State-Level Responses to U.S. Federal Policy on State Authorization for Higher Education

被引:1
|
作者
Natow, Rebecca S. [1 ]
Reddy, Vikash [2 ]
Ioannou, Victoria [3 ]
机构
[1] Hofstra Univ, Higher Educ Leadership & Policy Studies Program, Hempstead, NY 11550 USA
[2] Campaign Coll Opportun, Res Los Angeles Off, Sacramento, CA USA
[3] CUNY, Queens Coll, New York, NY 10021 USA
关键词
state authorization; higher education policy; intermediary organizations; policy implementation; federalism; IMPLEMENTATION; MANAGEMENT; POLITICS; LAW;
D O I
10.14507/epaa.31.7522
中图分类号
G40 [教育学];
学科分类号
040101 ; 120403 ;
摘要
In the United States, higher education institutions must be authorized as postsecondary education providers - through a process known as state authorization - to be eligible to receive federal student financial aid funds. Through state authorization policies, state governments play a key role in maintaining accountability for higher education. Since 2010, the federal government has issued a series of significant reforms on postsecondary state authorization; yet little is known about how state-level officials implement these policies. The purpose of this multi-case study was to analyze the experiences of five states (California, Illinois, Massachusetts, North Carolina, and Pennsylvania) responding to federal policy on postsecondary state authorization. Through semi-structured interviews with 25 officials across the five states and analysis of policy-relevant documents, this study found much consistency in the ways policy actors responded to federal state authorization policies. This study also found that states' implementation of these policies was challenged by insufficient staff capacity, limited communications with the federal department of education, complexity of federal policies, and high compliance costs. Intermediary organizations and policy actors' networks played important roles in many aspects of states' responses to the policies.
引用
收藏
页数:29
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Immigrants across the U.S. Federal Laboratory: Explaining State-Level Innovation in Immigration Policy
    Boushey, Graeme
    Luedtke, Adam
    STATE POLITICS & POLICY QUARTERLY, 2011, 11 (04) : 390 - 414
  • [2] U.S. Small Business Administration loans and U.S. state-level employment
    Orzechowski P.E.
    Journal of Economics and Finance, 2020, 44 (3) : 486 - 505
  • [3] Enforcement of state-level indoor tanning laws in the U.S.
    Hoerster, Katherine D.
    Pichon, Latrice C.
    Rubio, Debra A.
    Woodruff, Susan I.
    Forster, Jean L.
    Mayer, Joni A.
    ANNALS OF BEHAVIORAL MEDICINE, 2008, 35 : S15 - S15
  • [4] Forecasting U.S. State-Level Carbon Dioxide Emissions
    Burnett, J. Wesley
    Zhao, Xueting
    REVIEW OF REGIONAL STUDIES, 2014, 44 (03): : 223 - 240
  • [5] Non-utility Photovoltaic Deployment: Evaluation of U.S. State-level Policy Drivers
    Michaud G.
    Pitt D.
    Strategic Planning for Energy and the Environment, 2019, 38 (03): : 52 - 80
  • [6] The State of Higher Education Preparation Programs in the U.S.
    Holzweiss, Peggy C.
    Franklin, Corbin
    JOURNAL OF STUDENT AFFAIRS RESEARCH AND PRACTICE, 2024, 61 (02) : 279 - 294
  • [7] State-Level Immigrant Policy Climates and Health Care Among U.S. Children of Immigrants
    Molly Dondero
    Claire E. Altman
    Population Research and Policy Review, 2022, 41 : 2683 - 2708
  • [8] UNDERSTANDING U.S. ETHANOL CONSUMPTION AND ITS IMPLICATIONS FOR POLICY: A STUDY OF THE IMPACT OF STATE-LEVEL INCENTIVES
    Kesan, Jay P.
    Ohyama, Atsushi
    UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS LAW REVIEW, 2011, (02): : 435 - 474
  • [9] Indirect Presidential Influence, State-Level Approval, and Voting in the U.S. Senate
    Dwyer, Caitlin E.
    Treul, Sarah A.
    AMERICAN POLITICS RESEARCH, 2012, 40 (02) : 355 - 379
  • [10] Data on U.S. state-level electric vehicle policies, 2010-2015
    Wee, Sherilyn
    Coffman, Makena
    La Croix, Sumner
    DATA IN BRIEF, 2019, 23