Advertisement

State Governance Reform of Higher Education: Patterns, Trends, and Theories of the Public Policy Process

  • Michael K. McLendon
Part of the Higher Education: Handbook of Theory and Research book series (HATR, volume 18)

Abstract

The American campus-state relationship typically is cast in terms of a fundamental, even paradoxical, tension between the dual demands of institutional autonomy and public accountability, or between the university’s right to regulate its affairs from within and the state’s authority (and responsibility) to regulate the university’s affairs from without (Bailey, 1975; Berdahl, 1971; Carnegie Foundation, 1982; Glenny and Schmidtlein, 1983; Graham, 1989; Hines, 1988; Millet, 1982; Mortimer and McConnell, 1982; Newman, 1987; Volkwein, 1987). Because neither absolute autonomy of the campus from the state nor complete accountability of the campus to the state is likely to be feasible, the vexing question confronting policymakers is where, precisely, the line should be drawn between campus and state. The dominant pattern of the twentieth century was one of increasing involvement and intervention by state governments in the higher education sector. A large volume of literature has amassed, around, the interactions between higher education and state governments, focusing particularly on the development and functioning of different governance arrangements for higher education and on the effects of these different arrangements upon various institutional and state policy outcomes.

Keywords

High Education Policy Innovation High Education System American Political Science Review State Governance 
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.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Aiken, M., and Alford, R. (1970). Community structure and innovation: the case of public housing. American Political Science Review 64(3): 843–864.Google Scholar
  2. Almond, G.A., and Genco, S.J. (1977). Clouds, docks, and the study of politics. World Politics 29(4): 489–522.Google Scholar
  3. Bailey, S.K. (1975). Education Interest Groups in the Nation’s Capital, Washington, DC: American Council on Education.Google Scholar
  4. Baird, K.L. (1998). The NIH and FDA new medical research policies: a case of Policy Streams or Advocacy Coalitions? Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association, Chicago, 111.Google Scholar
  5. Barak, R.J. (1982). Program Review in Higher Education: Within and Without. Boulder, Colo.: National Center for Higher Education Management Systems.Google Scholar
  6. Barak, R.J., and Berdahl, R.O. (1977). State-level Academic Program Review in Higher Education. Report No. 107. Denver, Colo.: Education Commission of the States.Google Scholar
  7. Bardach, E. (1972). The Skill Factor in Politics. Berkeley, Calif.: University of California PressGoogle Scholar
  8. Baurngartner, F.R., and Jones, B.D. (1991). Agenda dynamics and policy subsystems. Journal of Politics 53: 1044–1074.Google Scholar
  9. Baumgartner, F.R., and Jones, B.D. (1993). Agendas and Instability in American Politics. Chicago: University of Chicago PressGoogle Scholar
  10. Baumgartner, F.R., and Jones, B.D. (2001), Policy dynamics. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association, Chicago, 111.Google Scholar
  11. Berdahl, R.O. (1959). British Universities and the State. Berkeley, Calif.: University of California PressGoogle Scholar
  12. Berdahl, R.O. (1971). Statewide Coordination of Higher Education. Washington, DC: American Council on Education.Google Scholar
  13. Berdahl, R.O. (ed.) (1975). Evaluating Statewide Boards. New Directions for Institutional Research, No. 5. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  14. Berdahl, R.O. (1980). Coordinating and governing boards: complementary or conflicting roles, Vetes 23(2): 9–18.Google Scholar
  15. Berdahl, R.O. (1998). Balancing self interest and accountability: St. Mary’s College of Maryland. In T.J. MacTaggart (ed.), Seeking Excellence through Independence; Liberating Colleges and Universities from Excessive Regulation. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  16. Berdahl, R.O., and MacTaggart, T. (2000). Charter Colleges: Balancing Freedom and Accountability. Boston: Pioneer Institute for Public Policy Research.Google Scholar
  17. Berry, F.S. (1994). Sizing up state policy innovation research. Policy Studies journal 22(3): 442–456.Google Scholar
  18. Berry, F.S., and Berry, W.D. (1990). State lottery adoptions as policy innovations: an event history analysis. American Political Science Review 84(2): 395–416.Google Scholar
  19. Berry, F.S., and Berry, W.D. (1992). Tax innovation in the states: capitalizing on political opportunity. American Journal of Political Science 36(3): 715–742.Google Scholar
  20. Berry, F.S., and Berry, W.D. (1999). Innovation and diffusion models in policy research. In P. Sabatier (ed.), Theories of the Policy Process. Boulder, Colo.: Westview PressGoogle Scholar
  21. Beyle, T. (1999). The governors. In V. Gray, R.L. Hanson, and H. Jacob (eds.), Politics in the American States: A Comparative Analysis (7th edn.). Washington, DC:Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly PressGoogle Scholar
  22. Bingham, R.D. (1977). The diffusion of innovation among local governments. Urban Affairs Quarterly 13(2): 223–232.Google Scholar
  23. Blaukenau, J. (2001). The fate of national health insurance in Canada and the United States: a Multiple-Streams explanation. Policy Studies Journal 29(1): 38–55.Google Scholar
  24. Boeckelman, K. (1992). The influences of states on federal policy adoptions. Policy Studies Journal 20(3): 365–375.Google Scholar
  25. Bowen, F.M., Bracco, K.R., Callan, P.M., Finney, J.E., Richardson, R.C., Jr., and Trombley, W. (1997). State Structures for the Governance of Higher Education: A Comparative Study. San Jose, Calif.: California Higher Education Policy Center.Google Scholar
  26. Bowen, F.M., and Glenny, L.A. (1976). State Budgetingfor Higher Education: State Fiscal Stringency and Public Higher Education. Berkeley, Calif.: Center for Research and Development in Higher Education, University of California, Berkeley.Google Scholar
  27. Brock, W.R. (1984). Investigation and Responsibility: Public Responsibility in the United States, 1865-1900. New York: Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar
