Innovative Higher Education

, Volume 35, Issue 1, pp 37–49 | Cite as

A New Compact for Higher Education: Funding and Autonomy for Reform and Accountability



Over the past few decades, America’s social compact for higher education as a public good has effectively lapsed as government support of higher education has diminished. Given the need for a highly educated workforce in today’s knowledge-based global economy, we propose a new compact for higher education that couples increased funding with increased institutional accountability. While the compact must retain academic freedom as an essential component of higher education, this autonomy must co-exist with rigorous accountability standards. Accountability systems should be multifaceted, as different methodologies have differing strengths and limitations. All systems should, however, inform the public and provide for institutional improvement.

Key Words

higher education funding accountability assessment 


  1. Advisory Committee on Student Financial Assistance. (2006). Mortgaging our future: How financial barriers to college undercut America’s global competitiveness. Washington, DC: Author.Google Scholar
  2. American Association of State Colleges and Universities. (2006). Value-added assessment: Accountability’s new frontier. Washington, DC: Author.Google Scholar
  3. Archibald, R. B., & Feldman, D. H. (2006). State higher education spending and the tax revolt. The Journal of Higher Education, 77(4), 618–644.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Association of American Colleges and Universities. (2004). Our students’ best work: A framework for accountability worthy of our mission. Washington, DC: Author.Google Scholar
  5. Association of American Colleges and Universities. (2005). Liberal education outcomes. Washington, DC: Author.Google Scholar
  6. Association of American Colleges and Universities. (2007). College learning for the new global century. Washington, DC: Author.Google Scholar
  7. Astin, A. W. (2004). To use graduation rates to measure excellence, you have to do your homework. Chronicle of Higher Education, 51(9), p. B20.Google Scholar
  8. Banta, T. W. (2007). A warning on measuring learning outcomes. Inside Higher Education. Retrieved August 4, 2009, from, January 26.
  9. Beyer, C. H., & Gillmore, G. M. (2007). Longitudinal assessment of student learning: Simplistic measures aren’t enough. Change, 39(3), 43–47.Google Scholar
  10. Callan, P. M. (2006). Measuring up 2006: The national report card on higher education. San Jose, CA: The National Center for Public Policy and Higher Education.Google Scholar
  11. Carey, K. (2004). A matter of degrees: Improving graduation rates in four-year colleges and universities. Washington, DC: The Education Trust.Google Scholar
  12. Carey, K. (2005). One step from the finish line: Higher college graduation rates are within our reach. Washington, DC: The Education Trust.Google Scholar
  13. Center for the Study of Education Policy at Illinois State University, National Association of State Student Grant Aid Programs, & State Higher Education Executive Officers. (2006). Recession, retrenchment, and recovery: State higher education funding and student financial aid. Normal, IL: Illinois State University.Google Scholar
  14. Clawson, D. (2009). Tenure and the future of the university. Science, 324(5931), 1147–1148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. College Board. (2006). Trends in college pricing. New York, NY: Author.Google Scholar
  16. Davis, G. (2006). Lessons of deregulation. Chronicle of Higher Education, 52(20), p. B15.Google Scholar
  17. Ewell, P. T. (2001). Statewide testing in higher education. Change, 33(2), 21–27.Google Scholar
  18. Jones, D. (2006). State shortfalls projected to continue despite economic gains: Long-term prospects for higher education no brighter. San Jose, CA: The National Center for Public Policy and Higher Education.Google Scholar
  19. Kentucky Council on Postsecondary Education. (2009). Statewide key indicators. Retrieved September 2, 2009, from
  20. Kuh, G. D. (2005). Promoting student success: What campus leaders can do (Occasional Paper No. 1). Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Center for Postsecondary Research.Google Scholar
  21. Kuh, G. D., Kinzie, J., Schuh, J. H., Whitt, E. J., et al. (2005). Student success in college: Creating conditions that matter. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  22. Lingenfelter, P. E. (2003). Educational accountability: Setting standards, improving performance. Change, 35(2), 19–23.Google Scholar
  23. Lubinescu, E. S., Ratcliff, J. L., & Gaffney, M. A. (2001). Two continuums collide: Accreditation and assessment. In J. L. Ratcliff, E. S. Lubinescu & M. A. Gaffney (Eds.), How accreditation influences assessment. New directions for higher education, no. 113 (pp. 5–21). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  24. McClure, A. (2007). Black males underrepresented in higher education. University Business, 10(1), 17.Google Scholar
  25. Menand, L. (1997). Re-imagining liberal education. In R. Orrill (Ed.), Education and democracy: Re-imagining liberal learning in America (pp. 1–19). New York, NY: College Board.Google Scholar
  26. Miller, M. A., & Ewell, P. T. (2005). Measuring up on college-level learning. San Jose, CA: The National Center for Public Policy and Higher Education.Google Scholar
  27. North Dakota University System. (2009). Creating a university system for the 21st century: 2007 Accountability Measures Report. Retrieved September 2, 2009, from
  28. Pascarella, E. T. (2001). Identifying excellence in undergraduate education: Are we even close? Change, 33(3), 19–23.Google Scholar
  29. Peter, K., & Horn, L. (2005). Gender differences in participation and completion of undergraduate education and how they have changed over time. (NCES 2005–169). U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. Washington, DC: U.S Government Printing Office.Google Scholar
  30. State Council of Higher Education for Virginia. (2009). Advancing Virginia: Access, alignment, investment—The 2007–13 strategic plan for higher education in Virginia. Retrieved September 2, 2009 from
  31. State Higher Education Executive Officers. (2005). Accountability for better results: A national imperative for higher education. Boulder, CO: Author.Google Scholar
  32. State Higher Education Executive Officers. (2006). State higher education finance FY 2005. Boulder, CO: Author.Google Scholar
  33. U.S. Census Bureau. (2007). Earnings gap highlight by Census Bureau data on education attainment. Washington, DC: Author.Google Scholar
  34. U.S. Department of Education. (2006). A test of leadership: Charting the future of U.S. higher education. Washington, DC: Author.Google Scholar
  35. Woo, S., & Knutson, R. (2009). Budget agreement deepens California’s pain. Wall Street Journal, 254(18), A3.Google Scholar
  36. Wood, M., & DesJarlais, C. (2006). When post-tenure review policy and practice diverge: Making the case for congruence. The Journal of Higher Education, 77(4), 561–588.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Educational Leadership and Policy StudiesThe University of Texas at ArlingtonArlingtonUSA
  2. 2.Office of Graduate StudiesThe University of Texas at ArlingtonArlingtonUSA

Personalised recommendations