Current Challenges Confronting U.S. Higher EducationThe first challenge: force

Current Challenges Confronting U.S. Higher Education
　　Good morning, everyone. In our last lecture, we discussed challenges that face universities and colleges worldwide. Today, we’ll take a special look at U.S. higher education and see what challenges U.S. higher education is facing. OK. Let’s get started.
　　The first challenge we’re examining in today’s lecture is the force of the marketplace on higher education. [1] Many people believe that the marketplace has overtaken state government as the dominant external force shaping and reshaping American higher education, even for public colleges and universities. You may ask, "Why is It so?" [2] Well, as is always the case, government support is not keeping pace with educational expenditures. So in many ways, the market is having more bearing on higher education than government. [3] In order to create more flexibility, many public colleges and universities are now asking for less government regulation and supervision. In some instances, they are even asking for less state money in return for more autonomy. And their argument is that the current structures and accountability requirements have hindered their capacity to be effective and efficient. [4] The ability to set their own tuition fees and secure freedom from state policies and regulations in areas such as purchasing and building represent just some of the additional autonomy that public institutions are seeking. And many are pressing for new legislation to provide this freedom through a range of innovations, including public corporations, charter colleges, state enterprise status, and performance contracts.
　　So, what is the result of these efforts? [5/6] Well, the result is that activities and research in certain fields and disciplines, for example, engineering, applied natural science, and agricultural science, become higher institutional priorities because they have stronger market value than other programs, such as humanities, do. So, what has happened is that institutions create new programs, alter academic calendars, and
　　pursue different financial aid policies to capture more and better students, in particular, those who can afford to pay high tuition. [7] For instance, executive MBA programs are increasingly popular. Also, institutions seek contracts and partnership agreements, and enhance research programs with practical applications that have large financial payouts. In order to do so, they are changing their institutional structures. And how do they do it? Let me tell you. [8] Institutions would add new units that focus on generating external grants and bringing new technology to market. [9] They would build conference centers and create for-profit subsidiaries. All these are done to generate more revenue for institutions. What are the implications of this? [10] Well, the implications are that academic research is increasingly focused on marketable knowledge, entrepreneurial priorities are taking precedence, services are being outsourced, and students are carrying an increasing burden to pay higher tuition fees for their education.
　　Then, how do university administrators view this trend? That is, the marketplace is showing stronger impact on how institutions are run. In fact, university administrators see little option except to respond to the marketplace. The reason is, if their institution does not react effectively, it will not have the necessary resources to offer high-quality and diverse academic programs. Institutions unable to compete may face hard circumstances because government support continues to fall, students become better-informed consumers, and advances in technology also widen the number and reach of competitors. In turn, the ability to compete—for students, resources, faculty, and prestige—becomes the driving strategic force. At its extreme, competition can overtake more traditional academic values. However, the downside of pursing market goals without appropriately balancing them against the public good is ... is that institutions will no longer be able to fulfill their social responsibility to produce well-educated citizens and face the threat of losing their privileged place in society as they resemble more closely other market-driven organizations.
　　[11] Now, let’s move on to the second challenge facing U.S. higher education, that is, the tension between competition and equality in admissions decisions. [12] Since World War II, U.S. higher education has been engaged in a process of "massification," that is, expanding to serve students from all walks of life. Motivating this effort is a widespread belief in the power of education to create social and economic mobility and a belief in the morality and social value of making higher education accessible to everyone. Research data bear out public perceptions: When young people from low-income backgrounds complete a bachelor’s degree, their income and employment characteristics after graduation are equivalent to their peers from more affluent backgrounds. So, education can truly be "the great equalizer." Although there is widespread public faith in the value of higher education, the progress of massification has been slow and uneven. And why is it slow and uneven? [13-1] Well, one, higher education did not admit significant numbers of racial and ethnic minorities until after the civil rights of the 1960s forced change. Second, despite significant expenditures on financial aid, minority and low-income individuals are still less likely to attend college than whites or students from middle- and upper-income families— although access gaps have nowadays narrowed somewhat, large gaps remain between completion rates. [14] Low-income students come to college less prepared, and must balance academic demands with work and family responsibilities. [13-2] Finding ways to increase the enrollment rates of low-income students and encourage their success once enrolled are two of the most important problems facing American higher education. One of the challenges to meet these goals is that they can conflict with the other central tenets of American higher education, that is, market competition and resistance to government control, as I said before. For example, institutional competition for the most academically talented students is likely to encourage increased use of tuition discounting for students who have no financial need, and this could divert resources away from low-income students who need financial aid. Similarly, institutions may seek to distinguish themselves in the academic marketplace by becoming more selective in admissions decisions, thus reducing the number of low-income students admitted. [15] However, a primary role of government is to mediate the potentially negative effects of competition by insisting that institutions adhere to their missions, and that institutions provide need-based financial assistance to students. So, a constant preoccupation of American higher education is this tension between the competitive, ambitious nature of institutions and the interests of government in promoting important public goals, primary among them broad access and widespread success for all students.
　　OK. For today’s lecture, we have briefly discussed some of the major challenges facing U. S. higher education, such as the impact of the marketplace on institutions and the tension between competition and promoting public goals.