Looking Inside the Black Box of Performance Funding for Higher Education: Policy Instruments, Organizational Obstacles, and Intended and Unintended Impacts
For several decades, policymakers have been concerned about increasing the efficiency and effectiveness of postsecondary institutions. In recent years, performance funding—which directly connects state funding to an institution's performance on indicators such as student persistence, credit acc...
| Main Authors: | , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Russell Sage Foundation
2016-04-01
|
| Series: | RSF: The Russell Sage Foundation Journal of the Social Sciences |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://www.rsfjournal.org/doi/full/10.7758/RSF.2016.2.1.07 |
| _version_ | 1819280865602043904 |
|---|---|
| author | Kevin J. Dougherty Sosanya M. Jones Hana Lahr Rebecca S. Natow Lara Pheatt Vikash Reddy |
| author_facet | Kevin J. Dougherty Sosanya M. Jones Hana Lahr Rebecca S. Natow Lara Pheatt Vikash Reddy |
| author_sort | Kevin J. Dougherty |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | For several decades, policymakers have been concerned about increasing the efficiency and effectiveness of postsecondary institutions. In recent years, performance funding—which directly connects state funding to an institution's performance on indicators such as student persistence, credit accrual, and college completion—has become a particularly attractive way of pursuing better college outcomes. But even as states have made an enormous investment in performance funding, troubling questions have been raised about whether performance funding has the effects intended and whether it also produces substantial negative side effects in the form of restrictions in access for underrepresented students and weakening of academic standards. This paper addresses these troubling questions by drawing on data richer than heretofore available. In addition to drawing on the existing body of research on performance funding, it reports data from a study of the implementation of performance funding in three leading states (Indiana, Ohio, and Tennessee) and its impacts on three universities and three community colleges in each state. |
| first_indexed | 2024-12-24T00:50:35Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-e666dc2261b147a083972003a726929e |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 2377-8253 2377-8261 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-12-24T00:50:35Z |
| publishDate | 2016-04-01 |
| publisher | Russell Sage Foundation |
| record_format | Article |
| series | RSF: The Russell Sage Foundation Journal of the Social Sciences |
| spelling | doaj.art-e666dc2261b147a083972003a726929e2022-12-21T17:23:35ZengRussell Sage FoundationRSF: The Russell Sage Foundation Journal of the Social Sciences2377-82532377-82612016-04-012114717310.7758/RSF.2016.2.1.07Looking Inside the Black Box of Performance Funding for Higher Education: Policy Instruments, Organizational Obstacles, and Intended and Unintended ImpactsKevin J. Dougherty0Sosanya M. Jones1Hana Lahr2Rebecca S. Natow3Lara Pheatt4Vikash Reddy5Teachers College, Columbia UniversitySouthern Illinois University at CarbondaleTeachers College, Columbia UniversityTeachers College, Columbia UniversityTeachers College, Columbia UniversityTeachers College, Columbia UniversityFor several decades, policymakers have been concerned about increasing the efficiency and effectiveness of postsecondary institutions. In recent years, performance funding—which directly connects state funding to an institution's performance on indicators such as student persistence, credit accrual, and college completion—has become a particularly attractive way of pursuing better college outcomes. But even as states have made an enormous investment in performance funding, troubling questions have been raised about whether performance funding has the effects intended and whether it also produces substantial negative side effects in the form of restrictions in access for underrepresented students and weakening of academic standards. This paper addresses these troubling questions by drawing on data richer than heretofore available. In addition to drawing on the existing body of research on performance funding, it reports data from a study of the implementation of performance funding in three leading states (Indiana, Ohio, and Tennessee) and its impacts on three universities and three community colleges in each state.http://www.rsfjournal.org/doi/full/10.7758/RSF.2016.2.1.07performance fundingperformance-based fundingoutcomes-based fundinghigher education accountabilityeducational accountabilitypublic accountabilityperformance managementperformance-based managementquality assurancehigher education policycollege quality |
| spellingShingle | Kevin J. Dougherty Sosanya M. Jones Hana Lahr Rebecca S. Natow Lara Pheatt Vikash Reddy Looking Inside the Black Box of Performance Funding for Higher Education: Policy Instruments, Organizational Obstacles, and Intended and Unintended Impacts RSF: The Russell Sage Foundation Journal of the Social Sciences performance funding performance-based funding outcomes-based funding higher education accountability educational accountability public accountability performance management performance-based management quality assurance higher education policy college quality |
| title | Looking Inside the Black Box of Performance Funding for Higher Education: Policy Instruments, Organizational Obstacles, and Intended and Unintended Impacts |
| title_full | Looking Inside the Black Box of Performance Funding for Higher Education: Policy Instruments, Organizational Obstacles, and Intended and Unintended Impacts |
| title_fullStr | Looking Inside the Black Box of Performance Funding for Higher Education: Policy Instruments, Organizational Obstacles, and Intended and Unintended Impacts |
| title_full_unstemmed | Looking Inside the Black Box of Performance Funding for Higher Education: Policy Instruments, Organizational Obstacles, and Intended and Unintended Impacts |
| title_short | Looking Inside the Black Box of Performance Funding for Higher Education: Policy Instruments, Organizational Obstacles, and Intended and Unintended Impacts |
| title_sort | looking inside the black box of performance funding for higher education policy instruments organizational obstacles and intended and unintended impacts |
| topic | performance funding performance-based funding outcomes-based funding higher education accountability educational accountability public accountability performance management performance-based management quality assurance higher education policy college quality |
| url | http://www.rsfjournal.org/doi/full/10.7758/RSF.2016.2.1.07 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT kevinjdougherty lookinginsidetheblackboxofperformancefundingforhighereducationpolicyinstrumentsorganizationalobstaclesandintendedandunintendedimpacts AT sosanyamjones lookinginsidetheblackboxofperformancefundingforhighereducationpolicyinstrumentsorganizationalobstaclesandintendedandunintendedimpacts AT hanalahr lookinginsidetheblackboxofperformancefundingforhighereducationpolicyinstrumentsorganizationalobstaclesandintendedandunintendedimpacts AT rebeccasnatow lookinginsidetheblackboxofperformancefundingforhighereducationpolicyinstrumentsorganizationalobstaclesandintendedandunintendedimpacts AT larapheatt lookinginsidetheblackboxofperformancefundingforhighereducationpolicyinstrumentsorganizationalobstaclesandintendedandunintendedimpacts AT vikashreddy lookinginsidetheblackboxofperformancefundingforhighereducationpolicyinstrumentsorganizationalobstaclesandintendedandunintendedimpacts |