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)

Many problems related to enrollment declines and demographic changes, it is argued, will need resolution at the state level by the decisions and recommendations of statewide planning agencies. Common duties of coordinating boards are characterized as planning, budget review, and program review. (MLW)

Higher education and public policy leaders need to reconsider how and whether the multicampus form of organization can continue to be useful. Issues include whether multicampus systems respond effectively to social, economic, demographic, and technological change; real costs; vulnerability to political influence; how leadership functions; and the…

This comparative study synthesizes data from a national study which examined differences among states in their governance structures, and asked if differences in performance were related to governing structures and whether governance structure affected strategies of state policymakers. The seven states examined were grouped into four governance…

This case study part of the State Structures for the Governance of Higher Education study, focuses on governance and related issues in New York's higher education system. The study's overall purpose was to examine differences among states in their governance structures, and to determine if differences in performance were related to governing…

This report examines the historical role of statewide coordinating boards, most of which were established after World War II to help states deal with conflicting institutional political interests and values. While authority over institutional management remains vested in governing boards, statewide coordinating boards serve as alternative models…