International Higher Education Finance: An Annotated ...€¦ · center for international higher...

International Higher Education Finance: An Annotated Bibliography

publication series center for international

higher education

Philip G. Altbach, Comparative Higher Education: Knowledge, the University and Development, 1997. (Commercial edition published by Ablex Publishers. Asian edition published by the Comparative Education Research Centre, University of Hong Kong. Japanese-language translation published by the Tamagawa University Press, Tokyo, Japan. Chinese-language translation published by the People’s Education Press, Beijing, China.)

Philip G. Altbach, ed., Private Prometheus: Private Higher Education and Development in the 21st Century, 1999. (Commercial edition published by Greenwood Publishers, Westport, Connecticut. Spanish-language transla-tion published by Centro de Estudios Sobre la Universidad, UNAM, Mexico. Japanese-language translation published by the Tamagawa University Press, Tokyo, Japan.)

Philip G. Altbach and Patti McGill Peterson, eds., Higher Education in the 21st Century: Global Challenge and National Response, 1999. (Published in coopera-tion with the Institute of International Education, New York. Spanish-language translation published by Editorial Biblios, Buenos Aires, Argentina.)

Philip G. Altbach and David Engberg, Higher Education: A Worldwide Inventory of Centers and Programs, 2000. (Commercial edition published by Oryx Publishers, Phoenix, Arizona.)

Philip G. Altbach, ed., The Changing Academic Workplace: Comparative Perspectives, 2000. (Also published as a special theme issue of Higher Education, vol. 41, no. 1-2, January-March, 2001.)

Philip G. Altbach and Viswanathan Selvaratnam, eds., From Dependence to Autonomy: The Development of Asian Universities, 2002. (Commercial edi-tion published by Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, the Netherlands. Japanese-language edition published by Tamagawa University Press, Tokyo, Japan. Chinese-language edition published in Taiwan. Asian paperback edi-tion published by De La Salle University Press, Manila, Philippines.)

Philip G. Altbach and Yoshikazu Ogawa, eds., Higher Education in Japan: Reform and Change in the 21st Century, 2002. (Also published as a special theme issue of Higher Education 43, no. 1, January 2002.)

Philip G. Altbach, ed., The Decline of the Guru: The Academic Profession in Developing and Middle-Income Countries, 2002. (Commercial edition published by Palgrave Publishers, New York and London.)

Glenda Kruss and Andre Kraak, eds., A Contested Good? Understanding Private Higher Education in South Africa, 2003. (Co-published with the Program for Research on Private Higher Education [PROPHE], University at Albany.)

Alma Maldonado-Maldonado, Yingxia Cao, Philip G. Altbach, Daniel C. Levy and Hong Zhu, eds., Private Higher Education: An International Bibliography, 2004. (Co-published with PROPHE, University at Albany.)

Francesca B. Purcell, Robin Matross Helms, and Laura Rumbley. Women’s Universities and Colleges: An International Handbook, 2004. (Commercial edi-tion published by Sense Publishers, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.)

Philip G. Altbach and Toru Umakoshi, eds., Asian Universities: Historical Perspectives and Contemporary Challenges, 2004. (Commercial edition published by the Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, Maryland. Japanese language edition published by Tamagawa University Press, Tokyo, Japan. Chinese lan-guage edition published by China Ocean University Press, Quingdao, China.)

Philip G. Altbach and Daniel C. Levy, eds., Private Higher Education: A Global Revolution, 2005. (Commercial edition published by Sense Publishers, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.)

James J.F. Forest and Philip G. Altbach, eds., International Handbook of Higher Education, 2006. (Commercial edition published by Springer Publishers, Dordrecht, the Netherlands.)

D. Bruce Johnstone, Financing Higher Education: Cost Sharing in International Perspective, 2006. (Commercial edition published by Sense Publishers, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.)

Philip G. Altbach, International Higher Education: Reflections on Policy and Practice, 2006.

Philip G. Altbach, Leslie A. Bozeman, Natia Janashia, and Laura E. Rumbley. Higher Education: A Worldwide Inventory of Centers and Programs. (Revised Edition), 2006. (Commercial edition published by Sense Publishers, Rotterdam, the Netherlands).

International Higher Education Finance: An Annotated Bibliography

Pamela N. Marcucci D. Bruce Johnstone

Center for International Higher EducationLynch School of Education, Boston CollegeChestnut Hill, Massachusetts

International Comparative Higher Education Finance and Accessibility Project (ICHEFAP), Center for Comparative and Global Studies in Education, Graduate School of Education, State University of New York at BuffaloBuffalo, New York

©2006. Boston College Center for International Higher Education and ICHEFAP.

Boston College Center for International Higher Education207 Campion HallChestnut Hill MA 02467USA

Website: http://www.bc.edu/cihe/

International Comparative Higher Education Finance and Accessibility Project (ICHEFAP)428 Baldy HallUniversity at Buffalo, State University of New YorkBuffalo, NY 14265USA

Website: http://www.gse.buffalo.edu/org/IntHigherEdFinance/

This research project has been supported by the Ford Foundation.

table of contents

introduction ix

sectioni:annotatedbibliographybyauthor’slastname 1

sectionii:cross-referencedbysubject 149

A1. Economics of Education and/or Higher Education 151

A2. Higher Education Finance 151

A3. Higher Education Finance: Cost-Sharing and Revenue Diversification 154

A4. Student Loans 157

A5. Grants and Any Other Forms of Student Assistance Other than Loans 160

A6. Privatization and Private Forms of Higher Education 161

A7. Access and Participation 162

sectioniii:cross-referencedbygeographicalarea 165

B1. No Setting: General, Theoretical, Universal or Conceptual 167

B2. Comprehensive or Encyclopedic 168

B3. High Income-Industrialized Other Than United States 168

B4. United States Only 172

B5. Low and/or Middle Income Other than Transitional 175

B6. Transitional 178

authorbiographies 179

introduction

This annotated bibliography was prepared by members of the research team involved in the International Comparative Higher Education Finance and Accessibility Project, a Ford Foundation-financed program of research, information dissemination and networking that began in 1999 and extends into 2007. The project examines the worldwide shift in the burden of higher education costs from governments and tax-payers to parents and students, and the policies of grants, loans and other governmental interventions designed to maintain higher educa-tional accessibility in the face of this shift. The project is directed by D. Bruce Johnstone, SUNY Distinguished Service Professor of Higher and Comparative Education Emeritus at the State University of New York at Buffalo and is based in the Center for Comparative and Global Studies in Education at the University’s Graduate School of Education. The Project has involved graduate students as well as visiting scholars/students and a number of “partner centers.” Since 1999, it has:• Created a substantial body of descriptive and theoretical literature

on higher educational finance and "cost-sharing” as well as the most complete compilation of country descriptions of the higher educa-tion costs borne by parents and students. Most of this available on the Website as well as in hard copy and many scholarly journals. [See http://www.gse.buffalo.edu/org/IntHigherEdFinance/]

• Provided, in part through a successful conference in Dar es Salaam in March 2002, a particularly positive impetus to the concept of "cost sharing" in Eastern and Southern Africa. The project also carried out a research project (2004-06) focusing on the dual tuition pro-grams characteristic of East Africa in order to examine the impacts of these programs on institutional financial health as well as the equity of who is able to receive the benefits of higher education.

• Co-hosted and co-planned conferences in Prague in the summer of 2003, in Moscow in the summer of 2004, and in China in the sum-mer of 2005 that brought together scholars and policy makers to focus on higher education finance in the social, political, and eco-nomic contexts of the transitional, or post-communist, countries in the former Soviet Union, Eastern and Central Europe and China.

• Developed a long-range research agenda for the further study of higher education finance and accessibility in an international compara-tive context that is informed both by a sound theoretical grasp of the economics and finance of higher education and by a practical grasp

x

of the politics and management issues affecting implementation of policy at both institutional and governmental levels.

• Provided fellowships for visiting scholars and advanced graduate students from Argentina, the Czech Republic, Chile, China, India, Japan, Kenya, Mongolia, Portugal, Sierra Leone, Russia, and Ukraine to spend varying periods of time at the University at Buffalo con-sulting the documentation center, auditing courses, and working with Professor Johnstone and the other graduate students on the project.

The project has also compiled, cataloged, and annotated a library of more than 500 articles, books, and papers on the topics of higher education finance, tuition policies, student financial assistance, and student loans. This annotated bibliography is the culmination of those efforts. The main topics covered in the bibliography include: the economics of higher education, higher education finance in terms of institutional finance, institutional revenues and expenditures, and revenue diversification and higher education finance specifically in terms of cost-sharing and revenue diversification, student loans, grants and all forms of student assistance other than loans, the politics and ideology of cost sharing, privatization and private forms of higher education and access and par-ticipation. The bibliography includes published and unpublished books, articles, conference papers and reports. It is far from exhaustive as new books and articles are emerging every day, and as the particular regional interests of the project have allowed it to delve more deeply into the issues in some geographical areas rather than in others. It is, however, an attempt to highlight the recent literature in English that deals with higher education finance throughout the world and to include those authors who have made a large contribution to the field.

The annotated bibliography is laid out alphabetically by author and then cross-referenced by subject area and by geographical region. Given that the subject categories are not discrete and that some publications deal with more than one issue or more than one geographical region, some of the publications appear in more than one category.

The subject categories include:

• Economics of Education and/or Higher Education (i.e. theoretical or conceptual rather than applied, or country- or topic-specific);

• Higher Education Finance General (institutional finance, insti-tutional revenues and expenditures, revenue diversification, cost-sharing, tuition and financial assistance, student grants and loans, management issues);

xi

• Higher Education Finance: Cost Sharing and Revenue Diversification General (tuition and cost sharing policies);

• Student Loans (including graduate taxes, income contingent repay-ment schemes and all other forms of deferring payment);

• Grants and all Forms of Student Assistance Other than Loans;

• Politics and Ideology of Cost Sharing (including Neo-Liberalism or its Opposition);

• Privatization and Private Forms of Higher Education;

• Access and Participation.

The geographical setting categories include:

• No Setting: general, theoretical, universal or conceptual;

• Comprehensive or Encyclopedic;

• High Income /Industrialized Other than US;

• US Only;

• Low and/or Middle-Income Other than Transitional;

• Transitional (i.e. recently converting from all state-owned means of production and a Marxist “command” economy to an economy largely organized by markets and allowing substantial measures of private ownership of the means of production).

Special thanks should be made to the following graduate students for their assistance on this annotated bibliography: Rima Aranha, Sherene Cheah, Gheorghita Faitar, Rachel Fix, Johnson Ishengoma, Rita Kasa, Handan Maziouglu, Ali Ait Si Mhamed, Mary Ngolovoi, Manar Sabry, Touorouzou Some, Qian Sun, Abebayehu Tekleselassie, Tomoka Toraiwa, Tengteng Wan, Jie Wang, Yu Wang, Shengjun Yuan, and Yan Zhao.

Section 1 Annotated Bibliography by

Author Last Name

3marcucci and johnstone

Abraham, Katharine G. and Melissa A. Clark. (2003). Financial Aid and Students’ College Decisions: Evidence from the District of Columbia’s Tuition Assistance Grant Program. Cambridge: National Bureau of Economic Research. Available at: http://www.nber.org/papers/W10112

The study focuses on the impact of the District of Columbia’s Tuition Assistance Grant Program (DCTAG) on students’ college choices. The DCTAG program, established in 1999, provides a substantial subsidy for DC residents to attend public colleges and universities throughout the USA. The study found that the number and share of DC residents applying to four-year colleges increased substantially under the program, and students were considerably more likely to apply to colleges that were eligible for the subsidy. According to the study, freshmen enrollments of DC residents also increased substan-tially at eligible institutions, although the effect on overall freshmen enrollments of DC residents was fairly modest, suggesting that in its first year the subsidy had more of an impact on where students chose to attend than on whether they chose to attend college at all.

Adams, Don. (2002). Education and National Development: Priorities, Policies, and Planning, Education in Developing Asia, Vol. 1. Hong Kong: Asian Development Bank and the Comparative Education Research Centre, The University of Hong Kong.

Part of the Education in Developing Asia series produced jointly by the Asian Development Bank (ADB) and the Comparative Education Research Centre of the University of Hong Kong, this book looks at the role of education in national development in Asia. It specifically examines the relationships between education, economic growth, poverty and social change and outlines policies for the develop-ment of high quality, equitable, and adequately financed education systems.

Advisory Committee on Student Financial Assistance. (2002). Empty Promises, The Myth of College Access in America. A Report of the Advisory Committee on Student Finance Assistance, Washington, DC: Advisory Committee on Student Financial Assistance. Available at: http://www.ed.gov/about/bdscomm/list/acsfa/emptypromises.pdf

Building on the Advisory Committee on Student Financial Assistance’s previous report Access Denied, Restoring the Nation’s Commitment to Equal Educational Opportunity, this report argues that financial barriers (shortages of student aid, especially need-based grant aid and rising college tuitions) prevent significant numbers of low-income, college-qualified graduates from attend-ing college within two years of graduation. While not discounting

annotated bibliography4

the importance of ongoing efforts to increase academic preparation and information about college and financial aid, the report argues that such strategies do not solve the financial problems facing col-lege-qualified, high school graduates and calls for the development of a federal strategy that focuses specifically on reducing unmet need through the provision of additional need-based grant aid.

Advisory Committee on Student Financial Assistance. (2001). Access Denied, Restoring the Nation’s Commitment to Equal Educational Opportunity. A Report of the Advisory Committee on Student Finance Assistance. Washington, DC: Advisory Committee on Student Financial Assistance. Available at: http://www.ed.gov/about/bdscomm/list/acsfa/access_denied.pdf

The report predicts that three interrelated factors are producing a crisis in access to higher education. These include the rising cost of higher education as a percentage of low-income family income; the shifting of policy priorities away from access at all levels to middle-income affordability and merit resulting in a rise in unmet need on the part of low-income students; and consequent choices on the part of students (i.e. working long hours, attending school part-time, and borrowing heavily) that lower the probability of degree comple-tion. The report calls for a renewal of the nation’s access strategy to address these problems and, more specifically, for the reinstate-ment of the nation’s longstanding access goal and the refocusing of federal student aid policy on reducing unmet need; increases in need-based grant aid to low-income students; the reaffirmation of Title IV programs as the long-term solution to the access prob-lem; and the rebuilding of access partnerships between the federal government, states and institutions with aid being targeted at low-income students.

Agarwal, Pawan. (2006). Higher Education in India. The Need for Change. New Delhi, India: Indian Council for Research on International Economic Relations. Available at: http://www.icrier.org/pdf/ICRIER_WP180__Higher_Education_in_India_.pdf

A comprehensive paper on higher education in India that provides an overview of its structure, the regulatory environment in which it works, its financing and other important issues including gover-nance, academics and technology. It argues that while the higher education system (particularly the private sector) in India has expanded rapidly over the last 20 years, it has done so with little reg-ulation and decreasing standards in all but a few quality institutions. Moreover the expansion in enrollments has taken place at a time


when public funding has declined (in real terms) and public univer-sities have started to charge higher tuition fees. These changes have had a negative impact on access for the poor given the absence of substantial student financial aid programs. The paper consolidates a number of recommendations into a broad framework for action. Within this framework it identifies several strategies for making higher education affordable and accessible to everyone including the introduction of an income contingent loan program and the establishment of a Social Equity Fund that would administer finan-cial aid programs for poor students.

Ahmed, Eliza. (2000). What Do Our Graduates Say About the Higher Education Contribution Scheme (HECS) – A Pilot Report on Compliers and Defiers. Canberra, Australia: Center for Tax System Integrity.

This report discusses the results of a pilot study of 30 graduates in Canberra that was aimed at obtaining information on the beliefs and attitudes of a sample of recent Australian graduates about HECS. The respondents were grouped into three categories: the upfront (those who paid at the beginning of each semester), the complied (those who had deferred their HECS debt and had commenced repaying), and the defied (those who deferred their HECS debt, but are not repaying even though they are required to).

Albrecht, Douglas & Adrian Ziderman. (1991). Deferred Cost Recovery for Higher Education: Student Loan Programs in Developing Countries. World Bank Discussion Paper #137. Washington, DC: The World Bank.Available at: http://www-wds.worldbank.org/servlet/WDSContentServer/WDSP/IB/2000/07/19/000009265_3980203115113/Rendered/PDF/multi_page.pdf

One of the first comprehensive descriptions of student loan programs worldwide. The information is now dated, but the com-prehensiveness is still a useful indicator of both the scope of student loan programs, worldwide, and some of their important variations.

Alexander, F. King and Ronald G. Ehrenberg. (Eds.). (2003, fall). Maximizing Revenue in Higher Education, New Directions for Institutional Research, 119.

A collection of papers, originally delivered at a 2001 forum at the Cornell Higher Education Research Institute on the financial and economic challenges influencing institutional revenue production. They address the issues of revenue generation and the struggle that institutions face in the United States to balance public expectations with the maximization of private market forces.


Altbach, Philip G. (Ed.). (1999). Private Prometheus: Private Higher Education and Development in the 21st Century. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.

This book includes 10 papers that examine the parameters of private higher education worldwide. Altbach outlines the perspectives on private higher education: themes and variations, issues and trends. Levy explores the diversity of private higher education by analyz-ing the formulation of isomorphism. Although the book is mainly about private higher education in Latin America, the private sectors in other countries including India, the Philippines, Malaysia and Hungary are also discussed.

Altbach, Philip, Patricia J. Gumport and D. Bruce Johnstone (Eds.). (2001). In Defense of American Higher Education. Baltimore, MD and London: Johns Hopkins University Press.

This edited work is well described by its title, “In Defense of American Higher Education.” However, several of the chapters have relevance to higher education in an international compara-tive perspective, and some to higher education finance. Philip Altbach’s introductory chapter presents what seems to be special to American higher education in an international comparative per-spective. Chapter 5 by Martin Trow, “From Mass Higher Education to Universal Access: The American Advantage,” places the ubiqui-tous pressure for “massification” in an international context, with particular reference to Europe and Japan as contrasted to the US. Johnstone’s Chapter 6, “Higher Education and Those Out-of-Control Costs,” examining the popular and often political perspective on higher education as having lost all control of its costs (and therefore ripe for having some governing board or strong central government force a drastic reduction in per-student costs) is a defensive portrayal that also attempts to see what reality lies behind this all too common allegation. The relevance to cost sharing and to the need for tuitions as higher education costs increase over time is laid out in a man-ner useful to an international examination of comparative costs and tuition policies.

Altbach, Philip G. and D. Bruce Johnstone (Eds.). (1993). The Funding of Higher Education: International Perspectives. New York: Taylor and Francis.

This is an edited volume of papers presented at the 6th International Conference on Higher Education held in Washington, DC in the summer of 1992. The descriptive information is dated, but some of the broader overview papers, such as ones by Johnstone, Massy


and Hulfactor, Firstenbach, and Psacharopolous, remain useful. Chapters on African higher education and financing and on higher education funding in Australia are outdated, but still useful.

American Association of State Colleges and Universities and the National Association of State Universities and Land-Grant Colleges. (2005). Student Charges and Financial Aid, 2004-2005. Washington, DC: American Association of State Colleges and University and the National Association of State Universities and Land-Grant Colleges. Available at: http://www.nasulgc.org/publications/05scfarpt.pdf

A report on trends in student charges (including tuition and fees and room and board in public colleges and universities), financial aid, and state financing policies.

American Council on Education. (2004a). Reflections on 20 Years of Minorities in Higher Education and the ACE Annual Status Report. Washington, DC: American Council on Education.Available at: http://www.acenet.edu/bookstore/pubInfo.cfm?pubID=319

This publication includes three articles by the creators of the ACE’s annual Minorities in Higher Education Annual Status Report on their perceptions of the evolution and influence of the report and prog-ress made in terms of minority participation over the past 20 years. Robert Atwell points to the disturbing trends including the move-ment from need based to merit based aid at the state and federal levels, rapidly increasing tuitions at public institutions and, what he calls, the attack on affirmative action. Sara Melendez compares the figures in the 1983 report with those in 2001-02 and finds that despite increased college participation rates across race, the gap between Hispanics and both whites and all other groups remains unacceptably high and the college completion rates remain unac-ceptably low. Reginald Wilson tracks the history of the report and finds that the first report identifies some trends that still hold true in 2004 including lower high school completion rates and college graduate rates by blacks and Hispanics.

American Council on Education. (2004b). Rewriting the Rules of the Game: State Funding Accountability and Autonomy in Higher Education. Washington, DC: American Council on Education.

Second in a series of essays based on roundtable discussions among college and university presidents on the changing rela-tionship between states and their institutions, the publication identifies the main topics discussed and areas in which consensus


has been reached. All participants acknowledged that the implicit social compact that has guided public investment in higher educa-tion has been changed. In response three main options for higher education were identified including finding ways of living with the new ground-rules; altering the nature of the debate and chang-ing the often value laden terminology used (i.e. to talk about such things as flexibility and freedom from counterproductive management regulations instead of autonomy); and articulating its commitment to better use the public money that it is given in exchange for more flexibility.

American Council on Education. (2004c). Shifting Ground: Autonomy, Accountability and Privatization in Public Higher Education. Part of Series: The Changing Relationship Between States and their Institutions. Washington, DC: American Council on Education.

This essay, the first in a series, is based on a discussion in January 2004 of college and university presidents about the changing relationship between states and their institutions and the impli-cations of this change for the future of higher education in the United States. It reports an acknowledgement among higher edu-cation leaders that they need to stop blaming state governments for cuts in support, acknowledge that this is unlikely to change in the short term and start identifying solutions. The essay also discusses the new trend toward privatization in higher education including decentralization, tuition deregulation, vouchers, changes in the regulatory status of colleges and universities, performance contracts or charter colleges and negotiated statewide compacts. The essay concludes by identifying critical questions that need to be addressed in the future. An appendix provides overviews of changes in the relationship between the state and public higher education in eight states.

Amonoo-Neizer, Eugene H. (1998). Universities in Africa: The Need for Adaptation, Transformation, Reformation, and Revitalization. Higher Education Policy, 11(4), 301-9.

This article argues that African universities, most of them estab-lished prior to independence or immediately after independence through the transplantation of European models, need to undergo a process of adaptation, reformation, and revitalization. It is further argued that African universities need to transform themselves and address the principal issues of finance, relevance, efficiency, qual-ity, equity, governance, and university-state relations. The article among other things, suggests that in order to maintain quality whilst


increasing access, finances must be diversified mainly through cost-recovery and cost sharing.

Andrews, Les. (1999). Does HECS Deter? Factors affecting university participation by low SEC Groups. Canberra, Australia: Department of Education, Training and Youth Affairs. Available at: http://www.dest.gov.au/archive/highered/occpaper/99F/does.pdf

The report identifies some of the reasons for the relatively low and unchanging participation rate of students from low socio-economic groups in higher education in Australia over the past twenty years and responds to charges that it is the Higher Education Contribution Scheme (HECS) that is responsible for this low participation. The report uses various methodologies to examine the reasons for the low participation and finds that HECS has very little influence on the low participation of lower income students.

Anthony, Susanne. (1999). Student Income and Study Behaviour in Denmark. European Journal of Education, 34(1), 87–94.

This article describes the State Educational Grants and Loans Scheme, the student financial support program in Denmark, and discusses the issue of students contributing to the costs of educa-tion, particulary living expenditures. It concludes with a historical review of the Danish support system and the effects of the current system.

Archibald, Robert B. (2002). Redesigning the Financial Aid System: Why Colleges and Universities Should Switch Roles with the Federal Government. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.

The author argues that higher education institutions, rather than the federal government, should provide student loan guarantees. Such a switch would provide institutions with more incentive to provide a good education, and would cause a saving in federal aid spending that could be applied to increasing Pell Grants for students from lower income families.

Association of African Universities. (1997). Revitalizing Universities in Africa: Strategy and Guidelines. Washington, DC: The World Bank.

