The role of for-profit, degree-granting institutions and state policy in selected states

As for-profit, degree-granting institutions (FPDGI) continue to educate a growing share of degree-seeking students, and as states grapple with how to graduate more students with limited public resources, states must consider what role, if any, for-profit institutions will play in their state. Furthermore, they must consider the role of state policy. Research on FPDGIs has identified perceptions that run the gamut from questions about ethics, debt, efficacy, and for-profit/public mission conflict, to accolades about access, outcomes, flexibility, and ability to address market needs. Yet there is very little research as to what role state policy leaders perceive these institutions are playing and what the role of state policy is as related to these institutions. This dissertation attempts to address these two questions. This qualitative study explores the perceptions of state policy leaders in Maryland and Ohio as to FPDGIs and state policy. Through interviews with more than 20 state policy leaders, as well as a review of policy, data, and other documentary evidence, this dual case study presents two pictures of the role of FPDGIs and state policy. The study provides a limited update to Education Commission of the States\u27 2000 study as to state policy, and leverages Zumeta\u27s 1996 framework of six policy issues that impact private not-for-profit institutions. This study identifies policies that are instrumental to understanding the role of FPDGIs in these two states, including participation in strategic planning, institutional and programmatic licensure, state financing policies, and state regulation. A study of these various policies suggests several roles that policy and regulation of FPDGIs play in each state. These include the roles of: providing consumer protection; ensuring academic quality; serving as an arbiter of need and anti-duplication (Maryland); and as an arbiter of public resources (Ohio). An unintentional role, that of providing credibility to FPDGIs, also emerges. Political, structural, and resource-based limitations to the states\u27 ability to regulate for-profit institutions also are explored. Finally, several roles of FPDGIs in the two states are described. These include that of: a private good; a legitimate, market-based choice for students; a low priority; and something to be controlled, limited, or eliminated