David A. Tandberg

Interest Groups and Governmental Institutions The Politics of State Funding of Public Higher Education

In attempting to explain state support of public higher education, this study develops a theory-driven, comprehensive conceptualization of the state political system within a larger theoretical framework that consists of state economic and demographic factors and higher education system attributes. Furthermore, although the higher education policy and finance literature has largely ignored the impact of interest groups on state policy and state support of higher education, they play a central role in the model presented here. The inclusion of politics in the explanatory model results in a more robust and pragmatically useful model.

Evaluating the Impacts of "New" Performance Funding in Higher Education.

In 2007, Washington adopted the Student Achievement Initiative, a statewide performance accountability system designed to improve retention rates and degree productivity among community colleges. Using difference-in-differences analysis, we found that the policy change has had little immediate effect on retention rates or associate’s degree productivity. However, community colleges produced more short-term certificates after the policy reform. These results are robust across many alternative comparison groups. Considering that certificates yield less value in the labor market than associate’s degrees but are easier for colleges to produce, we discuss the unintended consequences of rewarding colleges based on the number of credentials they produce.

Performance Funding in Higher Education: Do Financial Incentives Impact College Completions?.

In 2000, the Pennsylvania State System of Higher Education introduced a performance-based funding model aimed at increasing degree productivity among the state’s public colleges. This study examines how the new policy affected undergraduate degree completions. Using a difference-in-differences estimation strategy, results suggest the policy has not systematically increased degree completions within the state. With limited evidence of the policy’s effect, we conclude that this was an ineffective funding model in terms of its ability to increase college completions. Although we find modest impacts when compared against colleges in neighboring states, these impacts disappear when matched against similar colleges from other states.

The Conditioning Role of State Higher Education Governance Structures

This article reports on a study that examined whether the presence of a consolidated governing board for higher education conditions the impact various political factors have on state support for higher education. The existence of a consolidated governing board is shown to significantly alter the politics of the state higher education appropriations process.

State Support of Higher Education: Data, Measures, Findings, and Directions for Future Research

The ultimate goal of this chapter is to provide future researchers interested in predicting and explaining state support of higher education with the tools they need to advance the field’s understanding of this important topic. In so doing, this chapter analyzes the various data sources and measures of state funding of higher education; reviews and synthesizes relevant theories which, when properly utilized, will help scholars understand the factors impacting state funding of higher education; reviews the relevant research; discusses several specific factors that ought to be consider when explaining state support of higher education; and reviews recent data and methodological advancements in this area of scholarship. The chapter concludes with a discussion of possible future directions for research in the area of state support of higher education.

Financing College Opportunity Factors Influencing State Spending on Student Financial Aid and Campus Appropriations, 1990 through 2010

Some states invest relatively heavily in financial aid programs that benefit lower-income citizens, while other states concentrate their investment in programs that benefit students from higher-income backgrounds. States also vary in their levels of direct appropriations to campuses, a form of public subsidy that has long been viewed as benefitting middle-income citizens. What factors influence states to allocate higher education subsidies in a more or a less redistributive manner? This article reports on a study that examined sources of variation in state spending on need-based aid, merit-based aid, and appropriations over the period 1990–2010. Findings document relationships among spending patterns and structural and political conditions of states, indicating a “trade-off” between spending on merit- and need-based aid; as states invest more in the former, they reduce spending on the latter. We also show that the presence of a Republican governor and the strength of Republican representation in statehouses each is associated with increased state spending on need-based financial aid. Our results further show that increased wealth is positively associated with state spending on merit-based financial aid programs and state appropriations for higher education, but not need-based financial aid. We also find distinctive patterns of state support for higher education depending on the degree of centralization of a state’s governance arrangement for higher education; namely, the presence of a highly centralized structure is associated with decreased spending on merit-based aid programs and increased state appropriations to colleges and universities.

Interest Groups and State Policy for Higher Education: New Conceptual Understandings and Future Research Directions

An empirical literature recently has arisen attempting to explain policy outcomes for higher education in the 50 states. The studies have examined the policy influences of legislatures, bureaucracies, governors, and other institutional political actors, but few research efforts have sought to account—conceptually or empirically—for the policy impacts of organized interest groups in the arena of state postsecondary education. This chapter helps to remedy the gap. We outline a broad agenda for research that aims to deepen conceptual understanding of the relationship between interest groups and state level higher education policy and to chart future research directions. We organize the chapter around three foci: (1) a review of extant research on state-level interest group activity in the higher education arena; (2) development of a conceptual framework grounded in the literatures of political science and higher education on interest groups and public policymaking with which to guide future inquiry; and, (3) a discussion of possible future research directions in the area, including a number of rarely-used data sources that could enrich the future study of interest groups and higher education in the U.S. states.

The Determinants of State Spending on Higher Education: How Capital Project Funding Differs from General Fund Appropriations.

Our fixed-effects panel data analysis of state spending on higher education fills a near void of studies examining capital expenditures on higher education. In our study, we found that political characteristics (e.g., interest group activity, organizational structure, and formal powers) largely account for differences between general fund and capital appropriations for higher education.

One Policy, Disparate Reactions: Institutional Responses in Florida’s Developmental Education Reform

ABSTRACT This paper seeks to better understand how community colleges in Florida planned to implement a new sweeping state policy pertaining to developmental education. Via a cluster analysis, we identify three distinct patterns in the ways in which the colleges responded to the policy: reformers, responders, and resisters. Further, we find that these patterns are related to the extent to which individual colleges had previously enacted campus-based developmental education reform measures, the magnitude of students previously enrolled in developmental education, and the colleges’ perceptions of the effectiveness of the policy.

What Happens to Underprepared First-Time-in-College Students When Developmental Education is Optional? The Case of Developmental Math and Intermediate Algebra in the First Semester

ABSTRACT In 2014, developmental education became optional for many college students in Florida, regardless of prior academic preparation. This study investigated first-semester math course enrollment patterns for underprepared first-time-in-college (FTIC) students who would have previously been required to take developmental math and the passing rates for the students electing to take Intermediate Algebra (the most common gateway math course in Florida). We found that roughly a 3rd of underprepared students enrolled in developmental math, a 3rd enrolled in Intermediate Algebra, and roughly a 3rd enrolled in no math course whatsoever, with preparation level being related to enrollment pathways. Among those who enrolled in Intermediate Algebra, a small percentage also enrolled in developmental math in the same semester, either through a compressed or corequisite course, and FTIC students who received same-semester developmental support were more likely to pass Intermediate Algebra compared with similar underprepared students who took Intermediate Algebra without developmental support.