This document outlines a major strategy and guidelines to revitalize African universities to save them from declining quality and gen-eral institutional crisis. The document proposes strategic planning as a major strategy for revitalization and recommends guidelines addressing: quality of university education, finance, access, manage-ment, research, and international collaboration.


Avery, Christopher and Caroline M. Hoxby. (2003). Do and Should Financial Aid Packages Affect Students’ College Choices? Working Paper 9482, Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research. Available at: http://www.nber.org/papers/w9482

The study investigates whether high school students in their college choices respond to student aid packages like rational human capi-tal investors. The authors find that the typical high school student chooses his college and responds to aid in a manner that is broadly consistent with rational investment. However, they also record some serious variations, such as excessive response to loans and work-study programs, strong response to superficial aspects of grants, for example, whether they have a name, and response to a grant’s share of college costs rather than its amount. The study concludes that approximately 30 percent of high school students respond to aid in a way that apparently reduces their lifetime present value. According to the study, both lack of sophistication and credit constraints can explain the behavior of this group of students, although the weight of the evidence in this study favors a lack of sophistication.

Babalola, Joel B. (1998). The Cost and Financing of University Education in Nigeria. Higher Education, 36, July 1998, 43-66.

This article uses expenditure data from 10 Nigerian universities and the National Universities Commission (NUC) to identify areas of over- and under-spending so that adjustments can be made. It finds that there is overspending on general administration, general academic and retirement benefits with negative repercussions for research and public service. The article recommends some structural adjustments in the spending patterns of Nigerian universities to move money away from administration and into teaching, research and public service.

Bain, Olga. (2001). The Costs of Higher Education to Students and Parents in Russia: Tuition Policy Issues. Peabody Journal of Education. 76 (3&4), 57-80.

Using D. Bruce Johnstone’s theoretical framework of cost-sharing and empirical data from various sources, the author focuses on tuition policy issues in Russia. She describes the evolution of tuition policy in Russia, where until relatively recently higher education was free to all qualified students. Cost sharing was introduced in Russian higher education in the mid-1980s via the contract-training model, and later via the policy of split admissions whereby a certain number of students were state-supported, while others had their costs covered by their employers or other sponsors. The 1992 Law


on Education and the 1993 Constitution laid the legal framework for charging tuition fees to students. The author examines the afford-ability of tuition and fees in higher education and then summarizes the patterns of fees for instruction. Lastly she discusses the policy stumbling blocks as well as the relationship of markets to higher education.

Balan, Jorge. (1993). Governance and Finance of National Universities in Argentina: Current Proposals for Change. Higher Education, 25, 45‑59.

A historical account of higher education policy shifts in Argentina since 1987. Section three in particular focuses on finance reform and funding patterns of the late 1980s and early 1990s within the social and political context of these transition years.

Banya, Kingsley. (2001). Are Private Universities the Solution to the Higher Education Crisis in Sub-Saharan Africa. Higher Education Policy, 14 (2), 161-174.

Based on empirical data, this paper examines the factors leading to the proliferation of private colleges and universities in Africa in recent years. It identifies three compelling reasons why private universities blossomed recently in Africa: increased demand for university education; religion; and changing labor market demands. Challenges facing private universities in Africa are also discussed including finance; staffing; and the poor quality of academic pro-grams, faculty, and students. The article concludes that as public universities in sub-Saharan Africa have nearly collapsed, private uni-versities have become an alternative, and perhaps even a solution, to the higher education crisis in Africa.

Banya, Kingsley and Juliet Elu. (2001). The World Bank and Financing Higher Education in Sub-Saharan Africa. Higher Education, 42, 1-34.

This article critically examines the World Bank and other donor agencies policy changes toward the financing of higher education in sub-Saharan Africa that have profoundly affected the sector. It recom-mends that the unique context of each country should play a role in higher education financial policy formation and implementation.

Barr, Nicholas. (2005). Financing Higher Education: Answers from the UK. London, UK: Routledge Studies in Education.

The book traces the twenty-year evolution of the United Kingdom’s higher education finance system from one financed almost exclu-sively by the government and taxpayers to one with significant student/family financial contributions. The authors examine the


changes leading up to the highly-contested 2004 legislation that abolished up-front tuition fees and introduced a scheme that allows students to defer their contribution to the cost of their courses until after they have graduated in terms of two key elements – the proper design of student loans and the role of regulated market forces.

Barr, Nicholas. (2002). “Funding Higher Education: Policies for Access and Quality.” House of Commons Education and Skills Committee, Post –16 Student Support, Sixth Report of Session 2001-2002, HC445. Available at: http://econ.lse.ac.uk/staff/nb/Barr_Selcom020424.pdf

The paper describes a policy for achieving both improved access to and increased quality in higher education. The policy would include three elements: flexible fees, a wide-ranging loan program (with interest rates equal to the government’s cost of borrowing), and active measures to promote access.

Barr, Nicholas. (2001). The Welfare State as Piggy Bank, Information, Risk, Uncertainty, and the Role of the State. London, UK: Oxford University Press.

Building on economic theory, the author argues that the welfare state exists not only for poverty relief, but also to make up for per-vasive and probably unsolvable (at least in terms of what the author terms “twenty-first-century developments”) problems of imperfect information, risk and uncertainty; an insurance and consumption smoothing role that is as important as its more widely discussed redistributive role. The author takes education (in addition to insur-ance and pensions) as one of the topics that is central to the welfare state’s efficiency function. He argues that the state has a larger role to play in basic education due to imperfect information, and makes the case for market forces in higher education where information is widely available and easily understandable. He advocates a state role in income transfers to address equity objectives and in quality assurance. The author’s discussion of options for financing higher education ultimately supports public funding supplemented by private funds (fees) that can be paid with income-contingent loans offered at a market interest rate that cover all tuition charges and living costs.

Barr, Nicholas. (2000). The Benefits of Education: What We Know and What We Don’t. Economic Growth and Government Policy, Papers presented at a HM Treasury Seminar, October, 2000. Available at: http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/media/24A/71/252.pdf

A good, succinct theoretical discussion of the economic benefits of higher education and the inherent difficulties of measuring these


benefits, both public and private, in ways that are unambiguous, and also politically and ideologically acceptable. Nevertheless, Barr argues persuasively that there remain private benefits and that this fact, in addition to the sheer difficulty of 100% public financing, presents a strong case for some of the costs to be borne by the individual. Barr’s analysis also supports differential pricing and at least a partial mar-ketization of higher education. The government has a role, which is more to steer, to provide quality assurance, and to influence and perhaps to control the degree of competition among institutions, in addition to assuring equity through targeted grants and governmen-tally sponsored, but minimally subsidized, student loans.

Baum, Sandy. (2004). A Primer on Economics for Financial Aid Professionals. New York: The College Entrance Examination Board. Available at: http://www.collegeboard.com/prod_downloads/highered/fa/Economics-Primer-2004.pdf

This short monograph is a good general primer about higher educa-tion finance, particularly for the beginner.

Baum, Sandy and Saul Schwartz. (2006). How Much Debt is Too Much? Defining Benchmarks for Manageable Student Debt. New York: The College Board. Available at: http://www.collegeboard.com/research/pdf/06-0869.DebtPpr060420.pdf

Paper develops a range of empirically-derived thresholds for man-ageable student debt with manageable defined as levels of debt that will not unduly constrain the life choices facing former students.

Baum, Sandy and Marie O’Malley. (2003). College on Credit: How Borrowers Perceive their Education Debt, Results of the 2002 National Student Loan Survey. Braintree, MA: Nellie Mae Corporation. Available at: http://www.nelliemae.com/library/research_10.html

The report analyses the results of the Nellie Mae 2002 National Student Loan Survey (NASLS) and compares them with the three previous NASLSs. One particularly important finding, consistent with the earlier surveys, is the positive role that student loans appear to play in ensuring access to higher education. Over 70 percent of students who have borrowed for higher education believe that they could not have gone to college without the student loans and more than half said that student loans were important in allowing them to attend the college of their choice. The percentage of students who reported having their educational decisions negatively affected by student loans has decreased from 50 percent to 29 percent since


1997. However, the average undergraduate student loan debt has increased since 1997 by 66 percent and an increased number of bor-rowers (55 percent in 2002 compared to 50 percent in 1997) report feeling more burdened by their education debt. The analysis showed differences in perception of the burden by socio-economic class and ethnic group. Low-income students (defined as those eligible for Pell grants) appeared to feel more burdened by their debt than non-Pell recipients and African-American borrowers expressed a greater perception of burden.

Beerkens, Eric. (2003). Higher Education in Austria, Country Report. Higher Education Monitor. Enschede, the Netherlands: Center for Higher Education Policy Studies (CHEPS).Available at: http://www.utwente.nl/cheps/documenten/austria.pdf

This country study on Austria was produced as part of the CHEPS Higher Education Monitor, an ongoing research project that aims at providing education policy makers with current information on national higher educational systems. Each study provides informa-tion on the structure of the tertiary education sector. The reports provide excellent information on institutional finance and student support.

Bekhradnia, Bahram. (2003). Widening Participation and Fair Access: An Overview of the Evidence. London, UK: Higher Education Policy Institute. Available at: http://www.hepi.ac.uk

Making a distinction between widening participation (a sector wide issue) and fair access (an institutional issue), the article asserts that it is well possible to have one without the other and that misdi-agnosis of the problems involved may lead to ineffective and even harmful policies. In terms of widening access, despite improve-ments in the last 30 years, there is still a large gap in participation between different social groups in the UK. The article argues that in order to widen participation, it is critical to identify exactly what factors are keeping students from higher education. Evidence cited in the article suggests that demand for higher education is relatively insensitive to price and is not much affected by students’ fear of debt and instead is very much tied to the economic and social value that students put on higher education. Policies, therefore, need to be aimed at understanding and changing these attitudes. In terms of institutional efforts for fair access, the article dismisses the use of quotas and argues that institutions need to ensure that a wide variety of student apply and that their admissions staff have effective means of identifying student academic potential.


Belfield, Clive R. and Henry M. Levin. (Eds.). (2003). The Economics of Higher Education. Cheltenham, UK and Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar Publishing Limited.

A volume that contains 37 previously published contributions from the Economics of Higher Education that examine higher education from an economic perspective. Part I looks at the economic benefits (private and public returns) of higher education. Part II examines the impact of cost on student demand for higher education. Part III focuses on the production of higher education, while part IV looks at the cost functions for higher education institutions. Part V deals with higher education finance and includes articles on reve-nue diversification and student financial aid. The final part focuses on the higher education market in the United States.

Belfield, Clive and Henry M. Levin. (2002). Education Privatization: Causes, Consequences and Planning Implications. Fundamentals of Educational Planning, Number 74. Paris: International Institute for Educational Planning, UNESCO. Available at: http://www.unesco.org/iiep/eng/publications/catalogue.htm

This book provides an overview of the phenomenon of privatization in higher education. The authors define the three forms of privati-zation as (i) private provision, (ii) private funding, and (iii) private regulation, decision making and accountability and analyze the factors that drive it including excess and differentiated demand, pres-sure for higher quality, and general pressure linked to globalization. The authors then set up a framework for evaluating privatization programs that includes the criteria of freedom of choice, efficiency, equity and social cohesion and summarize privatization reforms in Chile, Colombia, the USA, the UK, the Netherlands and the Czech Republic. Finally, the authors outline the implications of privati-zation reforms for educational planning in the political, legal and economic domains.

Berkner, Lutz and Larry Bobbitt. (2000). Trends in Undergraduate Borrowing: Federal Student Loans in 1989-90, 1992-93, and 1995-96. Statistical Analysis Report. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics, US Department of Education. Available at: http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2000/2000151.pdf

This report reviews the effects of the 1992 Reauthorization by com-paring student borrowing patterns before and after the changes were implemented. These changes, which generally allowed more stu-dents to borrow and to borrow larger amounts, included increased loan limits of subsidized Stafford loans, the elimination of home


equity as a consideration in the federal need analysis and the avail-ability of unsubsidized loans to dependent students. Following the implementation of these changes, the percentage of student borrow-ers grew as did the average loan amount.

Berryman, Sue E. (2000). Hidden Challenges to Education Systems in Transition Economies (A World Free of Poverty). Washington, DC: Europe and Central Asia Sector, The World Bank. Available at: http://www-wds.worldbank.org/servlet/WDSContentServer/WDSP/IB/2000/10/07/000094946_00092105321215/Rendered/PDF/multi_page.pdf

The transition process in Eastern Europe and Central Asia has brought to the surface challenges that are much broader and deeper than anyone had expected. In most countries of this region, goal set-ting and steering processes, which provide the basis for assessing the performance of the education sector, are still partisan, nontranspar-ent, weak or missing. The efficient delivery of educational services depends on a strong checks-and-balances relationship between three forces: the state, the private sector, and stakeholders. Actual evidence shows that in most ECA (Europe and Central Asia Region) countries, the state now dominates the delivery of educational ser-vices, unchecked by competitive processes and stakeholder voices. Thus, an important purpose of the book is to sound a regional alert. Another purpose is strategic - to chart how ECA governments and the World Bank might move toward more effective delivery of edu-cational services in the region as a whole.

Bevc, Milena. (2004). Higher Education in Slovenia – Funding, Equity and Efficiency. Paper presented at the international conference “Accessibility of Higher Education: Challenges for Transitional Countries” in Moscow in June 2004.

This paper describes the public higher education funding system in Slovenia in terms of its equity and efficiency and the role of private investment in it. Using data collected by the Institute for Economic Research in Ljubljana and the Statistical Office of the Republic of Slovenia, the paper analyzes the system’s equity as measured by the structure of enrolled students by socio-economic groups and effi-ciency as measured by completion rates, dropout rates, repetition rates and length of study. The study finds that the present system of funding does not provide equal access to all socioeconomic groups with significantly greater proportions of higher income youth attend-ing higher education and that the system’s efficiency is low. The author concludes that to address this situation, tuition fees cover-


ing 10 to 30 percent of the instructional costs of higher education should be introduced along with a government supported student loan scheme.

Blair, Robert D.D. (1998). Financing Higher Education in Africa. In UNESCO, Higher Education in Africa: Achievements, Challenges and Prospects. Dakar, Senegal: UNESCO Regional Office for Education in Africa.

This paper provides an overview of various strategies and policies needed to achieve effective financing of higher education in Africa. Discussed also in this paper is the crisis facing higher education in Africa. The paper argues that financial reform is the essential pre-requisite for achievement of all other major reforms in higher education.

Blair, Robert D.D. (1992). Financial Diversification and Income Generation at African Universities. AFTED Technical Note No.2. Washington DC: World Bank.

The report assesses the progress made in revenue diversification at some selected African universities since 1988. The report concludes that very little progress had been made by 1992 and recommends the establishment of private universities (where they have not been established) as a potential means of diversifying the financial base of national higher education systems in Africa.

Boezerooy, Petra. (2003). Higher Education in the Netherlands. Country Report. Higher Education Monitor. Enschede, the Netherlands: Center for Higher Education Policy Studies. Available at: http://www.utwente.nl/cheps/documenten/netherlands.pdf

This country study of the Netherlands was produced as part of the CHEPS Higher Education Monitor, an ongoing research project that aims at providing education policy makers with current informa-tion on national higher educational systems. Each study provides information on the structure of the tertiary education sector. The reports provide excellent information on institutional finance and student support.

Boezerooy, Petra and Vossensteyn, H. (1999). How to Get In? – A Comparative Overview of Access to Higher Education. Higher Education in Europe, XXIV (3), 349-358.

In many countries, the transition from “elite” to “mass” higher edu-cation has provided a strong stimulus for putting access high on the political agenda. The article explores the accessibility of nine western


European countries on the basis of the concepts of selectivity and affordability. The nine countries concerned display a degree of varia-tion in terms of relative selectivity, ranging from those with strong entrance selection procedures, such as Finland, Sweden, and the United Kingdom, to countries with an open system, such as Austria, Belgium (Flanders), and The Netherlands. In addition, there is a good deal of variation in the extent to which students can afford to attend higher education. In countries with grants and loans, they are in a better position to meet their costs than in countries in which students are mainly subsidized with public support through their families.

Bollag, Burton. (2003). Improving Tertiary Education in Sub-Saharan Africa: Things that Work, report of a regional training conference held in Accra, Ghana, September 2004. Available at: http://www-wds.worldbank.org/servlet/WDSContentServer/WDSP/IB/2004/08/03/000090341_20040803142154/Rendered/PDF/297130PAPER0Improving0tertiary0ed.pdf

A report on the innovative experiences presented at the conference of the same name in Accra, Ghana in September 2003. The confer-ence, organized by the AAU, ADEA, the Ghana National Council for Tertiary Education and the World Bank, brought together 150 higher education leaders from 26 African countries to share experi-ences and best practices in higher education management efficiency, financing, access and quality.

Bouapao, L, O. Sengchandavong and S. Sihavong. (2000). Educational Financing and Budgeting in Laos PDR. Financial management of educa-tion systems. Paris: International Institute for Educational Planning, UNESCO. Available at: http://www.unesco.org/iiep/eng/publications/catalogue.htm

Part of a larger IIEP project that also included Cambodia and Vietnam, the report reviews the education finance and budgetary process in Laos as the country moves from a centrally planned to market-based economy. The report concludes that the process needs to be updated to reflect changes in the political and economic envi-ronment and move beyond incremental budgeting that does not take into account regional disparities.

Bowen, William G., Martin A. Kurzweil and Eugene M. Tobin. (2005). Equity and Excellence in American Higher Education. Charlottesville, VA and London, UK: University of Virginia Press.

The book addresses the conceptual issues involved in the simultane-ous pursuit of equity and excellence objectives in higher education


in the United States. It reviews the history of the pursuit and moves on to look at the main equity-excellence policy issues that are fac-ing universities now and future strategies for dealing with them. Particular attention is given to the debates surrounding affirmative action, student financial aid (need versus merit), and government support to public higher education. The authors devote a chapter to the issue of college preparedness arguing that it is the differential in college preparedness that is the major determinant of differences in educational attainment. Finally, the appendix looks at the experience of the University of Cape Town in South Africa in working towards equity and excellence objectives.

Boxall, Mike, Shahid Amin and Aamir Baloch. (2002). Determining the Costs of Widening Participation: Reports of Pilot Study. Universities UK Report. London: Universities UK. Available at: http://www.universitiesuk.ac.uk/studentexperience/wideningparticipation.asp

A report on the findings of a research exercise aimed at determining the costs incurred by Higher Education institutions in recruiting and retaining students from non-traditional backgrounds. The findings from the exercise substantiate the widely held view that students from nontraditional backgrounds are more expensive to recruit and retain than the traditional student.

Bray, Mark. (2002). The Costs and Financing of Education: Trends and Policy Implications. Education in Developing Asia, Volume 3, Manila, the Philippines: Asian Development Bank. Available at: http://www.adb.org/Documents/Books/Education_NatlDev_Asia/Costs_Financing/costs_financing.pdf

Part of the Education in Developing Asia series produced jointly by the Asian Development Bank (ADB) and the Comparative Education Research Centre of the University of Hong Kong, this book looks at the scale and nature of existing education provision and the volume of expenditures on education in developing member countries of the ADB. Of particular interest are the sections on cost sharing in education, cost recovery and student support in tertiary education, and the privatization of education.

Bray, Mark. (2001). Government and Household Financing of Education: Finding Appropriate Balances. International Conference on Economics of Education, Beijing, China.

Presented at the International Conference on Economics of Education at Peking University in May 2001, the paper first looks at recent data on the balance of inputs (direct and indirect costs)


between governments and households in primary and post-primary public education, the topic of Bray’s 1996 study, Counting the Full Cost: Parental and Community Financing of Education in East Asia. The second part of the paper looks at the evolution in international policy advocacy for fee-free basic education and fee-charging higher education and the implications of these policies for taxation, cost-sharing by students and their families and institutional income generation.

Bray, Mark and Nina Boresvskaya. (2001). Financing Education in Transitional Societies: Lessons from Russia and China. Comparative Education, 37(3), 345-365.

A number of theoretical debates about the nature of educational change in transitional societies have emerged in recent years. Focusing particularly on the financing of education, the article exam-ines patterns in Russia and China in light of this literature. It shows that although transitions in the two countries have displayed major differences, they have also demonstrated significant similarities such as the decentralization of financial responsibilities, due to the impact of market forces and the broader forces of globalization.

Bray, Mark and R. Murray Thomas (Eds.). (1998). Financing of Education in Indonesia. Hong Kong: Asian Development Bank and the Comparative Education Research Centre, The University of Hong Kong.

A study of how the Indonesian education system is financed. The chapter on higher education looks at its structure, sources of its funding, and the way in which the funds were spent.

Breneman, David and Chester E. Finn Jr. (1998). Public Policy and Private Higher Education, Washington, DC: Brookings Institute.

This book on the politics and economics of private higher educa-tion includes ten chapters: two provide analytical background on the financing of private higher education; three look at federal policy, dealing with the Washington political arena, student aid and tax matters; three deal with state policy, covering political relationships and financing options and one was written from the perspective of a private college president. The first and final chapters also pro-vide the recent history of public-private issues, policy options and recommendations.

Brown, Roger. (2004). The Possible Consequences of Top-Up Fees. Higher Education Review, 36 (3), 3 – 12.

This article looks at the possible consequences of the policies con-


tained in the UK’s Higher Education Bill that introduces variable top-up fees in higher education. The author concludes that the poli-cies will reorganize the sector to include a smaller number of larger and more similar higher education institutions.

Brown, Nigel and Charles River Associates. (2003). Saving for Learning in the United Kingdom. Report prepared for the Learning and Skills Research Center. London, UK: Learning and Skills Research Center.

As part of the Learning and Skills Research Center’s Saving for Learning Project, the report looks at available evidence on individ-ual contributions to the cost of learning in the United Kingdom (at all educational levels) and related savings behavior. It concludes that given the potential competing financial needs facing parents of undergraduate students (their own retirement, older parents, etc.), it is wisest to keep savings vehicles as general as possible. The report also stresses the need for the government to let people know what they will be expected to contribute towards the costs of higher educa-tion so long-term financial planning is possible.

Brown, Richard and Wendy Piatt. (2001). Funding Widening Participation in Higher Education: Discussion Paper. London, UK: The Council for Industry and Higher Education, IPPR. Available at: http://www.ippr.org.uk/uploadedFiles/projects/wendy.pdf

This paper was written in response to the widespread concern in the UK that the current higher education funding system does not encourage the participation of students from non-traditional backgrounds. Brown and Piatt offer a framework for change that proposes to further transfer public funds from relatively well-off students and institutions towards those individuals for whom the lack of financial means is a real deterrent to participation.

Caliber Associates. (2003). Cultural Barriers to Incurring Debt, An Exploration of Borrowing and Impact on Access to Postsecondary Education. Santa Fe, NM: ECMC Group Foundation.Available at: http://www.ecmcfoundation.org/current_access.html

This report uses US Census’s Survey of Income and Program Participation (SIPP) and National Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS) data to examine disparities among ethnic groups in terms of their willingness to finance higher education with student loans. The analysis found that the differences in the attitudes of different ethnic groups to borrowing appear to be due to socio-economic level rather than ethnicity.


Callan, Patrick M., Joni Finney, Kathy Reeves Bracco and William R. Doyle (Eds.). (1997). Public and Private Financing of Higher Education: Shaping Public Policy for the Future. Phoenix, AZ: Oryx Press.

A collection of essays divided into two categories: National Trends and Financing Higher Education in Five States from 1990‑95. Included are: California, Florida, Michigan, Minnesota, and New York. Information on statistics and data that highlights the last twenty years of higher education finance is detailed. Articles high-light themes of privatization, accessibility, and current policies amidst state politics.

