An analytical framework for the cross-country comparison of higher education governance asserts that there is a need to classify the indicators of governance within higher education. To do so, authors Dobbins, Knill and Vogtle take a critical look at three different European governance models: academic self-governance, the state-centered model and the market-oriented model. They believe that due to increased competition and struggling economies worldwide, higher education institutions are now under more scrutiny than ever before. This increased attention subsequently drives the need for institutions to address how they are governed, in order to determine and sustain best practices. In European universities, the European Commission has worked to reform governance through “the diversification of funding sources, an intensification of ties between universities and industries and a match between the supply of qualifications and labour market demands” (European Commission 2003, 2006). Although the authors recognize these efforts, they propose ideal-type models, calling specific attention to the categories of institutional balance of power, financial governance, and system autonomy. They find it most important to identify empirically observable indicators to observe the direction policy change is headed for European systems.

In the OECD article Approaches to Internationalization and Their Implications for Strategic Management and Institutional Practice, authors Henard, Diamond and Roseveare focus again on internationalization and the key role of governments. They offer suggestions for this partnership, citing that the following attributes will positively effect outcomes: “consistency is needed between policies and educational objectives, activities should be diversified, strategies should be linked to national policies and the framework should be explicit” (p.10-11). The article offers broad suggestions for how government can align with institutional strategies and further reflects on the ethics and values involved in this process.

Both articles from this week highlight the overarching relationship between government and higher education institutions. Although one article focused more on European systems, I found myself constantly comparing each of the 2 readings to our U.S system of government. They prompted me to think deeply about how we govern our own institutions, and what policies we have in place. As I read, I was reminded of the current presidential campaigns and how the topic of higher education is now of greater interest to Americans than ever before. As the Analytical Framework article mentions, there is more emphasis placed on the relationship of government through this economic downturn. Therefore, pressing issues such as government policies, support and financial aid have risen to the top of the discussion. On NASFAA’s website (the National Association of Student Financial Aide Administrators) they provide a concise list of the current presidential candidates and their plans for financing the future of higher education. As more candidates develop their own higher education proposals, this page will be updated accordingly. I enjoyed taking a look at their ideas and comparing them to the proposals from this weeks readings.