Learning Resources

Abstract: Entrepreneuring the Future of Higher Education: Radical Transformation in Times of Profound Change
by Mary Landon Darden
Rowman & Littlefield: Lanham, MD: 2021
202 pages
ISBN: 978-1-4758-5494-7

Abstract: In April of 2017 the University System of Georgia (USG) launched a system wide initiative, known as the Comprehensive Administrative Review (CAR). The charge was to identify and implement administrative service improvement, efficiencies, and administrative cost savings that can be redirected to student success efforts and core academic programs. As Chair of the CAR Steering Committee, Dr. Marrero will outline the objectives of the CAR, the process, implementation and reporting structures, and the results to date. Furthermore, as a President of two USG comprehensive universities during the process of and initial implementation of CAR (University of West Georgia and Georgia Southern University), Dr. Marrero will provide an institutional perspective and insight into building a culture of high performance with a focus on evidence-based leadership, accountability, and continuous improvement. The session will highlight why investing in and engaging your people is critical in building a culture of continuous improvement.

Abstract: Challenging times continue for higher education: calls for more accountability, assessment of outcomes, evidence of institutional performance, relevance for life and careers, and student success. Integrated strategic planning and decision making in this ever-changing environment is critical for campus leadership. To maximize accountability, assessment, analytics, and accreditation, it is imperative for campus leaders to develop an integrated approach that begins with standard metrics, aligns with performance-based goals, and connects with accreditation requirements. Analytics, learning analytics, and learning management systems provide the crucial link to learning standards that support the reporting, monitoring, and improvement of student learning.

Abstract: In 2009 the Arizona University System (supporting over 130,000 enrollments) through its Board of Regents directed its board president and the presidents of Arizona State University, University of Arizona, and Northern Arizona University to create an operational plan that reflected the board’s vision, goals, and strategic directions. A primary objective was to transform the system (or enterprise) vision into concrete goals and outcomes that would directly connect to financial decision making at the system and university level. The backdrop for higher education planning and budgeting expectations included the continuation of severe reductions in state funding, rapidly increasing student tuition and fees, and a call for greater accountability. The planning processes were characterized by the integration of board and presidential discussions, inclusion of constituent debate, identification of strategic choices, and approval of outcomes focused on measuring performance. The integration ran across and within three organizations or levels that included the Arizona Board of Regents, its system administration, and the three universities.

Abstract: This article explains the cost of education in public research universities. “Price,” meaning “tuition,” is often incorrectly substituted for “cost,” meaning expenditures by the university that make the education possible. University cost is disaggregated to enable readers to distinguish between the costs associated with providing education to students and the costs of other non-educational activities that tend to produce their own revenue. While tuition has increased rapidly, real cost per student for providing education has been roughly constant for nearly 20 years. Increased revenue from tuition has been almost precisely offset by reduced revenue from state appropriations.

Abstract: How have presidential leadership strategy, decision approaches, and institutional culture preferences influenced fund-raising effectiveness at a historically Black college for women? These conceptual dimensions guided a qualitative study that interviewed three recent Spelman College presidents and investigated documentary evidence to develop an understanding of each president's relative successes. Although generalizability is not possible when studying a single institution, the three very individualistic approaches to fund-raising adopted by these presidents indicate the contextual nature of fund-raising effectiveness and highlight the need for knowledgeable institutional planners who understand each of these conceptual dimensions to accommodate the varying contexts of their institutions.