Callender, Claire. (2003). Attitudes to Debt: School Leavers and Further Education Students’ Attitudes to Debt and their Impact on Participation in Higher Education. London, UK: Universities UK and HEFCE. Available at: http://bookshop.universitiesuk.ac.uk/downloads/studentdebt.pdf

The study investigates the impact of debt and perceptions of debt on participation in higher education in the United Kingdom. The author concludes that prospective students with tolerant attitudes towards debt are more likely to go to university than those who are debt adverse. According to the study, debt aversion deters entry into higher education and also is a social class issue. Those most anti-debt are the focus of widening higher education participation policies in the UK and include people from the lowest social classes, lone parents, Muslims, especially Pakistanis, and black and minor-ity ethnic groups. The study provides valuable material to inform analysis of student aid policies.

Callender, Claire and Martin Kemp. (2000). Changing Student Finances: Income, Expenditure and the Take-Up of Student Loans Among Full- and Part-time Higher Education Students in 1998/99. Department for Education and Employment Research Brief, No. 213. London, UK: Department for Education. Available at: http://www.dfes.gov.uk/research/data/uploadfiles/RR213.PDF

This study focuses on full and part-time undergraduate and PGCE (Postgraduate Certificate in Education - a British teaching qualifica-tion for people who already have a university degree) student income and expenditures in the UK and assesses how these have changed over time between 1995-96 and 1998-99. The study looks at different groups of students to identify those groups who might be experi-encing financial hardship. Among other findings it concludes that single parents were more likely than any other student groups to experience financial difficulties and were the most vulnerable finan-cially. The study also recorded student attitude towards borrowing,


finding that more than one third of students cited dislike of bor-rowing as a reason for not taking out a student loan. It is important to mention that the survey for the study was completed during the 1998-1999 academic year in a transitional period that saw the move from a student support maintenance system of grants and loans to a largely loans based one. It included the first cohort of students affected by the introduction of contributions to tuition fees.

Canada Millennium Scholarship Foundation. (2002). Student Financial Survey, Baseline Results. Montreal, Canada: Canadian Millennium Scholarship Foundation. Available at: http://www.millenniumscholar-ships.ca/images/Publications/sfs_e.pdf

This report provides the findings from a survey of 1,524 post-second-ary students in Canada on three selected themes: parental assistance, summer earnings and credit cards and lines of credit. The results of the survey indicate that students’ levels of parental financial assistance decrease with age, while their levels of debt and summer employment earnings increase. Results also show that students earn relatively modest amounts during summer employment and conse-quently are carrying significant debt loads from private sources.

Carnoy, Martin (Ed.). (1995). International Encyclopedia of Economics of Education. (2nd edition). Oxford and New York: Pergamon Press.

The International Encyclopedia of Economics of Education, second edition, is a comprehensive treatment of the economics of educa-tion, with many detailed chapters by such familiar economists as Carnoy, Levin, Hinchliffe, Woodhall, Blaug, M.J. Bowman, Bowles and Gintis, and many others. The chapters are particularly good on critical perspectives, and the introductions to each section by Martin Carnoy are well balanced and informative. Some of the chapters are a little dated, but the volume overall is a good comprehensive treat-ment of the economics of education.

Center for International Higher Education. (2001). International Higher Education, Winter 2001 issue. Special focus on Student Loans in International Perspective. Articles by Woodhall, Hopper, Bing Wu, Fomer, and Salmi. Boston, MA: Boston College Center for International Higher Education. Available at: http://www.bc.edu/bc_org/avp/soe/cihe/newsletter/News22/Newslet22.html

The International Higher Education Newsletter of Boston Colleges Center for International Higher Education presents very short, cur-rent, generally policy-oriented articles by recognized experts. The Winter 2001 issue focuses on student loans and contains articles


by Maureen Woodhall, one of the most recognized scholars of International comparative higher education finance; Jamil Salmi, a principal World Bank expert on higher education; Richard Hopper, an analyst with the World Bank with special expertise in student loans; Bing Wu, on the Jamacian student loan scheme; and Robert Fomer, Director of the Colorado Student Loan Program and an experienced trainer of student loan program officials in developing countries.

Cerdeira, Maria Luisa and L. Pereira. (2003). The Recent Evolution of Higher Education in Portugal. Paper presented at the Douro Seminar on Higher Education in Portugal.

This article addresses the higher education structure, students, financing and investment and management policy in Portugal and details the changes in higher education financial policy since the early 1990s including the most recent in 2003 when institutions became responsible for setting their own fee levels. Most of the insti-tutions’ expenses are supported by the state budget, which has been increasing in the last decade. The government has also increased investment on infrastructure. The financial model, the model of university autonomy at four levels (scientific, pedagogic, adminis-trative and financial and disciplinary) and the management organs are discussed.

Cervenan, Amy and Alex Usher. (2004). The More Things Change … Undergraduate Student Living Standards After 40 Years of the Canada Student Loans Program. Canadian Higher Education Report Series. Toronto, Canada: Educational Policy Institute.Available at: http://www.educationalpolicy.org/pdf/40Years.pdf

The paper looks at changes to the student body and student liv-ing standards since the introduction of the Canada Student Loans Program in 1964. This quantitative study addresses four aspects. First, it looks at changes in the composition of the student body and stresses the substantial changes that have taken place in the gender composition of the undergraduate population. Second, by focusing on changes in student income patterns, the study finds that the composition of student income has changed drastically over the past forty years. Third, the study concludes that in terms of stu-dent expenditures little has changed since the introduction of the Canada Student Loan program. Finally, looking at the effect changes in undergraduate income or expenditure have had on access to uni-versity education, the study comes up with the result that finances are no more a barrier to completion of higher education now than


they were in 1965. The paper also provides some general observa-tions on the apparent effects of the Canada Student Loan Program and concludes that over the forty years that the Program has been in place, educational opportunities have become wider.

Chapman, Bruce. (2006). Government Managing Risk: Income Contingent Loans for Social and Economic Progress. London: Routledge.

The book analyzes the ways in which income contingent loans can aid risk management policy reform. Part I looks at the use of income contingent loans for supporting higher education students and includes a detailed case study of risk sharing in the Australian income contingent loan program and a review of higher education income contingent loan programs in several other countries. Part II focuses on the potential role of income contingent loans for manag-ing risk in other areas of public policy.

Chapman, Bruce. (2004). A Critical Appraisal of the New Higher Education Charges for Students. Dialogue 23, 1, 61-72.

The article analyzes the 2005 reforms to the Australian higher educa-tion funding system approved by Parliament in late 2003. While it supports the HECS-HELP policy change (whereby universities will be able to set their own prices for HECS places up to a certain ceil-ing) as good economic and social reform, it criticizes the Fee-Help reform as allowing universities too much discretion in price set-ting and not enough in deciding the number of places to be offered on a fee paying basis. The article concludes by offering a preferred model of Australian higher education financing that would include price capping, reform of vocational education and training fees, and removal of all up-front costs.

Chapman, Bruce. (1999). Reform of Ethiopian Higher Education Financing: Conceptual and Policy Issues. Economics of Education Thematic Group. Washington, DC: World Bank. Available at: http://www1.worldbank.org/education/economicsed/research/econseries/Chapman_index.htm

This paper, done through a World Bank consultancy, proposes an Australian-style Higher Education Contribution Scheme (HECS) of income contingent loans for Ethiopia. (See Johnstone and Aemero, The Applicability for Developing Countries of Income Contingent Loans, with Special Consideration of an Australian HECS-type Income Contingent Loan Program for Ethiopia, which rebutted the Chapman proposal and presents a case for the inapplicability of income contin-gent loans in general for developing countries such as Ethiopia.)


Chapman, Bruce. (1997). Conceptual Issues and the Australian Experience with Income Contingent Charges for Higher Education. The Economic Journal 107, 738-751.

Bruce Chapman is the father of the Australian income contingent loan plan, and presents a good explanation of its essential concepts. The HECS program allowed a tuition fee to be imposed in Australia with less than the usual student opposition, and with apparent initial success in the cost recovery.

Chapman, Bruce and Chris Ryan. (2003). The Access Implications of Income Contingent Charges for Higher Education: Lessons from Australia. Discussion Paper No. 463, Center for Economic Policy Research, Australian National University. Canberra, Australia: Center for Economic Policy Research. Available at: http://cepr.anu.edu.au/discussionpapers.htm

This paper looks at the impact of Australia’s Higher Education Contribution Scheme (HECS) on university enrollment. Based on their analysis of university participation data for three cohorts (before HECS, immediately following the introduction of HECS and after substantial revisions were made to the HECS program), the authors conclude that HECS does not have a discouraging impact on university participation for the general population or for the lowest socio-economic groups.

Chapman, Bruce and Chris Ryan. (2002). Income Contingent Financing of Student Charges for Higher Education: Assessing the Australian Innovation. The Welsh Journal of Education (Special International Issue on Paying for Learning: The Debate on Student Fees, Grants and Loans in International Perspective), 11(1) 64-81.

Chapman and Ryan present the Australian higher education con-tribution schemes (HECS). In asserting that “economic theory” illustrates the conceptual superiority of income contingent loans over loans of more conventional fixed schedule properties, the authors are arguably overstating the case for income contingency and missing some of its inherent problems as well as some of the interesting variations on the income contingent theme.

Chapman, David. (2002). Management and Efficiency in Education: Goals and Strategies. Education in Developing Asia, Volume 2, Manila, the Philippines: Asian Development Bank. Available at: http://www.adb.org/Documents/Books/Education_NatlDev_Asia/Management_Efficiency/

Part of the Education in Developing Asia series produced jointly by the Asian Development Bank (ADB) and the Comparative Education


Research Centre of the University of Hong Kong, this book looks at trends and issues in education management and efficiency in developing member countries in the ADB. In terms of higher edu-cation, the book identifies four education management issues that will be especially relevant over the next decade. These include: the development of new/alternative funding streams; student transfer and the transfer of credits across institutions; the formulation and imposition of standards and the implementation of accreditation systems; and the translation of faculty creative talent into income streams for the institution. Recommendations are made for ways in which governments can strengthen the administration of their education systems.

Cheeseman Day, Jennifer and Eric C. Newburger. (2002). The Big Payoff: Educational Attainment and Synthetic Estimates of Work Life Earnings. Washington, DC: United States Census Bureau. Available at: http://www.census.gov/prod/2002pubs/p23-210.pdf

A report prepared by the US Census Bureau that looks at the eco-nomic value (in terms of work-life earnings) of a high school diploma or college degree and how the relationship between educational attainment and earnings has changed in the last 25 years.

Choy, Susan P. (2004). Paying for College, Changes Between 1990 and 2000 for Full-Time Dependent Undergraduates. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics. Available at: http://nces.ed.gov/ pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=2004075

This report, published by the National Center for Education Statistics, summarizes the data on tuition fees, grants, and loans from a vari-ety of sources, including the annual surveys of the College Board, the National Association of State Student Grant and Aid Programs, and the National Postsecondary Student Aid Studies from various years. The document focuses on changes between 1990 and 2000 for full-time dependent undergraduates, pulling together and pro-viding effective summaries of findings from the NCES Annual Condition of Education reports.

Chudgar, Amita. (2004). Higher Education Expenditure in India: Role of the Household. Paper prepared for the ASHE International Conference.

The paper explores the role of various family characteristics (parental education, family’s economic status, household size, membership in a social group, student’s gender) in financing higher education in India. The study finds that these characteristics account for 27 percent variation in higher education expenditure


and that they are more important in explaining variation in edu-cational expenditure at lower levels of education. The findings are important for the government’s higher education finance policy-making process

Chung, Yue Ping. (2003). The Student Loan Scheme in Hong Kong, Policy Research and Dialogue, Student Loan Schemes in Asia, Volume 1, N. 3. Bangkok, Thailand: UNESCO Asia and Pacific Regional Bureau for Education and Paris: IIEP.Available at: http://www2.unescobkk.org/ips/ebooks/documents/stu-dentloan/index.htm

Part of a new series on government-sponsored student loan schemes in Asia, the monograph describes the expansion of higher education in Hong Kong in the late 1980s and early 1990s and the increase in tuition and academic expenses for students that accompanied it. The monograph reviews the evolution of the student loans scheme looking first at past student grants and loans schemes and then the development of the (subsidized and non-subsidized) schemes that are presently in place. The monograph assesses the loans system in terms of its equity, efficiency and adequacy and concludes that it is generally equitable and efficient.

Chuta, E.J. (1998). New Dimensions in Educational Financing: the Nigerian Educational Bank. Higher Education, 35(4), 443-433.

This article describes the role of the Nigerian Education Bank in the educational system as threefold: to serve as a major intermediary in Nigeria’s education credit market; to harness private sector resources for funding of education; and to take over some government respon-sibilities to enable the government to re-channel its resources to other pressing areas of the economy. The main and specific func-tions of the bank include, among others: student lending, lending for publishing, equipment leasing, project financing, funds for mobili-zation and provision of advisory services for educational purposes. The article also highlights the comparative experience of several countries in Africa, Europe, and the Americas in the area of student financing. It recommends the active participation of Nigeria’s private sector in educational financing, and the strengthening of the stu-dent-lending scheme through resources from petroleum, a higher education tax and the value added tax.

Chuta, E.J. (1992). Student Loans in Nigeria, Higher Education, 23(4), 443-49.

This article describes the operations of the student loan program in


Nigeria, including its past problems and attempts of the Nigerian Students Loan Board to improve efficiency of loan collection.

Clancy, Patrick and Deirdre Kehoe. (1999). Financing Third-level Students in Ireland. European Journal of Education, 34(1), 43-56.

In this article the authors trace the policy changes in university financing and student economic support in Ireland in the last decade including most importantly the abolishing of tuition fees in 1996. The authors argue that the generous public financing of the tertiary sector that made it possible to abolish tuition fees may not last if Ireland’s economic boom starts to slow down and that renewed pres-sure on public expenditure would bring about renewed debate on levels of student contributions to their higher education costs.

Clark, Burton. (1998). Creating Entrepreneurial Universities, Organizational Pathways of Transition. IAU Press, Issues in Higher Education. Paris, France: Pergamon Press.

Amidst the backdrop of fiscal constraints and the rapidly changing role and position of universities, Burton Clark reports on a handful of Universities in Northern Europe that made valiant efforts in the 1980s and 1990s to become more entrepreneurial. Clark explains how it was done and offers insight by organizing his findings in two ways: through integrated stories and later generalized concepts highlighted in introductory and concluding chapters.

Cloete, Nico, Pundy Pillay, Saleem Badat. (2004). National Policy and a Regional Response in South African Higher Education. New York: Partnership for Higher Education in Africa.

This case study commissioned by the Partnership for Higher Education in Africa tracks the higher education policies that have been implemented since 1990 to meet the government’s equity and development goals and address the challenges inherent in the tension between them. The study describes measures being imple-mented in the Eastern Cape to identify strategic regional cooperation scenarios that could optimize the teaching, research and administra-tive expertise in the region, expand access and resource availability and achieve economies of scale.

Colclough, Christopher. (1999). Raising Additional Resources for Education in Developing Countries: Are Graduate Payroll Taxes Preferable to Student Loans? International Journal of Educational Development, 10 (2), 169-180.

This paper discusses whether user fees are helpful in raising addi-


tional resources to finance educational expansion in developing countries. Using simulations, it demonstrates that graduate payroll taxes satisfy equity and efficiency criteria more thoroughly than loan schemes and identifies the structural characteristics that are required for their success.

College Board, The. (2004). Education Pays. The Benefits of Higher Education for Individuals and Society. Trends in Higher Education Series. Washington, DC: The College Board. Available at: http://www.collegeboard.com

Part of the Trends in Higher Education Series, the report documents the benefits, both monetary and nonmonetary, of higher education for individuals and society. The report also looks at participation and success rates in higher education by race/ethnicity and gender and socioeconomic and identifies persistent gaps.

College Board, The. (2003). National Dialogue on Student Financial Aid, Research Reports. Washington, DC: The College Board. Available at: http://www.collegeboard.com

The College Board in 2002-03 sponsored a blue ribbon national task force entitled National Dialogue on Student Financial Aid that gener-ated several valuable research reports as background. Research report #1 “Fundamental Assumptions and Aims Underlying the Principles and the Policies of Federal Financial Aid to Students” by D. Bruce Johnstone, examines the often unstated but fundamental principles and finds that the actual federal financial policies – given these fun-damental aims and given the underlying nature of state controlled public higher education and state chartered private higher educa-tion--make far more “sense” than what is usually ascribed to the seemingly complex array of federal grants and loans. Donald Heller in Research report #4 presents a summary of what we know about the relationship between financial aid at the state level, including both need-based and so-called merit programs, and college access. In research report #5, Sandy Baum analyzes current data on student indebtedness and the evidence regarding the effect of student loans on college access. Research Report #6, by Michel McPherson and Morton Shapiro, entitled “Getting the Most out of Federal Student Aid Spending – Encouraging Colleges and Universities to Promote the Common Good” examine the sometimes complex and illusive incentive effects of federal student aid in all of its various dimen-sions upon college and university “behavior.” In Research Report #7, the College Scholarship Service Council of the College Board summarizes the recommendations of its task force on federal aid


reauthorization. Taken together, these research reports present, as of 2003, a collection of timely, policy oriented papers on financial assistance, particularly at the federal governmental level.

College Board, The. (2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005). Trends in Student Aid and Trends in College Pricing. Washington, DC: College Entrance Examination Board. Available at: http://www.collegeboard.com

These annual publications for the Washington Office of the College Board present recent data, with time series trends, on both tuitions and other student- and family-born expenses (i.e. college pricing) as well as various forms of student assistance, including federal grants and loans, state grants, federal campus-based grants, institutional grants, and estimates of other grant and loan programs. The time series data include total aid, number of recipients, and other key statistics in current and constant-dollar trends. Taken together the two reports provide an excellent overview of higher educational costs and opportunity in the United States.

Collins, Susan E., Thomas C. Leitzel, Samuel D. Morgan, and Robert J. Stalcup. (1994). Declining Revenues and Increasing Enrollments: Strategies for Coping. Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 18, 33‑42.

The results of a national survey of community college presidents on the coping strategies used to manage declines in state funding and increase enrollments in an attempt to avoid enrollment limitations. The survey findings are analyzed and discussed. Data reveals that community college leaders prefer to select limitation strategies that do not appear to alter the institution’s admission criteria or close the door to open access. In addition, tuition and fees were found to have increased at 90 percent of institutions and data indicates that continued enrollment growth may be adversely affected.

Committee of Vice-Chancellors and Principals in Tanzania. (1997). Public Universities Remaining Competitive Under Liberalized Education Environment in Tanzania. Dar es Salaam, Tanzania: University of Dar es Salaam.

This report on the implications of the liberalized higher educa-tion system for public universities in Tanzania reviews the reasons behind the growth of the private higher education sector and makes recommendations for reforms/improvements in the public higher education sector to help it remain competitive. Some of the recom-mendations include strengthening the public universities’ business focus, capitalizing on strengths and comparative advantages, imple-


menting incentive schemes and reforming retirement benefits and conditions for faculty, and reducing unit costs.

Congressional Budget Office. (2004a). Private and Public Contributions to Financing College Education. Washington, DC: Congressional Budget Office. Available at: http://www.cbo.gov/showdoc.cfm?index=4984&sequence=0

The paper, prepared at the request of the Senate Budget Committee, looks at how much students and their families paid in college costs in 1999-2000 after accounting for all financial aid (including loans, grants and tax credits). It finds that in 1999-2000, families (parents and students) bore between 37 percent for the lowest group and 59 percent for the highest of total costs. For every income group and every college type, the student’s share of the costs was less than 30 percent of total costs. It also found that while the parents’ share of costs increased as family incomes rose, in terms of percentage of income, parents in the lowest-income group contributed a larger percentage (9 percent) than did parents in the middle (less than 6 percent) or upper-income groups (6 percent).

Congressional Budget Office. (2004b). Estimating the Value of Subsidies for Federal Loans and Loan Guarantees. Washington, DC: Congressional Budget Office. Available at: http://www.cbo.gov/showdoc.cfm?index= 5751&sequence=0

This study looks at using commercial interest rates, which incorpo-rate risk, instead of risk-free Treasury rates when discounting federal student loans to their present values to measure the cost of these programs to the government.

Congressional Report. (2004). Slamming Shut the Doors to College, The State Budget Crisis and Higher Education. Washington, DC: United States Congress. Available at: http://edworkforce.house.gov/democrats/ higheredreport.pdf

Report prepared by the Democratic Staffs of the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions; Senate Committee on Appropriations; House Committee on Education and the Workforce; and the House Committee on Appropriations, Washington, DC that looks at the implications of cuts in state and federal higher educa-tion funding for student access.

Correia, Fernanda, Alberto Amaral and Antonio Magalhaes. (2002). Public and Private Higher Education in Portugal: Unintended Effects of Deregulation. European Journal of Education, 37(4), 457-472.

This paper concludes that the expansion and diversification of


Portuguese higher education was more the result of institutional strategies and new areas of knowledge than an answer to market demands or an increase in the sector’s responsiveness to external demands. The Portuguese case shows that both state regulation and market coordination are incomplete political regulators. Despite the presence of a large private sector, the available regulation mecha-nisms are unable to solve many of the problems that have arisen due to the very rapid expansion of that sector.

Council of Australian Postgraduate Associations. (2003). The Social and Economic Impact of Student Debt, March, Research Paper. Melbourne, Australia: Council of Australian Postgraduate Associations. Available at: http://www.capa.edu.au/frameset.html?/briefing/index.html

This research paper considers the social and economic consequences of student debt in Australia, and gives an overview of related research findings from New Zealand, the United Kingdom, and the USA. It discusses the impact of student debt on individual life choices, such as the decision to have children; the ability to accrue additional debt, such as a home mortgage; the capacity of the individual to save, either for their own children’s education or for their retirement; the size of the labor market as graduates choose to work overseas to avoid repay-ing their debt; and fees for professional services as dentists, doctors, lawyers and accountants who accrue larger student debts.

Court, David. (1999). Financing Higher Education in Africa. Makerere: the Quiet Revolution. Washington, DC: World Bank. Available at: http://www-wds.worldbank.org/servlet/WDSContentServer/WDSP/IB/2001/10/12/000094946_01100204031685/Rendered/PDF/ multi0page.pdf

The provision of quality higher education to a large number of cli-entele without undue dependence on government budget has been the major challenge of most universities in Africa today. The article describes instructive lessons from Makerere University in Uganda, which demonstrates new possibilities to solve the challenge.

Included among the major alternative funding strategies are schemes to encourage privately sponsored students, commercial-ize service units, institutionalize consultancy arrangements, and introduce demand-driven courses. As a result of these reforms, the University moved from a situation where none of its students paid tuition to one where 70% of the students do. Overall enrollment has doubled with privately sponsored students representing 80% of new admissions. The funds gained from non-government sources have been allocated to library development, faculty development, build-


ings maintenance, and most important, for raising staff salaries, where the impact has been a slow down on faculty mass exodus to

“greener pastures”.

Cunningham, Alisa, Christina Redmond and Jamie Merisotis. (2003). Investing Early, Intervention Programs in Selected US States, Institute for Higher Education Policy, Montreal, Canada: Canada Millennium Scholarship Foundation. Available at: http://www.millenniumscholar-ships.ca/images/Publications/investingeng_web2.pdf

Based on research showing that financial aid alone cannot ensure equal access to higher education, state-sponsored early intervention programs are designed to encourage educationally and economi-cally disadvantaged students to “enter the post-secondary education pipeline.” Programs offer different services including counseling/awareness, academic/enrichment/support, parental involvement, personal enrichment/social integration, mentoring or scholarship support or some combination thereof. The report examines 17 such programs in 12 states by categorizing each program based on its approach, its target and its oversight and administration and assess-ing their outcomes. The report concludes among other findings that state programs that combine several components tend to be more effective and that tutoring, mentoring and academic enrichment are important program components. It also highlights the trade-off between the scope of program services and the number of students in the program.