  28. Brody, A. (1935). The American State and Higher Education. Washington, DC: American Council on Education.Google Scholar
  29. Brubacher, J.S. (1967). The autonomy of the university: how independent is the Republic of Scholars? journal of Higher Education 38(5): 237–249.Google Scholar
  30. Brubacher, J.S,, and Rudy, W. (1968). Higher Education in Transition: The History of American Colleges and Universities, 1936-1968. New York: Harper and Row.Google Scholar
  31. Burke, J., and Serban, A. (1997). Performance Funding and Budgeting for Public Higher Education. Albany, NY: Rockefeller Institute of Government.Google Scholar
  32. Burnham, W.D. (1970). Revitalization and decay: looking toward the third century of American electoral politics. Journal of Politics 38(3): 146–172.Google Scholar
  33. Callan, P.M. (1991). Perspectives on the Current Status of Emerging Policy Issues for State Coordinating Boards. AGB Occasional Paper No. 2. Washington, DC: Association of Governing Boards of Colleges and Universities.Google Scholar
  34. Callan, P.M. (1994). The gauntlet for multicampus systems. Trusteeship 2(3): 16–20.Google Scholar
  35. Carnegie Commission on Higher Education. (1971). The Capitol and the Campus. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  36. Carnegie Commission on Higher Education. (1973). Governance of Higher Education. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  37. Carnegie Council on Policy Studies in Higher Education. (1976). The States and Higher Education: A Proud Past and a Vital Future. Supplement. Berkeley, Calif.: Carnegie Council.Google Scholar
  38. Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching. (1976). The States and Higher Education: A Proud Past and a Vital Future. New York: The Carnegie Foundation.Google Scholar
  39. Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching. (1982). The Control of the Campus: A Report on the Governance of Higher Education. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University PressGoogle Scholar
  40. Carter, S., and Blanton, R. (1983). Management flexibility in Kentucky: the passage of House Bill 622. In J.R. Mingle (ed.), Management Flexibility and State Regulation in Higher Education. Atlanta, Ga:Atlanta, Ga: Southern Regional Education Boardouthern Regional Education Board.Google Scholar
  41. Chambers, M.M. (1936). Some Features of State Educational-Administrative Organization. Washington, DC: AmericanCouncil on Education..Google Scholar
  42. Chambers, M.M. (1937). Government and Educational Organizations. Washington, DC: American Council on Education.Google Scholar
  43. Chambers, M.M. (1961). Voluntary Statewide, Coordination. Ann Arbor, Mich.: The University of Michigan.Google Scholar
  44. Chambers, M.M. (1962). Chance and Choice in Higher Education. Danville, III.: The Interstate.Google Scholar
  45. Chambers, M.M. (1965). Freedom and Repression in Higher Education. Bloomington, Ind.: Bloomcraft PressGoogle Scholar
  46. Chubb, J.E., and Peterson, P.E. (eds.) (1989). Can the Government Govern? Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.Google Scholar
  47. Clubb, J.M., Flanagan, W.H., and Zingale, N.H. (1980). Partisan Realignment. Beverly Hills: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  48. Clune, W.H. (1987). Institutional choice as a theoretical framework for research on educational policy. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis 9(2): 117–132.Google Scholar
  49. Cobb, R.W., and Elder, C.D. (1983). Participation in American Politics: The Dynamics of Agenda Building. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University PressGoogle Scholar
  50. Cobban, A.B. (1975). The Medieval Universities: Their Development and Organization. London: Harper and Row.Google Scholar
  51. Cohen, M., March, J., and Olsen, J. (1972). A garbage can model of organizational choice. Administrative Science Quarterly 17: 1–25.Google Scholar
  52. Collier, D., and Messick, R.E. (1975). Prerequisites versus diffusion: testing explanations of social security adoption. American Political Science Review 69(4): 1299–1315.Google Scholar
  53. Conant, J.B. (1964). Shaping Educational Policy. New York: McGraw Hill.Google Scholar
  54. Creswell, J.W., Roskens, R.W., and Henry, T.C. (1985). A typology of multicampus systems. Journal of Higher Education 56(1): 25–37.Google Scholar
  55. Crosson, P.H. (1984). State postsecondary education policy systems. The Review of Higher Education 7(2): 125–142.Google Scholar
  56. Crosson, P.H. (1996). Where all politics is local: Massachusetts. In T.J. MacTaggart (ed.), Restructuring Higher Education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  57. Cudlip, W.B. (1969). The University of Michigan: It’s Legal Profile. Ann Arbor, Mich.: University of Michigan.Google Scholar
  58. Curry, D.J., and Fischer, N.M. (1986). Public higher education and the state: models for financing, budgeting and. accountability. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Association for the Study of Higher Education, San Antonio, TX.Google Scholar
  59. Davis, H. (2001). A political model of higher education governance and policy reform adoption. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Vanderbilt University.Google Scholar
  60. Davis, O., Dempster, M., and Wildavsky, A. (1966). A theory of the budgetary process. American Political Science Review 60(3): 529–547.Google Scholar
  61. Dawson, R.E., and Robinson, J.A. (1963). Inter-party competition, economic variables, and welfare policies in the American states. Journal of Politics 25(2): 265–289.Google Scholar
  62. deGive, M.L., and Olswang, S. (1999). Coalition building to create a branch campus system. The Re-view of Higher Education 22(3): 287–313.Google Scholar
  63. Dodd, I.., and Jillson, C. (eds.) (1994). New Perspectives on American Politics. Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly PressGoogle Scholar
  64. Douglass, J.A. (1992). Creating a fourth branch of state government. History of Education Quarterly 32(1): 31–72.Google Scholar
  65. Dressell, P.L. (1980). The Autonomy of Public Colleges. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  66. Durant, R.F., and Diehl, P.F. (1989). Agendas, alternatives, and public policy: lessons from the U.S. foreign policy arena. Journal of Public Policy 9(1): 179–205.Google Scholar
