The centralization of authority in public higher education from a local campus to the multicampus system and from local governing boards to state mechanisms is discussed. Dissipation of staff time in meeting bureaucratic requirements and faculty uneasiness with centralized planning and long-distance decision-making are described. (MLW)

Identifying the traditional function of the trustees as that of maintaining a balance between accountability and autonomy, and pointing out the threat to that role inherent in the new emphasis on accountability and the development of systems of public higher education, the author outlines prospects for the seventies and the challenge for trustees.…

Issues, such as admissions and tuition, that once were institutional prerogatives are seen now as having to be addressed more collectively. The need for states to have independent boards and staffs sensitive to educational values, but with the public-interested-oriented perspective is argued. (MLW)

Noting that institutional trustees have less authority as a result of the collectivistic trend, the author forcasts continued growth of statewide higher education agencies and discusses the problems of statewide coordination. He suggests ways in which local boards should cooperate with state agencies to bring about improvement in governance. (JT)

Problems unique to central administrations and board members are discussed, including the line of authority, treating institutions equitably, exceeding statute-imposed limitations, the failure of board members to do their homework, and the extent to which the board should represent the people of the state and the institutions it governs. (MLW)

The President of Ohio State University discusses the movement for statewide coordination of higher education noting its disadvantages and widespread criticism of it. He concludes, however, that since the balancing of competing claims is the name of the game it is still best done at the state level where the search for the public interest should…

By their blind advocacy of institutional interests as advanced by faculty and administrators, many college and university governing boards are assuring their gradual displacement by stronger coordinating councils or super boards governing a state system of public higher education. (Author/JMD)

In the 1960s crisis, higher education is seen as having made some decisions that outlasted their usefulness: easy tenure, Ph.D. overproduction, overbuilt plants. In meeting today's crisis, there is the threat of creating new "policy dinosaurs," such as overcentralization, erosion of faculty quality, debasement of educational standards. (Author/MLW)

State systems are seen as becoming more centralized. Many college presidents see a diminishing of campus autonomy by governing board staffs of higher education. Statewide planning and opening lines of communication are also discussed by George Janik and George B. Weathersby. (MLW)