Search Results

In previous times, the United States has been considered as a state that gives utmost priority to higher education. As seen in the history of education in the United States, governmental efforts to expand opportunities for college attendance is key to providing channels for upward mobility, thus, lessening the scope and impact of economic inequality. However, recent studies have shown that this priority of promoting higher education has decreased over time. This chapter aims to explain why the United States has experienced such a departure. It emphasizes how policies created at earlier junctures foster new political dynamics. It also explains how higher education policies promoted development regarding key interest groups such as lenders. However, these same policies failed to mobilize ordinary citizens, this includes students, and families who hoped to send their children to college.

This chapter discusses the deployment and use of computing in higher education. Topics covered include administrative uses, teaching and computers, role of computing in academic research, IT in the library, personal use of computers, and special role of the Internet. It is shown that in addition to being a supplier of computer science and technology, the higher education industry trained (or educated) tens of millions of people, equipping many of them with the values, work practices, and skills that have defined the economy and society of modern America and, indeed, of many individuals and firms around the world. Its use of all manner of technology also reflects patterns of application evident in many parts of the nation's economy, including its use of the digital hand. Because it educates so many workers, and influences the values and activities of so many individuals, its use of computing is influential and important.

This chapter analyses issues about values related to the governance and management of universities as public service institutions. It examines a further dimension of the culture of publicly funded universities, and places the debate about the management of academic knowledge work in a wider, European perspective. Some of the issues raised can be applied to other higher education systems outside Europe, providing that due attention is also paid to the local context of such systems.

This chapter shows that the developmental trajectory of scientific disciplines is highly dependent on the nationally based higher education and science systems in which they are embedded, despite possibly increasing flows of international influence. By comparative examination of the emergence and evolution of business studies in the USA and Europe, it demonstrates that not only the ways in which this particular discipline came to be organized in the first place, but also how its later development into a scientific field, differed in these two settings.

This chapter explores the “least likely” case of a constitutional policy such as higher education. Among the policies that national states least want to abandon to EU authorities, higher education is nevertheless being Europeanized and is triggering the involvement of subnational authorities and civil society organizations. As a European market for higher education is created, the logic of competition among higher education systems and institutes forces national states to remove their barriers, share knowledge, exchange best practises, and converge towards compatible systems.

This chapter explores the ramifications of debates surrounding the concepts of NM and NPM in the systemic context of the UK knowledge-intensive university. It analyses changes in the UK higher education systems since the 1970s to determine how far the context of and the actual practices and technologies used to ‘manage’ academic knowledge work in organizations at the beginning of the 21st century differ from the context and oversight of academic knowledge work in UK universities in the 1960s, 1970s, and 1980s. The chapter also considers how UK academics in management roles and career managers interpret the recent systemic, organizational, and other changes in their academies. Finally, consideration is given to changes in expectations about the roles of academics holding leadership and management roles at different points in this forty-five-year period.

This chapter explores the shaping of higher education for blacks by focusing on the role of Jim Crow reformers, foundations, individual whites, black educational leaders and administrators, and especially state government. At the heart of the struggle was the question of whether and how southern states could be encouraged or forced into supporting a system of genuinely separate and equal higher education for blacks in the South. Just as reformers sought to rationalize primary education in the South, they sought to create a similar pattern of rationalization and centralization of higher education. The goal of the General Education Board (GEB), for example, was the creation of an “orderly and comprehensive system” that was “territorially comprehensive, harmoniously related [and] individually complete.” This new system would “discourage unnecessary duplication and waste and encourage economy and efficiency.” In keeping with the emerging race relations model, black colleges and universities were an inevitable part of this new rationalization.

This chapter presents the history of policies and practices in the supply of IT workers, especially as they relate to policy for higher education and computing research, in the United States. There is no direct worker policy that mandates how many workers of various types need to be trained. Instead, policy about the supply of IT workers is vested in other kinds of policy: national research output, education, defence, social welfare, immigration, national economic competitiveness, and taxation. Concerns about the national supply of IT workers is tied directly to scientific research and higher education policy, and these are the topics that are investigated most extensively in this chapter. Both the National Science Foundation (NSF) and the National Academies of Science and Engineering have been key players in this.

