Abstract
This paper analyzes the development of the Postsecondary Institutions Rating System (PIRS) by the United States federal government from 2013 to 2015. PIRS generated debate and opposition, which ultimately resulted in a significant transformation of the initiative. The present analysis identifies and explores key assumptions regarding higher education access, affordability, and quality embedded in this policy agenda. We argue that, as a rating mechanism, PIRS involves different and at times conflicting notions of quality, one of the most salient being “value for money.” The ratings system also emphasizes and promotes the concept of employability through its proposed outcome measures. Analyzing PIRS requires not only an exploration of its technical implementation and potential outcomes, but also a conceptual analysis. For this, we relied on discourse analysis of documents the U.S. government has generated or made publically available, and of the responses among different policy stakeholders.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Aldridge, S. and Rowley, J. (1998) ‘Student’s Charters: an evaluation and reflection’, Quality in Higher Education 4(1): 27–36.
Astin, A.W. (1980) When Does a College Deserve to be Called High Quality? Improving Teaching and Institutional Quality, Washington, DC: American Association for Higher Education.
Bacchi, C. (2009) Analysing Policy, Melbourne: Pearson.
Becker, G.S. (1980) Human Capital, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Beeson, G. (1998) ‘A student charter as a component of quality improvement in higher education’, Quality in Higher Education 4(1): 17–25.
Bergquist, W.H. (1995). Quality Through Access, Access with Quality. The New Imperative for Higher Education, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Black, D.A. and Smith, J.A. (2006) ‘Estimating the returns to college quality with multiple proxies for quality’, Journal of Labor Economics 24(3): 701–728.
Blanco Ramírez, G. (2013) ‘Studying quality beyond technical rationality: political and symbolic perspectives’, Quality in Higher Education 19(2): 126–141.
Bowen, G.A. (2009) ‘Document analysis as a qualitative research method’, Qualitative Research Journal 9(2): 27–40.
Chakroun, B. (2010) ‘National qualification frameworks: from policy borrowing to policy learning’, European Journal of Education 45(2): 199–216.
Charmaz, K. (2014) Constructing Grounded Theory, London: Sage.
College Board (2014) Trends in Student Aid, New York, NY: Collegeboard.
Diem, S., Young, M.D., Welton, A.D., Mansfield, K.C. and Lee, P.-L. (2014) ‘The intellectual landscape of critical policy analysis’, International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education 27(9): 1068–1090.
Dill, D.D. and Soo, M. (2005) ‘Academic quality, league tables, and public policy: a cross-national analysis of university ranking systems’, Higher Education 49(4): 495–533.
El-Khawas, E. (2013) ‘Quality assurance as a policy instrument: what’s ahead?’, Quality in Higher Education 19(2): 248–257.
Fain, P. (2014) ‘Gainful employment’s partial unveiling’, Inside Higher Ed, 14 March, available on https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2014/03/14/details-gainful-employment-proposal-expected-friday.
Fain, P. (2015) ‘Ratings without… rating’, Inside Higher Ed, 25 June, available on https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2015/06/25/education-department-says-rating-system-will-be-consumer-tool-rather-comparison.
Field, K. (2015) ‘Education Dept. considers creating not 1 but 2 college-ratings systems’, The Chronicle of Higher Education, 16 March, available on http://www.chronicle.com/article/Education-Dept-Considers/228531/.
Flick, U. (2009) An Introduction to Qualitative Research, Los Angeles: Sage.
Flick, U. (2014) An Introduction to Qualitative Research, Los Angeles: Sage.
Fugate, M., Kinicki, A.J. and Ashforth, B.E. (2004) ‘Employability: a psycho-social construct, its dimensions, and applications’, Journal of Vocational Behavior 65(1): 14–38.
Gazier, B. (ed.) (1998) Employability — Definitions and Trends, Berlin: European Employment Observatory.
Gazier, B. (ed.) (2001) Employability: The Complexity of a Policy Notion, New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Books.
Harvey, L. (2001) ‘Defining and measuring employability’, Quality in Higher Education 7(2): 97–109.
Harvey, L. and Askling, B. (2003) ‘Quality in higher education’, in R. Begg (ed.) Dialogue Between Higher Education Research and Practice, Hingham, MA: Kluwer, pp. 69–83.
Harvey, L. and Green, D. (1993) ‘Defining quality’, Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education 18(1): 9–34.
Harvey, L. and Newton, J. (2010) ‘Transforming quality evaluation: moving on’, in D.F. Westerheijden, B. Stensaker and M.J. Rosa (eds.) Quality Assurance in Higher Education Trends in Regulation, Translation and Transformation, Dordrecht: Springer, pp. 225–245.
Hillman, N. (2014) College Ratings: What Lessons can We Learn from Other Sectors?, Champaign, IL: National Institute for Learning Outcomes Assessment, available on http://www.learningoutcomesassessment.org/documents/HillmanViewpoint.pdf.
Huisman, J. and Currie, J. (2004) ‘Accountability in higher education: bridge over troubled water?’, Higher Education 48(4): 529–551.
Jaschick, S. (2013) ‘Dubious of Obama plan’, Inside Higher Ed, 16 December, available on https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2013/12/16/most-presidents-doubt-obamas-plan-promote-affordable-higher-education.
