Using an output distance function as an analytic framework, stochastic frontier analysis (SFA), and a generalized true random effects (GTRE) model, this study examines the financial context of bachelor’s degree production efficiency among public master’s colleges and universities (MCUs) in the United States. Employing a GTRE model, degree production inefficiency is decomposed into transient (short-run) and persistent (long-run) components. This investigation finds that bachelor’s degree production is positively and non-linearly related to doctoral degree production. Persistent efficiency is positively related to tuition revenue, state appropriations, and Pell grant revenue and negatively related to federal grant and contract revenue. This study finds that bachelor’s degree production efficiency scores that take into account the financial context of public MCUs should be considered as “pure” efficiency scores, which differ from the “technical” efficiency scores that don’t adjust for the financial context. Using efficiency scores, this research allows for the ranking of public MCUs, which may be used to further identify best management practices.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.
Buy single article
Instant access to the full article PDF.
Price includes VAT for USA
Agasisti, T., & Belfield, C. (2017a). Efficiency in the community college sector: Stochastic frontier analysis. Tertiary Education and Management, 23(3), 237–259.
Agasisti, T., & Belfield, C. (2017b). Efficiency in the community college sector: Stochastic frontier analysis. Tertiary Education and Management, 23(3), 237–259.
Agasisti, T., & Haelermans, C. (2016). Comparing efficiency of public universities among European countries: Different incentives lead to different performances. Higher Education Quarterly, 70(1), 81–104.
Badunenko, O., & Kumbhakar, S. C. (2016). When, where and how to estimate persistent and transient efficiency in stochastic frontier panel data models. European Journal of Operational Research, 255(1), 272–287. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2016.04.049.
Badunenko, O., & Kumbhakar, S. C. (2017). Economies of scale, technical change and persistent and time-varying cost efficiency in Indian banking: Do ownership, regulation and heterogeneity matter? European Journal of Operational Research, 260(2), 789–803.
Battese, G. E., & Coelli, T. J. (1992). Frontier production functions, technical efficiency and panel data: With application to paddy farmers in India. In International applications of productivity and efficiency analysis (pp. 149–165). Retrieved from http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-94-017-1923-0_10. Accessed 22 Sept 2017.
Battese, G. E., & Coelli, T. J. (1995). A model for technical inefficiency effects in a stochastic frontier production function for panel data. Empirical Economics, 20(2), 325–332.
Das, M., & Das, S. (2014). Technical efficiency of higher education institutions: A study of affiliated degree colleges of Barak Valley in Assam, India. 3(1), 66–76.
Debreu, G. (1951). The coefficient of resource utilization. Econometrica, 19(3), 273–292. https://doi.org/10.2307/1906814.
Doyle, W. (2015). Efficiency in degree production among public comprehensive universities. The University next Door: What Is a Comprehensive University, Who Does It Educate, and Can It Survive, 93–120.
Färe, R., Grosskopf, S., & Lovell, C. A. (1994). Production frontiers. Cambridge [England]: Cambridge University Press.
Farrell, M. J. (1957). The measurement of productive efficiency. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series A (General), 120(3), 253–290.
Farsi, M., Filippini, M., & Greene, W. (2006). Application of panel data models in benchmarking analysis of the electricity distribution sector. Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics, 77(3), 271–290.
Fieger, P., Villano, R., & Cooksey, R. (2016). Efficiency of Australian technical and further education providers. International Journal of Training Research, 14(1), 62–75.
Filippini, M., & Greene, W. (2016). Persistent and transient productive inefficiency: A maximum simulated likelihood approach. Journal of Productivity Analysis, 45(2), 187–196. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11123-015-0446-y.
Filippini, M., Geissmann, T., & Greene, W. H. (2018). Persistent and transient cost efficiency—An application to the Swiss hydropower sector. Journal of Productivity Analysis, 49(1), 65–77.
Gralka, S. (2018). Persistent inefficiency in the higher education sector: Evidence from Germany. Education Economics, 0(0), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1080/09645292.2017.1420754.
Greene, W. (2005). Fixed and random effects in stochastic frontier models. Journal of Productivity Analysis, 23(1), 7–32.
Grosskopf, S., Hayes, K. J., Taylor, L. L., & Weber, W. L. (1999). Anticipating the Consequences of School Reform: A New Use of DEA. Management Science, 45(4), 608–620.
Harnisch, T. L., & Lebioda, K. (2016). Top 10 higher education state policy issues for 2016 (p. 7). Retrieved from AASCU website: http://www.aascu.org/policy/publications/policy-matters/TopTen2016.pdf. Accessed 13 Aug 2017.
Hillman, N. W., Tandberg, D. A., & Gross, J. P. K. (2014). Performance funding in higher education: Do Financial incentives impact college completions? The Journal of Higher Education, 85(6), 826–857. https://doi.org/10.1353/jhe.2014.0031.
Hillman, N. W., Hicklin Fryar, A., & Crespín-Trujillo, V. (2017). Evaluating the impact of performance funding in Ohio and Tennessee. American Educational Research Journal, 55, 144–170. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831217732951.
Hopkins, D. S., & Massy, W. F. (1981). Planning models for colleges and universities. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Horne, J., & Hu, B. (2008). Estimation of cost efficiency of Australian universities. Mathematics and Computers in Simulation, 78(2), 266–275. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matcom.2008.01.018.
Huang, C. J., & Liu, J.-T. (1994). Estimation of a non-neutral stochastic frontier production function. Journal of Productivity Analysis, 5(2), 171–180. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01073853.
