We use cookies to give you the best experience possible. By continuing we’ll assume you’re on board with our cookie policy

The notions that higher education should be purported by public funds, that the university should participate in the creation and transmission of knowledge, and that Institutions should be permitted a degree of autonomy, or the power to govern without outside controls, were attributable to the growth of universities in the nineteenth century (Latch, Comport, & Bedaub, 2011, p. 18). The expansion of higher education has been defined as the single-most important trend worldwide (Latch et al. , 2011, p. 21 ). Latch et al. (2011) explore the history and development of this growth as it pertains to the United States.

The best essay writers are ready to impress your teacher.
Make an order now!


Although Its conception dates back to the seventeenth century, the asses and asses marked two of the most expansive decades for American higher education. Enrollments peaked drastically due to the establishment of denominational colleges (Latch et al. , 2011, p. 49). By 1908, the standard American university could be defined as: admitting only bona fide high school graduates, providing two years of general education followed by two years of advanced or specialized courses, offering doctoral training in at least five departments, and having at least one professional school.

The development of higher education JUST FROM $13/PAGE

As a result, the universities became the most powerful force In generating (2011) depict Generation 9: The Academic Revolution, 1945-1975, as a collegiate body scarred by wars, civil injustices, and protests. Student movements plagued campuses that increasingly evolved into radicalism and violence. Segregation of African American students was outlawed by the Brown v. Board of Education decision in 1954; however, violent confrontations persisted until the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Nonetheless, this period experienced great expansion as a result of the Serviceman’s

Readjustment Act of 1944, better known as the GIG Bill, and the influx of community colleges. The GIG Bill offered educational benefits to returning veterans post-World War II. In 1945, 1. 6 million students were enrolled in higher education institutions-? only 88,000 were veterans. Two years later, student enrollment increased 45% to 2. 3 million students with more than 1 million accounting for the veteran population (Latch et al. , 2011, p. 115). This surge ultimately led to the increase in community colleges which were opening at a rate exceeding one per week during 1965 to 1972 Latch et al. 2011, p. 60). The aforementioned era is of particular interest because there are several comparisons to present day, or what will eventually be referred to as Generation 1 1 . Similar to the Serviceman’s Readjustment Act of 1944, the Post-WI 1 Veterans Educational Assistance Act-?more commonly referred to as the Post-WI 1 GIG Bill-?has increased higher education enrollment for active duty military and veterans across the nation. During Generation 9, there was a massive increase of community colleges to accommodate the growth of students.

Similarly, today there is expansive placement in the availability of colleges and universities with online and distance learning alternatives to cater to the academic interests of the working adult. Structure of the Academe Autonomy As mentioned before, autonomy is a key element of higher education. Latch et al. (2011) contend that the “intricacy and unpredictability of learning and investigation require a high degree of freedom from intellectually limiting external intervention and control if an institution of higher education is to perform effectively’ (p. 9). Therefore, autonomy allows academic institutions to freely make decisions on such issues like curriculum, pedagogy, and procedures for student evaluations. Yet, the individuality and independence allotted to institutions through autonomy has suffered due to external influences. Accountability It is evident that higher education in the United States has evolved over the years. The role of accountability has changed throughout the course of this evolution and the concept of “freewheeling and unconstrained” institutions is a notion of the past (Latch et al. 2011, p. 72). Higher education institutions continue to face an increased amount of external demands in order to appease the public. Latch et al. (2011) recognize that “governments need to retain authority over substantive issues related to the character of higher education systems, while institutions should be given a very large measure of freedom over procedural aspects of their programs” (p. 76). If this is the case, control of academe is shared between the institution and the government. However, is shared control ideal in higher education?

If institutions were to have total control, perhaps “bad seeds” would ruin it for everyone-?whether it is a diploma mill, outrageous tuition rates, etc. If the government had total control over bout, there is a need for some kind of relationship to exist between the two in order for higher education to thrive. This is precisely what Latch et al. (2011) suggest-? the need for an appropriate role of government and accrediting agencies to ensure that academic institutions follow appropriate policies and procedures to assess student learning outcomes and to review the effectiveness of their programs (p. 80).