  67. Duryea, E.D. (1973). The Corporate Basis of University and College Government: An Historical Analysis. State University of New York, Buffalo, Department of Higher Education.Google Scholar
  68. Dye, T.R. (1990). American Federalism, Lexington, Mass.: Lexington Books.Google Scholar
  69. Dye, T.R. (1995). Who’s Running America? (6th edn.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: rentice Hall.Google Scholar
  70. Easton, D. (1953). The Political System. New York: A. Knopf.Google Scholar
  71. Easton, D. (1965). A. Systems Analysis of Political Life. New York: WileyGoogle Scholar
  72. Elazar, D. (1972). American Federalism: A View from the States. New York: Thomas Crowell.Google Scholar
  73. Elder, CD., and. Cobb, R.W. (1984). Agenda-building and the politics of aging. Policy Studies Journal 13: 115–129.Google Scholar
  74. Enarson, H. (1960). The campus, the state, and the nation. Public Administration Review 20(1): 106.Google Scholar
  75. Eulau, H., and Quinley, H. (1970). State Officials and Higher Education. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  76. Ewell, P.T, (ed.) (1985). Assessing Educational Outcomes. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  77. Ewell, P.T. (1990). State Policy on Assessment: The Linkage to Learning. Denver, Colo.: Education Commission of the States.Google Scholar
  78. Ewell, P.T. (1991). Assessment and public accountability: back to the future. Change 23(6): 12–17.Google Scholar
  79. Ewell, P.T. (1994). A Preliminary Study of the Feasibility and Utility for a National Policy of Instructional “Good Practice” Indicators in Undergraduate Education. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Research and Improvement.Google Scholar
  80. Filer, J.E., Moak, D.L., and Uze, B. (1988). Why some states adopt lotteries and others don’t. Public Finance Quarterly 16(3): 259–283.Google Scholar
  81. Fine, K. (1993). A History of Minnesota Higher Education: A Policy Analysis’. St. Paul, Minn.: Minnesota House of Representatives.Google Scholar
  82. Fisher, L. (1988). State legislatures and the autonomy of colleges and universities, journal of Higher Education 59(2): 133–162.Google Scholar
  83. Floyd, C.E. (1982). State Planning, Budgeting, and Accountability. AAHE-ERIC Higher Education Report, No. 6. Washington, DC: American Association of Higher Education.Google Scholar
  84. Folger, J., and Jones, D.P. (1993). Using Fiscal Policy to Achieve State Education Goals. Denver, Colo.: Education Commission of the States.Google Scholar
  85. Foster, J. (1978). Regionalism and. innovation in the states. Journal of Politics 40(1): 179–187.Google Scholar
  86. Fowler, F.C. (1994). Education reform comes to Ohio: an application of Mazzoni’s arena models. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis 16(3): 335–350.Google Scholar
  87. Frost, S.H., Hearn, J.C., and Marine, G. (1997). State policy and the public research university. Journal of Higher Education 68(4): 363–397.Google Scholar
  88. Glenny, L.A. (1959). Autonomy of Public Colleges: The Challenge of Coordination. New York: McGraw Hill.Google Scholar
  89. Glenny, L.A. (1970). Institutional autonomy for whom? In G.K. Smith (ed.), The Troubled Campus: Current issues in Higher Education. Washington, DC: AAHE.Google Scholar
  90. Glenny, L.A. (1976). State Budgeting for Higher Education. Berkeley, Calif.: Center for Research and Development in Higher Education, University of California, Berkeley.Google Scholar
  91. Glenny, L.A., Berdahl, R.O., Palola, E.G., and Paltridge, J.G. (1971). Coordinating Higher Education for the 70’s. Berkeley, Calif.: Center for Research and Development in Higher Education, University of California, Berkeley.Google Scholar
  92. Glenny, L.A., and Bowen, F.M. (1977). State Intervention in Higher Education. Cambridge, Mass.: Sloan Commission on Government and Higher Education.Google Scholar
  93. Glenny, L.A., and Dalglish, T.K. (1973), Public Universities, State Agencies, and the Law. Berkeley, Calif.: Center for Research and Development in Higher Education, University of California, Berkeley.Google Scholar
  94. Glenny, L.A., and Schmidtlein, F.A. (1983). The role of the state in the governance of higher education. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis 5(2): 133–153.Google Scholar
  95. Glenny, L.A., and Weathersby, G.B. (1971). Statewide Planning for Postsecondary Education: Issues and Design. Boulder, Colo.: National Center for Higher Education Management Systems.Google Scholar
  96. Click, H.R., and Hays, S.P, (1991). Innovation and reinvention in state policymaking: theory and the evolution of living will laws. Journal of Politics 53(3): 335–850.Google Scholar
  97. Gove, S.K., and Solomon, B.W. (1968). The politics of higher education: a bibliographic essay. Journal of Higher Education 39(4): 181–195.Google Scholar
  98. Graham, H.D. (1989). Structure and governance in American higher education: historical and comparative analysis in state policy. Journal of Policy History 1(1): 80–107.Google Scholar
  99. Gray, V. (1973). Innovation in the states: a diffusion study. American Political Science Review 67(4): 1174–1185.Google Scholar
  100. Gray, V. (1994). Competition, emulation, and policy innovation. In L. Dodd, and C. Jillson (eds.), New Perspectives on American Politics. Washington, DC: CQ PressGoogle Scholar
  101. Greer, D. (1998). Defining the scope and limits of autonomy: New Jersey. In T.J. MacTaggart (ed.). Seeking Excellence through Independence. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  102. Gruson, E.S. (1979). State Regulation of Higher Education in a Period of Decline. Cambridge, Mass.: Sloan Commission on Government and Higher Education.Google Scholar
  103. Haider-Markel, D.P. (1998). The politics of social regulatory policy: state and federal hate crime policy and implementation effort. Political Research Quarterly 51(1): 69–88.Google Scholar
  104. Halstead, D.K. (1974). Handbook for Statewide Planning in Higher Education. Washington, DC: U.S. Office of Education Research and Improvement.Google Scholar
  105. Halstead, D.K. (1979). Higher Education Planning: A Bibliographic Handbook. Washington, DC: National Institute of Education.Google Scholar