Jaquette, O., & Parra, E. E. (2014). Using IPEDS for panel analyses: Core concepts, data challenges, and empirical applications. In Higher education: Handbook of theory and research (Vol. 29, pp. 467–533). Retrieved from http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-94-017-8005-6_11
Johnes, J. (2014). Efficiency and mergers in English higher education 1996/97 to 2008/9: Parametric and non-parametric estimation of the multi-input multi-output distance function: Efficiency and mergers in English higher education 1996/97 to 2008/9. The Manchester School, 82(4), 465–487. https://doi.org/10.1111/manc.12030.
Johnes, G., & Johnes, J. (2016). Costs, efficiency, and economies of scale and scope in the English higher education sector. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 32(4), 596–614.
Jondrow, J., Lovell, C. K., Materov, I. S., & Schmidt, P. (1982). On the estimation of technical inefficiency in the stochastic frontier production function model. Journal of Econometrics, 19(2–3), 233–238.
Kadlec, A., & Shelton, S. (2015). Outcomes-based funding and stakeholder engagement. Lumina Issue Papers. Retrieved from https://www.luminafoundation.org/files/resources/kadlec-shelton-ofb-full.pdf. Accessed 24 Sept 2017.
Kassiola, J. J. (2007). The erroneous accusation of research “Mission creep” at Master’s institutions: Why teaching in the 21st century must be research-based. College Teaching, 55(4), 139–144. https://doi.org/10.3200/CTCH.55.4.139-144.
Kelly, P. J., & Jones, D. P. (2007). A new look at the institutional component of higher education finance: A guide for evaluating performance relative to financial resources. Retrieved from https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED512623. Accessed 24 Sept 2017.
Kim, M. M., & Ko, J. (2015). The impacts of state control policies on college tuition increase. Educational Policy, 29(5), 815–838.
Kumbhakar, S. C. (1990). Production frontiers, panel data, and time-varying technical inefficiency. Journal of Econometrics, 46(1–2), 201–211.
Kumbhakar, S. C., & Heshmati, A. (1995). Efficiency measurement in Swedish dairy farms: An application of rotating panel data, 1976–88. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 77(3), 660–674.
Kumbhakar, S. C., Ghosh, S., & McGuckin, J. T. (1991). A generalized production frontier approach for estimating determinants of inefficiency in US dairy farms. Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, 9(3), 279–286.
Kumbhakar, S. C., Lien, G., & Hardaker, J. B. (2014). Technical efficiency in competing panel data models: A study of Norwegian grain farming. Journal of Productivity Analysis, 41(2), 321–337. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11123-012-0303-1.
Last, A.-K., & Wetzel, H. (2010). The efficiency of German public theaters: A stochastic frontier analysis approach. Journal of Cultural Economics, 34(2), 89–110. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10824-009-9111-5.
Laureti, T., Secondi, L., & Biggeri, L. (2014). Measuring the efficiency of teaching activities in Italian universities: An information theoretic approach. Economics of Education Review, 42, 147–164. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econedurev.2014.07.001.
McLendon, M. K., & Hearn, J. C. (2013). The resurgent interest in performance-based funding for higher education. Academe, 99(6), 25–30.
National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. (2016). Digest of Education Statistics, 2015 (No. NCES 2016-014; p. 1042). Washington, DC.
Rutherford, A., & Rabovsky, T. (2014). Evaluating impacts of performance funding policies on student outcomes in higher education. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 655(1), 185–208. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002716214541048.
Shephard, R. (1970). Theory of cost and production functions. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Siegel, D., Wright, M., Chapple, W., & Lockett, A. (2008). Assessing the relative performance of university technology transfer in the us and Uk: A stochastic distance function approach. Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 17(7–8), 717–729. https://doi.org/10.1080/10438590701785769.
Stevens, P. A. (2005). A stochastic frontier analysis of English and welsh universities. Education Economics, 13(4), 355–374.
Tandberg, D. A., & Hillman, N. W. (2014). State higher education performance funding: Data, outcomes, and policy implications. Journal of Education Finance, 39(3), 222–243.
Thanassoulis, E. (2001). Introduction to the theory and application of data envelopment analysis. Retrieved from http://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/978-1-4615-1407-7.pdf. Accessed 21 Sept 2017.
Titus, M. A. (2006). Understanding the influence of the financial context of institutions on student persistence at four-year colleges and universities. The Journal of Higher Education, 77(2), 353–375.
Titus, M. A. (2009a). Bachelor’s degree productivity X-inefficiency: The role of state higher education policy. Journal of College Student Retention: Research, Theory & Practice, 11(1), 7–32.
Titus, M. A. (2009b). The production of bachelor’s degrees and financial aspects of state higher education policy: A dynamic analysis. The Journal of Higher Education, 80(4), 439–468.
Titus, M. A., & Eagan, K. (2016). Examining production efficiency in higher education: The utility of stochastic frontier analysis. In M. Paulsen (Ed.), Higher education: Handbook of theory and research (Vol. 31, pp. 441–512) Retrieved from http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-319-26829-3_9. Accessed 17 Sept 2017.
Titus, M. A., Vamosiu, A., & McClure, K. R. (2017). Are public Master’s institutions cost efficient? A stochastic frontier and spatial analysis. Research in Higher Education, 58(5), 469–496.
Tsionas, E. G., & Kumbhakar, S. C. (2014). Firm heterogeneity, persistent and transient technical inefficiency: A generalized true random-effects model: Firm heterogeneity, persistent and transient technical inefficiency. Journal of Applied Econometrics, 29(1), 110–132. https://doi.org/10.1002/jae.2300.
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
About this article
Cite this article
Titus, M.A. Examining degree production and financial context at public master’s colleges and universities in the United States: a distance function approach. Tert Educ Manag 26, 215–231 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11233-019-09049-6
- Public master’s colleges and universities
- Degree production
- Output distance function
- Stochastic frontier analysis
- Generalized true random effects (GTRE) model
- Transient (short-run) efficiency
- Persistent (long-run) efficiency