Academic Freedom The notion of academic freedom also originated in Germany with such concepts like freedom of professors to teach and freedom of students to learn. Considering how early on higher education dates back in history, it is rather discouraging to discover that American professors were not granted such liberties until much later on, and even then faced challenges like during the McCarthy era. This is odd to observe in a country known as the “Land of the Free” and even more so considering the First Amendment. Although real advancements in academic freedom have been made over the years, Latch et al. 2011) argue that it is not until post-WI 1 where the greatest progress is witnessed (p. 104). Outspoken professors have been defended by their respective universities and even the media. However, this does not hold true for international students. Latch et al. (2011) describe the aftermath of September 1 lath as the first time in the history of the United States where the burdens and risks of being a foreign student have outweighed the benefits (p. 106). This is a damaging reality for higher education which will hopefully soon fade. Academic freedom is essential and important for higher education.

External Forces Federal Government Latch et al. (2011) present an interesting background on the history of government involvement with higher education in the United States. The strain on the relationship between the federal government and higher education institutions currently stems from a number of issues. The most apparent is growth of student indebtedness. Latch et al. (2011) explain that since the asses the federal government has had the greatest impact on direct aid to students and promoting equal opportunity to remove the price barriers which have deterred low-income students out of higher education (p. 18). In 1965, President Lyndon Johnny’s Great Society program was an aggressive effort to achieve and ensure an equal opportunity or all Americans to attend college (Latch et al. , 2011, p. 116). The Peel Grant was created to provide support to those students with the greatest financial need, while what is now known as the Stafford Student Loan program was designed for those students in need of federal support to attend college, but who had greater family resources (Latch et al. , 2011, p. 120).

The Clinton and Bush administrations shifted this focus with the Tax Payer Relief Act of 1997 and the Economic Growth and Tax Reconciliation Act of 2002. These benefits began to assist the middle- to high-class income families with tax breaks that lower income and needier families would not be eligible for (Latch et al. , 2011, p. 127). Despite the criticism surrounding the relationship between higher education and the federal government, this consortium is essential. World War II initiated a sudden increase in federally sponsored research with the creation of the National Science Foundation which continued through the asses.

In 2008, the federal government funded $48 billion towards campus-based programs in higher education (Latch et al. , 2011, p. 128). Federal regulation has also had a huge impact on higher education in regards to desegregation. As mentioned before, colleges and universities remained racially segregated until the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Since then, the federal government has played an integral role in decisions regarding college admissions, faculty and staff hiring, and the awarding of scholarships (Latch et al. 2011, p. 131). Still, colleges and universities contend that such involvement from the federal government rapidly escalates the price of education, leaving institutions no other option but to pass along the financial burden to students (Latch et al. 2011, p. 132). Legal Latch et al. (2011) analyze the legal environment and its impact on higher education, the institution, faculty, and the student. Of the legal cases discussed, Fountain Gate Ministries v. City of Plano is particularly interesting.

While the church argued that their practices were strictly related to those of a church, a court deemed Fountain Gate Ministries to be a college based on their educational instruction, faculty, degree activities, and other college-like characteristics. The term adult education can be defined as an entity that incorporates learners in the aerospace, military, community- and faith-based activities, health organizations, cultural institutions, environmental efforts, and internet-based distance education (Gasworks, Rose, & Ross-Gordon, 2010, p. 6).