  106. Hannah, S.B. (1996). The Higher Education Act of 1992: skills, constraints, and the politics of higher education. The Journal of Higher Education 76(5): 498–528.Google Scholar
  107. Hansen, S. (1983). The Politics of Taxation. Westport, Conn.: Praeger.Google Scholar
  108. Harcleroad, F.F. (1975). Institutional Efficiency in State Systems of Public Higher Education. Report Series No. 1. Washington, DC: American Association of State Colleges and Universities.Google Scholar
  109. Hays, S.P. (1996). Influences on re-invention during the diffusion of innovations. Political Research Quarterly 49(3): 631–650.Google Scholar
  110. Hearn, J.C., and Griswold, C.P. (1994). State-level centralization and policy innovation in U.S. postsecondary education. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis 16(2): 161–190.Google Scholar
  111. Hearn, J.C., Griswold, C.P., and Marine, G. (1996). Region, resources, and reason: a contextual analysis of state tuition and student aid policies. Research in Higher Education 37(1): 241–278.Google Scholar
  112. Hebel, S. (2000). Movement to create charter colleges gathers support and critics. Chronicle of Higher Education November 3: A31.Google Scholar
  113. Heclo, H. (1978). Issue networks in the executive establishment. In A. King (ed.), The New American Political System. Washington, DC: American Enterprise Institute.Google Scholar
  114. Heller, D.E. (2002). The policy shift in state financial aid programs. In J.C. Smart (ed.), Higher Education: Handbook of Theory and Research, Vol. XVII. New York: Agathon PressGoogle Scholar
  115. Herbert, A.W. (2001). Statewide education governance reform: the Florida experiment. ECS Governance Notes. Denver, Colo.: Education Commission of the States.Google Scholar
  116. Herbst, J. (1982). From Crisis to Crisis: American College Government 1636-1819. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University PressGoogle Scholar
  117. Hill, D.S. (1934). Control of Tax-Supported Higher Education in the United States. New York: The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching.Google Scholar
  118. Hines, E.R. (1988). Higher Education and Slate Governments: Renewed Partnership, Cooperation, or Competition? ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report, No. 5, Washington, DC: George Washington University.Google Scholar
  119. Hines, E.R. (2000). The governance of higher education. In J.C. Smart (ed.), Higher Education: Handbook of Theory and Research, Vol. XV. New York: Agathon PressGoogle Scholar
  120. Hines, E.R., and Hartmark, L.S. (1980). Politics of Higher Education. AAHE-ERIC Higher Education Research Report, No. 7. Washington, DC: American Association of Higher Education.Google Scholar
  121. Hobbs, W.C. (1978). Government Regulation of Higher Education. Cambridge, Mass.: Ballinger.Google Scholar
  122. Hofstadter, R., and Metzger, W.P. (1955). The Development of Academic Freedom in the United States. New York: Columbia University PressGoogle Scholar
  123. Huber, J.D., Shipan, CR., and Pfahler, M. (2001). Legislatures and statutory control of bureaucracy. American journal of Political Science 45(2): 330–345.Google Scholar
  124. Huntington, S. (1981). American Politics: The Promise of Disharmony. Cambridge, Mass.: Belknap PressGoogle Scholar
  125. Hyatt, J.A., and Santiago, A.A. (1984). Incentives and Disincentives for Effective Management. Washington, DC: National Association of Colleges and University Business Officers.Google Scholar
  126. John, P. (1998). Analyzing Public Policy. London: Pinter.Google Scholar
  127. Johnstone, D.B. (1992). Central Administrations of Public Multicampus College and University Systems. Albany, NY: State University of New York, Albany.Google Scholar
  128. Jones, B.D. (1994). Reconceiving Decision-Making in Democratic Politics. Chicago, Ill.: University of Chicago PressGoogle Scholar
  129. Jones, B.D., Baumgartner, F., and Talbert, J. (1993). The destruction of issue monopolies in Congress. American Political Science Review 87(3): 657–671.Google Scholar
  130. Jones, B.D., Baumgartner, F., and. True, J.L. (1998). Policy punctuations: U.S. budget authority, 1947-1995. journal of Politics 60(1): 1–30.Google Scholar
  131. Jones, C. (1970). An Introduction to the Study of Public Policy. Belmont, Calif.: Wadsworth.Google Scholar
  132. Jones, D.P. (1984). Higher Education Budgeting at the State Level: Concepts and Principles. Boulder, Colo.: National Center for Higher Education Management Systems.Google Scholar
  133. Kamieniecki, S. (2000). Testing alternative theories of agenda setting. Policy Studies Journal 28(1): 176–189.Google Scholar
  134. Kawar, A, (1989). Issue definition, democratic participation, and genetic engineering. Policy Studies journal 17(4): 719–744.Google Scholar
  135. Kelly, F.f., and Hill, D.S. (1933). Economy in Higher Education. New York: Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching.Google Scholar
  136. Kelly, F.J., and McNeeley, J.H. (1933). The State and Higher Education: Phases of Their Relationship. New York: Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching.Google Scholar
  137. Kelly, S.Q. (1994). Punctuated change and the era of divided government. In L. Dodd, and C. Jillson (eds.), New Perspectives on American Politics. Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly PressGoogle Scholar
  138. Kerr, C, and Gade, M.L. (1989). The Guardians: Boards of Trustees of American Colleges and Universities. Washington, DC: Association of Governing Boards of Universities and Colleges.Google Scholar
  139. King, A. (1985). Agendas, alternatives, and public policies (book review), Journal of Public Policy 5(2): 281–283.Google Scholar
  140. King, D.C. (1994). John Kingdon as an agenda item. Policy Currents 4(3): 17–20.Google Scholar
  141. King, G., Keohane, R., and Verba, S. (1994). Designing Social Inquiry. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University PressGoogle Scholar
  142. Kingdon, J.W, (1984). Agendas, Alternatives, and Public Policies. New York: Harper Collins.Google Scholar
  143. Kingdon, J.W. (1994). Agendas, ideas, and policy change. In L. Dodd, and C. Jillson (eds.), New Perspectives on American Politics. Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly PressGoogle Scholar
