東華大學圖書館 |

語系: 繁體中文

說明(常見問題)

回圖書館首頁

手機版館藏查詢

登入

回首頁

切換: 標籤 | MARC模式 | ISBD

The role of for-profit, degree-grant...

Cosentino, Randi Reich.

FindBook

Google Book

Amazon

博客來

The role of for-profit, degree-granting institutions and state policy in selected states.

紀錄類型:	書目-語言資料,印刷品 : Monograph/item
正題名/作者:	The role of for-profit, degree-granting institutions and state policy in selected states./
作者:	Cosentino, Randi Reich.
面頁冊數:	237 p.
附註:	Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 72-07, Section: A, page: .
Contained By:	Dissertation Abstracts International72-07A.
標題:	Business Administration, Management. -
電子資源:	http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=3455390
ISBN:	9781124631547

The role of for-profit, degree-granting institutions and state policy in selected states.
Cosentino, Randi Reich.

The role of for-profit, degree-granting institutions and state policy in selected states. - 237 p.

Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 72-07, Section: A, page: .

Thesis (Ed.D.)--University of Pennsylvania, 2011.

As for-profit, degree-granting institutions (FPDGI) continue to educate a growing share of degree-seeking students, and as states grapple with how to graduate more students with limited public resources, states must consider what role, if any, for-profit institutions will play in their state. Furthermore, they must consider the role of state policy. Research on FPDGIs has identified perceptions that run the gamut from questions about ethics, debt, efficacy, and for-profit/public mission conflict, to accolades about access, outcomes, flexibility, and ability to address market needs. Yet there is very little research as to what role state policy leaders perceive these institutions are playing and what the role of state policy is as related to these institutions. This dissertation attempts to address these two questions. This qualitative study explores the perceptions of state policy leaders in Maryland and Ohio as to FPDGIs and state policy. Through interviews with more than 20 state policy leaders, as well as a review of policy, data, and other documentary evidence, this dual case study presents two pictures of the role of FPDGIs and state policy. The study provides a limited update to Education Commission of the States' 2000 study as to state policy, and leverages Zumeta's 1996 framework of six policy issues that impact private not-for-profit institutions. This study identifies policies that are instrumental to understanding the role of FPDGIs in these two states, including participation in strategic planning, institutional and programmatic licensure, state financing policies, and state regulation. A study of these various policies suggests several roles that policy and regulation of FPDGIs play in each state. These include the roles of: providing consumer protection; ensuring academic quality; serving as an arbiter of need and anti-duplication (Maryland); and as an arbiter of public resources (Ohio). An unintentional role, that of providing credibility to FPDGIs, also emerges. Political, structural, and resource-based limitations to the states' ability to regulate for-profit institutions also are explored. Finally, several roles of FPDGIs in the two states are described. These include that of: a private good; a legitimate, market-based choice for students; a low priority; and something to be controlled, limited, or eliminated.

ISBN: 9781124631547Subjects--Topical Terms:

626628
Business Administration, Management.

The role of for-profit, degree-granting institutions and state policy in selected states.
LDR:03289nam 2200289 4500 001 1404928
005 20111201133003.5
008 130515s2011 ||||||||||||||||| ||eng d
020 $a 9781124631547
035 $a (UMI)AAI3455390
035 $a AAI3455390
040 $a UMI $c UMI
100 1 $a Cosentino, Randi Reich. $3 1684276
245 1 4 $a The role of for-profit, degree-granting institutions and state policy in selected states.
300 $a 237 p.
500 $a Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 72-07, Section: A, page: .
500 $a Adviser: Joni E. Finney.
502 $a Thesis (Ed.D.)--University of Pennsylvania, 2011.
520 $a As for-profit, degree-granting institutions (FPDGI) continue to educate a growing share of degree-seeking students, and as states grapple with how to graduate more students with limited public resources, states must consider what role, if any, for-profit institutions will play in their state. Furthermore, they must consider the role of state policy. Research on FPDGIs has identified perceptions that run the gamut from questions about ethics, debt, efficacy, and for-profit/public mission conflict, to accolades about access, outcomes, flexibility, and ability to address market needs. Yet there is very little research as to what role state policy leaders perceive these institutions are playing and what the role of state policy is as related to these institutions. This dissertation attempts to address these two questions. This qualitative study explores the perceptions of state policy leaders in Maryland and Ohio as to FPDGIs and state policy. Through interviews with more than 20 state policy leaders, as well as a review of policy, data, and other documentary evidence, this dual case study presents two pictures of the role of FPDGIs and state policy. The study provides a limited update to Education Commission of the States' 2000 study as to state policy, and leverages Zumeta's 1996 framework of six policy issues that impact private not-for-profit institutions. This study identifies policies that are instrumental to understanding the role of FPDGIs in these two states, including participation in strategic planning, institutional and programmatic licensure, state financing policies, and state regulation. A study of these various policies suggests several roles that policy and regulation of FPDGIs play in each state. These include the roles of: providing consumer protection; ensuring academic quality; serving as an arbiter of need and anti-duplication (Maryland); and as an arbiter of public resources (Ohio). An unintentional role, that of providing credibility to FPDGIs, also emerges. Political, structural, and resource-based limitations to the states' ability to regulate for-profit institutions also are explored. Finally, several roles of FPDGIs in the two states are described. These include that of: a private good; a legitimate, market-based choice for students; a low priority; and something to be controlled, limited, or eliminated.
590 $a School code: 0175.
650 4 $a Business Administration, Management. $3 626628
650 4 $a Education, Policy. $3 1669130
650 4 $a Education, Higher. $3 543175
690 $a 0454
690 $a 0458
690 $a 0745
710 2 $a University of Pennsylvania. $3 1017401
773 0 $t Dissertation Abstracts International $g 72-07A.
790 1 0 $a Finney, Joni E., $e advisor
790 $a 0175
791 $a Ed.D.
792 $a 2011
856 4 0 $u http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=3455390