Daka, J.S.J. et al. (2000). Innovative Strategies for Financing and Management of Engineering Education in Africa, Proceedings of the Workshop, Gaborone, Botswana.

Report of the experts group meeting organized by the African Network of Scientific and Technological Institutions (ANSTI) to dis-cuss the inadequacy of financial resources for engineering education in Africa and discuss existing and potential strategies for dealing with financial constraints. The report contains a large number of papers describing the income generating strategies being imple-mented by engineering faculties in a number of African countries (Kenya, Nigeria, and South Africa in particular).

Daniel, Hans-Dieter, Stephanie Schwarz and Ulrich Teichler. (1999). Study Costs, Student Income and Public Policy in Europe. European Journal of Education, 34, (1), 7-21.

Cost and funding have been amongst the major issues of higher education policy in industrialized societies for several decades. The


aim of the comparative study on which the article is based was not only to provide updated in-depth information on higher education costs and funding, but also to establish the quantitative role public support continues to play in covering the overall costs of study. The qualitative function of public support in shaping the students’ roles as dependent children, investors or citizens was also analyzed.

Davis, Jerry Sheehan. (2003). Unintended Consequences of Tuition Discounting, Lumina New Agenda Series, Volume 3, Number 1. Indianapolis, IN: Lumina Foundation for Education.Available at: http://www.luminafoundation.org/publications/Tuitiondiscounting.pdf

The monograph looks at tuition discounting including the ways in which it does not always achieve its goals of increasing institutional revenue, increasing student diversity and attracting outstanding students and its unintended negative effects on lower-income students.

Davis, Jerry Sheehan. (2000). College Affordability: Overlooked Long-Term Trends and Recent 50-State Patterns. USA Group New Agenda Series, Vol. 3, No. 1. Indianapolis, IN: USA Group Foundation. Available at: http://www.luminafoundation.org/publications/collegeaffordability.pdf

Aimed at informing discussions on the college affordability crisis in the United States, the monograph looks at long-term trends in college charges, the ability of students and families to pay them and trends in graduation productivity ratios (college prices in relation to the earnings outcomes of college graduates). Among the copi-ous findings are the following: prices in public and private colleges grew rapidly in the 1990s, but at a lower rate than during the 1980s; it has become more difficult for low-income students to afford to attend college without access to student financial aid; the perceived

“affordability crisis” for middle class students is more one of willing-ness to pay than one of ability to pay; since the early 1980s, mean annual earnings have grown much faster for young persons with college degrees than those with just high school degrees; and there are substantial state-by-state differences in affordability and gradua-tion productivity and, therefore, significant inequities between states in terms of paying for college.

De Dios Jimenez, Juan and Manuel Salas-Velasco. (2000). Modeling Educational Choices. A Binomial Logit Model Applied to the Demand for Higher Education. HigherEducation, 40, 293-311.

Using a binomial logit model and cross-sectional survey data on the educational choices made by Spanish high school graduates, the


authors examine the extent to which the theoretical determinants of educational choice (academic aptitude, the student’s social back-ground, family income, employment prospects, etc.) actually are confirmed in practice. The authors found that social background, family income and scholastic ability mainly explain the educa-tional choice of students (i.e. the probability of choosing a four year university).

Department for Education and Skills. (2004a). Student Loans and the Question of Debt. London, UK: Department for Education and Skills. Available at: http://www.dfes.gov.uk/hegateway/uploads/Debt%20-%20FINAL.pdf

This government paper looks at the impact of student debt on par-ticipation in higher education in the United Kingdom and describes the new student support system due to start in 2006. It argues that debt need not be a significant deterrent to higher education and that the real deterrents lie elsewhere in the system at lower levels of education.

Department for Education and Skills. (2004b). Increasing Voluntary Giving to Higher Education, Task Force Report to Government. Nottingham, UK: DfES Publication Center.Available at: http://www.dfes.gov.uk/hegateway/uploads/Increasing%20Voluntary%20Giving%20to%20Higher%20Education%20%20Task%20Force%20Report%20to%20Government.pdf

The report on the potential role of voluntary giving in supporting institutional development in UK higher education asserts that the success of higher education fundraising in the United States is not only due to the country’s strong culture of giving, but more importantly to its universitities’ culture of asking. The report recommends that this culture of asking be fostered in higher edu-cation institutions in the United Kingdom through the creation of strong development offices and commitment in terms of time and resources by university leadership. The report lists ten key recommendations to the Government, inter-university agencies and institutional governing bodies that include the commission-ing of a national survey on attitudes towards voluntary giving to higher education, the fielding of study trips to the United States, a review of tax relief provisions and the introduction of planned giving vehicles.

Department for Education and Skills. (2003). The Future of Higher Education, White Paper presented to the Parliament by the Secretary


of State for Education and Skills in January, London, United Kingdom. Available at: http://www.dfes.gov.uk/hegateway/uploads/White%20Pape.pdf

A Government white paper that proposed several policy changes in the system of financing higher education in the United Kingdom to expand capacity and increase access. Policy components include the re-introduction from 2004 of a new grant of up to £1,000 a year for students from lower-income families; the introduction in 2006 of a new Graduate Contribution Scheme that includes the scrapping of up-front tuition in favor of a deferred payment scheme; the payment of the first £1,100 of fees for students from lower income families; and the appointment of a Higher Education Access Regulator, who will develop a framework for Access Agreements for each institution. Most of the proposals became law in 2004.

Deutsches Studentenwerk (Ed.). (1997). Current Developments in the Educational Assistance Systems in Western Europe in Connection with the Family Burden Equalisation Systems. Project Manager Dieter Schaferbarthold. Bonn, Germany: Deutsches Studentenwerk.

The report, produced within the context of a project supported by the German Federal Ministry for Education, Science, Research and Technology, looks at current developments in the educational assis-tance systems of 13 western European countries (Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Ireland, Italy, the Netherlands, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, and the UK) and the interaction of these systems with each country’s family burden equalization sys-tem and maintenance legislation provisions.

Dill, David D. and Maarja Soo. (2004). Transparency and Quality in Higher Education Markets. In Pedro Teixeira, Ben Jongbloed, David Dill and Alberto Amaral (Eds.), Markets in Higher Educatio. Rhetoric or Reality? (pp. 13-36). Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

In their paper, prepared for the third Douro higher education semi-nar in Douro Portugal (October 2003), the authors review relevant research on the transparency of higher education markets. They explore the relationship between academic quality information and perfect competition in higher education markets and discuss prob-lems of misinformed principals and under informed consumers. The article discusses information asymmetry whereby consumers (students) and those who pay (government, parents, students them-selves) do not have as much information as the higher education institutions themselves on the quality of education available and


whether there are other comparable options that are cheaper. The authors argue that this situation leads to inefficiency in the higher education market. As a result, the social costs of higher education may not produce the optimal social benefits. Another problem raised in the article is the existence of imperfect information on the actual quality of academic programs, because producers themselves have imperfect information on a program’s true quality and therefore they fail to make improvements. The authors suggest that the cur-rent institutional framework provides insufficient incentives for academic quality improvements within universities and discuss the effects of information asymmetry and imperfect information on the market, the effectiveness of social investment and the way university resources are used.

Dobson, Ian. (2001). Go Forth and Diversity! The Rise and Fall of Government Contributions to Australian Higher Education. Higher Education Management, 13 (1), 9-22.

The article reviews higher education funding over the years in Australia and the policy changes that were behind the variations in government contributions. While 25 years ago the government pro-vided higher education institutions with 90 percent of their income, by 1998 government contributions accounted for less than 52 per-cent. This decline was paralled by an increase in the percentage of income provided by the students themselves and funding from other sources (research grants and contracts, donations, investment income etc.) and is expected to continue.

Ehrenberg, Ronald G. (2000). Tuition Rising, Why College Costs so Much, Cambridge and London: Harvard University Press.

This is one of the best recent books on higher education finance, par-ticularly in the elite, high cost/high price colleges and universities. Ehrenberg is an economist and former Cornell administrator, and combines a sophisticated yet readable book on both the economics of rising costs and prices, and on the practical administrative, or managerial, side of coping with this trajectory.

Eicher, Jean-Claude. (1998). The Costs and Financing of Higher Education in Europe. European Journal of Education, 33(1), 31‑39.

One of the many articles presented in this volume of the European Journal of Education on innovation and changes in financing higher education in Europe, the author discusses the costs and financing of higher education in Europe. Over the last four decades, higher education systems in Europe have undergone deep quantitative


transformations that have been accompanied by very great structural changes. Based on recent observations and economic analyses of the financing of higher education in Europe, it can be concluded that students’ participation in the financing of their studies is still lower than the optimum seems to justify in many European countries, that tuition fees are increasing in different forms and methods, that stu-dent aid systems in most countries must be rethought and amended in relation to the evolution of fees, that a harmonization of fees and student aid systems is highly desirable if a unified Europe is to be built, and that many problems are still being debated, particularly the level of tuition fees and the ways of reimbursing loans.

Eisemon, Thomas and Jamil Salmi. (2002). Increasing Equity in Higher Education: Strategies and Lessons from International Experience, International and Intercultural Development Education Graduate Program, Florida International University.

The paper studies the efforts of governments in developing coun-tries to implement policies that increase equity in higher education. It examines the relationship between access to higher education and the quality and efficiency of different policies. The paper also asserts that direct grants to meritorious, but needy students are the most effective way to increase higher education participation.

EKOS Research Associates. (2003). Making Ends Meet, The 2001-2002 Student Financial Survey. Montreal, Canada: Canada Millennium Scholarship Foundation. Available at: http://www.millenniumscholar-ships.ca/images/Publications/making_ends_meet_en.pdf

Written to fill the gap in knowledge regarding the total debt load of students (beyond student loans) in Canada and its origin and on their expenditures during their in school years, the survey also examines the impact of this information on access and enrollment behavior.

European Centre for Higher Education. (1999). Access and Admission to Higher Education in Europe. Higher Education in Europe, XXXIV(3), 335-465.

This special issue addresses access and admission to higher edu-cation in Europe and includes articles on several different facets of access including gender, finance and selectivity issues. In their article, Boezerooy and Vossensteyn use the concepts of selectivity and affordability to compare accessibility in nine western European countries. Gabrscek provides an interesting case study of Slovenia’s introduction, for the first time in central and eastern Europe, of an external exam at the interface of secondary and higher education.


Grunberg reviews the CEPES project to promote gender equality in higher education. Several articles addressing quality issues are also included.

Eurydice. (1999). Key Topics in Education: Financial Support for Students in Higher Education in Europe, Trends and Debates. The Information Network on Education in Europe. European Commission. Available at: http://www.eurydice.org/Doc_intermediaires/analysis/en/frameset_analysis.html

A comprehensive compilation of data and policy issues concerning higher education finance in Europe with extensive case study analy-sis and recent statistics. Very much a practical reference on present systems of student support in Europe from tuition fees and loans to grants and tax relief. Detailed description of social benefits, foreign study and students facilitate model building and interpretation.

File, Jon and Leo Goedegebuure (Eds.). (2003). Real-Time Systems, Reflections on Higher Education in the Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland and Slovenia. CHEPS, CROSS, Netherlands: Vutium Press. Available at: http://www.utwente.nl/cheps/publications/complete_list/english/ English_books.doc/

The book outlines the higher education systems and main policy issues in each of the four countries and includes a chapter on each of four key areas including institutional funding, tuition fees and student support, quality assurance and governance. The chapter on student support by Hans Vossensteyn looks the debates involved in cost sharing and the history of its implementation (or non-imple-mentation) in each country. He concludes that the tradition of free higher education is eroding in three of the four countries, but that the systems of student financial support are poor and the dual track structures that have been established are far from fair.

Finnie, Ross, Alex Usher and Hans Vossensteyn. (2004). Meeting the Need: A New Architecture for Canada’s Student Financial Aid System. Toronto, Canada: Educational Policy Institute.Available at: http://www.irpp.org/pm/archive/pmvol5no7.pdf

The report proposes the creation of a new system for student finan-cial assistance in Canada that would replace the plethora of existing programs with a single program to deliver assistance to those in financial need. The report describes the current Canadian system (loans and need based grants, tax credits and savings programs), identifies its major flaws (too much spending on tax credits, inad-equate assistance limits among others) and describes several


student assistance models in other countries that are defined by the person/entity who is primarily responsible for the costs of study - the student, the parents or some combination thereof. The report outlines a proposed system that would consist of a single program to assess need and deliver a combination of loans and grants. The system would redefine the definition of “dependent student” with the implication that family financial resources are assessed for more students, and create a secondary loan program for dependent students whose parents could not or would not make the expected contributions. It would also create programs that provide debt relief for graduates who face excessive debt bur-dens relative to their incomes and ensure that the system is well advertised to the public.

Finnie, Ross. (2004). A Simple Model of Access and Capacity for Post-Secondary School in Canada. Kingston, Canada: Queen’s University. Available at: http://www.queensu.ca/sps/working_papers/files/sps_wp40.pdf

The study develops a conceptual framework in order to frame issues of access to postsecondary education and system capacity in the con-text of increasing tuition, changes in student aid policies, and higher educational institutions facing financial austerity. The framework employed in the study is based on a supply-demand model and makes clear how the demand and supply of postsecondary education interact to determine the number of students and their characteris-tics. The framework is applied to analyze the effects of an increase in tuition and in student financial aid, as well as to consider issues of higher educational system capacity. This study adds to the under-standing of the postsecondary education system in terms of student body formation and related policy issues.

Finnie, Ross. (2002). Student Loans, Student Financial Aid and Post-secondary Education in Canada. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 24 (2), 155-170.

The article reviews the Canadian student loan system and suggests reforms including higher borrowing limits, wider eligibility and more assistance for those having repayment problems. To fight declining educational quality, the author also proposes the intro-duction of a post-secondary education revitalization social contract whereby each party (students, provincial governments, the federal government) would put C$1,000 per student of new money into the system each year, which would increase average per student spend-ing by 25 percent.


Fiske, Edward B. and Helen F. Ladd. (2004). Elusive Equity, Education Reform in Post-apartheid South Africa. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.

The book looks at the strategies employed by South Africa to reform the state education system following the defeat of apartheid and the election in 1994 of the democratically elected new government. While it focuses mainly on primary and secondary school reforms (and gives particular attention to the impact of school fees on enroll-ment patterns and school quality), the book has a chapter on the higher education system and government policies to redress past inequalities and create a unified multiracial university system.

Foose, Robert A. and Joel W. Meyerson. (1986). Alternative Approaches to Tuition Financing, Making Tuition More Affordable. Washington, DC: National Association of College and University Business Officers.

This monograph examines several tuition funding and payment alternatives currently in use and gives an overview of their major characteristics, and examples of different versions. Plans and spon-soring institutions are identified in the appendices.

Fossey, Richard and Mark Bateman. (Eds.). (1998). Condemning Students to Debt. College Loans and Public Policy. New York: Teachers College Press.

Designing student loan programs that expand access, especially to lower income groups, and recover investments is certainly one of the foremost challenges to cost sharing policy reforms. Student loan policies, programs, and outcomes are addressed in 10 essays/chapters. In particular, chapters 3, 6, and 7 are of interest to those designing loan programs as they focus on making due with less, how loans affect student’s educational decisions, and an analysis on why and who defaults on student loans using both qualitative and quantitative data.

Fred Hemingway Consulting and Kathryn McMullen. (2004). A Family Affair: The Impact of Paying for College or University, A Literature Review and Gap Analysis. Montreal, Canada: Canada Millennium Scholarship Foundation and Canadian Policy Research Networks. Available at: http://www.millenniumscholarships.ca/images/news/june25_family_e_.pdf

Against the backdrop of decreases in government direct post sec-ondary funding on a per student basis in Canada, and increases in the costs being covered by students and their families, the report examines the strategies used by students and their families to man-


age these costs and looks at the impact of this increased cost burden in terms of debt trends and participation. The report offers very detailed suggestions about future research that is needed to further clarify these issues.

Fred Hemingway Consulting. (2004). Pressure Points in Student Financial Assistance, Exploring the “Making Ends Meet” Database. Montreal, Canada: Canada Millennium Scholarship Foundation. Available at: http://www.millenniumscholarships.ca/images/Publications/pressure_en.pdf

The data in this study came from the EKOS survey of 1,543 Canadian students in the 2001-02 school year. Using Canada Student Loans Program definitions and categories, this report explores the data to identify additional information for analysis, and the policy implica-tions inherent in the reformatted data. Information was extracted on the following eight topics: 1) actual vs. allowed Canada Student Loan living expenses, 2) actual education & living costs vs. assistance limits, 3) student financing strategies, 4) actual vs. expected parental contributions, 5) students’ intent to work, 6) impact of work on time taken to graduate, 7) program choice, and 8) graduate debt.

Fred Hemingway Consulting. (2003). Assessing Canada’s Student Aid Need Assessment Policies. Montreal, Canada: Canada Millennium Scholarship Foundation. Available at: http://www.millenniumscholarships.ca/images/Publications/assessing_en.pdf

A part of the Canada Millennium Scholarship Foundation’s ongo-ing evaluation of its programs to enhance access to post-secondary education, the report looks at the effectiveness of current need assessment procedures in Canada and seeks to determine whether there are better ways and means of assessing student need in the future. Based on web searches, literature reviews and interviews and reviews of assessment methodologies used in the United States, the report outlines the student loans need assessment presently used in Canada and seeks to identify possible program bias against cer-tain student groups and unmet need. It concludes that unmet need is increasing as a result of increases in tuition and fee amounts since 1994 and too low loan limit and recommends among other things: indexing assistance limits to recognize increases in costs; increasing the income exemption above the $600 level; reducing required parental contributions to more realistic levels; moving from a needs-testing to a means-testing approach; and establishing an unsubsidized loan option available to qualified families.


Fry, Peter, and Utui Rogerio. (1999). Promoting Access, Quality, and Capacity Building in African Higher Education: The Strategic Planning Experience at Edward Mondlane University, Association for the Development of Higher Education in Africa-Working Group on Higher Education. Washington, DC: ADEA Working Group on Higher Education. Available at: http://www.adeanet.org/publications/wghe/wghe_uem_en.pdf

This report analyzes the efforts of Edward Mondlane University in Mozambique to carry out strategic institutional reforms intended to: expand access higher education; improve the quality of university teaching and research; and strengthen its capacities for institutional planning, program implementation, performance monitoring, and output evaluation.

Gill, T.K. and S.S. Gill. (2000). Financial Management of Universities in Developing Countries. Higher Education Policy, 13(2), 125-130.

This short article reviews the options available to universities in developing countries (and particularly India) to deal with resource constraints including implementation of, or increases in, tuition fees, privatization, and implementation of policies to attract foreign students, policies to encourage investment by businesses, and poli-cies to encourage entrepreneurial activities.

Gladieux, Lawrence E. and Arthur Hauptman. (1995). The College Aid Quandary: Access, Quality and the Federal Role. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.

This book examines U.S. financial aid policies in a historical con-text and discusses present programs and future strategies aimed at improving student aid. Loan programs and their problems are high-lighted throughout the book as it describes the unique and dynamic approach to higher education funding in the United States. Recent data and estimates on costs and expenditures in higher education by various levels of government, families, individuals, and endow-ments are included.

Glennerster, Howard. (2003). A Graduate Tax Revisited. Higher Education Review, 35(2), 25-40.

Re-published 1968 article by Howard Glennerster, Stephen Merrett and Gail Wilson with a short introduction by H. Glennerster. Although not implemented in any country, the “graduate tax” concept is an important part of the theoretical literature on student finance, and Glennerster’s 1968 article was its first widely read proposal.


Greenaway, David and Michelle Haynes. (2000). Funding Universities to Meet National and International Challenges, School of Economics Policy Report, Russell Group of Universities.Available at: http://www.nottingham.ac.uk/economics

The report points out that higher education in the United Kingdom faces three challenges: funding, access, and regulation. It examines the publicly-funded British universities and observes that funding for UK higher education has lagged behind increasing enrollments over the past two decades. The report argues that since both the individual and society benefit from higher education, the students should also bear some of the costs, which would bring additional revenues into UK higher education institutions. To stimulate the country’s knowledge-based economy, the report concludes that future funding strategies should include greater fee differentiation, more generous scholarships and more extensive income-contingent loans, which would allow a larger portion of UK students from lower socio-economic backgrounds to obtain a higher education.

Guhr, Daniel J. (2001). Access to Higher Education in Germany and California, Studies in Comparative Education. Frankfurt am Main, Berlin, Bern, New York: Peter Lang.

Based on access data by ethnic group for California and by social class (measured by parental employment, employment sector, and educational background) for Germany, the book compares and con-trasts access to higher education patterns in California and Germany. The author analyzes the extent to which the groups differ in their success rates in gaining access to higher education and the respec-tive impacts of the policy tools (affirmative access in California and need-based aid in Germany) used in each context to positively influ-ence these success rates.

Guillé, Marianne. (2001). Student Loans: A Solution for Europe? Paris: PuRE Public Funding and Private Returns to Education European Commission Project. Available at: http://www.etla.fi/PURE/StudentLoans_fullpaper.pdf

Written in the context of the 15 country Public Funding and Private Returns to Education (PuRE) European Commission project, the paper compares the student loan systems in European countries in terms of their relationship to grants, their criteria of eligibility, and their repayment conditions. The paper concludes with recommen-dations for a European Loan scheme that would harmonize these systems. The report recommends that all students should be eligible


for loans that are sufficient to cover all living costs, that repayments should be income contingent and that all students should have to pay a real interest rate.

Hansen, Janet S. (Ed.). (1990). College Savings Plans, Public Policy Choices. New York: College Entrance Examination Board.

This 1990 edited volume, published by the College Board, is dated but is still an interesting and useful historical account of the early years of the government’s movement from need-based student aid to an emphasis on tax-advantaged savings plans to encourage parents to save for their children’s college educations. While encouraging—and perhaps even subsidizing—parents to save more for the higher educational expenses of the children, the concept has been rightly criticized on two counts. First, it is not clear how much additional savings such plans generate—as opposed to moving savings from other vehicles into the more subsidized one, rewarding parents for taking advantage of this vehicle, but arguably not actually increasing accessibility. Another objection is that it has the quality of seemingly solving the largely political of middle and upper middle class tuition anxiety without, in fact, spending any money in the current budget years by hiding the true (present value) costs to the government of the programs, in part by pushing the effective costs of the tax advan-tages far into the future.

Harding, Ann. (1995). Financing Higher Education: An Assessment of Income-Contingent Loan Options and Repayment Patterns Over the Life Cycle. Education Economics, 3, 173-203.

The author provided much of the simulation modeling of the Australian Lifetime earnings streams upon which the design of the Australian Higher Education Contribution Scheme (HECS) was based. Although the HECS program has undergone modification, this early 1995 article is valuable in its account of the importance of simulated future earnings and the need to go beyond the simulation only of mean incomes to a simulation of the distributions of incomes/earnings/around these estimated means. By Harding’s simulations, most Australians would repay their HECS debts in full by their 65th year (93% of males and 89% of females), with most repaying in their 30s and 40s.

Harmon, Colm, Ian Walker and Niels Westergard-Nielsen (Eds.). (2001). Education and Earnings in Europe: A Cross Country Analysis of the Returns to Education. Northampton, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing.

This book, reports on a research project, Public Funding and Private


Returns to Education (PURE), supported by the European Commission under the Targeted Socio-Economic Research Program. The volume summarizes the most current empirical studies on returns-to-edu-cation in fifteen European countries, including Austria, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Italy, Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland and the United Kingdom. The authors are labor market economists, and much of the volume is annotative and econometric, although conclusions are readable and useful to the non-econometrician. The introduction, in particular, is a good treatment of the complexities of the econometric work on the returns to education, describing, for example, attempts to control for age, labor force participation, family background, and other factors affecting earnings outside of education.

