research-state-college

When innovative higher education policy doesn’t work—and what to do


New series of reports reveal state efforts to boost college access and attainment found lacking

research-state-collegeSigh. Innovation through experimentation, as all scientists know, happens through failure(s), and according to a new series of papers from The American Academy of Political and Social Science, almost all of the 50 states are experiencing ineffectiveness through policy experimentation concerning higher education.

The 11 research papers, published in the Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, examine state policy initiatives in higher education that have been developed since the Great Recession to today.

Taken as a whole, says the Academy, the new research does not paint a pretty picture of the current state of higher-ed in the U.S.

In summary of the 11 papers, researchers found that despite “considerable experimentation aimed at improving access to college and attainment of degrees, the 50 states often have been ineffective in broadening college opportunities and graduation rates for their residents. In many cases, states pursue policies that just don’t work.”

And, according to their analyses, researchers say the main cause of ineffectiveness in policy is due to political and leadership turn-over, causing instability in implementation.

(Next page: The stunning findings of the reports)

The authors, which include Michael McLendon, Simmons Centennial Endowed Chair in Higher Education Policy and Leadership and associate dean in the Simmons School of Education at Southern Methodist University; Laura Perna, executive director of the Alliance for Higher Education and Democracy (AHEAD) and professor in the Graduate School of Education at the University of Pennsylvania; and many other notable scholars, say the reason why state policy effectiveness matters is because it directly affects higher education attainment.

“It is they—the 50 state governments—that determine the levels and types of public financial resources to invest in postsecondary education; it is they that oversee the systems that provide oversight and accountability of higher education, and it is they that establish and monitor goals for the performance of campuses,” says a summary of the work.

Some of the state policy initiatives reviewed in the research include: financing for student scholarships, fiscal responses to the Great Recession, the implementation of “performance funding” to allocate funds to state colleges, the use of “P-20 councils” to align high school curriculum with college readiness and the disparate effects of gubernatorial and legislative leadership.

In taking on these policies, the researchers say the 50 state governments have emerged as “active laboratories of policy experimentation” since the mid-1980’s. But the experimentation often goes awry.

According to the findings:

State responses to the Great Recession of 2007-09 have ranged from purposeful action to listless policy drift.

In the wake of the Great Recession, trends in state funding show declining college affordability in nearly all of the states. The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) of 2009 achieved its intended effect, explain researchers, in as much as it forestalled decreases in state general appropriations for higher education. But ARRA did not prevent decreases in state spending on student financial aid, a finding that has potentially negative implications for college affordability.

There is little evidence that performance funding—tying a state’s support for its colleges to the institutions’ graduation rates—leads to improved student outcomes. In fact, current policies not only appear to be unrelated to student performance but may contribute to lower performance over a longer period of time.

State “P-20 coordinating councils,” aimed at ensuring a state’s high schools are following a curriculum that prepares students for the state’s colleges, have been a common policy innovation but generally have not resulted in policy change. Lack of policymaking authority, turnover in membership and political differences with governors limit their effectiveness, say the reports.

Tuition decentralization—an approach taken in Texas in which the legislature delegated tuition-setting authority to college governing boards as it was reducing public appropriations to higher education—has had a mixed effect on the enrollment of under-represented students.

The policy choices of the states also shape variations in spending on need-based student aid, merit-based aid and general fund appropriations. Notably, as states invest more in merit-based financial aid, they tend to spend less on need-based aid, a condition that can undercut higher education attainment.

Leadership matters. Different policy approaches yield significant variations in educational attainment across the states and those that work do so because of strong leadership. According to the research, a unified statewide agenda for higher education helps to ensure that individual institutions do not act against state interests or undercut efforts to increase access and attainment.

Researchers specifically noted that one area requiring leadership is in the implementation of the Common Core State Standards (CCSS), explaining that the CCSS illustrates how “continuity and change in patterns of state political leadership can shape the effectiveness of policies designed to increase college attainment.”

“While ineffective policies should be refined or ended, abandoning recently implemented policies simply because of a change in administration or political majority may undermine policy effectiveness,” they said. “The Common Core could improve college students’ college readiness and reduce remediation, but if the policy is dropped before it has a chance to take hold or be evaluated, we will never know.”

For a full list of policy recommendations for states, at the national level, for leadership, and on the subjects of college readiness, college affordability and future research, be sure to read the concluding report on the “Insights and implications for state policy-makers” here.

Sign up for our newsletter

Newsletter: Innovations in K12 Education
By submitting your information, you agree to our Terms & Conditions and Privacy Policy.

Oops! We could not locate your form.

Sign up for our newsletter

Newsletter: Innovations in K12 Education
By submitting your information, you agree to our Terms & Conditions and Privacy Policy.