Russell_USGConsolidations_11_28_18_2
➤ Gửi thông báo lỗi ⚠️ Báo cáo tài liệu vi phạmNội dung chi tiết: Russell_USGConsolidations_11_28_18_2
Russell_USGConsolidations_11_28_18_2
Better Outcomes Without Increased Costs? Effects of Georgia’s University System ConsolidationsLauren Bussell’November 28. 21)18AbstractDeclining state Russell_USGConsolidations_11_28_18_2e appropriations for higher education have prompted consolidations within numerous public university systems. Using administrative data from the University System of Georgia, I investigate the effects of recent consolidations on educational quality and efficiency. Comparing cohorts matriculating aft Russell_USGConsolidations_11_28_18_2er consolidations to similar cohorts at non-consolidated institutions reveals that consolidation increases retention rates and the fraction of studentRussell_USGConsolidations_11_28_18_2
s graduating on-time with four-year degrees, spending data and conversations with ƯSG administrators suggest that increased spending on academic suppoBetter Outcomes Without Increased Costs? Effects of Georgia’s University System ConsolidationsLauren Bussell’November 28. 21)18AbstractDeclining state Russell_USGConsolidations_11_28_18_2ucation consolidation, college mergers, higher education finance.'Thi’ Nelson A. Rockefeller Center for Public Policy and the Social Sciences, Dartmouth College, 6092 Rockefeller Hall. Hanover. NH. 03755. Phone: 663-646-1291. Email: l.aiirenHussellt'tdartmouth.edu. I have benefited from discussions Russell_USGConsolidations_11_28_18_2with Heidi Williams, David Alitor, .Iradiua Angrist, Sara Fisher Ellison. Glenn Ellison, Esther Duflo, Amanda Pallais, and Phillip Levine as well as tRussell_USGConsolidations_11_28_18_2
he MU' Labor Lunch participants. 1 thank Rachana Bhatt, Angela Hell, and Claire Arnold at the University System of Georgia Board of Regents for providBetter Outcomes Without Increased Costs? Effects of Georgia’s University System ConsolidationsLauren Bussell’November 28. 21)18AbstractDeclining state Russell_USGConsolidations_11_28_18_2er I122374Ị. Any opinion, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation or the University System of Georgia.11 IntroductionFor years, public higher education systems have res Russell_USGConsolidations_11_28_18_2ponded to fiscal pressures with consolidations. Ill 1974, the University of Wisconsin system combined with the Wisconsin State Universities system toRussell_USGConsolidations_11_28_18_2
avoid program duplication and contain growing costs (University of Wisconsin 2016). In 1995, Minnesota restructured its public system of state collegeBetter Outcomes Without Increased Costs? Effects of Georgia’s University System ConsolidationsLauren Bussell’November 28. 21)18AbstractDeclining state Russell_USGConsolidations_11_28_18_2ate college, or community college systems include Kentucky (1997). Kansas (1965-2008). Alabama (2015), Louisiana (2015), Texas (2015), anil Georgia (2013-2018) (Warren 2008: oilman 2011; Diamond 2013: Reeve 2013: Hamilton 2013; Marcus 2013: Mytelka 2015). Most recently, in October 2017, University o Russell_USGConsolidations_11_28_18_2f Wisconsin officials announced a plan to merge all two-year campuses with four-year institutions, and the President of the Connecticut State CollegesRussell_USGConsolidations_11_28_18_2
ami Universities System announced that the state’s 12 community colleges will be consolidated into a single community college, a plan prompted by theBetter Outcomes Without Increased Costs? Effects of Georgia’s University System ConsolidationsLauren Bussell’November 28. 21)18AbstractDeclining state Russell_USGConsolidations_11_28_18_2efficiency since fiscal pressures have only intensified in recent years. Between 2003 and 2013. state appropriations declim'd dramatically with public research institutions receiving 28% less funding per student ill 2013 than 2003 and public community colleges receiving 9% less. As of the 2016 fisca Russell_USGConsolidations_11_28_18_2l year, state appropriations in all but five states were still below pre-recession levels (SHEEO 2016). In the midst of lower levels of state appropriRussell_USGConsolidations_11_28_18_2
ations, all sectors of the higher education market have increased spending in real terms on education and related expenses. Public community colleges Better Outcomes Without Increased Costs? Effects of Georgia’s University System ConsolidationsLauren Bussell’November 28. 21)18AbstractDeclining state Russell_USGConsolidations_11_28_18_2ed share of spending (Desrochers and Hurlburt 2016), and state policymakers have identified consolidations as one way to improve efficiency.Consolidations are an attractive response to increases in spending due to potential economies of scale. A merged institution can operate with a single admission Russell_USGConsolidations_11_28_18_2s or registrar office and con2solidate libraries. health services, and athletics programs. Additionally, a merged institution can cut its administratiRussell_USGConsolidations_11_28_18_2