  144. Kingdon, J.W. (1995). Agendas, Alternatives, and Public Policies. (2nd edn.). New York: Harper Collins.Google Scholar
  145. Riser, L., and Ostrom, E. (1982). The three worlds of action: a metatheoretical synthesis of institutional approaches. In E. Ostrom (ed.), Strategies of Political Inquiry. Beverly Hills: Sage.Google Scholar
  146. Klein, A.J. (1938). Cooperation and Coordination in Higher Education. Washington, DC: American Council on Education.Google Scholar
  147. Kuhn, T.S. (1970). The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. (2nd edn.). Chicago: University of Chicago PressGoogle Scholar
  148. Langenberg, D. (1994). Why a system? Change 26(2): 8–9.Google Scholar
  149. Layzell, D.T., and Lyddon, J.W. (1990). Budgeting for Higher Education at the State Level: Enigma, Paradox, and Ritual. ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report, No. 4. Washington, DC: George Washington University.Google Scholar
  150. Layzell, T.D. (1972). Budget review procedures of the Illinois Board of Higher Education, 1962-1968. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Illinois.Google Scholar
  151. Lee, E., and Bowen, F. (1971). The Multicampus University, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  152. Lee, E., and Bowen, F. (1975). Managing Multi-Campus Systems. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  153. Lindblom, C.E. (1959). The science of ‘muddling through’. Public Administration Review 19(2): 79–88.Google Scholar
  154. Lindblom, C.E. (1965). The Intelligence of Democracy: Decision Making through Mutual Adjustment. New York: Free PressGoogle Scholar
  155. Lindblom, C.E. (1968). The Policymaking Process. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: rentice Hall.Google Scholar
  156. Lorenz, R.H. (1983). Improved efficiency through decreased government regulation: the case of Wisconsin. In R, Mingle (ed.), Management Flexibility and State Regulation in Higher Education. Atlanta, Ga:Atlanta, Ga: Southern Regional Education Boardouthern Regional Education Board.Google Scholar
  157. Lowi, T.J. (1969). The End of Liberalism. New York: Norton.Google Scholar
  158. Lowry, R.C. (2001). Governmental structure, trustee selection, and public university prices and spending. American journal of Political Science 45(4): 845–861.Google Scholar
  159. Lutz, J.M. (1987). Regional leadership patterns in the diffusion of public policies. American Politics Quarterly 15(3): 387–398.Google Scholar
  160. Taggart, T.J. (ed.) (1996). Restructuring Higher Education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  161. MeacTaggart, T.J. (ed.) (1998). Seeking Excellence through Independence: Liberating Colleges and Universities from Excessive Regulation. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  162. March, J.G., and Simon, H. (1958). Organizations. New York: WileyGoogle Scholar
  163. March, J.G., and Olsen, J.P. (1989). Rediscovering Institutions: The Organizational Basis of Politics. New York: Free PressGoogle Scholar
  164. Marcus, L.R. (1997). Restructuring state higher education governance patterns. The Review of Higher Education 20(4): 399–418.Google Scholar
  165. Marcus, L.R., Pratt, B., and Stevens, J.L. (1997). Deregulating colleges: the autonomy experiment. Educational Policy 11(1): 92–110.Google Scholar
  166. Mawhinney, H.B. (1993). An Advocacy-Coalition approach to change in Canadian education. In P. Sabatier, and U.C. Jenkins-Smith (eds.), Policy Change and Learning: An Advocacy Coalition Approach. Boulder: Westview PressGoogle Scholar
  167. Mayhew, D. (1991). Divided We Govern: Party Control, Lawmaking, and Investigations, 1946-1990. New Haven: Yale University PressGoogle Scholar
  168. Mazzoni, T. (1991). Analyzing state school policy making: an arena model. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis B(2): 115–138.Google Scholar
  169. McConnell, T.R. (1971). The Redistribution of Power in Higher Education: Changing Patterns of Internal Governance. Berkeley, Calif.: Center for Research and Development in Higher Education, University of California, Berkeley.Google Scholar
  170. McCoy, M. (1983). The adoption of budget flexibility in Colorado. In J. Mingle (ed.). Management Flexibility and State Regulation in Higher Education. Atlanta, Ga: Southern Regional Education Board.Google Scholar
  171. McEldowney, R.P. (1995). A century of democratic deliberation over American and British national health care: extending the Kingdon model. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University.Google Scholar
  172. McGuinness, A.C. (1994). State Postsecondary Education Structures Handbook. Denver, Colo.: Education Commission of the States.Google Scholar
  173. McGuinness, A.C. (1995). Restructuring State Roles in Higher Education: A Cast Study of the 1994 New Jersey Higher Education Restructuring Act. Denver, Colo.: Education Commission of the States.Google Scholar
  174. McGuinness, A.C. (1997). State Postsecondary Education Structures Handbook. Denver, Colo.: Education Commission of the States.Google Scholar
  175. McLendon, M.K. (2000a). Setting the agenda for state decentralization of higher education: testing the explanatory boundaries of alternative agenda models. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, The University of Michigan.Google Scholar
  176. McLendon, M.K. (2000b). Setting the governmental agenda for state decentralization of higher education. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  177. McLendon, M.K,, Heller, D., and Young, S. (2001). State postsecondary policy innovation: politics, competition, and interstate migration of policy ideas. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association, Chicago, Ill.Google Scholar
  178. McLendon, M.K., and Ness, E. (2001). 2001 Slate Higher Education Governance Survey. Nashville, Term.: Peabody Center for Education Policy, Vanderbilt University.Google Scholar
  179. McLendon, M.K,, and Eddings, S. (2002). Direct democracy and higher education: the state ballot as an instrument of higher education policymaking. In D. Opfer, and K. Wong (eds.), Politics of Education Yearbook: Elections and Education.. Thousand Oaks: Corwin PressGoogle Scholar