Hauptman, Arthur M. (1999). Ideas on Higher Education Funding: Internal Financing of Student Loans, International Higher Education, 16, 4-5.

Hauptman, a long-time player in the analysis of US financial aid and loan policies, turned his attention in this short article to the possible role that student loans and tuitions might play in other countries, particularly developing countries. The short length of the article (a requirement of articles in the Boston College publication) allows for very little theory or context, and little analysis, but the proposal for tuition in developing countries (many of which display a political/ideological rejection of tuition and other forms of cost-sharing) – a portion of which new revenues could be used to support a student loan plan – is reasonable, although lacking in specifics.

Hauptman, Arthur. (1998a). Accommodating the Growing Demand for Higher Education in Brazil: A Role for the Federal Universities?, LCSHD Paper Series No. 30. Washington, DC: World Bank Latin America and Caribbean Regional Office. Available at:http://www-wds.worldbank.org/servlet/WDS_IBank_Servlet?pcont=details&eid=000094946_99031910571767

This paper focuses on three questions: 1) What policy might be adopted so that some of the growth in demand is accommodated by the federal universities in Brazil within the constraint of existing public resources? 2) What could Brazil do to free up public resources currently provided to the federal universities to fund future growth in other sectors of higher education? 3) How can Brazil ensure that access to federal universities is expanded for students with below average family incomes? Two financing models are examined in this report. One model is to set tuitions and allocate government


funds to public institutions on the basis of cost recovery. The other one is to set tuitions at public institutions as a percentage of GDP per capita or some other general economic measure. Hauptman con-cludes that Brazil should seek to coordinate its funding and tuition policies with the student aid programs rather than have these poli-cies work at cross purposes.

Hauptman, Arthur M. (1998b). Linking Funding, Student Fees, and Student Aid: An Alternative to Cost Recovery. International Higher Education, 13, 10-11.

The paper first presents arguments for and against cost recovery in higher education highlighting the major critics on the subject. The paper then presents a strategic model for financing higher educa-tion that links funding, tuition fees, student aid polices with overall economic trends.

Hauptman, Arthur M. (1990). The Tuition Dilemma, Assessing New Ways to Pay for College, Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution Press.

This slim monograph was an effective analysis of the higher educa-tion finance and particularly student finance landscape as of 1990. Tuition anxiety was high, and politicians and analysts were seeking new approaches, some with sound economics and finance, others with mainly cosmetic approaches. Although dated, this is an excel-lent treatment, particularly since many of the same programs and alleged solutions – e.g., tuition pre-payments, tax-advantage savings plans, income contingent loans – remain with us.

Hearn, James C. (2003). Diversifying Campus Revenue Streams: Opportunities and Risks, Washington, DC: American Council on Education, Center for Policy Analysis.

This report considers why colleges and universities are diversify-ing their revenue streams, examines how they are doing so, and synthesizes the research on decision-making processes regard-ing new revenues. The revenue-seeking efforts are investigated in eight domains: 1) instruction, 2) research and analysis, 3) pricing, 4) financial decision making and management, 5) human resources, 6) franchising, licensing, sponsorship, and partnering arrangements with third parties, 7) auxiliary enterprises, facilities and real estate, and 8) development. The author asserts that revenue diversification efforts should not only generate new revenues, but also generate new net returns. When pursuing new revenues one must deal with the question of why new revenues are being sought. This report is a good reference for leaders of higher education institutions.


Heath, Julia A. (1998). Financing and Provision of Education and Health Services in Developing Countries: A Review Article. Economics of Education Review, 17(3), 359-62.

A review article looking at Marketing Education and Health in Developing Countries edited by Christopher Colclough. The article provides an overview of the approach taken by this collection to analyze the results of market-determined distribution of education and health services in developing countries. The article supports the book’s main contention that market-led initiatives might be more appropriate (to the point that they are effective at all) in developed, as opposed to developing countries and introduces attention to the differential gender based impact of these initiatives.

Heller, Donald E. (2001a). The Effects of Tuition Prices and Financial Aid on Enrollment in Higher Education, California and the Nation. Rancho Cordova, CA: EdFund. Available at: http://www.edfund.org/pdfs/i-57.pdf

This report, prepared for the California Student Aid Commission and the EdFund, assesses the impact of tuition prices and financial aid on student decisions to attend college. The report starts by sum-marizing the existing research and points out that different studies have come to different conclusions regarding students’ responsive-ness to tuition prices and financial aid. It asserts that while college pricing and financial aid factors generally play a relatively small part of the decisions made by most students compared to their academic aptitude and achievement; the degree to which their parents, sib-lings and peers promote college as a post-high school option, the proximity of colleges, etc., college pricing and financial aid policies are among the only factors under the direct control of education policy makers.

Heller, Donald E. (2001b). Debts and Decisions: Student Loans and Their Relationship to Graduate School and Career Choice, Lumina Foundation for Education New Agenda Series, Volume 3, Number 4. Indianapolis, IN: Lumina Foundation for Education. Available at: http://www.luminafoundation.org/publications/debtsdecisions.pdf

This report examines the relationship between the amount of loans that students take out during their undergraduate years and the decisions that they make regarding careers and enrollment in graduate school. Data is used from 11,000 undergraduate stu-dents who completed their baccalaureate education in the 1992-93 academic year.


Heller, Donald E. (Ed.). (2000). The States and Public Higher Education Policy. Affordability, Access, and Accountability. Baltimore, MD: The John Hopkins University Press.

The essays in this report explore the debates surrounding issues of affordability, access and accountability in higher education in the United States by focusing on the relationship between tuition, financial aid and enrollment. The report surveys recent literature on this relationship, updates the historical findings on student price responsiveness nationally and applies these findings to California. The report makes the point that while research has shown that col-lege pricing and financial aid factors play a relatively small role in a student’s decision to enroll in college, they are critically important because they are among the only factors under the direct control of policy makers.

Heller, Donald E. (1999). The Effects of Tuition and State Financial Aid on Public College Enrollment. The Review of Higher Education, 23(1), 65-89.

This study examines the impact of state policy in the US on public college enrollment by students from different racial groups. The author suggests that if the impact of rising prices does differ from group to group, states need to adapt their policies to safeguard the goal of equality of access to public higher education.

Heller, Donald E. (1997). Student Price Response in Higher Education: An Update to Leslie and Brinkman. The Journal of Higher Education, 68(6), 624-659.

In 1987 Leslie and Brinkman reviewed 25 quantitative analyses for their meta-analysis on the relationship between price and enrollment in higher education. The main quandary has been, and continues to be, that college participation rates grew in the US over the past three decades, even in the face of increasing costs. The answer is that college prices, though increasing in nominal terms, have not increased in real terms. Heller extends the Leslie and Brinkman arti-cle with more recent student demand studies to answer the question: Do tuition and financial aid changes have the same effect on later cohorts of students as those found by Leslie and Brinkman? Many of the 20 new student demand studies Heller uses focus on the effect of tuition and aid changes on students of different income catego-ries, races, and in different college sectors. Heller concludes that the evidence continues to be overwhelming: as the price of tuition goes up, the probability of enrollment tends to go down.


Herbert, Alicia and Claire Callender. (1997). The Funding Lottery, Student Financial Support in Further Education and its Impact on Participation. London, UK: Policy Studies Institute.

The report assesses the impact of student financial support in the further education sector in the UK on participation and concludes that given the absence of a comprehensive or universal system of financial support for further education students and the discretionary nature of the financial funds that are available, the current funding system can only have a minimal impact on widening participation. It recommends the creation of a national-level comprehensive system of financial support built on additional research on the actual costs of participation, and the impact of financial support on initial access, completion and progression in further education.

Herz, Barbara. (2005). University-Level Education for Women in the Developing World: Questions for Public Policy. New York: Carnegie Corporation of New York.

This paper was commissioned by the Carnegie Corporation of New York to explore the accessibility, value and cost of higher education for African women and the social, cultural and financial barriers that they face. The author argues that one of the first steps for improving women’s participation in higher education is to fill in some of the research and data gaps on current university enroll-ment patterns, on the economic and social returns to university education and on strategies for increasing women’s education at the university level. After reviewing the data that is available in each of the three areas, she makes suggestions for future research and data collection.

Heyneman, Stephen and Alan J. DeYoung (Eds.). (2004). The Challenge of Education in Central Asia. Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.

The book looks at developments in the field of education in the Central Asian countries that emerged as independent entities after the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991. The book addresses a num-ber of educational issues including the problems of educational accessibility and quality in Central Asia and looks at the educational reforms aimed to decentralize the system. In terms of higher educa-tion, a wide range of issues are addressed including university quality, governance problems, the dilemma of confusing profit-making edu-cation with private education, the process of financial diversification, institutional autonomy issues, and the dilemmas involved in creat-ing a new citizenry through a new university structure.


Hinchliffe, Keith. (2002). Public Expenditures on Education in Nigeria: Issues, Estimates and Some Implications, Africa Region Human Development, Working Paper Series. Washington, DC: The World Bank.

This paper, the first in a set being prepared to provide basic informa-tion on the educational system in Nigeria, was written to address the inadequacy of knowledge regarding expenditures on education. Based on case studies in nine states and data from four additional states together with information on Federal and local government spending, estimates of local, state and Federal government expen-ditures and their distribution across educational levels are made for 1998. The data is then compared to recent estimates in other African countries. It was found that not only does Nigeria spend a lower percentage of total government expenditure on education than the average for 19 sub-Saharan African countries, it also distributes a significantly higher portion of that expenditure to higher education, at the cost of primary education.

Hochschul-Informations-System GmbH. (2002). Euro Student, Social and Economic Conditions of Student Life in Europe 2000, German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (Bundesministerium fur Bildung und Forschung).

This report is part of a project aimed at delivering internationally-com-parable indicators on the social and economic conditions of student life in Europe. The following indicators are included: demographic characteristics, access to higher education, study performance, social make-up of the student body, accommodation, funding and state assistance, living expenses-student spending, student employment and time budget, and internationalization. The final report includes two formats: the “Synopsis of Indicators” and the “National Profiles” (CD-ROM). Surveys were conducted in Austria, Belgium, Finland, France, Germany, Ireland, Italy, and Netherlands.

Hoffmann, Adonis. (1995, Winter). The Destruction of Higher Education in Sub-Saharan Africa. Journal of Blacks in Higher Education, 0, 83-87.

The article interalia observes that financial pressures and an explo-sion in the college-age population have put tremendous pressures on higher education in Sub-Saharan Africa leading to a critical crisis. The article concludes that this crisis portends the most egregious long-term damage to Africa’s economic survival.

Holtta, Seppo. (1998). The Funding of Universities in Finland; Towards Goal-oriented Government Steering. European Journal of Education, 33(1), 55 – 63.

This article focuses on the new higher education policy in Finland


from the late 1980s, which put greater trust in universities by allo-cating them extra resources and decreasing their accountability to the State. The current policy tends to be a mix of self-regulation, and contract between the Ministry of Education and each university. Decentralization and deregulation are the characteristics of this new policy. The new funding model is composed of three distinct components: the basic budget, oriented towards formula budget-ing; the performance component, based on indicators of efficiency and effectiveness in academic activities; and the component for development programs, which is awarded based on a national com-petition. External funding has increased in recent years. The article concludes with discussions on the new funding model and the bal-ance between the state, markets and the academic profession.

Horn, Laura J., Xianglei Chen and Chris Chapman. (2003). Getting Ready to Pay for College: What Students and their Parents Know about the Cost of College Tuition and What are They Doing to Find Out. Washington, DC: NCES, NHES, US Department of Education. Available at: http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2003/2003030.pdf

Using data from the 1999 National Household Education Survey Program’s Parent and Youth Surveys, the study looked at how much students who plan to attend postsecondary institutions and their par-ents know about the costs of attending college. It examined whether parents had started to save for their children’s education, had gath-ered information on financial aid, and knew about the various tax credits that were available to offset costs. The study found that both parents and students tended to overestimate tuition; especially for public institutions and that parents’ ability to estimate accurately was positively linked to their household income and educational level. However, regardless of income and educational level, parents who were involved with their children’s school were more likely to have begun saving for college and were more aware of college costs.

Huang, Lihong. (2005). Elitism and Equality in Chinese Higher Education. Studies of Student Socio-economic Background, Investment in Education, and Career Aspirations. Studies in Comparative and International Education. Stockholm: Institute of International Education, Stockholm University. Available at: http://www.interped.su.se/publications/lihongth-esis.pdf

A doctoral dissertation, this study presents empirical patterns of social equity in Chinese higher education based on a questionnaire survey administered to 1,200 students at six public universities in Southwest China. The survey findings reveal that a disproportion-


ate number of students come from high-income families and that students from urban areas are over-represented while rural girls are severely under-represented. It confirms that the average cost of higher education in China is far above the average annual income of even urban families and that about one-third of the students took out student loans, borrowed elsewhere or received some other form of financial system. The author concludes that given these results, stu-dent loans should be made more accessible to a greater proportion of students and more financial assistance to students from lower socio-economic strata, especially rural girls, should be available. She also concludes that private enterprises should be more involved in financ-ing and otherwise supporting higher education given that most of the students aspire to take jobs in the private sector. She suggests further research on the entire education sector in China to compare to similar data on students in another system or country and on the gender differences in terms of access to higher education.

Huang, Lihong. (2002, September). Paying for Higher Education in an International Perspective. Stockholm: Institute of International Education Working Paper Series, Stockholm University. Available at: http://www.interped.su.se/publications/WPS4.pdf

This paper looks into the funding mechanisms and cost sharing practices in the US, Australia, UK, and Asian countries. It pays particular attention to the ways these countries are struggling to apportion the cost burden appropriately among parents, students and taxpayers without diminishing access and opportunity.

Huisman, Jeroen. (2003). Higher Education in Germany. Country Report. Higher Education Monitor. Enschede, the Netherlands: Center for Higher Education Policy Studies (CHEPS).Available at: http://www.utwente.nl/cheps/documenten/germany.pdf

Country study for Germany produced as part of the CHEPS Higher Education Monitor, an ongoing research project that aims at provid-ing education policy makers with current information on national higher educational systems. Each study provides information on the structure of the tertiary education sector. The reports provide excel-lent information on institutional finance and student support.

Iacobucci, Frank and Carolyn Tuohy (Eds.). (2005). Taking Public Universities Seriously. Toronto, Canada: University of Toronto Press.

A comprehensive collection of papers presented at the University of Toronto’s Munk Centre for International Studies international sym-posium on public universities in 2004 that identify the challenges


that face them (including increasing participation rates, stagnating or decreasing government investment in public higher education, public opposition to cost sharing, and quality concerns) and the ways these challenges are being addressed. Most relevant to higher educa-tion finance are the seven chapters included in Part VI, Enhancing Accessibility: Normative Foundations for Income-Contingent Grant and Loan Programs, which look at the impact of tuition fees on accessibility and the ways that this impact is tempered by the careful design of student financial aid programs. Nicholas Barr reviews the lessons learned from economic theory and country experience and describes the recently introduced reforms in the United Kingdom in light of these lessons. Ross Finnie argues that given their differ-ent functions and effects, both student loans and grants are essential parts of any student financial assistance strategy and that their proper mix is necessary for an integrated successful system. Benjamin Alarie and David Duff propose an income-contingent style student loan to replace Ontario’s current system of mortgage style student loans. H. Lorne Carmichael argues for a graduate tax that while similar to an income contingent student loan would never present students with a fixed amount that they were responsible for repaying (thereby avoid-ing debt aversion). Under such a graduate tax program, graduates would start to pay a fixed percentage of their earning (the graduate tax) through the tax system once they started to earn above a cutoff salary and would continue to pay for 35 years from their year of graduation.

Ifill, Roberto M. and Michael S. McPherson. (2004). When Saving Means Losing: Weighing the Benefits of College-savings Plans. Indianapolis, IN: Lumina Foundation for Education. Available at: http://www.luminafoundation.org/publications/SavingMeansLosingWebL.pdf

The report looks at the implications of families putting savings into state college saving plans, called “529 Plans”, in terms of the stu-dents’ treatment by traditional financial aid programs. The authors analyze the effects on financial aid of a $100 increase in assets of each of four family income levels, and three costs of attendance and finds that by saving lower income families may reduce their eligibil-ity for need-based aid.

Ikenberry, Stanley and Terry W. Hartle. (1998). Too Little Knowledge is a Dangerous Thing, What the Public Thinks and Knows About Paying for College. Washington, DC: American Council on Education.

To one who has even a modicum of economic sophistication and who has followed the course of higher education finance for some years,


the public’s reaction to rising tuitions is perplexing and frustrating. This reaction is even more dangerous when the misconceptions are held not simply by the general public, but by politicians, journalists, civic leaders and opinion makers generally. This monograph, based on a well-designed public opinion poll, analyzes just what “the pub-lic” does believe--which is a valuable service and useful antidote to analysts and higher education leaders who hide too much behind the theoretically reasonable economic principles behind rising tuition, and who sometimes therefore discount the anger and anxiety that is very real and potentially very dangerous, however unsophisticated it may be.

Independent Institute for Social Policy. (2004). Accessibility of Higher Education in Russia. Project Summaries. Moscow, Russia: Independent Institute for Social Policy.

Between 2001 and 2004, the Independent Institute for Social Policy coordinated a Ford Foundation research project that included 11 indi-vidual studies on the impact of social and economic differentiation, institutional factors, and socio-cultural factors on access to higher education in Russia aimed at devising methods of increasing such access. This report summarizes the findings of each study.

Independent Committee of Inquiry into Student Finance. (2000). Student Finance Fairness for the Future. Research Report: Volume I and 2.

This report, known as the Cubie Report, discusses the findings of a study that reviewed tuition fees and financial support for students normally residents of Scotland, who were participating either part- or full-time in further and higher education courses elsewhere in the UK. The purpose of the report is to make recom-mendations for changes to the current system that would promote access to higher education, particularly for those groups currently underrepresented.

Institute for Higher Education Policy and Scholarship America. (2004). Investing in America’s Future, Why Student Aid Pays Off for Society and Individuals, Washington, DC: Institute for Higher Education Policy, St. Peter: Scholarship America, Indianapolis: USA Funds.

The paper acknowledges that student aid, particularly grants, is a critical part of the investment in higher education that leads to public and private benefits. Public benefits include increased tax revenues, decreased reliance on public assistance programs, lower unemployment rates, and increased voting, volunteering and other civic activities. The paper discusses these benefits in detail. The


paper also stresses the role student aid plays in increasing access to postsecondary education especially in circumstances of increasing tuition. It points out that student aid enables lower income students to acquire college education that benefits both individuals and soci-ety. However, this study indicates that over the last three decades the amount and type of support has shifted considerably, resulting in diminishing access for low-income students. In its conclusion the paper suggest possible policy solutions to address higher education access issues.

Institute for Higher Education Policy. (2000). Higher Education Cost Measurement, Public Policy Issues, Options, and Strategies. Compilation of background papers prepared for the Seminar on Cost Measurement and Management, The New Millennium Project on Higher Education Costs, Pricing, and Productivity. Washington, DC: Institute for Higher Education Policy.

This is a compilation of background papers prepared for seminars on cost measurement and information management in higher edu-cation. Approaches to cost analysis, inter-institutional effort to share cost information, institutional cost and productivity, and the impact of differential allocation of subsidy are the major background papers included in the compilation.

Institute for Higher Education Policy, Sallie Mae Education Institute, and the Education Resources Initiative. (1997). Student Loan Debt: Problems and Prospects. Proceedings from a National Symposium. Washington, DC: Institute for Higher Education Policy.

The collection of papers (proceedings from a national symposium) addresses a number of questions related to student debt. Jacqueline E. King of the American Council on Education in her study “Student Borrowing: Is there a Crisis?” suggests that increased reliance on loans is not a crisis for all students; nevertheless there are pockets of students for whom borrowing has become a problem. Patricia M. Scherschel of USA group in her research “Reality Bites: How Much Do Student Owe?” focuses on borrowing patterns and debt levels, as well as how they changed over time. Susan Choy of MPR Associates, Inc. in the article “Early Labor Force Experiences and Debt Burden” looks at early labor force experiences of borrowers and non-borrowers. Sandra Baum of Skidmore College and Diane Saunders of Nellie Mae in their paper “Life After Debt: Summary Results of the National Student Loan Survey” discuss students’ repayment experiences and attitudes toward borrowing and repaying student loans. Finally, Patricia Somers of the University of Arkansas at Little


Rock and James Cofer of the University of Arkansas System in their qualitative study “Singing the Student Loan Blues: Multiple Voices, Multiple Approaches?” describe student experiences with borrowing, lenders, and their colleges.

International Finance Corporation. (1999). Investing in Private Education in Developing Countries. Washington, DC: International Finance Corporation.

The paper provides an overview of the International Finance Corporation’s (IFC), the private sector arm of the World Bank Group, strategy for education in developing countries. It describes the IFC’s potential roles (to assist in the development of parent-of-student finance markets and investment in education goods and services) and its current initiatives including investments in two private universities in Argentina. The paper also includes information about applying to the IFC for funding, resource mobilization and advisory services.

Ipsos-Reid. (2004). Canadians Attitudes Towards Financing Post-Secondary Education: Who Should Pay and How? Toronto, Canada: Ipsos-Reid.

The paper presents survey findings on Canadians’ opinions on higher education finance. The paper explores Canadians’ estimates and views on higher education costs, university graduate earnings, student debt, student aid policy, and opportunities for post-second-ary education. According to the survey, 90 percent of Canadians consider the costs of a university education as a good long-term investment. The survey found that the majority of Canadians would like to see the difference between available funds to students and the costs of education covered by increasing loan limits for students.

Ishengoma, Johnson. (2002). Cost Sharing in Higher Education in Africa: Fact or Fiction. Journal of Higher Education in Africa, 2(2), 101-133. Abstract available at: http://www.bc.edu/bc_org/avp/soe/cihe/ africaHEjournal/journal_home.htm

The article reports on the success of Tanzania’s cost-sharing poli-cies in generating additional resources for, increasing capacity in and improving access to Tanzania’s major public university, the University of Dar es Salam. It concludes that low enrollments in the privately sponsored, tuition-fee paying programs, the failure to charge break-even fees on the university’s cafeteria and hostel operations, the proposal to give more loans to cover items that were supposed to have been covered by students and parents in a previous phase of the cost-sharing program, the apparent inability and/or unwillingness to


begin serious efforts to collect on these loans, and the government’s general reluctance to introduce the next cost sharing phases are all indications that real cost sharing in higher education in Tanzania has a long way to go in order to reach its goals.

Jackson, Roy. (2002). The National Student Financial Aid Scheme of South Africa (NSFAS): How and Why it Works. Welsh Journal of Education (Special International Issue on Paying for Learning: The Debate on Student Fees, Grants and Loans in International Perspective), 11(1), 82-94.

The article discusses the South African student loan scheme as an affordable financial instrument that helps historically disadvantaged students with academic ability gain access to university. It identi-fies the reasons for the scheme’s success in a continent where so many student loan programs have failed. These reasons include the scheme’s young age, (i.e. it was able to benefit from lessons learned elsewhere), the strong political support that it received from the South African government, its capitalization by foreign donors for the first several years of operation, a strong legal framework based on sound legislation, a deliberate mix of central control with decen-tralized administration, the charging of a positive real rate of interest, the use of an income-contingent style repayment schedule, and a state of the art information technology system.

Johnes, Geraint. (2004). The Evaluation of Welfare Under Alternative Models of Higher Education Finance. In Pedro Teixeira, Ben Jongbloed, David Dill and Alberto Amaral (Eds.), Markets in Higher Education. Rhetoric or Reality? (pp. 113-126). Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

Paper prepared for the Duoro III conference in Portugal held in September 2003 that develops a model to assess the welfare effects of alternative methods of financing access to higher education.

