Changes in US higher education - Dissertation Example

?Introduction A goal of higher education is for to be in an environment where they can focus on their academic success. Pressure has been placed on many universities to ensure that all students complete their degree. The growing importance of degree completion has led to the increased need for leaders to ensure that the mission and goals of their institutions are aligned with students completing their education. Within universities, departments such as athletics are examining their role in providing student athletes with opportunities for full participation in the college experience. Leaders within the university are challenged to provide a student athlete with an environment where they focus on their academic success (Eckel and King, 2004). Other challenges include ensuring institutional practices and policies are not being compromised for the sake of athletic programs and to ensure student athletes are being fully engaged through the integration within their campus academic communities (Eckel and King, 2004) Some of the challenges that leaders face in higher education today are law, distance learning, response to change, gender, diversity and retention. The implementation of change in higher education can be quite costly and initiate faculty and personnel changes within the pedgological construct and dynamic of the university. This paper will address the challenges leaders face in organizing a successful preparation to these dynamics. However, prior to dealing more on this issue, the essential background of some of the problems in US higher education shall be discussed first. Background of some of the problems in US higher education In the United States, higher education is under local government control and capitalism, and a gateway to transform an individual into a middle-class (Eckel and King, 2004). In this regard, the US higher education has become a reflection of American character which primarily depicts independence, suspicion of government, ambition, inclusiveness and competitions (Eckel and King, 2004). This makes US higher education so complex and diverse that in one way or another it is difficult to describe standard practice for all those exercised in the states. The US higher education is subdivided into three different institutions which includes four-year, two-year and less than two-year courses which can be public, private and not-for-profit, and private and for profit. Considering that the US higher education is not controlled by the federal government, each of the 50 states is therefore responsible for its local management and control on higher education. This resulted to the fact that there is a significant variation in the degree of control for higher education from state to state (Eckel and King, 2004). As a result, there is variation of policies from different states regarding the establishment and management and control of colleges and universities. These variations although would not be so much of an issue at some point, but have significant impacts on the US higher education in the future. This could be explained further through the following situations. Although higher education remains to be at the third priority of the most states in the US in the budget allocation, it is also the first priority to undergo budget cut especially in bad economic times and fall of state tax revenue (Eckel and King, 2004). This is a corresponding problem in higher education for having the full potential to organize itself and achieve substantial amount of profit for its self provision. Today, colleges and universities in the US are trying to expand their revenue stream through different strategies including online education system, niche-oriented degree and non-degree academic programs, expansion of research capacities, engagement in licensing and sponsorship agreement, and obtaining auxiliary enterprises (Eckel and King, 2004). These strategies could prove as substantial evidences that the US higher education is highly commercialized and has become intended for profit-making activity. This also proves the fact that the US higher education could substantially provide for itself especially in the midst of tough economic times in which the state’s provision should be prioritized to some other important concerns. It is indeed the characteristic of US higher education to be independent, but this has corresponding drawbacks especially in times of trying to acquire help from the government most especially in challenging times for economic event of the country. In the event of downward spiraling economy, the US higher education is one of the institutions to suffer first and this is because of the fact that it could hardly get the support of its corresponding state especially in the event of tough and challenging times. Clearly, due to its ability to stand independent, higher education has become one of the less primary concerns in the event that the state would be faced with tough challenges and hard decisions. Another problem faced with contemporary US higher education is in line with the ongoing and expected trends in the business environment. It is true that the higher education should be able to meet the ongoing demand or trends in its prevailing environment. Considering that there are varying policies for higher education in the US, the country’s stand on institutionalizing effective education system on this matter may form a significant struggle in the future due to lack of highly centralized effort governing the country’s education system. For instance, the recent increasing trend in business practice and the necessary skills needed for professionals should be covered primarily by the higher education. For instance, future accountants are expected not only to focus on basic function of accounting but they also have to explore on other necessary skills which could be of high importance on future business trends (Howieson, 2003). Situations like this pose a significant disadvantage on the US higher education because of its lack of unifying efforts when it comes to developing general policies that would be able to work effectively and efficiently for the entire country. The US is faced with ever changing political, economic, social and environmental concerns. For instance, under social concerns, the entire state has to address different social issues. These issues on the other hand are strongly interrelated with the ongoing education model that has to significantly address future concerns of the state (Ryan and Fraser, 2010). This means that the US higher education specifically has to be designed based on existing concerns of the state. However, there is a challenge on this considering that the US significantly faces constant varying changes in political, economic and social environment. This