  180. McNeely, J.H. (1939). Higher Educational Institutions in the Scheme of State GovemmetH. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Interior, Office of Education.Google Scholar
  181. Meisinger, R.J., Jr. (1976). State Budgeting for Higher Education: The Uses of Formulas. Berkeley, Calif.: Center for Research and Development in Higher Education, University of California, Berkeley.Google Scholar
  182. Meisinger, R.J., Jr., and Mingle, J.R. (1983). The extent of state controls in Maryland public higher education. In J.R. Mingle (ed.), Managing Flexibility and State Regulation in Higher Education. Atlanta, Ga:Atlanta, Ga: Southern Regional Education Boardouthern Regional Education Board.Google Scholar
  183. Menzel, D., and Feller, I. (1978). Leadership and interaction patterns in the diffusion of innovations among the American states. Western Political Quarterly 30(4): 528–536.Google Scholar
  184. Midlarsky, M.I. (1978). Analyzing diffusion and contagion effects: the urban disorders on the 1960s. American Political Science Review 72(3): 996–1008.Google Scholar
  185. Mikesell, J.L. (1978). Election periods and state tax policy cycles. Public Choice 33(3): 99–105.Google Scholar
  186. Millard, R.M. (1979). Postsecondary education and “the best interest of the people of the States”, Journal of Higher Education 50(2): 24–27.Google Scholar
  187. Millet, J.D. (1975). State coordinating boards and statewide governing boards: state government coordination versus institutional independence. In R.O. Berdahl (ed.). Evaluating Statewide Boards. New Directions for Institutional Research, No. 5. San Francisco: jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  188. Millet, J.D. (1982). Conjflict in Higher Education: State Government Versus Institutional Independence. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  189. Mills, M. (1999). From coordinating board to campus: implementation of: a policy mandate on remedial education. The Journal of Higher Education 69(6): 647–672.Google Scholar
  190. Mingle, J.R. (ed.) (1983). Management Flexibility and State Regulation in Higher Education. Atlanta, Ga: Southern Regional Education Board.Google Scholar
  191. Mingle, J.R. (1995). The Case for Coordinated Systems of Higher Education. Denver, Colo.: State Higher Education Executive Officers Association.Google Scholar
  192. Mingle, J.R., and Epper, R.M. (1997). State coordination and planning in an age of entrepre-neurship. In M.W. Peterson, D. Dill, and L. Mets (eds.), Planning and Managing for a Changing Environment. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  193. Mintrom, M. (1997). Policy entrepreneurs and the diffusion of innovation. American Journal of Political Science 41(3): 738–770.Google Scholar
  194. Moe, T. (1984). The new economics of organization. American Journal of Political Science 28(4): 739–777.Google Scholar
  195. Moe, T. (1990). Political institutions: the neglected side of the story. journal of Law, Economics, and Organization 6(1): 215–253.Google Scholar
  196. Mohr, L. (1969). Determinants of innovation in organizations. American Political Science Review 63(1): 111–126.Google Scholar
  197. Mooney, C.Z., and Lee, M.H, (1995). Legislating morality in the American states: the case of pre-Roe abortion regulation reform. American journal of Political Science 39(3): 599–627.Google Scholar
  198. Moos, M.C., and Rourke, F.E. (1959). The Campus and the State. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins PressGoogle Scholar
  199. Mortimer, K.R. (1972). Accountability in Higher Education. Washington, DC: George Washington University, ERIC Clearinghouse on Higher Education.Google Scholar
  200. Mortimer, K.R., and McConnell, T.R. (1982). Sharing Authority Effectively. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  201. Mucciaroni, G. (1992). The garbage can model and the study of policy making: a critique. Polity 24(3): 460–482.Google Scholar
  202. Mulford, C.L., and Rogers, D.L. (1982). The historical development of interorganizational coordination. In D. Rogers (ed.), Interorganizational Coordination: Theory, Research, and Implementation. Ames, 1a: The Iowa State University PressGoogle Scholar
  203. Mumper, M. (1987). Understanding policy agendas. The Social Science journal 24(1): 33–86.Google Scholar
  204. Nettles, M.T. (1995). The emerging national policy agenda on higher education assessment: a wake up call. The Review of Higher Education 18(3): 293–313.Google Scholar
  205. Nettles, M.T., and Cole, J.J.K. (1999). State Higher Education Assessment Policy: Research Findings from Second and Third Years. Stanford, Calif.: National Center for Postsecondary Improvement.Google Scholar
  206. Newman, F. (1987). Choosing Quality: Reducing Conflict between the State and the University. Denver, Colo.: Education Commission of the States.Google Scholar
  207. Novak, R.J. (1996). Methods, objectives, and consequences of restructuring. In T. MacTaggart (ed.). Restructuring Higher Education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  208. Novak, R.J. (2000). Fulfilling a Dream Deferred. Trenton, NJ: New Jersey Association of State Colleges and Universities.Google Scholar
  209. Novak, R.J., and Leslie, D.W. (2001). A not so distant mirror: Great Depression writings on governance and finance of public higher education. History of Higher Education Annual Volume 20.Google Scholar
  210. Ogren, C.A., and Conrad, C.F. (1991). Introduction to foundations in American higher education. In J.L. Bess (ed.), Foundations of American Higher Education. ASFIE Reader Series. Needham Heights, Mass.: Simon and Schuster.Google Scholar
  211. Olivas, M. (1984). State law and postsecondary coordination: the birth of the Ohio board of regents. The Review of Higher Education 7(4): 357–395.Google Scholar
  212. O’Rourke, P.J. (1996). Restructuring as a way of life: Alaska. In T.J. MacTaggart (ed.), Restructuring Higher Education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  213. Ostrom, E. (1999). Institutional rational choice: an assessment of the institutional analysis and development framework. In P.A. Sabatier (ed.), Theories of the Policy Process. Boulder, Colo.: Westview PressGoogle Scholar
  214. Padgett, J.F. (1980). Managing garbage can hierarchies. Administrative Science Quarterly 25(4): 583–604.Google Scholar