Johnstone, D. Bruce. (2006). Cost-Sharing and the Cost-Effectiveness of Grants and Loan Subsidies to Higher Education. In Texeira, Pedro, Bruce Johnstone, Maria Joao Rosa and Hans Vossensteyn (Eds.), A Fairer Deal: Cost-Sharing and Accessibility in Western Higher Education (pp.51-78). Springer Science + Business Media (formerly Klewer Academic Publishing). Available at: http://www.gse.buffalo.edu/org/inthigheredfinance/publications.html

Grants and the so-called effective grants contained within student loans – that is, the present value of the subsidy streams that are present in virtually all student loans – are presented as alternative


governmental expenditures that ought to be examined for their respec-tive cost-effectiveness in promoting whatever goal or goals constitute the basis for governmental subsidization via student assistance.

Johnstone, D. Bruce. (2005a). Higher Education Accessibility and Financial Viability: the Role of Student Loans. In Tres, Jaoquim and Francisco Lopez Segrera (Eds.), Higher Education in the World 2006: The Financing of Universities (pp. 84-101). Barcelona: Global University Network for Innovation (GUNI) published by Palgrave Macmillan.Available at: http://www.gse.buffalo.edu/org/inthigheredfinance/publi-cations.html

This chapter, drawn from earlier papers prepared for the International Comparative Finance and Accessibility Project, serves as the Project’s primer on student loans. It begins with the four principal ways that governments can participate in generally available student lending, including (1) bearing all or a significant part of the risk; (2) subsidizing interest; (3) absorbing some costs; and in some cases (4) employing governmental income tax and /or pension contribution collection systems for the collection of student loan obligations. The chapter covers the forms of student lending, including conventional or mort-gage-type loans, income contingent loans, and hybrid versions of fixed schedule and income contingent repayment obligations, and presents examples of loan programs in several countries, concluding with the crucial elements of student lending, including terms and conditions, risk bearing, and the provision of capital.

Johnstone, D. Bruce. (2005b). A Political Culture of Giving and the Philanthropic Support of Higher Education in International Perspective. International Journal of Educational Advancement. 5(3), 256-264.

The “political culture of giving,” which is presented as one of the criti-cal factors in the success of philanthropic funding in the search for other-than-governmental funding of higher education, depends to a considerable degree on the political acceptance of the appropriateness of tuition fees and other elements of cost-sharing. Johnstone suggests that Germany and other European countries that continue to reject the appropriateness of cost-sharing will have difficulty in attracting broad-based philanthropic support for institutions of higher education.

Johnstone, D. Bruce. (2005c). Fear and Loathing of Tuition Fees: an American Perspective on Higher Education Finance in the UK. Perspectives. 9(1), 12-16. Available at: http://www.gse.buffalo.edu/org/inthigheredfinance/publications.html

Although the UK in 1997 became the first European country to have


a more-than-incidental tuition fee, the Labor Party’s Left – sup-ported by a strong National Union of Students and strong academic Left – seems never to have forgiven the Labor Government for this act, and in 2004 managed to convert the tuition fees – which, because they were means-tested, were mainly paid by relatively well-to-do parents – to deferred fees, which are to be paid for mainly by students. This article traces this and other features of what Johnstone describes as the UK’s somewhat curious “fear and loathing” of tuition fees.

Johnstone, D. Bruce. (2004a). Higher Education Finance and Accessibility: Tuition Fees and Student Loans in Sub-Saharan Africa. Journal of Higher Education in Africa. 2(2), pp. 11-36.Abstract available at: http://www.bc.edu/bc_org/avp/soe/cihe/africa-HEjournal/journal_home.htm

The article describes some of the historic resistance to cost sharing in Africa as well as its rationales – the most compelling of which is the sheer need for revenue, coupled with the increasing unlike-lihood that African governments can raise revenue by taxation to meet currently underfunded social needs and simultaneously provide more money to higher education. It identifies some limita-tions to the dual-track tuition policies that are being implemented in East Africa and some reasons for the many failures African countries have experienced with student loans programs. Finally, it cautions against the prevailing fascination with income-contin-gent loans and makes recommendations drawn from both theory and practice.

Johnstone, D. Bruce. (2004b). Cost-Sharing and Equity in Higher Education: Implications of Income Contingent Loans. In Pedro Teixeira, Ben Jongbloed, David Dill, and Alberto Amaral (Eds.), Markets in Higher Education. Rhetoric or Reality. (pp. 37-60). Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

This chapter traces the history of cost-sharing in European higher education, and some implications of the current interest in income contingent loans for recovering a portion of the costs either of stu-dent living or tuition fees or both. The author outlines the differences and similarities (which are more than commonly thought) between income contingent versus conventional repayment obligations and describes some of the unintended consequences of the former. He recommends that countries carefully study the theoretical underpin-nings of cost sharing and the operations of alternative programs of tuition fees and student loans, before choosing a loan system.


Johnstone, D. Bruce. (2004c). The Economics and Politics of Cost Sharing in Higher Education: Comparative Perspectives. Economics of Education Review. 23(4), pp. 403-410. Available at: http://www.gse. buffalo.edu/org/inthigheredfinance/publications.html

This paper examines the rationales for cost-sharing as well as the continuing ideological, political, and technical opposition to it, even in the face of extreme austerity and the virtual inevitability of higher educational revenue diversification in most countries.

Johnstone, D. Bruce. (2004d). The Applicability of Income Contingent Loans in Developing and Transitional Countries. Journal of Educational Planning Administration, pp. 159-174. For a Chinese translation of the same paper, refer to this article in Peking University Education Review, 2(1). Available at: http://www.gse.buffalo.edu/org/inthigheredfinance/publi-cations.html

This paper explores the theoretical applicability for developing coun-tries of income contingent loans or graduate taxes for recovering a portion of the cost of higher education. It argues that a HECs type of student loan program is often unviable in a country with little capacity to know and verify incomes or earning.

Johnstone, D. Bruce. (2003). Cost-Sharing in Higher Education: Tuition, Financial Assistance, and Accessibility. Czech Sociological Review, 39(3), 351-374. Available at: http://www.gse.buffalo.edu/org/inthigheredfinance/ publications.html

This paper has served the International Comparative Higher Education Finance and Accessibility Project as the introductory paper to the concept of cost sharing, summarizing the range of country experiences and providing an outline of the forms of cost sharing, the rationales for a policy of cost sharing, the political and ideologi-cal opposition to such policies, and a perspective on the complex arena of student lending. This paper updates an earlier version by Johnstone and Schroff-Mehta that was widely distributed from the project and on the project web page and that appears as a chapter in Heather Eggins, eds. Globalization and Reform in Higher Education published by the Society for Research into Higher Education.

Johnstone, D. Bruce. (2002). Challenges of Financial Austerity: Imperatives and Limitations of Revenue Diversification in Higher Education. The Welsh Journal of Education (Special International Issue on Paying for Learning: The Debate on Student Fees, Grants and Loans in International Perspective), 11(1), 18-36.

This article by Johnstone presents the standard case for revenue


diversification, describes the problems wrought by the pervasive and increasing austerity in higher education and presents the various forms of revenue diversification. The principal theme of the paper, however, is to acknowledge some of the limitations on revenue diversification, beginning with the difficulties in the deter-mination and verification of parental income, the challenge to the very notion of student dependence on parental support, and the serious limitations on student cost sharing, including the limited opportunities, in many countries and regions, for part-time employ-ment, and more seriously, the limitations on student loan programs. The paper points to the need for effective cost recovery on student loans, including repayment compliance, an efficient system for col-lections (which may or may not be attached to the governments tax withholding and pension contribution system), and the need for repayment guarantees, which might appropriately include parents and other members of the family, but which the paper concludes need an ultimate governmental guarantee for those without access to credit worthy co-signatories. The paper also presents some limitations on faculty and institutional entrepreneurship as well as limitations on philanthropy as an alternative to governmental revenue.

Johnstone, D. Bruce. (2001a). Higher Education and Those ‘Out-of-Control Costs’. In Philip G. Altbach, Patricia J. Gumport and D. Bruce Johnstone (Eds.), In Defense of American Higher Education (pp. 144-178). Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.

This chapter takes on the common challenge, or allegation, that higher educational costs are “out of control,” and demonstrates why this is a misleading and inaccurate portrayal. The article then acknowledges some smoke and some possible fire, and analyzes this challenge from a variety of meanings, including whether the essence of the criticism be sheer profligacy, or inefficiency, or wrong priori-ties, or insensitivity to the needs of poorer students and families.

Johnstone, D. Bruce. (2001b). Response to Austerity: The Imperatives and Limitations of Revenue Diversification in Higher Education. Buffalo, NY: The International Comparative Higher Education Finance and Accessibility Project, Center for Comparative and Global Studies in Education, State University of New York at Buffalo. Available at: http://www.gse.buffalo.edu/org/inthigheredfinance/publications.html

See annotation for “Challenges of Financial Austerity: Imperatives and Limitations of Revenue Diversification in Higher Education”, Welsh Journal of Higher Education.


Johnstone, D. Bruce. (1999). Financing Higher Education: Who Should Pay and Other Issues. In Philip G. Albach, Robert O. Berdahl, and Patricia J. Gumport (Eds.), American Higher Education in the 21st Century: Social Political, and Economic Challenges (pp.347-369). Baltimore, MD: The Johns Hopkins University Press. 2nd Edition 2005.

This chapter is a comprehensive, albeit succinct, treatment of higher education finance focusing on the three broad issues of: (1) the size of the higher education enterprise, (2) the efficiency or productivity of the enterprise, and (3) the sources of revenue, or who pays (as among students, parents, taxpayers or philanthropists). This paper presents estimates of the costs, or more properly the expenses, borne by students and parents at high-and low-cost public and private insti-tutions, as of 1994-95.

Johnstone, D. Bruce. (1992). Tuition Fees. In B.R. Clark and G. Neave (Eds.), The Encyclopedia of Higher Education, (pages 1501-1509), Vol. 2. London, UK: Pergamon Press.

This paper on Tuition Fees became the entry by the same title in the massive four-volume Encyclopedia of Higher Education, published in 1992 by Pergamon Press and edited by Burton Clark and Guy Neave. It defines tuition, or tuition fees, acknowledging the US distinction between “tuition” and “fees,” but essentially treating as “tuition fees” all charges that are not discretionary and not related to food, lodging or other costs of student living. Johnstone presents the conventional cases both for and against tuition fees, discusses criteria for set-ting an appropriate level of tuition fees, and differentiates between the important distinction of the tuition fee at a point in time, and increases in those tuition fees over time. It discusses the pros and cons of differentiating tuition fees based on e.g. program costs, residency, ability to repay student debt, or market power and student demand. It concludes with discussions of whether the tuition (or tuition fee as the British would write) is seen as a parental or a student obligation-

-which obligations differ in important ways, both in the underlying economic and ideological rationales and in the appropriate modes of collection.

Johnstone, D. Bruce. (1991). The Costs of Higher Education. In Philip G. Altbach (Ed.), International Higher Education: An Encyclopedia, (pp. 59-89), Vol. 1. New York: Garland Science Publishing.

Johnstone’s entry in Altbach’s 1991 two-volume International Higher Education: An Encyclopedia, is one of the early treatments of the interna-tional comparative costs of higher education, with particular attention to “cost sharing,” including data on the costs borne by students and


parents in five countries. Johnstone presents three broad categories of higher educational costs: the cost of instruction; the cost of student living; and the opportunity costs, or student-foregone earnings. He presents the three underlying issues of higher education finance: (1) how much of societies total resources ought to be devoted to higher, or post-secondary education; (2) what ought to be the unit cost of higher education, or the overall efficiency or productivity of enterprise; (3) and how these costs ought to be apportioned among taxpayers or the general consumer, parents, students, or philanthropists. The encyclopedia entry discusses the ways a national higher educational system balances the financial goals of efficiency, equity and equality of opportunity and then goes into a discussion of cost sharing in five nations: US, UK, Japan, Australia and Sweden. While the data are old, the entry presents a more recent and expanded treatment of cost sharing than Johnstone’s works from the mid-80s that introduced the cost-sharing concept, and adds data on Japan and Australia not covered in his earlier works.

Johnstone, D. Bruce. (1987, Spring). International Perspectives on Student Financial Aid. Journal of Student Financial Aid, 17(2), 30-44.

This 1987 article published in the Journal of Student Financial Aid summarizes the essence of Johnstone’s 1986 book, Sharing the Cost of Higher Education: Student Financial Assistance in the United Kingdom, The Federal Republic of Germany, France, Sweden and the United States. As with the book, the actual data on cost shares and the summary descriptions of the national systems are dated, but the underlying theory and perspective on cost sharing remains valid and a useful lens of analyzing public and institutional policy toward tuition, finance assistance, expectant parental contributions, loans, elements of loan subsidy, etc.

Johnstone, D. Bruce. (1986). Sharing Costs of Higher Education: Student Financial Assistance in the United Kingdom, the Federal Republic of Germany, France, Sweden, and the United States. New York: College Entrance Examination Board.

This 1986 book is the foundation of Johnstone’s theories and writ-ings on “cost sharing”--the perspective on higher education finance that treats higher educational costs as essentially given, and then examines how these costs are borne, or shared, by taxpayers, stu-dents, parents, and philanthropists. The comparative analysis is of student financial assistance in the United Kingdom, United States, France, Sweden, and Germany as of the mid 80s. While the data are out-dated, as is the descriptions of these national systems, the


introductory and concluding chapters on the theory of cost shar-ing and on the summary observations of how public policy can be viewed through the lens of those forces attempting to shift costs onto another party, are still valid.

Johnstone, D. Bruce. (1972). New Patterns for College Lending: Income Contingent Loans. New York and London: Columbia University Press.

This book, published in 1972 while the author was a Project Specialist for the Ford Foundation, was the product of extensive research within the Foundation in response to the question of whether the Ford Foundation should back Yale University’s early experiment with income contingent lending. As the first entire book devoted to the concept of income contingent lending, it remains important for the analysis of the principles of income contingency, as well as an historical record of the details of several important early – and failed

– experiments, particularly Yale’s Tuition Postponement Option, and Duke’s Deferred Tuition Plan. The book is particularly useful in its discussion of the essence of income contingency and the need for a source of subsidy, whether the source be the institution, the taxpayer, or the high earning borrowers who thereby need to pay a substan-tial premium in effective interest on their repayments. Johnstone also presents for the first time his proposal for a “hybrid” version of income contingent and fixed-schedule loans in which only the low earners would repay “income contingently,” and where the source of subsidy would be the government, which is now subsidizing stu-dents on the basis of their parents low earnings at the time they were in college, but which could just as (or perhaps more) reasonably subsidize students on the basis of their own low lifetime earnings after college, thus providing the means of funding the losses from low earners without the “mutualization” of risk and the consequent adverse selection that tends to keep potential high earners out of the program.

Johnstone, D. Bruce and Olga Bain. (2001). Universities in Transition: Privatization, Decentralization and Institutional Autonomy as National Policy with Special References to the Russian Federation. Buffalo, NY: The International Comparative Higher Education Finance and Accessibility Project, Center for Comparative and Global Studies in Education, University of New York at Buffalo.

This paper presents the three interrelated concepts of privatiza-tion, decentralization, and institutional policy in connection with government’s relationship to higher education, and in the context of governmental policies that seem to be attempting to further these


three trends worldwide. It then gives examples with respect to gov-ernmental policies in the Russian Federation in the 1990’s, following the dissolution of the Soviet Union, the severe financial crisis, and the embrace of more market principles.

Johnstone, D.Bruce, Alka Arora, and William Experton. (1998). The Financing and Management of Higher Education: A Status Report on Worldwide Reforms. Washington, DC: The World Bank. [Prepared in con-junction with the October 1998 UNESCO World Conference on Higher Education, Paris, October 5-8, 1998.]

This monograph was commissioned in 1998 by the World Bank as part of the World Bank’s contributions to the 1998 UNESCO World Conference on Higher Education, held in Paris in October of that year. The authors present worldwide trends in financing and management in the context of five themes: (1) expansion and diversification; (2) financial pressures and austerity; (3) the gravitation toward more mar-ket orientation, together with the search for more non-governmental revenue; (4) the demand of greater accountability with both institu-tions and faculty; and (5) the demand for both greater quality and greater efficiency. Particular emphasis is placed on resource diversi-fication and increasing use of cost sharing in student loans. Examples are given from, e.g., Hungary, Chile, China, and Argentina.

Jongbloed, Ben. (2004). Tuition Fees in Europe and Australia: Theory, Trends and Policies. In John C. Smart (Ed.), Higher Education: Handbook of Theory and Research (pp. 241–309), Volume XIX. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

Part of the Handbook compendium series that collects literature reviews on higher education topics, the chapter discusses tuition fees in higher education using price theory, human capital the-ory and screening theory. It reviews the literature on private and social returns to human capital investment. Using examples of facts, trends and policies in Western Europe and Australasia, the chapter draws some conclusions about the setting of fees and the design of student support systems.

Jongbloed, Ben. (2003). Marketisation in Higher Education, Clarke’s Triangle and the Essential Ingrediants of Markets. Higher Education Quarterly, 57 (2), 110-135.

The article discusses the introduction of marketization and market-type mechanism policies (deregulation and privatization) into the higher education sector; a sector that has traditionally been character-ized by a high degree of government intervention. It identifies eight


conditions, four for providers and four for consumers, that need to be fulfilled for a market to function and looks at the extent to which they exist in the Dutch higher education system. These freedoms include freedom of entry, freedom to specify the product, freedom to use available resources, freedom to determine prices, freedom to choose provider, freedom to choose product, information on prices and quality, and direct and cost-covering prices paid. The author con-cludes that there is a substantial presence of market-type elements in the Dutch higher education system, with the exception of prices that reflect costs and the capacity for new providers to enter the market. He concludes that there is no such thing as a truly free market in higher education and that Burton Clark’s triangle of coordination between state authority, the market and academe can be seen as a dynamic process in which demands confront supply and that finding the optimal balance between these is the real challenge.

Jongbloed, Ben and Jos Koelman. (2000). Vouchers for Higher Education? A Survey of the Literature Commissioned by the Hong Kong University Grants Committee. Enschede, the Netherlands: Center for Higher Education Policy Studies (CHEPS). Available at: http://www.utwente.nl/cheps/documenten/engart00vouchers.pdf

This report surveys the literature on the use of vouchers in higher education and presents the pros and cons of their use. It also describes voucher models and reviews the theory and practice of vouchers in compulsory education and in higher education.

Jongbloed, Ben and Carlo Salerno. (2002). Funding and Recognition: A Comparative Study of Funded Versus Non-funded Higher Education in Eight Countries. Enschede, the Netherlands: Center for Higher Education Policy Studies (CHEPS). Available at: http://www.utwente.nl/cheps/documenten/engreport02fundingandrecognition.pdf

Prepared by the Centre for Higher Education Policy Studies (CHEPS) for the Dutch Ministry of Education, Culture and Sciences, the report looks at how different countries invest in higher educa-tion, and specifically in higher education outside the public sector, in order to foster the competitiveness of their systems. The study compares the situation of recognized government funded and non-funded higher education institutions in eight countries in terms of formal criteria for public funding, the degree to which such criteria refers to quality, the existence or not of programs that meet quality criteria, but are not eligible to receive funding, and recent changes in the system that could affect the sector of recognized, non-funded higher education.


Junor, Sean and Alexander Usher. (2004). The Price of Knowledge 2004. Access and Student Finance in Canada. Montreal, Canada: Canada Millennium Scholarship Foundation Research Series.

This second edition of the Price of Knowledge generally follows the same format as the original edition published in 2002, but adds new information and additional analysis in each area. After reviewing the barriers to post-secondary education, the book provides exten-sive information on the costs of higher education facing students and their families and the student assistance resources available to them.

Junor, Sean and Alexander Usher. (2002). The Price of Knowledge: Access and Student Finance in Canada. Montreal, Canada: Canada Millennium Scholarship Foundation Research Series.

Produced within the context of the Canada Millennium Scholarship Foundation’s program of research into access to higher education, the book describes what is known to date about access and student finance in Canada. The book provides a wide range of data collected from a variety of national sources including data on barriers to higher education, student behavior and composition, costs of higher educa-tion, financial assistance programs and graduate outcomes.

Kagia, Ruth. (1997). Financing Sustainable Educational Programs in Sub-Saharan Africa: Challenges and Opportunities. Paper presented at the International Seminar on Basic Education and Development in Sub-Saharan Africa organized by Japan International Development Agency (JICA), Tokyo, March 6-7, 1997.

The paper among other issues, discusses rationale for invest-ing in education, context of financing educational programs in Sub-Saharan Africa, challenges and opportunities for financing sustainable development in Africa. Challenges discussed in this paper include economic, political and historical diversities, rapid population growth, heavy debts, low access to education at all levels, gender gaps, and declining quality. Opportunities for developing educational programs include forging effective partnerships, capac-ity building and supporting educational reforms.

Kaiser, Frans. (2003). Higher Education in France. Country Report. Higher Education Monitor. Enschede, the Netherlands: Center for Higher Education Policy Studies (CHEPS).Available at: http://www.utwente.nl/cheps/documenten/france.pdf

Country study for France produced as part of the CHEPS Higher Education Monitor, an ongoing research project that aims at provid-


ing education policy makers with current information on national higher educational systems. Each study provides information on the structure of the tertiary education sector. The reports provide excel-lent information on institutional finance and student support.

Kaiser, Frans, Hans Vossensteyn, Eric Beerkens, Petra Boezerooij, Jeroen Huisman, Anneke Lub, Peter Maassen, Carlo Salerno and Henno Theisens. (2003). Higher Education Policy Issues and Trends, An Update on Higher Education Policy Issues in 11 Western Countries. Enschede, the Netherlands: Center for Higher Education Policy Studies (CHEPS). Available at: http://www.utwente.nl/cheps/documenten/engreport-03monitorupdatereport.pdf

This report provides insights into the latest developments in higher education in terms of infrastructure, finance, governance, and qual-ity assurance in ten Western European countries (Austria, Denmark, Finland, Flanders, France, Germany, the Netherlands, Portugal, Sweden and the UK) and Australia. The first part includes individual countries profiles and cross-country studies, and the second part presents an overview of statistical trends in these countries. The report also looks at developments in European higher education as part of the ‘Lisbon process’ through which the European Union is working to become the most competitive and dynamic knowledge-based economy in the world by 2010.

Kaiser, Frans, Hans Vossensteyn and Jos Koelman. (2001). Public Funding of Higher Education: A Comparative Study of Funding Mechanisms in Ten Countries. Enschede, the Netherlands: Center for Higher Education Policy Studies (CHEPS). Available at: http://www.utwente.nl/cheps/documenten/engart01fundingmech.pdf

This study, commissioned by the Dutch Ministry of Education, Culture and Science in 2000, explores the funding mechanisms in ten higher education systems: Australia, Denmark, Flanders, France, Germany, New Zealand, Sweden, the Netherlands, Tennessee (USA), and the UK. For each country, the study provides a detailed description of the national funding mechanisms, high-lights recent discussions and trends regarding higher education funding and reflects on the impact of the funding mechanisms on the quality of teaching. The first part of the report “Summary and Reflections” provides an overview of the results of the project from a comparative perspective. The second part mainly consists of the detailed case descriptions in the ten countries. Overall the report is an excellent resource.


Kaiser, Frans, van der Meer, P., Beverwiji, J., Klemperer, A., Steunenberg, B. and A. Van Wageningen. (1999). Market Type Mechanisms in Higher Education. A Comparative Analysis of their Occurrence and Discussions on the Issue in Five Higher Education Systems. Enschede, the Netherlands: Center for Higher Education Policy Studies (CHEPS). Available at: http://www.utwente.nl/cheps/publications/complete_list/english/English_reports.doc/

According to this report, public higher educational institutions are pulled from traditional public teaching and research activities into more market-oriented activities to generate additional resources. The report explores types of market-oriented policies in place and the market structure and regulations imposed by the government to introduce market like mechanisms in higher education on the basis of field surveys in five countries: Germany, France, the UK, the Netherlands and the US. According to the report, the success of market type mechanisms in higher educational institutions depends on the level of productive efficiency, the degree of providers’ respon-siveness to the demands of the consumers, the degree of choice that customers have regarding services and providers and the attention paid to equity.

