This weeks reading explored the topic of University Governance and what role the government plays in regulating/controlling higher education. In The World Bank article, two models explored are the state control model and the state supervising model. The first model entails the state government seeking to control the universities, while in the later model, the state seeks to just monitor and regulate universities, rather than control them. Different countries and institutions can have different levels of government involvement in their public universities. The article explores levels anywhere from fully state controlled, semi-autonomous, semi-independent, to completely independent.  Each model has it’s own advantages and disadvantages and depends on many different factors to determine what works for each countries university system – once again there is no “one size fits all” approach available.  Private institutions are another cause of conversation, as the state does not have direct authority to control the universities in the way they do with public institutions.  Many times financial aid, which is funded by the state and federal government, is granted to students who attend both public and private universities.  The money follows the student; therefore, in a sense, the government is partially funding private education – this is a common practice in the United States.  There are several issues that arise with the private sector of education as there is a belief that private institutions have financial gain as a primary interest in mind, rather than universal education. Some questions the article asks about regulating private universities include:

• Should there be a balance between the public and private sectors?
• Is it acceptable for the private sector to focus on commercially profitable programs, that focus on subjects which are in high demand
• What regulatory processes can/should the state adopt and which will achieve results?
• Will the same quality assurance regime be applied to both public and private institutions?

While the answers to these questions will vary, they are good starting points for viewing private education as a whole and how university governance should be carried out differently for public and private universities.  We also must not lose sight over the benefits of private education, as many times they fill a gap that private education cannot meet.  Private universities usually have the capital to build programs quicker and meet the need of students and the economy faster than public institutions.  There is also not enough space to educate the entire population in public institutions; therefore, private institutions help ensure a higher percentage of the population is able to seek higher education.  Although, this article was written in 2004, it addresses the important point that if the government is providing funding to private institutions, does that mean they have control?  The author does not believe it does because we are reminded that higher education isn’t controlled the same way lower levels of public education are regulated because students are not required to attend – seeking higher education is a choice.  If students are not satisfied with their experience at a university, they can take the tuition they pay somewhere else, causing the college to lose that funding source.  This is a type of “self-regulation” as colleges work hard to keep their students happy, as they are their consumers.