  215. Palola, E., Lehmann, T., and Blischke, W.R. (1970). Higher Education by Design. Berkeley, Calif.: Center for Research and Development in Higher Education, University of California, Berkeley.Google Scholar
  216. Paltridge, J.G. (1965). Organizational Forms Which Characterize Statewide. Coordination of Higher Education. Berkeley, Calif.: Center for Research and Development in Higher Education, University of California, Berkeley.Google Scholar
  217. Parsons, W. (1996). Public Policy: An Introduction to the Theory and Practice of Policy Analysis. London: Elgar, Aldershot.Google Scholar
  218. Peters, G. (1994). Agenda setting in the European Community. Journal of European Public Policy 1(3): 9–26.Google Scholar
  219. Peterson, M.W., and Einarson, M.K. (2000). Analytic framework of institutional support for student assessment. In J.C. Smart (ed.), Higher Education: Handbook of Theory and Research, Vol. XV. New York: Agathon PressGoogle Scholar
  220. Peterson, M.W., and McLendon, M.K. (1998). Achieving independence through conflict and compromise: Michigan. In T.J. MacTaggart (ed.), Seeking Excellence through Independence: Liberating Colleges and Universities from Excessive Regulation. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  221. Peterson, P.E., and Rom, M.C. (1990). Welfare Magnets. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.Google Scholar
  222. Petit, L.K. (1987). Ambiguities in the administration of public university systems. In L.E. Goodall (ed.), When Colleges Lobby States. Washington, DC: American Association of State Colleges and Universities.Google Scholar
  223. Pliner, E. (1966). Coordination and Planning. Baton Rouge, La: Public Affairs Research Council of Louisiana.Google Scholar
  224. Plotnick, R.D., and Winters, R.F. (1985). A politicoeconomic theory of income redistribution. American Political Science Review 79(2): 458–473.Google Scholar
  225. Polsby, N.W. (1984). Policy Innovation in America. New Haven: Yale University PressGoogle Scholar
  226. Portz, J. (1996). Problem definitions and policy agendas: shaping the educational agenda in Boston. Policy Studies Journal 24(3): 371–386.Google Scholar
  227. Prestine, N.A. (1989). Political systems theory as an explanatory paradigm for governance conflict. Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, Calif.Google Scholar
  228. Prestine, N.A. (1991). Political systems theory as an explanatory paradigm for teacher education reform. American Educational Research Journal 28(2): 237–274.Google Scholar
  229. Price, D.E. (1971). Professionals and ‘entrepreneurs’: staff orientations and policymaking on three senate subcommittees. Journal of Politics 33(2): 316–336.Google Scholar
  230. Rashdall, H. (1936). The Universities of Europe in the Middle Ages. Oxford: Clarendon PressGoogle Scholar
  231. Redford, F.. (1969). Democracy in the Administrative State. New York: Oxford University PressGoogle Scholar
  232. Richardson, R.C., Bracco, K.R., Callan, P.M., and Finney, J.E. (1999). Designing State Higher Education Systems for a New Century. Phoenix, Ariz.: Oryx PressGoogle Scholar
  233. Rockman, B. (1994). The new institutionalism and the old institutions. In L. Dodd, and C. Jillson (eds.), New Perspectives on American Politics. Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly PressGoogle Scholar
  234. Rogers, E. (1983). Diffusion of Innovations. New York: Free PressGoogle Scholar
  235. Rosenthal, A. (1981). Legislative Life: People, Process and Performance in the States. New York: Harper and Row.Google Scholar
  236. Rosenthal, A. (1989). The legislative institution. In C.E. Van Horn (ed.), The State of the States. Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly PressGoogle Scholar
  237. Rosenthal, A. (1998). The Decline of Representative Democracy. Washington, DC:Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly PressGoogle Scholar
  238. Rudolph, F. (1962). The American College and University: A History. Athens, Ga: University of Georgia PressGoogle Scholar
  239. Sabatier, P.A. (1991). Toward better theories of the policy process. PS: Political Science and. Politics 24(2): 147–156.Google Scholar
  240. Sabatier, P.A. (1992). Political science and public policy: an assessment. In W. Dunn, and R.M. Kelly (eds,), Policy Studies Review Annual, Vol. 10. New Brunswick, Mass.: Transaction Publishers.Google Scholar
  241. Sabatier, P.A. (ed.) (1999a). Theories of the Policy Process. Boulder, Colo.: Westview PressGoogle Scholar
  242. Sabatier, P.A. (1999b). The need for better theories. In P.A. Sabatier (ed.), Theories of the Policy Process. Boulder, Colo.: Westview PressGoogle Scholar
  243. Sabatier, P.A. (1999c). Fostering the development of policy theory. In P.A. Sabatier (ed.). Theories of the Policy Process. Boulder, Colo.: Westview PressGoogle Scholar
  244. Sabatier, P.A., and Jenkins-Smith, H.C. (1993). Policy Change and Learning: An Advocacy Coalition Approach. Boulder, Colo.: Westview PressGoogle Scholar
  245. Sabatier, P.A., and Jenkins-Smith, H.C. (1999). The advocacy coalition framework: an assessment. In P.A. Sabatier (ed.), Theories of the Policy Process. Boulder, Colo.: Westview PressGoogle Scholar
  246. Sabloff, P.L, (1997). Another reason why state legislatures will continue to restrict public university autonomy. The Review of Higher Education 20(2): 141–162.Google Scholar
  247. Schattschneider, E.E. (1960). The Semisovereign People. New York: Holt, Rhinehart, and Winston.Google Scholar
  248. Schlesinger, A.M. (1986). The Cycles of American History. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar
  249. Schmidtlein, F.A., and Glenny, L.A. (1977). State Budgeting for Higher Education: The Political Economy of the Process. Berkeley, Calif.: University of California, Berkeley.Google Scholar
  250. Schneider, M., and Teske, P. (1992). Toward a theory of the political entrepreneur. American Political Science Review 86(3): 737–747.Google Scholar
  251. Sigelman, L., and Smith, R.E. (1980). Consumer legislation in the American states: an attempt at explanation. Social Science Quarterly 61(1): 58–69.Google Scholar
  252. Sigelman, L., Roedle, P.W., and Sigelman, C.T. (1981). Social service innovation in the American states: deinstitutionalization of the mentally retarded. Social Science Quarterly 62(3): 503–515.Google Scholar