ve payroll by retaining fewer administrators to oversee larger institutions. For example. Connecticut policymakers predict that combining 12 exist ingBetter Outcomes Without Increased Costs? Effects of Georgia’s University System ConsolidationsLauren Bussell’November 28. 21)18AbstractDeclining state Russell_USGConsolidations_11_28_18_2and provosts with a single vice chancellor, a single provost, arid a single chief financial officer (Megan 2017). However, potential savings are not limited to administrative spending. Instruction may also have economies of scale if institutions can consolidate program offerings, a goal of both the Russell_USGConsolidations_11_28_18_2Minnesota mergers in the 1990s and the Georgia mergers in 2013 (Healy 1996; USG 2012).Mergers will increase the productivity of instil III ions if theRussell_USGConsolidations_11_28_18_2
re are overall cost savings that do not decrease quality or quality improvements that do not increase overall costs. However, the effect of mergers onBetter Outcomes Without Increased Costs? Effects of Georgia’s University System ConsolidationsLauren Bussell’November 28. 21)18AbstractDeclining state Russell_USGConsolidations_11_28_18_2 ieder 2012; Woodhouse 2015). Administrators who oppose consolidations in Georgia and South Carolina have cited challenges in combining institutions with dissimilar missions (Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia 2013; Rivard 2013; Shain 2014; Rivard 2015), ami students have worried a Russell_USGConsolidations_11_28_18_2bout how mergers will affect their educational experiences (Rivard 2013; Rivard 2015). Little evidence exists to inform the debate since effects of coRussell_USGConsolidations_11_28_18_2
llege ami university mergers have rarely been rigorously investigated.In this paper, I examine five recent mergers within the University System of GeoBetter Outcomes Without Increased Costs? Effects of Georgia’s University System ConsolidationsLauren Bussell’November 28. 21)18AbstractDeclining state Russell_USGConsolidations_11_28_18_2ical of many public consolidations in that administrators have predicted fiscal savings through economies of scale and plan to redirect savings to spending that will increase student attainment. In fact, the USG Board of Regents has adopted increasing educational attainment as its first guiding prin Russell_USGConsolidations_11_28_18_2ciple for assessing potential consolidations (USG 2011a). USG combined eight institutions into four in 2013 and subsequent mergers followed in 2015, 2Russell_USGConsolidations_11_28_18_2
016. 2017, and 2018.Using a differences-in-differemes methodology. 1 compare student retention and gradna3tion outcomes for cohorts enrolling just befBetter Outcomes Without Increased Costs? Effects of Georgia’s University System ConsolidationsLauren Bussell’November 28. 21)18AbstractDeclining state Russell_USGConsolidations_11_28_18_2dent-level covariates such as demographics, financial aid receipt, and measures of pre-college preparation which allow me to account for cohort composition changes which could otherwise bias estimates of merger effects.My evidence indicates that rhe USG consolidations increased retention of first-ti Russell_USGConsolidations_11_28_18_2me undergraduate students.1 The main estimates indicate that the mergers increased the probability that a student re-enrolled for a second year by 1.7Russell_USGConsolidations_11_28_18_2
percentage points. Since 21% of students dropout after the first year, this represents an 8% decline in first-year dropout. I find no similar retentiBetter Outcomes Without Increased Costs? Effects of Georgia’s University System ConsolidationsLauren Bussell’November 28. 21)18AbstractDeclining state Russell_USGConsolidations_11_28_18_2h their studies). Consolidations also increase the fraction of students pursuing a Bachelor's degree who graduate within four years by 4 percentage points. Since only 14% of Bachelor’s degree students pre-consolidation finish on time, this corresponds to an 29% increase in on-time graduation.I asses Russell_USGConsolidations_11_28_18_2s several potential mechanisms underlying these gains. The most obvious potential explanation is increased overall spending per student as prior workRussell_USGConsolidations_11_28_18_2
has established that increasing spending, especially on academic support, is an effective way for public institutions to increase postsecondary attainBetter Outcomes Without Increased Costs? Effects of Georgia’s University System ConsolidationsLauren Bussell’November 28. 21)18AbstractDeclining state Russell_USGConsolidations_11_28_18_2ending per student. Instead, consolidations allowed affected institutions to shift spending from student services to academic support in such a way that overall spending was unaffected. Discussions with L'SG administrators reveal that the increase in academic support spending is likely reflective of Russell_USGConsolidations_11_28_18_2 the hiring of additional advising staff.Evon if consolidations increase productivity by improving student outcomes without increasing costs, it is noRussell_USGConsolidations_11_28_18_2
t clear that, they are welfare improving for students. It is possible that consolidations lead to higher tuition and fees for students through instituGọi ngay
Chat zalo
Facebook