means that the US higher education from time to time should be evaluated that would suit to the prevailing needs of the country. However, due to the absence of centralized policy development, challenges are expected to come upon the implementation process especially on creating a unified effort in building the US standard for higher education. Expectations for US higher education In the US education system, leaders involved in the higher education are expected to turn challenges into opportunities. In the US nursing education for instance, nurse educators are expected to do something in order to respond effectively to the evolving US health care system (Rich and Nugent, 2010). Nurse educators are expected to formulate a better education system that will be able to address the prevailing demand in the US health care system as far as the state is concerned with formulating plans in order to improve the policies involved in the country’s contemporary health services. In other words, this demands for integration of US higher education with the prevailing social, political or economic concerns of the state. As stated earlier, budget for the US higher education may vary and cannot be expected with stability at some certain point due to the state’s level of priority and concerns given to it in the budget allocation process. It is in this regard that there is always a strong positive association between the US higher education and intercollegiate athletics for instance. In this, students are expected to maintain good grades in order to substantially minimize the cost associated with college life (Mixon and Trevino, 2005). The US higher education has specific academic missions and it is expected that this institution should be able to deliberately provide them to all despite the local government’s limited support at some certain point. It is in line with this that many expect substantial positive impacts of intercollegiate athletics on the US higher education because it does not only motivate students to obtain good academic performance, but including the psychic costs associated with college life (Mixon and Trevino, 2005). However, it is also expected that the intercollegiate athletics should essentially fall on the right response to change that at some point may be hindered by intrapersonal conflict, perceived institutional support, managerial turnover and other institutional support (Peachey and Bruening, 2011). It is therefore expected that the integration of intercollegiate athletics with higher education should be in line with personal expectations, institutional support, good management approach and support in order to effectively perform it with the current US higher education system. This would ensure that the higher education with respect to change could be expected to stand effectively even with some certain modifications and integrations along the way due to organizational change. Organizational change in the US higher education is therefore a must and it is expected to undergo that way especially in its prevailing condition which is most vulnerable to various changes. The role of higher education leaders On the other hand, as stated earlier, the US system for higher education is motivated by a specific quest and that is to stay on top of the ongoing international competition. Part of this is the convergence towards international uniformity, conformity, and compliance, which substantially brings forward high expectations in teacher education for higher education (Delandshere and Petrosky, 2004). Teachers therefore are expected to obtain high teaching standard, knowledge and education in order to meet world class demand. The US cannot just simply compete with the world’s existing standard for higher education without considering the very basic need for it to succeed. The very basic foundation for this, as already stated is the quality standard to be implemented among teachers. For instance, managing campus programs especially those integrated with intercollegiate athletic programs could be a significant issue to be explored in great detail. Teachers do not have essential trainings in handling this, but are already informed in great detail about extracurricular activities in the academic world. In particular, schools must be able to provide the necessary resources in order for students to invest in extracurricular activities such as athletic programs (Steams and Glennie, 2010). This primarily calls for teachers or leaders in the academic institutions to be extra resourceful provided that educational institutions in particular are more sensitive when it comes to funding and resources for athletic programs due to substantial monetary reasons for commercialization of the education system. The president or directors for instance need to initiate basic strategies how they could fund the academic institution without the aid of the national or state government. Athletic directors in great specific detail should be able to formulate strategies how to deliver quality education to those who are deserving students in the academe just to be able to augment their capacity to self-finance their education. However, this has to be implemented without compromising the original and specific objectives of the academe in various substantial aspects. Furthermore, professional learning activities are also important among teachers in the academe for these would ensure discovery of significant factors that would affect the standard for education system (Kwakman, 2003). Higher education for instance requires teachers with high level of professional learning experience and this primarily would contribute to excellence and help the US education system to be elevated in the international competition. For instance, the need to integrate the intercollegiate athletics in the US higher education programs is a specific strategy allowing financially-challenged students to enter into universities and colleges with increasing demand for tuition fee that specifically creates a wide gap between public and private universities (Rosenstone, 2004). This is the very thing that Athletic directors for instance should be able to ensure that it is effectively executed. However, this requires professional learning activities on the part of academic leaders in order to specifically discover significant factors that will contribute to the success of higher education amidst the ongoing economic, political and social changes and climate. It is important to consider not only the objectives to help higher education to survive, but this substantially illustrates the fact that academic leaders need to have sufficient background on what specific approaches should be integrated with strategies to ensure success in improving the current state of higher education (Kwakman, 2003). Some important leaders’ actions to bring change to US higher education Based on the presented issues above, the present state of the US higher education is such a continuing challenge to policy makers. It is in line with this that teachers and even researchers in teacher education are encouraged to actively participate in the US policy-making arena (Bales, 2006). Groups of researchers for instance have substantial background in the current policy-making activities in between the national and state authority in line with the current system for higher education in the country. Their information could be a potential source of guiding principles leading to the change of US higher education. Policy makers should ensure that it is not only the policies involved in the development and improvement of US education are necessary but the basic which is initial teacher education is to be substantially required in the policy-making process (Lee, 2006). This only means that in order to achieve a remarkable change in the US higher education, one of the basic foundations is to undergo personal development for every teacher which has to be covered by the national or state authority with high level of synchronicity or consistency. On the other hand, government leaders including the executive, judicial and legislative body have many things that they can do especially in the move to enhance the US higher education for it to be more competitive in the international arena. They all have the ability to support and even improve the “Structured Opportunity Market” in higher education by applying the vital role of human capital for national economies (Douglass, 2010). In other words, tapping the human resource for social transformation is necessary in order to promote a high level of higher education by implementing the role of human capital in the economic, political and social context. Furthermore, the present socio-economic climate in the US could have a remarkable influence in the organizational culture among universities in the higher education just like what happened in the United Kingdom (Humberstone, 2009). In this study, it is particularly shown that the higher education covering sport and leisure management has been widely considered based on the existing shift in the socio-economic climate which resulted to reinforcing the university culture for the restructuring of the sport management programs. In order to appreciate this in great detail, there is a need to undergo the creation of knowledge production system among scholars and students in order to participate in global knowledge networks especially in the case of the US which has a unique historical and cultural education policy framework (Crow and Silver, 2008). In line with this, university directors or concerned professors for instance have to strongly coordinate with each other in order to understand further the whole context of the law for the US higher education and implement resolutions that could be approved at the right time. Conclusion The goals of higher education in the US which include the achievement of its organizational academic objectives and to support students in great detail seem to be only superficial at some certain point. The US higher education is a picture of highly commercialized institution which primarily receives only a portion of government support, and the rest is line with independent strategies to compete and stand in the long run. As mentioned, the US higher education is a depiction of American character which primarily includes the very nature of independence. It is because of this that the US higher education substantially needs a fair share in the policy making process in both the national and state authority in order to achieve competence in the international market for higher education. This is also a significant move in order to compete in the global market with highly structured opportunity market. Potential leaders not only the policy makers but involving teachers and researchers are supposed to contribute their significant role in order to bring positive change to US higher education. After all, they all have essential things to share in the process even though there may be a form of challenges for them in it. References Bales, B. L. (2006).Teacher education policies in the United States: The accountability shift since 1980. Teaching and Teacher Education. 22, 395-407. Crow, M. M., and Silver, M. (2008). American education systems in a global context. Technology in Society. 30, 279-291. Delandshere, G., and Petrosky, A. (2004). Political rationales and ideological stances of the standards-based reform of teacher education in the US. Teaching and Teacher Education. 20, 1-15. Douglas, J. A. (2010). Creating a Culture of Aspiration: Higher Education, Human Capital and Social Change. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences. 2, 6981-6995. Eckel, P. D., and King, J. E. (2004). An Overview of Higher Education in the United States: Diversity, Access, and the Role of the Marketplace. Retrieved January 4, 2012, from http://www.acenet.edu/bookstore/pdf/2004_higher_ed_overview.pdf Howieson, B. (2003). Accounting practice in the new millennium: is accounting education ready to meet the challenge? The British Accounting Review. 35, 69-103. Humberstone, B. (2009). Sport management, gender and the ‘bigger picture’: Challenging changes in Higher Education-A partial auto/ethnographical account. Sport Management Review. 12, 255-262. Kwakman, K. (2003). Factors affecting teachers’ participation in professional learning activities. Teaching and Teacher Education. 19, 149-170. Lee, A. A. (2006). How teaching influences learning: Implications for educational researchers, teacher educators and policy makers. Teaching and Teacher Education. 22, 612-626. Mixon, F. G. Jr. and Trevino, L. J. (2005). From kickoff to commencement: the positive role of intercollegiate athletics in higher education. Economics of Education Review. 24, 97-102. Peachey, J. W., and Bruening, J. (2011) Investigating ambivalence towards organizational change in a Football Championship Subdivision intercollegiate athletic department. Sport Management Review. Rich, K. L., and Nugent, K. E. (2010). A United States perspective on the challenges in nursing education. Nurse Education Theory. 30, 228-232. Rosenstone, S. J. (2004). Challenges Facing Higher Education in America: Lessons and Opportunities. Retrieved January 4, 2012, from http://www.utoronto.ca/president/04conference/downloads/Rosenstone.pdf Ryan, Y., and Fraser, K. (2010) Education Development in Higher Education. International Encyclopedia of Education (3rd ed.). 411-418. Stearns, E., and Glennie, E. J. (2010). Opportunities to participate: Extracurricular activities’ distribution across and academic correlates in high schools. Social Science Research. 39, 296-309. Read More