With this is mind, it is feasible to accept the fact that education can take place nearly anywhere. As Latch et al. (2011) conclude college can be defined as an establishment with instructional programs and degree-granting authority (p. 174). Another notable case is Income v. Nassau County Community College in 1996. This involved a senior citizen auditor enrolled in “Family Life and Human Sexuality’ course. Mr.. Income pursued this lawsuit alleging religious bias, but there was no solid basis for such claims. He was enrolled under the terms of a free, noncredit program for adults over the age of sixty-five (Latch et al. 2011, p. 185). Vinegars (1997) further explains that this course was introduced back in 1968 and explored such topics as intercourse, birth control, pregnancy, parenthood, birth, diseases, health, and alternative lifestyles (Para. 9-10). This example exposes an ongoing epidemic in colleges and universities; students just take some kind of accountability when it comes to their education. When enrolling into courses about sexual humanity, religious studies, or behavioral sciences, students should anticipate to be challenged on their belief system or to be taken out of their comfort zone.

These courses are not created to cause emotional strain, but are offered to enlighten and to develop respect for diversity. Cohen v. San Bernardino Community College is significant from a legal standpoint, as well as in regards to academic freedom. Dean Cohen was a tenured English and Film Studies referees who had been working at San Bernardino Community College since 1968. His unique teaching style had been referred to as “abrasive” and “confrontational”; however, Professor Cohen had been praised for stimulating and motivating students with little to no interest in his remedial English course.

In 1993, a female student formally charged the professor with sexual harassment and the campus committee agreed by ordering Cohen to modify his teaching strategy. Cohen filed a lawsuit against the college under the claims that his academic freedom and freedom of al. , 2011, p. 97). Although his approach could very well be considered risqué to say the least, the Cohen case exposes the fragility of the classroom setting and the risks faculty members take to break the norm.

Voluntary Consortia Latch et al. (2011) describe the external forces of the three-sector system-? voluntary enterprise, public enterprise, and private enterprise-?in great detail, including their impact and influence on institutional autonomy and academic freedom within higher education in the United States. Of these, voluntary consortia are of particular interest. Over the years, many colleges and universities have plopped interdenominational arrangements to extend their educational services.

One such example of interdenominational cooperation is in the state of California. The University of California and California State University systems have developed an agreement with each of the California community colleges to satisfy general education and lower-division requirements for transfer students. The Entertainments General Education Transfer Curriculum and the General Education-Breadth program provide an outline of courses for students uncertain of which four-year college they will transfer to or which degree they will pursue.

The Serviceberry Opportunity Colleges (SOC) program, which is funded through the Department of Defense through a contract with the American Association of State Colleges and Universities, is another example of voluntary consortium. SOC agreements provide active duty military and their dependents with educational opportunities in light of the varying military lifestyle. Due to deployments and reenlistment relocations, military students often have to put school on hold for periods of time. These agreements provide students with enrollment and catalog rights for five years, and guarantee renewable credit to and from all SOC member colleges.

Such programs help aide this group of students with completing their respective programs. Thus, voluntary consortia offer institutions an alternative way to prepare for future operations, program development, and student success (Latch et al. , 2011, p. 217). Conclusion There are many factors that have revolutionized higher education in the United States. Yet, the question still remains: is higher education a public good-?benefit to society-?or a private good-?benefit to the individual?

Higher education is increasingly en as a private good that does not deserve as much external support as it has had -?and that students (also referred to as the “users”) should pay more of the cost (Latch et al. , 2011, p. 228). Latch et al. (2011) point out that the courts and legislative authority, governmental decision-making and intervention, and implemented policies and programs have profoundly impacted higher education and the academic profession. Thus, it would be rather ridiculous to claim that students are the “users”; there are clearly a number of entities that have their own interest in mind when it comes to higher education.

Such external influences like federal government, legislative procedures, and voluntary consortia have transformed American higher education throughout the years. Although institutions have frowned upon these sometimes “obligatory’ relationships, these associations have enhanced and continue to provide opportunities to students. After World War II, “Americans began to perceive undergraduate and graduate degrees as gateways to the professions, the new route to the American dream” (Latch et al. , 2011, p. 116). This encouraged to pursue college degrees to not only better themselves as individuals, UT to enhance society as a whole.

Share this Post!

Kylie Garcia

Hi, would you like to get professional writing help?

Click here to start