-- State Postsecondary Education Research

I read State Postsecondary Education Research.  I read the book over the course of my fall travels-- it was the perfect book to read in airports and during take-off and landing.  I just regret not summarizing each chapter earlier :(  This book was edited by Kathleen Shaw and Donald Heller, and each chapter looked at different policies or studies.

In the acknowledgements, the editors indicated that this book came together as a result of a panel on the challenges of conducting state-level policy research.

Introduction-- The Challenges of Comparative State-Level Higher Education
US is distinct because it has very limited federal oversight and control of postsecondary education.  States differ greatly in governance and control of higher ed.  Researchers become excited with these because they are really able to research and see differences and what are the best practices.  The book provides good examples of cross-state higher education policy research.

One-- Incorporating Political Indicators into Comparative State Study of Higher Education Policy 
--Examine the conceptual, methodological, and practical opportunities associated with collecting political-system data and integrating data into comparative analysis (pg. 4). Review policy innovation and literature

Most research has been focused on policy effects rather than determinants, and ignoring these political determinants can be problematic.  The framework spelled out from the authors views states as individual policy actors and agents of influence in a larger social system-- shows theory of a loosely coupled system.

Policy innovation and diffusion-- states adopt policy because of demographic, socioeconomic  and political features, and their ability to influence one another's behavior.  --innovation and diffusion

In a linear model of 500 universities over 11 years, it was found that increased representation of African Americans and Latinos in legislatures positively influenced level of minority student enrollment at public universities ( pg. 17)-- this shows by changing those who have the power and make policies really does have an effect on who policies are made for

Regulatory coordinating boards-- Lowry found that states with these boards charge lower tuition!  Something for other states to consider perhaps??  Lowry's work also saw that with the principal-agent theory, certain government boards in higher education might advance interests of some stakeholders over others (example given-- academic over elected officials).  I think this is a good thing-- should academics be held higher than elected officials?

pg 26-- much research says that a policy is a policy is a policy, meaning that they think it's the same in each state.  BUT even if states adopt identical policies, they will be enacted in very different ways!

Huge analytic challenges-- why states do what they do

Two-- Can Access to Community Colleges for Low-Income Adults be Improved?
-- looking at Bridges to Opportunity Initiative-- examined project geared at improving education in two-year sector (pg. 5)

The first line of the chapter asks, "Is it possible to develop a single model of policy change that applies across multiple and diverse states?"  I wrote no right in the book.  This case study looks at the Bridges to Opportunity Program -- the model used for the research uses a broad range of stake holders-- from local to state level.  For the policy change process, the goal is to engage key stakeholders.

pg 39-- community colleges will best be served if state agencies worked closer with workforce development agencies-- so true!!  The model uses top-down and bottom-up approaches, so it emphasized the interaction between the different stakeholders.  A huge thing is to engage these stake holders.

One example that is also an exception is the state of Ohio-- they were able to do things very quickly due to strong legislative backing.  Where with Louisiana, the community college system was already weary of legislative influence, so what happened in the past certainly affected future policies.

From the research, it was determined that one model of change would not work as a generalizable model from state to state.  States that have a more-well established community college system have a stronger change of success in adopting these policies.

Three-- The Role of Higher Education in State Budgets?
-- Role of higher education in state budgets

This chapter mirrors much of what was discussed in Fowler and in class-- state budgets use higher education as a balance wheel.  When things aren't going well, less funding is given to higher ed because they know schools can make up this revenue with tuition.  When times are good, more money is put into higher ed as to make up for the difference.  However, who is this really hurting?  I think it's hurting those paying additional tuition when personal and family finances cannot really support the increases in tuition/additional loans and debt.

pg- 57-- interesting to note-- using competing interest theory, Medicaid competes with higher education, and when corrections funding increases, so does spending in higher education.

Hovey's hypothesis suggests that in good times, higher ed appropriations will increase more than other budget categories, and this will only occur for higher ed (as compared to other budget lines).  Other potential competitions are K-12 education, corrections, and healthcare.  Results show conformity to the balance wheel model.  Looking at the data, the hypothesis is correct!! (and provides general support).  However, the balance wheel test did not work for health care, corrections, and K-12 education.  For health care and corrections, it is a linear model BUT with K-12, it is much more complicated than the balance wheel model.

Takeaways from this is that public universities need to build reserves, and include discussions of stability across years in negotiations with the state for funding.