Kajubi, Senteza. (1992, June). Financing Higher Education in Uganda Higher Education, 23, 433-41.

This article discusses the current structures of educational finance in Uganda, arguments for increased cost recovery and the introduc-tion of student loans. The article also examines obstacles to student loans in Uganda.

Kane, Thomas J. and Peter R. Orszag. (2003). Higher Education Spending: The Role of Medicaid and the Business Cycle, Policy Brief Number 124. Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution.

A policy brief that looks at the decline in quality in public college and universities due to decreasing state support (due in turn to the State’s rising Medicaid obligations) and the institutions’ inability to offset these decreases with adequate tuition increases.

Kane, Thomas J. (1995). Rising Public College Tuition and College Entry: How Well do Public Subsidies Promote Access to College? Working Paper Series. National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc. Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.

This paper evaluates the price sensitivity of students, using several sources of non-experimental variation in costs. The bulk of the


evidence points to large enrollment impacts, particularly for low-income students and for those attending two-year colleges.

Kasozi, A.B.K. (2003). University Education in Uganda. Challenges and Opportunities for Reform. Fountain Series in Education Studies. Kampala, Uganda: Fountain Publishers.

This study reviews the higher education sector in Uganda and the challenges that it faces in terms of access. It proposes a number of reforms in such areas as university management, institutional capacity and university finance. The third chapter is dedicated to higher education finance and includes information on the cost shar-ing strategy that is currently in place in the public university sector.

Kaul, Rekha. (1993). Caste, Class and Education: Politics of the Capitation Fee Phenomenon in Karnataka. New Delhi, India: Sage Publications.

This book looks at the growth of “capitation fee colleges” in the State of Karnataka (and the rest of India). It argues, with data from 19 private engineering and medical colleges, that the capitation fee phe-nomenon reflects what it terms persisting inequalities and the elitist base of the education system, works to maintain the caste-class and power structures and lowers educational standards. The book con-cludes by outlining several corrective measures and interventions that need to be made by the government and social forces.

Kezar, Adrianna J. (2000). Higher Education Trends: Finance. George Washington University. Washington, DC. Graduate School of Education and Human Development. Washington, DC: ERIC Clearinghouse on Higher Education. Available at: http://www.eriche.orgAibergU/finance.html

Summarizes the major literature on financial issues in higher educa-tion. Reviews a major study on trends in higher education finance that presents data from an ongoing study of tuition discounting at 270 colleges and universities and finally relates this to how higher education is financed internationally. Debt financing, creative budget strategies, and strategic planning in response to shrinking resources are explored.

Kiamba, Crispus. (2004). Privately Sponsored Students and Other Income-Generating Activities at the Univeristy of Nairobi. Journal of Higher Education in Africa, 2(2), 53-74.Abstract available at: http://www.bc.edu/bc_org/avp/soe/cihe/africa-HEjournal/journal_home.htm

This article describes the income generating policies that have been


implemented by Kenyan public universities (with a special focus on the University of Nairobi) to deal with declining government investment in higher education. In particular it looks at the dual track tuition policy adopted in 1998 wherein the limited number of students admitted for government sponsored places in university (Module (I program) have to pay only a token tuition fee and a much greater number of other students are admitted on a full tuition pay-ing basis to the Module II program.

Kiiza, Julius. (1997). Liberalization Policies and University Education in Uganda. An Assessment of Cost Sharing Policy. M.P.S.R. , 1, 70-87.

The article critically assesses the cost sharing policy that is being implemented in Uganda’s public universities under what the author calls “ a sophisticated remote control mechanism of the IMF-World Bank fraternity” Using the efficiency-equity model, the article argues that cost sharing policy that is premised upon the doctrine of economic rationalism, is neither socially nor politically rational. The article further argues that in the context of socio-economic contingencies pertaining in Uganda, cost sharing will predictably undermine the pursuit of social equity without effectively realizing the efficiency motive.

Kim, Anna and Young Lee. (2003). Student Loan Schemes in the Republic of Korea: Review and Recommendations, Policy Research and Dialogue, Student Loan Schemes in Asia, Vol. 1, N. 4, Bangkok, Thailand: UNESCO Asia and Pacific Regional Bureau for Education and Paris: IIEP. Available at: http://www2.unescobkk.org/ips/ebooks/documents/studentloan/index.htm

After briefly introducing the background of the higher education system and the development of the student loan schemes in the Republic of Korea, this monograph, part of a new series on stu-dent loan schemes in Asia, compares the two major loan schemes, the Ministry of Education and Human Resources Development (MOE&HRD) Scheme and the Government Employees Pension Corporation (GEPC) Scheme in terms of their financial viability and their equity performance. Particular attention is paid to the measure-ment of the loan repayment ratio, the repayment burden and the net recovery ratio.

King, Jacqueline. (2004). Missed Opportunities: Students Who Do Not Apply for Financial Aid. American Council on Education Issue Brief. October. Washington, DC: American Council on Education (ACE).

The paper looks at the 50 percent of undergraduates at institu-


tions that participate in the federal Title IV student aid programs who did not apply for financial aid in 1999-2000. Using data from the National Postsecondary Student Aid Study, it finds that large proportions of low and moderate-income students (1.7 million in 1999-2000) did not complete a Free Application for Federal Student Aid (FAFSA), that students at community colleges are far less likely to apply for aid than students at other types of institutions and that 850,000 students who did not file a FAFSA form would have prob-ably been eligible for a Pell Grant. The paper explores the reasons given by students for not applying (family could afford to pay; family income too high to qualify; missed deadlines; or some other reason) and concludes that all low-and moderate- income students need to be encouraged to submit the FAFSA.

King, Jacqueline. (2003a). 2003 Status Report on the Federal Education Loan Programs. Washington, DC: American Council on Education.

US Higher Education Loan Programs are complex and ever-chang-ing, but this 2003 report is as good a description as there has been in recent years. The author, Jacqueline King, directs the Center for Policy Analysis of the American Council of Education, the US

“umbrella” Higher Education Association that represents all sectors of higher education, public and private, and through which most of the legislative testimony on behalf of colleges and universities is transmitted to the US Congress, particularly during the periodic Title V reauthorization processes. Much of the data comes from the 1999-2000 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS).

King, Jacqueline. (2003b). 2003 Status Report on the Pell Grant Program. Washington, DC: American Council on Education.

This report on the Pell Grant is made up of two major parts. The first part looks at the historical trends in the Pell Grant Program and is based on the data from the annual Pell Grant end-of-year reports, including program structure and history, changes in the Maximum and Average grant, number of applicants and recipients, Pell grants and other Title IV student aid programs, family income and college affordability, institutional participants and shares of program funds, recipients’ income, and recipient dependency sta-tus. The second part describes characteristics and financing choices of Pell grant recipients and other undergraduates and is based on the data from 1999-2000 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS), focusing on demographic characteristics, income and Expected Family Income (EFC), institutional type and total stu-


dent budget, attendance status, living arrangements, and adjusted student budget, student aid, need, net price, and unmet need, and employment.

King, Jacqueline. (2002). Crucial Choices, How Students’ Financial Decisions Affect Their Academic Success. Washington, DC: American Council on Education, Center for Policy Analysis

This report describes the demographic and academic background of entering college students and discusses how these students pay for college. It also delineates the choices students can make to improve the likelihood that they will complete a college degree. The data show that low-income students arrive at college with many strikes against them. Among other characteristics, they are more likely to have children, to be the first in their family to attend college, and to have completed a high school curriculum that is not rigorous. Even after receiving grants, they must find an average of $5,400 in addi-tional resources to meet their college expenses.

King, Jacqueline. (1999). Money Matters, The Impact of Race/Ethnicity and Gender on How Students Pay for College. Washington, DC: American Council on Education.

Using data from the 1995-96 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study, the report focuses on how men, women and students from the major racial and ethnic groups pay for college and identifies background characteristics that influence their finance decisions. The report contains student profiles of white students, African-American students, Hispanic/Latino students, Asian-American students, American Indian students, women students and men students in terms of their background characteristics, their price choices (type of institution, attendance status, and housing), the grants that they receive and the net price they must pay, and the financing choices that they make (work vs. loans vs. work and loans).

King, Tracey and Ellynn Bannon. (2002). The Burden of Borrowing: A Report on the Rising Rates of Student Debt. Washington, DC: State PIRG’s Higher Education Project.

This report discusses the high and rising rates of student loan debt in the United States and possible explanations for such increases including a decline in the buying power of the Pell grants, a shift from savings to student loans among families, and large increases in tuition. It recommends that in order to protect student from unman-


ageable levels of debt there need to be increases in grant aid funding, decreases in the cost of borrowing to students, and continued flex-ible repayment options.

Kinser, Kevin and Daniel C. Levy. (2005). The For-Profit Sector: U.S. Patterns and International Echoes in Higher Education. PROPHE Working Paper Number 5. Albany, NY: Program for Research on Private Higher Education (PROPHE). Available at: http://www.albany.edu/dept/eaps/prophe/publication/paper/PROPHEWP05_files/PROPHEWP05.pdf

This working paper looks at the for-profit sector in higher edu-cation in the United States and identifies its main types and international dimensions. It also points out several tendencies of the for -profit sector that appear to be common in very different international contexts.

Kipp, Samuel M., Derek V. Price and Jill K. Wohlford. (2002). Unequal Opportunity, Disparities in College Access Among the 50 States, Lumina Foundation for Education, New Agenda Series, Volume 4, Number 3. Indianapolis, IN: Lumina Foundation for Education.

Part of the Lumina Foundation’s New Agenda Series, this volume classifies almost 3,000 public and private colleges and universities in the United States according to their accessibility (admissibil-ity plus affordability) to students. It finds that college/university accessibility varies among states and among students from dif-ferent income groups within states. Individual state summaries describe the state of higher education access, the college-going rates of recent high school graduates, and freshmen enrollment patterns in that state.

Kirshstein, Rita J., Andrea R. Berger, Elana Benatar, and David Rhodes. (2004). Workforce Contingent Financial Aid: How States Link Financial Aid to Employment, Lumina Foundation for Education, Research Report. Indianapolis, IN: Lumina Foundation for Education.

In the United States, workforce-contingent financial aid (WCFA) programs can take the form of programs that provide financial aid to students in support for a future workforce commitment and those that repay existing educational debt in exchange for specified work. The number of programs is expanding rapidly at the state and national levels and 43 states support programs. Few studies assess the effectiveness of these programs and it appears that their popularity is based more on political appeal and appearances than on quantitative findings. The report documents the need for further


research to assess the success of such programs in helping students cover their educational costs.

Kitaev, Igor. (1999). Private Education in Sub-Saharan Africa: A Re-exami-nation of Theories and Concepts Related to its Development and Finance. Paris: UNESCO, International Institute for Educational Planning (IIEP). Available at: http://www.unesco.org/iiep/eng/publications/catalogue.htm

This book reviews the existing literature, theories, and concepts related to the recent trends in the development and financing of private primary and secondary education in sub-Saharan African. Covered in this book are the following themes: rationale for private education development and finance; current trends in private educa-tion development and finance; information and decision making on private education finance; and implications for policy research on community/family contributions to private education.

Kitaev, Igor, Teresita Nadurata, Virginia Resurrection and Freddie Bernal. (2003). Student Loans in the Philippines: Lessons from the Past. Policy Research and Dialogue, Student Loan Schemes in Asia, Vol. 1, N. 1. Bangkok, Thailand: UNESCO Asia and Pacific Regional Bureau for Education and Paris: IIEP. Available at: http://www2.unescobkk.org/ips/ebooks/documents/studentloan/index.htm

After reviewing the background of the higher education system and the student financial support programs in the Philippines, this monograph, part of a new series on student loans schemes in Asia, focuses on the central student loan scheme, Study Now, Pay Later (SNPL), looking at its history, problems and lessons. It also briefly describes new student loan initiatives in the Philippines.

Kruss, Glenda and Andre Kraak. (2003). A Contested Good? Understanding Private Higher Education in Africa. Boston, MA and Albany, NY: Boston College’s Center for International Higher Education and SUNY at Albany’s Project for Research on Private Higher Education (PROPHE).

Made up largely of papers from the conference on private higher edu-cation in South Africa organized by the Human Science Research Council in 2002, the book seeks to empirically describe the sector in South Africa (largely commercial, for-profit, non-university), and examine the debates that are presently surrounding it involving reg-ulation and accreditation and its role as competition or complement to the public higher education sector.


Kusherbaev, Krymbek et al. (2001). Educational Financing and Budgeting in Kazakhstan, Financial Management of Education Systems, Paris: International Institute for Education Planning – UNESCO. Available at: http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0012/001235/123537e.pdf

The volume looks at processes in education finance in Kazakhstan after 1991. These developments are discussed in a broader context of changes that have taken place within the country’s system of educa-tion during the decade since independence. The volume indicates problem areas in financing education and describes the solutions sought to address them. In addition, the volume contains appen-dixes with detailed information on the education enterprise and its finance in Kazakhstan.

LaRocque, Norman. (2003). Who Should Pay? Tuition Fees and Tertiary Education Financing in New Zealand. Wellington, New Zealand: Education Forum. Available at: http://www.educationforum.org.nz/doc-uments/publications/who_should_pay.pdf

The book discusses the tertiary education policy shifts of the 1990s in New Zealand, specifically focusing on the introduction of tuition fees, the creation of an income contingent student loans program, and the effects of these reforms on access to tertiary education. The book also provides international comparisons on the issues of higher education finance and access. The author states that there is little justification for public subsidies to tertiary education and analyzes the beneficial effects of tuition fees in higher education. He also disagrees with, and provides counter evidence to, those who argue that tuition fees negatively impact participation especially among underrepresented groups.

LaRocque, Norman. (2001). Shaping the Tertiary Education System. Wellington, New Zealand: Education Forum and Arthur Anderson. Available at: http://www.educationforum.org.nz/

This report examines the underlying rationale for the proposed reforms in New Zealand and discusses the Tertiary Education Advisory Commission’s second report “Shaping the System”. The author identifies problems with the report in terms of its percep-tion of competition and the impact of competition on the tertiary education sector and the Commission’s approach to funding and regulating the tertiary education sector. The author assesses the wider tertiary education reforms as well, including the student loan scheme tuition fees, and equity impacts of increased spending on tertiary education.


Lebel, Philip. (1999). Economic Criteria for Higher Education Finance. Paper presented at the International Conference on Reforming Universities for the 21st Century,” Beijing, China July 31-August 1, 1999.

Drawing some examples from developed and developing nations, the paper argues that although proposals for reform of university finance may begin in the first instance as a response to political pressure, it is important to examine the economic impact of alterna-tive financial incentives. The paper outlines how different financial incentives may produce alternative educational outcomes. Any pro-posal to alter the method of university financing should proceed on a clear understanding of the effects of various economic incentives, the paper concludes.

Lee, W. O. (2002). Equity and Access to Education: Themes, Tensions and Policies, Education in Developing Asia, Vol. 4, Asian Development Bank. Hong Kong: Comparative Education Research Centre, The University of Hong Kong.

Part of the Education in Developing Asia series produced jointly by the Asian Development Bank (ADB) and the Comparative Education Research Centre of the University of Hong Kong, this book looks at trends of access and equity in education in the developing member countries of the ADB and then looks at these trends by country to study the relationship between the degrees of access and equity and individual characteristics of economic and human development.

Leslie, Larry and Paul Brinkman. (1988). The Economic Value of Higher Education. New York: American Council on Education.

This volume, while dated, is valuable both for its treatment of the his-tory of the literature, and especially of the empirical research, on the economic value of higher education in the 1960’s, 1970’s, and 1980’s, and also for its “integrative review” or “meta-analysis” of this research. Meta-analysis is an analysis that puts together empirical research from a large number of studies with slightly different populations and sub-jected to slightly different statistical techniques and attempts to draw a new “overview” conclusion from the substantially larger database, although not necessarily data that was collected at the same time in the same way. The meta-analysis is particularly useful when much of the empirical research was based on small or narrowly drawn samples, and which were often inconclusive because of these limitations. The Leslie and Brinkman meta-analysis is useful particularly in its attempt to reach conclusion from the many somewhat flawed and rather small studies on income elasticity of demand for higher education—that is,


studies that have attempted to show the enrollment impact of tuition increases. There remains considerable controversy regarding the usefulness or even appropriateness of research that uses aggregate enrollment changes as the only dependent variable, but Leslie and Brinkman’s meta-analysis is probably the best summary of this body of research especially from the 70’s and 80’s.

Levy, Jan S. (2004). Student Finance Schemes in Norway. A Case Study. Paris: International Institute for Educational Planning.

A case study of the Norwegian higher education finance system trac-ing its development over the last 60 years. Considerable attention is given to the system reforms made in 2003 that increased the finan-cial support to students and increased the grants proportion of this support.

Levy, Daniel C. (2004). The New Institutionalism: Mismatches with Private Higher Education’s Global Growth, PROPHE Working Paper Series, Working Paper No. 3. Albany, NY: Project for Research on Private Higher Education (PROPHE). Available at: http://www.albany.edu/~prophe/publication/

This paper compares evidence on private higher education with the new institutionalism and concludes that the new institutionalism does not take into account the enormous and often growing organizational diversity brought on by the sharp growth of private higher education. Levy analyzes the private higher education sectors in Argentina, China and Hungary. He also explores how the coercive and non-coercive tenets of isomorphism come up short against the private higher edu-cation literature’s inter-sectoral evidence. The paper finally deals with two further sectoral considerations: reconciling the new institutional-ism with inter-sectoral diversity, and privatization and intrasectoral diversity.

Levy, Daniel C. (2003). Profits and Practibility: How South Africa Epitomizes the Global Surge in Commercial Private Higher Education, Working Paper Series, Working Paper No. 2. Albany, NY: Project for Research on Higher Education (PROPHE). Available at: http://www.albany.edu/~prophe/publication/

This paper argues that the growth of South Africa’s private higher education illustrates the commercial thrust at the bottom of most contemporary private higher education growth worldwide. From a comparative perspective this paper uses global perspectives to help understand the South African case and uses the South African case to help understand key global tendencies. The conclusion is that South


Africa presents an intriguing case through which to explore the nature of the world’s expanding commercial private higher education.

Levy, Daniel C. (2002). Unanticipated Development: Perspectives on Private Higher Education’s Emerging Roles, PROPHE Working Paper Series, Working Paper No. 1. Albany, NY: Project for Research on Private Higher Education (PROPHE). Available at: http://www.albany.edu/~prophe/publication/

The paper analyzes the roles of private higher education and pos-its that the development of these roles has been unanticipated and has not followed a systematic design. The consideration of private higher education’s roles includes three inter-related contrasts: 1) roles linked to various types of private higher education; 2) roles in new and established private sectors; 2) distinctive and non-distinc-tive roles, compared to public roles.

Levy, Daniel C. (Ed.). (1986). Private Education: Studies in Choice and Public Policy. New York: Oxford University Press.

The book is made up of three parts: overviews of private school choice and public policy, intersectoral comparisons, and review of private choice and financial policy in higher education. Public poli-cies towards private schools are examined in part one. Comparisons between private and public schools are made in part two, also at the higher education level. International patterns of higher education finance, financing of private higher education in America, and cross-subsidization in higher

Lewis, Darrell R. and Halil Dunbar. (1999). Equity Effects of Higher Education in Developing Countries: Access, Choice and Persistence. In David W. Chapman and Ann E. Austin (Eds.), Higher Education in the Developing World: Changing Contexts and Institutional Responses (pp. 169-194). Westport, CT: Greenwood Publishers.

Part of a collection of papers that look at the critical issues facing higher education institutions in the developing world, the paper looks at the challenge of managing enrollment expansion while preserving equity, raising quality, and controlling costs. It asserts that despite increases in enrollments, programs and institutions, there has been only limited progress on equalizing educational opportunities for disadvantaged groups in developing countries. It points out the inequalities inherent in systems that provide free or low cost education to students from middle and high-income fami-lies and calls for the implementation of tuition fees (or increases in existing tuition fees) of up to 20 or 25 percent of instructional


costs and the use of some of these funds for means tested financial assistance to students from lower socio-economic groups.

Li, Wenli and Weifang Min. (2000). Tuition, Private Demand and Higher Education Expansion in China. Beijing, China: School of Education, Peking University.

All higher education institutions in China have adopted cost-recov-ery policies since 1997. This study analyzes the impact of college costs, expected return to education and family education and financial background on the probability of individual enrollment in higher education in China, especially in urban areas. The data are from Urban Household Survey of the State Statistical Bureau of China, which was collected in August 1999. Using price-response measures, this study examines cost sensitivity among different income groups. It also analyzes willingness to pay for higher educa-tion and the financial resources available for students’ educational expenses using data from a college student survey, administered in December 1999. This study finds that the main portion of financial resources is coming from the students’ families, and that the gap in terms of willingness to pay among different income groups is becoming larger with increases in tuition. The study concludes by outlining some recommendations aimed at informing enroll-ment projections and tuition policy choices in the Chinese higher education system.

Looker, E. Dianne. (2004). Why Don’t They Go On? Factors Affecting the Decisions of Canadian Youth Not to Pursue Post-Secondary Education. Montreal, Canada: Canada Millennium Scholarship Foundation Research Series. Available at: http://www.millenniumscholarships.ca/images/Publications/looker_en.pdf

The paper focuses on why young people opt out of postsecondary education. In order to address this question, it uses two studies of Canadian youth commissioned by the Canada Millennium Scholarship Foundation (Foley, 2001, and COGEM, 2001), which examine the fac-tors affecting the decision not to attend postsecondary education. The paper gives an overview of the relevant literature, describes the design and major findings of the two studies mentioned above, and presents some policy implications based on this research.

Lund, Helen. (1999). Making and Saving Money: Income Generation and Cost Saving in Higher Education, Commonwealth Higher Education Manage-ment (CHEMS)-Association of Commonwealth Universities (ACU).

Based on data from questionnaire surveys administered to 150 insti-


tutions in Commonwealth countries (attached in the article) and other sources in a variety of countries, this report consists of two main parts: income generation and cost saving. The institutional initiatives for generating income include: 1) short and full-cost courses, 2) advertising, 3) corporate sponsorship, 4) hire of facilities, 5) fundraising, 6) research/technology transfer/spin-off compa-nies, 7) sale of manufactured goods and commercial services, 8) investment, and 9) unusual income generating initiatives. Lund also summarizes the institutional initiatives for cost saving which include: 1) conference management, 2) downsizing, 3) estates and environment, 4) finance office, 5) libraries, 6) personnel adminis-tration, 7) publications and information, 8) purchasing, 9) student administration, 10) teaching and learning, and 11) cost-cutting across the board.

Mabizela, Mahlubi, George Subotzky and Beverley Thaver. (2002). The Emergence of Private Higher Education in South Africa: Key Issues and Challenges. A discussion document prepared for the CHE Annual Consultative Conference, Education Policy Unit, University of the Western Cape.

The document discusses emerging trends in the private higher edu-cation sector in South Africa, international trends in private higher education, and the relationship between private higher education and the public sphere.

Maldonado, Alma, Yingxia Cao, and Philip G. Altbach. (2004). Private Higher Education: An International Bibliography. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.

This volume provides a bibliographical guide to the literature on pri-vate higher education. It contains nearly 2,000 documents – books, articles, reports, theses and dissertations from all over the world, compiled according to geographical region, topic and author. It is a very useful reference book for researchers to consult relevant materi-als in the field of private higher education.

