Good Policy, Good Practice. Improving Outcomes and Productivity in Higher Education: A Guide for Policymakers
| Title: | Good Policy, Good Practice. Improving Outcomes and Productivity in Higher Education: A Guide for Policymakers |
| Author: | Callan, Patrick M. Ewell, Peter T. Finney, Joni E. Jones, Dennis P. |
| Date: | 2007 |
| Catalog #: | |
| Price: | FREE |
 |
|
| Description: |
Part I of Good Policy, Good Practice offers examples of strategies, programs,and practices that our research fi nds can raise educational productivity. The examples cited in this report were compiled and organized by the National Center for Higher Education Management Systems and the National Center for Public Policy and Higher Education. We offer these examples to inform policymakers of promising practices and policy leadership that
support improvements. We particularly sought programs and practices that challenged the conventional wisdom that gains in educational productivity or efficiency must necessarily come at the expense of quality or access. The three strategies and the programs described are included because they are designed to enhance higher education opportunity, educational effectiveness, and cost-effectiveness. Part II of Good Policy, Good Practice describes the levers that state policymakers can use, directly and indirectly, to infl uence improvements. It is unlikely that systematic productivity gains of the magnitude needed — and that are possible with widespread adoption of the types of strategies identified in Part I — can be achieved without deliberately designed and supportive state policy frameworks. Reorientation of public investment, of statutes and regulations, of accountability measures, and, in some instances, of governance structures may be required to raise productivity. These policy levers are necessarily described in Part II with less specifi city than the strategies in Part I. These levers are, we believe, relevant to most states, but implementation strategies depend on state context. Part II emphasizes the necessity of state policy support and, if needed, policy change. Without long-term state policy leadership and commitment, it is unlikely that even the most promising programs described in Part I will achieve the scale and sustainability needed for broad impact in both prosperous and lean budgetary times. |