This chapter examines the school-to-higher education transition to ascertain the extent to which grade 12 learners of all races have been able to fulfill their aspirations of proceeding to higher education. It begins by setting out the parameters within which the notion of discrimination in learning pathways can be considered. It proceeds to compare the findings of a 2001 baseline study of the higher education aspirations of grade 12 learners, across all nine provinces of South Africa, with the higher education enrollment profile for 2002. This comparison is then juxtaposed against a second one, derived from the findings of another baseline study. In that case, the higher education aspirations of grade 12 learners in a 2005 cohort are compared with the higher education enrollment profile for 2006. An exploration of the determinants of discrimination in learning pathways follows this analysis. The chapter concludes with a consideration of the effect of racial classification on the perpetuation of discrimination.

This chapter is organized as follows. The first section gives a stylized description of the elementary and secondary education systems as they map onto the life course in childhood and early adulthood. The second section describes the persistent achievement gap between the races. The third section discusses some of the varied and widespread public and private responses to that achievement gap. Section four analyzes the present state of higher education in America. Section five examines diversity and inequality in access to that system of higher education, while section six presents issues of skill formation and returns to education. The seventh section returns to international comparisons as evidenced in the OECD, Third International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS), and Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) studies, and to the question of the relative quality of U.S. education. The concluding section revisits the question of U.S. education as a model.

This chapter shows how Jim Crow reformers used southern universities to create a new southern ideology of race relations and interracialism, which preached that reform inspired by social science coupled with mutual tolerance could create a harmoniously segregated order. Black colleges and universities would provide the middle-class leadership necessary to help govern a new vertical segregation, which would be more just for southern blacks but still secure for southern whites.

This chapter begins with a discussion of the rising demand for more education—especially at the tertiary level—and the internationalization of higher education. It then reviews several theories that attempt of explain why higher education is so tightly linked to occupational and material success. An overview of the subsequent chapters is presented.

This chapter explores how students' private concerns came to occupy the center of campus and national politics in the 1960s and in so doing thrust higher education into the thick of the nascent rights revolution. Students' rights-based reconstruction of the educated citizen marked a departure from the older reciprocal-based formulation that had been decisive in the creation of past higher education policy. From the 1930s through the 1950s, the state provided citizens with educational opportunities in order to repay them for their sacrifices during the Great Depression and the brutal war years that followed. But the gradual expansion of educational access and of federal involvement in higher education set in motion a sequence of unexpected social and political reactions that prepared the way for the shift from a reciprocal to a rights-based conception of the educated citizen founded on the principle of diversity.

This chapter lays out the history and background of the federal government's growing involvement in American higher education, arguing that the latter had emerged as a predominant “parastate” in the twentieth century. Situated between citizens and the state, completely beholden to neither party but expected and committed to serve both, higher education proved perfectly suited for the task. The potential for higher education's ideas and individuals to migrate into the heart of society proved particularly seductive to state builders. That higher education could be used to shape citizens' political commitments resonated with national leaders, such as Franklin Roosevelt and Lyndon Johnson, who wanted to build a new and more powerful state but had to do so using homegrown materials, all the more effective if they were locally produced. From such stuff was the American state made.

Brazil provides an additional test of the regime-type argument—it has changed regime type three times since 1930. But only one of these—the 1964 shift to autocracy—predicted a change in education. Instead, education changed with Brazil’s vital constituency. Brazil’s federal government was affiliated with a political entrepreneur from 1930 to 1964; and political entrepreneurship was gradually returning at the state level in the 1990s, though it would not reach the federal level until 2003. In line with the book’s framework, this chapter shows Brazilian education changing from an all-levels system to a top-down system after 1964, and the beginnings of a change back to an all-levels system in the 1990s. Throughout, employers needed skilled workers but faced inelastic skilled wages, and the government therefore provided selective worker training. The chapter also applies the book’s framework to education in two states: the wealthiest, São Paulo; and one of the poorest, Bahia.