  253. Simon, H.A. (1957). Administrative Behavior: A Study of Decision Making Processes in Administrative Organization. (2nd edn,). New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  254. Simon, H.A. (1985). Human nature in politics: the dialogue of psychology with political science. The American Political Science Review 79(2): 293–304.Google Scholar
  255. Skowronek, S. (1982). Building a New American State: The Expansion of National Administrative Capacities 1877-1920. Cambridge: Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar
  256. Squire, P. (1993). Professionalization and. public opinion of state legislatures. Journal of Politics 55(2): 479–491.Google Scholar
  257. Stream, C. (1999). Health reform in the states: a model of state small group health insurance market reforms. Political Research Quarterly 52(3): 499–525.Google Scholar
  258. Sundquist, J.L. (1983). Whither the American party system? Political Science Quarterly 98(4): 573–593.Google Scholar
  259. Thelin, J.R. (1982). Higher Education and Its Useful Past: Applied History in Research and Planning. Cambridge, Mass.: Schenkman Publishing.Google Scholar
  260. Treadway, D.M. (1996). Restructuring that works: North Dakota. In T.J. MacTaggart (ed.), Restructuring Higher Education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  261. Trombly, W. (2001). Florida’s new ‘K-20’ model. Crosstalk 9(2): 14–16.Google Scholar
  262. Trow, M. (1983). Defining the issues in university-government relations: an international perspective. Studies in Higher Education 8(2): 114–128.Google Scholar
  263. Trow M. 1988. American higher education past present and future. Educational Researcher 173 13–23Google Scholar
  264. True, J.L,, Jones, B.D., and Baumgartner, F.R. (1999). Punctuated-equilibrium theory: explaining stability and change in American policymaking. In P.A. Sabatier (ed.), Theories of the Policy Process. Boulder, Colo.: Westview PressGoogle Scholar
  265. Underwood, D. (1999). Reinventing public higher education: a case study. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, the University of Oregon.Google Scholar
  266. Usdan, M.D., Minar, D.W., and Hurvitz, L. (1969). Education and State Politics: The Developing Relationship between Elementary-Secondary and Higher Education. New York: Teachers College PressGoogle Scholar
  267. Van Der Slik, J. (1999). Beyond incrementalism: changing higher education governance in Illinois. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association, Chicago, Ill.Google Scholar
  268. Veysey, L.R. (1965). The Emergence of the American University. Chicago: University of Chicago PressGoogle Scholar
  269. Volkwein, J.F. (1984). State financial control practices and public universities: results of a national study. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Association for the Study of Higher Education, Chicago, Ill.Google Scholar
  270. Volkwein, J.F. (1986a). State financial control of public universities and its relationship to campus administrative elaborateness and cost. The Review of Higher Education 9(3): 267–286.Google Scholar
  271. Volkwein, J.F. (1986b). Campus autonomy and its relationship to measures of university quality. Journal of Higher Education 57(5): 510–528.Google Scholar
  272. Volkwein, J.F. (1987). State regulation and campus autonomy. In eJ.C. Smart (ed.), Higher Education Handbook of Theory and Research, Vol. III. New York: Agathon PressGoogle Scholar
  273. Volkwein, J.F. (1989). Changes in quality among public universities. Journal of Higher Education 60(2): 136–151.Google Scholar
  274. Volkwein, J.F., and Malik, S.M. (1997). State regulation and administrative flexibility at public universities. Research in Higher Education 38(1): 17–42.Google Scholar
  275. Walker, J.L. (1969). The diffusion of innovations among the American states. American Political Science Review 63(3): 880–899.Google Scholar
  276. Waller, C, Coble, R., Scharer, T., and Giamportone, S. (2000). Governance and Coordination of Public Higher Education in All Fifty States. Raleigh, NC: North Carolina Center for Public Policy Research.Google Scholar
  277. Weir, M. (1992). Ideas and the politics of bounded innovation. In S, Steinmo, K, Thelin, and F. Longsthreth (eds.), Structuring Politics: Historical Inslilutionalism in Comparative Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar
  278. Weissert, C. (1991). Policy entrepreneurs, policy opportunists, and legislative effectiveness. American Politics Quarterly 19(2): 262–274.Google Scholar
  279. Western Interstate Commission for Higher Education. (1959). Yardsticks and Formulas in University Budgeting. Boulder, Colo.: Western Interstate Commission for Higher Education.Google Scholar
  280. Wildavsky, A. (1979). The Politics of the Budgetary Process. (3rd edn.). Boston: Little Brown.Google Scholar
  281. Zahariadis, N. (1992). ‘To sell or not to sell?’ telecommunications policy in Britain and France.Journal of Public Policy 12(2): 355–376.Google Scholar
  282. Zahariadis, N. (1998). Comparing three lenses of policy choice. Policy Studies Journal. 26(3): 434–448.Google Scholar
  283. Zahariadis, N. (1999). Ambiguity, time, and multiple streams. In P.A. Sabatier (ed.), Theories of the Policy Process. Boulder, Colo.: Westview PressGoogle Scholar
  284. Zahariadis, N., and Allen, C.S. (1995). Ideas, networks, and policy streams: privatization in Britain and Germany. Policy Studies Review 14(1): 71–88.Google Scholar
  285. Zumeta, W. (1996). Meeting the demand for higher education without breaking the bank: a framework for the design of state higher education policies for an era of increasing demand. Journal of Higher Education 67(4): 367–425.Google Scholar
  286. Zumeta, W. (1998). Public university accountability to the state in the late twentieth century: time tor a rethinking? Policy Studies Review 15(4): 5–22.Google Scholar
  287. Zusman, A. (1984). The legislature and the university: conflict in higher education. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Association for the Study of Higher Education, Chicago, Ill.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • Michael K. McLendon
    • 1
  1. 1.Vanderbilt UniversityUSA

Personalised recommendations