Jørgensen, M.W. and Phillips, L.J. (2002) Discourse Analysis as Theory and Method, London: Sage.
Kelchen, R. (2014) Moving Forward with Federal College Ratings: Goals, Metrics, and Recommendations (WISCAPE policy brief), Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin-Madison, Wisconsin Center for the Advancement of Postsecondary Education (WISCAPE) available on http://www.wiscape.wisc.edu/docs/WebDispenser/wiscapedocuments/kelchen_policybrief.pdf?sfvrsn=2.
Kingdon, J.W. (2010) Agendas, Alternatives, and Public Policies. 2nd edn. Boston: Pearson.
Kristensen, B. (2010) ‘Has external quality assurance actually improved quality in higher education over the course of 20 years of the “Quality Revolution”?’, Quality in Higher Education 16(2): 153–157.
Long, M.C. (2008) ‘College quality and early adult outcomes’, Economics of Education Review 27(5): 588–602.
McQuaid, R.W. and Lindsay, C. (2005) ‘The concept of employability’, Urban Studies 42(2): 197–219.
Miles, M.B., Huberman, A.M. and Saldaña, J. (2014) Qualitative Data Analysis: A Methods Sourcebook, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Molla, T. and Cuthbert, D. (2015) ‘The issue of research graduate employability in Australia: an analysis of the policy framing (1999–2013)’, The Australian Educational Researcher 42(2): 237–256.
Morley, L. (2003) Quality and Power in Higher Education, Philadelphia, PA: Society for Research into Higher Education and Open University Press.
Newton, J. (2010) ‘A tale of two ‘qualitys’: reflections on the quality revolution in higher education’, Quality in Higher Education 16(1): 51–53.
Pitcher, J, Hogarth, T. and Purcell, K. (1999) Graduate Opportunities, Social Class and Age: Employers’ Recruitment Strategies in the New Graduate Labour Market, London: Council for Industry and Higher Education.
Purcell, K., Pitcher, J. and Simm, C. (1999) Working Out?: Graduates’ Early Experiences of the Labour Market, Manchester: CSU Publications.
Rein, M. and Schön, D. (1996) ‘Frame-critical policy analysis and frame-reflective policy practice’, Knowledge and policy 9(1): 85–104.
Rosa, M.J., Tavares, D. and Amaral, A. (2006) ‘Institutional consequences of quality assessment’, Quality in Higher Education 12(2): 145–159.
Skolnik, M.L. (2010) ‘Quality assurance in higher education as a political process’, Higher Education Management and Policy 22(1): 1–20.
Staklis, S., Skomsvold, P. and Soldner, M. (2014) New College Graduates at Work: Employment Among 1992–93, 1999–2000, and 2007–2008 Bachelor’s Degree Recipients 1 Year After Graduation, Washington, DC: NCES, available on http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2014/2014003rev.pdf.
Støren, L.A. and Aamodt, P.O. (2010) ‘The quality of higher education and employability of graduates’, Quality in Higher Education 16(3): 297–313.
Studley, J. (2013) College Ratings Listening Tour: College Value and Affordability, HomeRoom. The Official Blog of the US Department of Education, available on http://www.ed.gov/blog/2013/12/college-ratings-listening-tour-college-value-and-affordability/.
Studley, J. (2015) Helping Families Navigate Their Higher Education Options, HomeRoom. The Official Blog of the US Department of Education, available on http://www.ed.gov/blog/2015/06/helping-families-navigate-their-higher-education-options/.
Tomlinson, M. (2012) ‘Graduate employability: a review of conceptual and empirical themes’, Higher Education Policy 25(4): 407–431.
U.S. Department of Education (2014a) Fact sheet: a college ratings framework, Retrieved from http://www2.ed.gov/documents/college-affordability/college-ratings-fact-sheet.pdf.
U.S. Department of Education (2014b) A New System of College Ratings — Invitation to Comment, available on http://www2.ed.gov/documents/college-affordability/framework-invitation-comment.pdf.
U.S. Department of Education (2014c) Obama Administration takes action to protect Americans from predatory, poor-performing career colleges, available on http://www.ed.gov/news/press-releases/obama-administration-takes-action-protect-americans-predatory-poor-performing-career-colleges.
U.S. Office of the Press Secretary (2013a) Fact sheet on the President’s plan to make college more affordable: a better bargain for the Middle Class, available on http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2013/08/22/fact-sheet-president-s-plan-make-college-more-affordable-better-bargain.
U.S. Office of the Press Secretary (2013b) Remarks by the President on college affordability, available on http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2013/08/22/remarks-president-college-affordability-buffalo-ny.
Udam, M. and Heidmets, M. (2013) ‘Conflicting views on quality: interpretations of ‘a good university’ by representatives of the state, the market and academia’, Quality in Higher Education 19(2): 210–224.
van Vught, F. and Ziegele, F. (2011) U-Multirank: Design and Testing the Feasibility of a Multidimensional Global University Ranking, Brussels: Consortium for Higher Education and Research Performance Assessment.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Franke, R., Ramírez, G.B. Value for Money and Employability: Conceptualizing the U.S. Federal Rating System of Postsecondary Institutions. High Educ Policy 30, 299–317 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41307-016-0024-6
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/s41307-016-0024-6