The importance of higher education in societal advancement cannot be overstated. A nation’s social and economic development in the 21 st century is pegged on its investment in higher education ( Etzkowitz et al., 2000 ). This is because higher education acts as a focal point for knowledge generation and application. These elements contribute to both economic development and growth by building skills and fostering innovation. Further, higher education improves the quality of life of individuals and acts as the basis for resolution of the world’s most pressing challenges. Thus, the educational and intellectual roles of institutions of higher learning and societal development cannot be decoupled. Besides, higher education is associated with improved well-being and higher standards of living ( Stearns, 2017 ). It is crucial for governments to not only invest in the creation of knowledge but also to promote its diffusion. Several issues often influence higher education. These include a dministrative and r egulatory f orces , various economic responses, and government efforts. This personal reflection seeks to explore these issues.
Impact of Administrative and Regulatory Forces on Higher Education
Today, institutions of higher education are amongst the most broadly regulated entities. In the United States (U.S), federal executive regulation is used to regulate most facets of higher education administration. However, traditionally, this was not the case since these institutions were exempted from all forms of federal regulation. This position changed with the involvement of states in the functioning of higher education. The federal government used the Fourteenth Amendment to justify its regulatory role ( Stearns, 2017 ). Several reasons justified this involvement. Firstly, the federal government injected a significant amount of research money into universities. Thus, the government formulated various regulations to protect its contribution and ensure that research would be conducted honestly and with integrity. Secondly, federal regulation of institutions of higher education was justified by the application of such non-discriminatory and equal opportunity laws as the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Thirdly, increased federal funding meant that Congress had a role to play in ensuring that taxpayers’ money was being put to proper use. The regulation also extends to the private institutions of higher education since they are for-profit entities. Consequently, they are subjected to the Internal Revenue Code and regulated by the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) ( Stearns, 2017 ).
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Impacts of the a dministrative and r egulatory f orces on h igher e ducatio n are multifaceted. On the one hand, these forces are not only costly but have also been deemed ineffective in attaining the congressional objectives. On the other hand, they represent a deviation from such constitutional doctrines as delegation doctrine, concepts of federalism, and separation of powers ( Stearns, 2017 ; Etzkowitz et al., 2000). The legislation and enforcement of policy objectives for higher education also form an inflexible and rigid framework within which the universities and colleges have to operate. Compliance with these demands is both costly and ineffective. While the government’s administrative and regulatory forces are well-intended, it has led to increased spending, commercialization, and taxation of colleges and universities. Such legislations as the Administrative Procedures Act and Higher Education Opportunity Act of 2008 have unprecedented impacts on the operations of higher education institutions. An alternative approach would be one that entails ensuring that federal agencies have less discretion when it comes to rulemaking, allowing flexible regulation, and enhancing cooperative federalism.
Effectiveness of Economic Responses on the Field of Higher Education
Higher education in the U.S is currently viewed as a commercial industry and colleges, and universities are expected to respond accordingly to this reality ( Etzkowitz et al., 2000 ). The reasons for this perception are fourfold. Firstly, the cost of attending university has risen considerably. This is coupled with increased consumer price index and stagnation of the average wages’ purchasing power. The increased cost of higher education is attributed to several key factors. These include increased rates of enrolment despite the high cost of tuition; monopolization of the sector due to the difficulties and restrictions of establishing an institution of higher learning; and presence of financial aid for students through governmental support. In this context, students are reduced into consumers who have to explore options of acquiring an education cost-effectively. Secondly, with the transition of higher education into a private as opposed to a common good implies that tuition has to rise ( Etzkowitz et al., 2000 ). While conservatives argue that students should pay for their education, the liberals reckon that the government should step in and offer support. Thirdly, owing to increased immediate demands compared to the past, institutions of higher education are expected to be efficient enterprises. With the projected future decline in government funding, these institutions' operational model has to be efficient. Lastly, the institutions have turned into regionally accredited and investor-funded entities with the emergence of the for-profit model ( Etzkowitz et al., 2000) . While some view this as a viable model, others reckon that it is a capitalist enterprise that is anchored on market cycles.
In many countries, students are expected to pay for tuition either via their families or through a loan. The latter is based on the premise that they can pay the loan upon graduation. Due to limited public resources, policymakers reckon that the rich should pay more to ease the burden on resource-constrained households ( Johnstone , 2004 ). However, gaps exist with regard to additional revenue that the institutions would need versus the resources required for the underprivileged learners. Moreover, the role of politics in the matter cannot be overstated. In cases where all students are expected to pay a standard figure irrespective of their families’ socioeconomic status, the well-off learners are at an advantage ( Johnstone , 2004 ). This is because while they can contribute more, they are not compelled to. In countries with elevated inequality levels and limited resources, the rich are still advantaged. The imposition of standard tuition figure in countries with low levels of inequality and higher access to resources is also bound to be problematic in case of shrinking and limited public funds.
T he Role of Government in Higher Education
The challenges associated with higher education across the globe have led to increased scrutiny from various stakeholders. Consequently, the role of governments has come to fore in this discourse. Despite the focus on governments, it is crucial to understand that higher education should be viewed as a partnership between the individual institutions, the government and other concerned stakeholders ( Shanahan & Jones , 2007; Leydesdorff & Etzkowitz , 2001; Etzkowitz et al., 2000 ). Each of these entities has a vital role to play in shaping higher education. The government, in particular, has been instrumental in promoting access to higher education for non-traditional and low-income learners ( Shanahan & Jones , 2007 ). This has been achieved through the provision of financial aid and various related policies. The government has also been at the forefront of promoting student completion and success. While access to higher education is essential, it doesn't imply students have everything they need to succeed. Thus, the government has a role to play in advancing such innovative approaches as competency-based education and contextualized learning models. Such strategies play a vital role in promoting student success, particularly with the dynamic nature of the global marketplace.
The government also has a role to play in measuring the performance of higher education, especially by focussing on the credentials earned by learners in the context of the prevailing labour market. Another critical role of governments in higher education today is the linkage of institutions of higher learning and other relevant stakeholders with employers and the general public workforce system ( Leydesdorff & Etzkowitz , 2001) . This is vital in ensuring that graduates fit into the job market ( Shanahan & Jones , 2007 ). As the labour market evolves, governments also have to realize that higher education is not the only way of securing a middle class and middle-skill job, although its role in this pursuit cannot be overstated. Thus, the government has to be strategic and innovative for it to address this gap.
References
Etzkowitz, H., Webster, A., Gebhardt, C., & Terra, B. R. C. (2000). The future of the university and the university of the future: evolution of ivory tower to entrepreneurial paradigm. Research Policy , 29 (2), 313-330.
Johnstone, D. B. (2004). The economics and politics of cost sharing in higher education: comparative perspectives. Economics of education review , 23 (4), 403-410.
Leydesdorff, L., & Etzkowitz, H. (2001). The transformation of university-industry-government relations.
Shanahan, T., & Jones, G. A. (2007). Shifting roles and approaches: Government coordination of post ‐ secondary education in Canada, 1995–2006. Higher Education Research & Development , 26 (1), 31-43.
Stearns, J. (2017). The Harmful Effects of Federal Regulation on Higher Education. JL & Educ. , 46 , 303.
