<p>Characteristics of state governance are often discussed when considering differences in higher education policy decision-making across the USA. These comparisons are rooted in widely utilized&#xa0;typologies that consider structural centralization, autonomy, and authority. Despite the continued consideration of these typologies, previous research notes limitations regarding understanding policy roles within these agencies. Using latent class analysis, the current study provides a new exploratory policy-focused typology of how states allocate responsibilities to higher education agencies around improving postsecondary degree attainment. The resulting four-group typology serves as a foundational overview of differences in state higher education governance in the USA. As well as provides a descriptive tool for future causal and explanatory research. We also offer insights into potential takeaways of differences in policy-making responsibilities between states and considerations for policymakers, state officials, and researchers.</p>

错误:搜索内容不能为空,请输入英文关键词
错误:关键词超出字数限制,请精简
高级检索

Developing an exploratory policy-focused typology of state higher education governance for degree attainment oversight in the USA

  • Paul G. Rubin,
  • Jason C. Lee,
  • Lucas N. English,
  • Melanie Heath

摘要

Characteristics of state governance are often discussed when considering differences in higher education policy decision-making across the USA. These comparisons are rooted in widely utilized typologies that consider structural centralization, autonomy, and authority. Despite the continued consideration of these typologies, previous research notes limitations regarding understanding policy roles within these agencies. Using latent class analysis, the current study provides a new exploratory policy-focused typology of how states allocate responsibilities to higher education agencies around improving postsecondary degree attainment. The resulting four-group typology serves as a foundational overview of differences in state higher education governance in the USA. As well as provides a descriptive tool for future causal and explanatory research. We also offer insights into potential takeaways of differences in policy-making responsibilities between states and considerations for policymakers, state officials, and researchers.