Research in Higher Education

, Volume 38, Issue 1, pp 17–42 | Cite as

State Regulation and Administrative Flexibility at Public Universities

  • James Fredericks Volkwein
  • Shaukat M. Malik


Have regulatory practices changed in the past decade and does flexibility make a difference in campus effectiveness? This study first measures the academic, personnel, and financial dimensions of state regulation, as well as the changes that have occurred since 1983. Second, this study examines the relationship between state regulation and various state characteristics, and tests the hypothesis that state characteristics have an effect on the level of flexibility granted to university campuses. Third, the research analyzes the relationship between state regulation and campus characteristics, and examines whether the level of campus flexibility is associated with measures of university quality.


State Characteristic Education Research State Regulation Financial Dimension Regulatory Practice 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Aldrich, H. E. (1979). Organizations and Environments. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  2. Atwell, R. H. (1985). A view from Washington. In Gardner et al. (eds.), Cooperation and Conflict. Washington, D.C.: Association of Governing Boards.Google Scholar
  3. Berdahl, R. O. (1971). Statewide Coordination of Higher Education. Washington, D.C.: American Council On Education.Google Scholar
  4. Blau, P. M. (1973). The Organization of Academic Work. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  5. Boone, J. N., Peterson, S., Poje, D. J., and Scarlett, M. (1991). University autonomy: Perceived and preferred location of authority. Review of Higher Education 14(2): 135-153.Google Scholar
  6. Carnegie Commission on Higher Education (1973). Governance of Higher Education. New York: McGraw Hill.Google Scholar
  7. Carnegie Council on Policy Studies in Higher Education (1976). The States and Higher Education: A Proud Past and a Vital Future. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.Google Scholar
  8. Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching (1982). The Control of the Campus: A Report on the Governance of Higher Education. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  9. Curry, D. J., and Fischer, N. M. (1986). Public higher education and the state: Models for financing, budgeting, and accountability. ASHE paper, San Antonio, TX (ERIC #ED 268886).Google Scholar
  10. de Groot, H., McMahon, W., and Volkwein, J. F. (1991). The cost structure of American research universities. Review of Economics and Statistics 73: 424-431.Google Scholar
  11. Downs, A. (1967). Inside Bureaucracy. Boston: Little Brown.Google Scholar
  12. Dressel, D. (ed.) (1980). The autonomy of public colleges. New Directions for Institutional Research, No. 26. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.Google Scholar
  13. Fisher, L. A. (1988). State legislatures and the autonomy of colleges and universities: A comparative study of legislation in four states, 1900–1979. Journal of Higher Education 59(2): 133-161.Google Scholar
  14. Gardner, J. W., Atwell, R. H., and Berdahl, R. O. (eds.) (1985). Cooperation and Conflict. Washington, D.C.: Association of Governing Boards.Google Scholar
  15. Graham, H. D., and Diamond, N. (1996). The Rise of American Research Universities: Elites and Challengers in the Postwar Era. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
  16. Lawrence, P. R., and Lorsch, J. W. (1967). Organization and Environment. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  17. Levy, D. C. (1980). University and Government in Mexico: Autonomy in an Authoritarian System. New York: Praeger.Google Scholar
  18. Millet, J. D. (1984). Conflict in Higher Education. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.Google Scholar
  19. Mingle, J. (ed.) (1983). Management Flexibility and State Regulation in Higher Education. Atlanta: Southern Regional Education Board.Google Scholar
  20. National Research Council (1995). Research-Doctorate Programs in the United States: Continuity and Change. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
  21. Newman, F. (1987). Choosing Quality: Reducing Conflict Between the State and the University. Washington, D.C.: Education Commission of the States.Google Scholar
  22. Pascarella, E. T., and Terenzini, P. T. (1991). How Colleges Affect Students: Findings and Insights from Twenty Years of Research. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.Google Scholar
  23. Pfeffer, J., and Salancik, G. R. (1978). The External Control of Organizations: A Resource Dependence Perspective. New York: Harper and Row.Google Scholar
  24. Sloan Commission on Government and Higher Education (1980). A Program for Renewed Partnership. Cambridge: Ballinger Pub. Co.Google Scholar
  25. Volkwein, J. F. (1986a). State financial control of public universities and its relationship to campus administrative elaborateness and cost: Results of a national study. Review of Higher Education 9(3): 267-286.Google Scholar
  26. Volkwein, J. F. (1986b). Campus autonomy and its relationship to measures of university quality. Journal of Higher Education 57(5): 510-528.Google Scholar
  27. Volkwein, J. F. (1987). State regulation and campus autonomy. In J. C. Smart (ed.), Higher Education Handbook of Theory and Research, vol. 3, pp. 120-154. New York: Agathon Press.Google Scholar
  28. Volkwein, J. F. (1989). Changes in quality among public universities. Journal of Higher Education 60(2): 136-151.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Human Sciences Press, Inc. 1997

Authors and Affiliations

  • James Fredericks Volkwein
    • 1
  • Shaukat M. Malik
    • 2
  1. 1.University at AlbanyAlbany
  2. 2.University at AlbanyUSA

Personalised recommendations