How do views on the future of higher education held by for-profit and non-profit universities differ? What aspirations do they hold in common, and where do their differences lie? Where do for-profits have an advantage over the non-profits?
I was very fortunate to have the opportunity to discuss some of these and other issues with Douglas Becker, Chairman and CEO of Laureate Education, Inc. as part of our joint presentation of the 2004 Earl V. Pullias lecture at USC. The title of our presentation was Higher Education and the Global Marketplace: Entrepreneurial Activity in a Dynamic Environment.
In my presentation, I spoke of the intertwining missions of research, teaching, and social growth of the research university, and of some of the dangers that entails. I discussed five aspects of the evolving environment for higher education that I believed presented great opportunity to the for-profit sector to advance through disruptive innovation. They were 1) a “winner-take all” competition among research universities; 2) changing societal expectations; 3)increasing globalization; 4)changing access to information; and 5) changing demographics and the knowledge economy. I closed by noting that much innovation comes from competitors who are entering an established industry by "working at the fringes", and that we would be wise to observe, and in some cases work with, leaders on the for-profit sector in order to capture some of the innovation that they bring.
In his presentation, Becker began by describing Laureate Education, which has created what is arguably the first truly international university system. They own a variety of higher education institutions ranging from a specialized hotel school, through full universities encompassing such professional schools as law and medicine. Their goal, as stated by Becker, is to provide “an optimal mix of quality and affordability, with preparation for a successful career for each student as our central objective.” All of this is carried out within the context of individual institutions that are firmly rooted in the local culture of their society, but which nevertheless offer students with unusual exposure to the rest of the world. He then went on to compare Laureate and non-profit higher education in a number of dimensions. He argues that the two are closer than one might first think in many areas, and that current market-state policies of government are increasingly aligning the interests of non-profit and for-profit higher education. However, Laureate cannot undertake certain “public good” activities such as extensive research or teaching in areas of limited student interest, since it must always focus on areas that bring a good return on investment for both the students and Laureate. He contends that the major difference between the two segments lies in accountability and compensation practices and governance, areas where he believes the for-profits are in a much stronger situation.
Becker is a great innovator in the world of for-profit higher education. His comments are well worth reading.
The for-profits have little interest in academic freedom per se. The better ones are very interested in seeing that their students get a good education, and so focus more on the students needs rather than the faculty prerogatives. This sometimes has positive effects, sometimes negative. Check out Danial Levy's work, described in the post "More on private higher education globally". He addresses some aspects of the issue of academic freedom in his work.
Posted by: Lloyd Armstrong | January 22, 2007 at 03:47 PM
In searching your site for topics related to for-profit institutions of higher learning and what political impacts does it present to academic freedom? Or does it? thanks.
Posted by: Paulette Pardun | January 22, 2007 at 12:52 PM