Marginson, Simon. (1997, November). Imagining ivy: Pitfalls in the privatization of higher education in Australia. Comparative Education Review, 41, 460‑80.

The challenges involved in privatizing higher education in Australia are examined in detail. Distinctions are made between private commercial and private non‑profit institutions to explain why the unaided private sector failed in Australia but succeeded in Latin America.


Massy, William F. (2004). Markets in Higher Education: Do They Promote Internal Efficiency? In Pedro Teixeira, Ben Jongbloed, David Dill and Alberto Amaral (Eds.), Markets in Higher Educatio. Rhetoric or Reality? (pp. 13-36). Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

The paper, prepared for the third Douro Seminar in Douro, Portugal (October 2003) on markets in higher education, assesses the extent to which markets drive institutions toward internal efficiency. The author concludes that markets do better than government regulation and gives some recommendations for improving their performance.

Mateju, Petr and Natalie Simonova. (2003, June). Czech Higher Education Still at the Crossroad. Czech Sociological Review. (39)3, 393-411.

The article, part of a special issue on Higher Education, reviews the transformation of the Czech higher education system since the fall of Communism. It argues that while there have been significant changes in terms of its structure, governance, autonomy, openness and spirit, lasting financial and structural obstacles have limited growth and higher education opportunities. The authors point to the failure of the Bill of Financing Higher Education, which would have established a comprehensive student financial assistance program, increased the use of private funding and expanded capacity, to pass Parliament in 2002 as a major blow to the ability of the sector to accommodate increased demand.

Matthews, Rebecca. (2001). Myths of Equal Opportunity 2001: Wealth of School-District as a Determinant of Tertiary Participation. Wellington, New Zealand: New Zealand University Students’ Association.

This report looks at the tertiary participation rate of school-leavers by the wealth of their school district. It was conducted in a policy environment where there have been some government measures to improve equity of participation by lowering the costs of study through charging no interest on student loans during in-school years. The analysis found that between 1997 and 2000 there was an improvement in tertiary participation rates from most deciles, with the exception of students from Deciles 6-8 who seems to have plateaued. There is still a much greater likelihood of tertiary partici-pation for students from wealthier school districts.

Mayanja, Muhammad. (1998). The Social Background of Makerere University Students and the Potential for Cost Sharing. Higher Education, 36 (1), 21-41.

The article assesses the social background of Ugandan students at


Makerere University who are given subsidy to cover part of the costs of higher education. The findings were that students from well-to-do affluent families from prosperous districts were enjoying the per-formance-based subsidy (PBS) and the privately sponsored places and programs (PSSP) introduced by Makerere University. The study recommended that while the government must have the primary responsibility for funding higher education, the public subsidy must become more sensitive to equity and if need be the government should introduce cost sharing based on positive discrimination.

Mayhew, Ken, Cecile Deer and Mehak Dua. (2004). The Move to Mass Higher Education in the UK: Many Questions and Some Answers. Oxford Review of Education, 30(1), 65-82.

This paper describes the course and causes of the expansion of higher education in the UK since the 1960s. While the number of university students from modest social backgrounds has increased, they com-prise much the same proportion of the university population as they did 40 years ago. Though personal rates of return from higher edu-cation are generally substantial, there is still doubt about the extent of the returns to society and how productively new graduates will be employed in the labor market. The paper considers the impact of this expansion with tight public funding since the early 1980s and of the increase in compliance and audit costs. Finally it suggests that the incentive structures applied by the government may have made the different parts of the sector more homogenous than is desirable.

McEwan, Patrick J. and Martin Carnoy. (2000, Fall). The Effectiveness and Efficiency of Private Schools in Chile’s Voucher System. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 213-239.

This article evaluates the relative effectiveness and efficiency of private and public schools under Chile’s voucher system that was introduced in 1980. The findings show mixed results in terms of effectiveness (academic achievement) and efficiency (cost per speci-fied level of outputs) among non-religious voucher schools, Catholic voucher schools, public schools and Catholic schools.

McKeown-Moak, Mary. (2002). Financing Higher Education in the New Century, The Third Annual Report from the States. Denver, CO: State Higher Education Executive Officers (SHEEO).

This report summarizes trends in financing higher education in the United States based on various reports of states appropriations and a survey of state higher education finance officers.


McMahon, Walter W. (1988). Potential Resource Recovery in Higher Education in Developing Countries and the Parents’ Expected Contribution. Economics of Education Review, 7(1), 135‑152.

The first published article to note the great difficulty of cost-effec-tively determining “family incomes,” and the difficulties this poses for all financing schemes that purport to be “need based.”

McPherson, Michael S. and Morton Owen Schapiro. (2001). The Blurring Line Between Merit and Need in Financial Aid. Stanford, CA: National Center for Postsecondary Improvement. Available at: http://www.stanford.edu/group/ncpi/documents/pdfs/the_blurring_line.pdf

This paper looks beyond the “merit” and “need” labels to provide empirical evidence on the sensitivity of aid awards to both “need” and “merit”, understood as evidence of academic achievement or potential. It shows that even need-based grant awards are measurably sensitive to students’ academic promise, while the responsiveness of award levels to income is less than a purely need-based system would produce. A focus solely on so-called “non-need” or “merit” aid significantly understates the role that academic promise and achievement play in the distribution of institutional grant aid. The paper concludes that the greater transparency provided by common standards of need measurement is a considerable virtue, and is also probably about as far as the anti-trust laws might properly allow cooperation on aid policy to go.

McPherson, Michael S. and Morton Owen Schapiro. (1998). The Student Aid Game: Meeting Need and Rewarding Talent in American Higher Education. Consortium for Policy Research in Education, Madison, WI. Finance Center. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

This book examines issues in the provision of student financial aid within the context of continuing changes in government student aid policies and private sector decisions resulting in larger and larger shares of the cost of higher education being borne by individuals and their families. Part I reviews the role student aid has played in the past and the changing way colleges and universities approach stu-dent aid. Part II examines how undergraduate education is financed in the United States. Implications of recent financing trends for access and choice of undergraduate college are reviewed. Part III focuses on how various categories of colleges and universities have been changing their financing patterns both in their sources of rev-enue and pattern of expenditure. Part IV highlights merit aid from


the view of both students and institutions. Part V addresses policy implications at the government level and for individual schools. Principles for decision-making are offered.

McPherson, Michael S., Morton Owen Shapiro and Gordon C. Wilson. (1993). Paying the Piper, Productivity, Incentives and Financing in U.S. Higher Education. Ann Arbor, MI: The University of Michigan Press.

Revenue shortfall and expenditure pressures are forcing higher educational institutions to be economical and accountable to their products. The theme of this book is whether institutions of higher learning meet production requirements in terms of input and out-put measures without losing sight of the broader mission of higher education. The book argues that they meet efficiency requirements at the same time that they produce the desired outcome through the application of incentives. By deciding who pays the bill, the financial system in US higher education creates a set of incentives that deter-mine the productivity of the system. The book explores important policy issues such as the impact of federal aid on the enrollment behavior of students from low-income families, and the effect of government financing on the institutional behavior of colleges and universities. The book concludes with a discussion of the next fron-tier in higher education economics.

Merisotis, Jamie and Dianne S. Gilleland. (2000). Funding South African Higher Education: Steering Mechanisms to Meet National Goals. Washington, DC: The Institute for Higher Education Policy. Available at: http://www.ihep.org/Pubs/PDF/SouthAfrica.pdf

This comprehensive research-based paper discusses funding mecha-nisms that are designed to encourage or “steer” South African higher education towards meeting certain economic and social goals. These mechanisms can be included either as a part of a base formula fund-ing that is provided to institutions or as part of non-base funding provided by the government to continue the basic operation and maintenance of higher education.

Metcalf, Hilary. (2005). Paying for University: The Impact of Increasing Costs on Student Employment, Debt and Satisfaction. National Institute Economic Review. 191(1), pp. 106-117.

The article reviews findings from a student survey on the effects of tuition fees in the UK on debt, term-time employment and student satisfaction. The survey found that while fees have led to an increase in student debt and a decline in student satisfaction, they did not appear to impact term-time employment.


Min, Weifang. (2004). Historical Perspectives and Contemporary Challenges: The Case of Chinese Universities. Beijing, China: Center on Chinese Education.

This paper reviews the Chinese higher education system in a histori-cal perspective. The author gives particular attention to changes in its financing system that were the result of the country’s economic reforms and the growing demand for higher education that accom-panied them.

Ministry of Education, Science and Technology. Republic of Kenya. (2005). Sessional Paper No. 1 of 2005 on A Policy Framework for Education, Training and Research. Nairobi, Kenya: Government Printer.

The paper, written to provide a policy framework for the Kenyan education and training sector in the 21st century, reviews the evolution of education policy in Kenya since independence and sets out a number of goals and objectives. In terms of higher education, the goal is to expand public universities to have a capacity of at least 5,000 students each by 2015 and to increase the proportion of all students studying science related courses to 50 percent, with at least one third of these being women by the year 2010. Among the strategies for reaching these goals include the creation of incentives for increased investments in university education, the creation of an all-embracing national accredita-tion system with credit transfer; increases in the Government contribution to the loan scheme and mobilization of resources from the private sector so the loan program can give loans to all categories of students.

Ministry of Higher Education and Scientific Research. (2002). Palestinian Higher Education Financing Strategy. Palestinian National Authority. Washington, DC: World Bank.

This paper discusses the main challenges facing Palestinian Higher Education in terms of financial hardship. Chapter one reviews the problems of increasing demand, financial sustainabil-ity, efficiency, equity, and management. Chapter 2 discusses the development of financing strategies. Chapter 3 focuses on assess-ing the success of the financing strategies and different scenarios in meeting their goals. The last chapter addresses the implemen-tation of administrative and regulatory measures that are needed to supplement the financing policies.

Minxuan, Zhang. (2000). Differential or Flat? A Comparative Study of Tuition Policies in the World. A Consultant Report to the University


Grants Committee of Hong Kong University, March 2000. Prepared for the University Grants Committee of Hong Kong, the report reviews tuition fee policies throughout the world and their rationales from a historical perspective giving particular attention to the rationales for differential versus flat tuition fees. It then looks at the factors involved in tuition policies in Hong Kong and, given their widespread acceptance there, focuses on the arguments for a differential versus flat tuition fee policy. While Hong Kong has had a flat tuition policy for the past twenty years, the author reviews the recent arguments or rationales for a differential policy (based on course unit costs, expected returns to the students, or students’ and families’ ability to pay). The author reviews these rationales, but concludes that it is not the right time to introduce differential fees in higher education in Hong Kong with the exception of medical studies whose higher unit costs and higher expected returns call for higher tuition fees.

Mizikaci, Fatma. (2006). Higher Education in Turkey. UNESCO-CEPES Monographs on Higher Education. Bucharest, Romania: UNESCO.

A detailed description of the higher education sector in Turkey, its history and future challenges. Contains many interesting statistics that are not available in English from the country’s higher educa-tion authorities.

Mkude, Daniel. (2003). Contracting Non-Academic Services to Private Providers: The Dar Es Salaam Experience. Case study prepared for a Regional Training Conference on Improving Tertiary Education in Sub-Saharan Africa, Accra, September 2003.

This article prepared for the Regional Training Conference on Improving Tertiary Education in Sub-Saharan Africa held in Accra, Ghana in September 2003 looks at the experience of the University of Dar es Salaam in contracting out non-academic services (general cleaning, gardening and landscaping, security of off campus hostels and catering) as a way of reducing student unit cost, allowing the university to focus its attention on its core business and increasing the efficiency of these services. The report outlines the non-tangible and tangible benefits of the privatization exercise and recommends that all universities in Africa identify their core mission and the ser-vices that belong to it and those services that could be better operated by others outside the university.

Mkude, Daniel, Brian Cooksey and Lisbeth Levey. (2003). Higher Education in Tanzania, A Case Study. Oxford, UK and Dar es Salaam,


Tanzania: James Currey and mkuku n Nyota. Published in association with the Partnership for Higher Education in Africa, an initiative of Carnegie Corporation of New York, The Ford Foundation, The John D. and Catherine T. McArthur Foundation, and the Rockefeller Foundation, the book outlines the major higher education reforms undertaken by the University of Dar es Salaam, Tanzania’s oldest and largest public university, through its Institutional Transformation Program. The book mainly focuses on financial reforms (including the introduction of cost sharing), curri-cula reforms, and governance, administration, and planning reforms undertaken by the University from 1988 to present.

Mok, Ka-Ho and Jason Tan. (2004). Globalization and Marketization in Education. A Comparative Analysis of Hong Kong and Singapore. Cheltenham, UK and Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar Publishing.

Using findings from recent research projects conducted by the authors, this book looks at the strategies used by Hong Kong and Singapore to reform their education systems in response to global-ization. Particular attention is paid to education financing, provision and regulation and the extent to which the two countries have changed their education governance models from one of state con-trol to market-led models. The authors conclude, using the example of the education sector, that instead of bringing about an end to the state, globalization may instead be driving the modern state to change the way the public sector is managed resulting in a more activist state.

Mokgwathi, G.M.G. (1992). Financing Higher Education in Botswana. Higher Education, 23(4), 425-31.

The article describes the current system of university finance in Botswana and considers alternative options, including the introduc-tion of student loans recommended by the Presidential Commission in 1990.

Monks, James. (2001). Loan Burdens and Educational Outcomes. Economics of Education Review, 20, 545-550.

This study investigates the relationship between student debt levels and the likelihood of pursuing a graduate degree. It focuses on the educational outcomes of graduating seniors from a set of private, highly selective colleges and universities in the USA. The central conclusion the author draws is that students do not appear to be sig-nificantly influenced by their debt in regards to their post-graduation


choices. However, a sizable minority of borrowers do feel adversely affected by their student loans.

Mora, Jose-Gines and Michael Nugent. (1998). Seeking New Resources for European Universities: the Example of Fund-raising in the US. European Journal of Education, 33(1), 113-131.

With Government revenue declining on the one hand, and the demand for higher education increasing on the other, European universities are facing the need to diversify their sources of financial support. The article describes several alternative sources of income including tuition fees and fees for research and service contracts that are being introduced in European universities today. However, with the state budget for higher education ever declining, the article argues that there is a need to look for additional alternative finan-cial schemes. It then explores the applicability of voluntary support and institutional advancement that are common in the US to the European context. The article concludes that European universities can and should initiate both voluntary support and institutional advancement following the US model.

Mumper, Michael. (1995). Removing College Price Barriers: What Government Has Done and Why It Hasn’t Worked. New York: SUNY Press.

Mumper explores federal and state efforts to achieve universal col-lege affordability, and explains why those efforts have failed. Rising costs and constrained budgets are the easy answers, however, shift-ing federal government policies toward grants and loans made the real difference. Though Pell Grants were increased, a larger percent-age of totals went to awarding grants to those with higher incomes rather than providing more for the most disadvantaged. Likewise, a larger percent of the total student aid budget went towards funding loans to finance, in large part, middle and upper‑income students. Recommendations are made.

Musisi, Nakanyike B. and Nansozi K. Muwanga. (2003). Makerere University in Transition, 1993 – 2000. Oxford, UK and Kampala, Uganda: James Currey and Foundation Publishers.

Published in association with the Partnership for Higher Education in Africa, an initiative of Carnegie Corporation of New York, The Ford Foundation, The John D. and Catherine T. McArthur Foundation, and the Rockefeller Foundation, the book documents the major higher education reforms undertaken by Makerere University, Uganda’s oldest and largest public university, from 1993-2000. In


particular, the book describes the cost sharing and revenue diversi-fication policies implemented at Makerere University that brought it from near bankruptcy and total dependency on government financ-ing in the early 1980’s to raising over 60 percent of its annual budget by the 1999/ 2000 academic year.

Mwamila, Burton L.M., Issa Omari and Eva Mbuya. (2002). Proceedings from the International Conference on Financing Higher Education. Dar es Salaam, Tanzania: University of Dar es Salaam.

Proceedings from the ten-nation conference, “Financing Higher Education in Eastern and Southern Africa: Diversifying Revenue and Expanding Accessibility,” held in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, in March 2002 and co-hosted by the University of Dar es Salaam and the International Comparative Higher Education Finance and Accessibility Project of the State University of New York at Buffalo. In addition to the keynote papers, the proceedings include highlights from the discussions and a list of findings and recommendations that reflect the views of the majority of participants. Among the latter is the recognition that cost-sharing in some fashion is almost certainly an imperative for African higher education and that tuition fees are an important component of cost sharing.

Nanzaddorj, Buluut. (2001). Educational financing and budgeting in Mongolia. Financial management of education systems. Paris: International Institute for Educational Planning- UNESCO.Available at: http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0012/001235/123534e.pdf

Prepared as part of the IIEP’s research project on capacity building in budgetary processes for education in Central Asia and Mongolia, the book analyses the financial management and budgeting procedures used in Mongolia against a backdrop of its educational system and recent history. Since the dissolution of the Soviet Union, Mongolia has experimented with market reforms in education and introduced cost sharing in higher education.

Narayana, M.R. (2005). Student Loan by Commercial Banks: A Way to Reduce State Government Financial Support to Higher Education in India. Journal of Developing Areas, 171-187.

This study aims to find plausible answers to the ongoing policy debate about financing higher education through public subsidies versus student loans. It focuses specifically on the financing of collegiate education, which is part of general higher education, in Karnataka State in South India. This study provides interest-ing data about the development of student lending in India, as


well as the structure of higher education finance. The results of this study imply that the student loan may not be a perfect substi-tute for budgetary subsidies to the poor but deserving student in collegiate education. Thus, the paper recommends a mix of govern-mental and private funds in supporting students through collegiate education.

National Center for Education Statistics. (2004). Paying for College: Changes between 1990 and 2000 for Full-time Dependent Undergraduates. Findings from the Condition of Education 2004. Washington, DC: United States Department of Education. Available at: http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2004/2004075.pdf

The National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) is the part of the US Department of Education responsible for collecting and analyz-ing data that are related to education in the US and abroad. In terms of higher education, the NCES collects information on a variety of issues from postsecondary institutions (Integrating Postsecondary Data System) and students (National Postsecondary Student Aid Studies – NPSAS - and National Education Longitudinal Study

– NELS) and publishes the Condition of Education and the Digest of Education Statistics each year. This report examines changes in stu-dent financing of undergraduate education between 1989-90 and 1999-2000, focusing on full-time students who were considered financially dependent on their parents for financial aid purposes. The results of the changes enacted by the 1992 higher Education Amendments are pointed out, and comparisons are made by using data for the 1989-98 and 1999-2000 NPSAS years by type of institu-tions and family income quarters.

National Center for Education Statistics. (2003). Congressionally Mandated Studies of College Costs and Prices. Washington, DC: United States Department of Education.

This monograph discusses the major findings of the three NCES publications that were prepared in response to the Congressional mandate in Section 131 of the 1998 Amendments to the Higher Education Act. These include the Study of College Costs and Prices, 1988-89 to 1997-98; What Students Pay for College: Changes in Net Price of College Attendance Between 1992-03 and 1999-2000; and A Study of Higher Education Instructional Expenditures: The Delaware Study of Instructional Costs and Productivity. The report looks at the extent to which spending patterns contribute to tuition increases; the extent to which increases in financial aid have helped students and their families meet the increasing price of postsecondary education; and


the direct instructional expenditures within the disciplinary mix of an institution and by discipline across institutional types.

National Center for Education Statistics. (2002). Student Financing Undergraduate Education, 1999-2000. Statistical Analysis Report, National Postsecondary Student Aid Study. Washington, DC: United States Department of Education.

This report describes the tuition, total price of attendance, and financial aid received by undergraduates who were enrolled in U.S. postsecondary institutions during the 1999-2000 academic year, based on data from 1999-2000 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study. It begins with a discussion of the percentage of undergradu-ates receiving various types of financial aid, the sources of the aid, and the average award amounts in 1999-2000. The focus is on loans and grants at the four major types of institutions where undergradu-ates are enrolled. This report also includes a compendium of tables that describe tuition, total price of attendance and the various types and sources of financial aid in more detail by institutional and stu-dent characteristics.

National Center for Public Policy and Higher Education. (2004). Measuring Up 2004. The National Report Card on Higher Education. San Jose, CA: The National Center for Public Policy and Higher Education. Available at: http://www.highereducation.org

The third in the Measuring Up series, the report evaluates and grades the 50 states based on their higher education performance in terms of higher school student preparation, higher education par-ticipation and affordability, completion rates, and benefits.

National Center for Public Policy and Higher Education. (2002). Losing Ground, A National Status Report on the Affordability of American Higher Education. San Jose, CA: The National Center for Public Policy and Higher Education. Available at: http://www.highereducation.org

The National Center for Public Policy in Higher Education has been an independent watchdog over higher educational policy at both the federal and state levels--independent from the institutional associations in Washington, DC as well as the various associa-tions of institutions at the state level. Directed by Patrick Callan, the staff has taken upon itself to provide excellent, well-researched, and frequently provocative comparisons of the 50 states on various dimensions, including quality, accountability and affordability. This report is the 2002 report on affordability, considering both state and national policies. The “five national trends” identified in the report


include: (1) the high rate of tuition increases that have made US higher education less affordable for most American families; (2) the failure of both federal and state financial aid to keep pace with these tuition increases; (3) the striking increase in borrowing to pay for college; (4) the juxtaposition of steep increases in public college tuition with a serious flattening of earnings on the part of the bot-tom income deciles of the American public; and (5) the fact that tuition has been increased at such high rates in part to compensate for the failure of state support to maintain its share of the increasing costs of higher education.

National Commission on the Cost of Higher Education. (1998). Straight Talk About College Costs and Prices. Phoenix, AZ: Oryx Press

This book includes facts and figures on federal student aid, student aid and tuition, real costs, and college costs in addition to sociological surveys, one example being the perceived costs of higher education. Terms and concepts are also neatly identified and described in easy language as it is written for high‑level policy makers, not specialists. An excellent reference for US higher education.

National Union of Students. (2000). Equal access or elitist entry? The Impact of Student Funding on Access to Higher Education. London, UK: National Union of Students.

This monograph from the UK National Union of Students is a pre-dictably partisan and critical, but nonetheless well researched and written, answer to the UK government’s increasing drift in the late 1990’s toward increasing reliance on markets, tuition fees, and stu-dent loans. The National Union of Students has always opposed these trends, seemingly in the hope of restoring and even enhancing an earlier period in the UK where higher education was free of any tuition fees and students were supported by generous means-tested maintenance grants that allowed them to pursue their studies full time, without the distractions either of part-time employment or the burden of borrowing. The monograph is partly an examination of Australia, Germany, and the US, and in particular an attempt to find fault with both Australia and the United States, both of which con-tinue to move in the direction of cost sharing and a higher education finance system that places a portion of the burden on both parents and students. The report is well written, but predictably selective both in its citations and its conclusions, finding both the Australian and the American systems injurious to students and participation (contrary to much evidence presented elsewhere, such as Chapman and Johnstone).


National Union of Students. (1968). The Case Against Loans, NUS Policy on Student Support. London: National Union of Students.

This pamphlet written in 1968 is dated, but is still of consider-able historic interest, presenting the British students’ case against loans—which case is actually an affirmation of their case for no tuition fees and for generous “mandatory grants” covering the costs of student living. This was written before there was any tuition fees and before there were any student loans in the UK. The absence of any general available student loan program in Britain was almost certainly a hardship for older students, part-time students, further education students, and others who were not eligible for the then-generous mandatory grants. However, the opposition to loans was predicated on a strategic assumption that the British Government would be politically constrained from adopting tuitions or allow-ing an erosion of mandatory grants as long as there were no loans to accommodate the students. The corollary assumption was that the existence of a generally-available student loan program would be a precursor to either the advent of tuition fees or to an erosion of student grants—both of which, of course, began occurring in the late 1990’s.

Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis and the Center for Higher Education Policy Studies. (2001). Higher Education Reform: Getting the Incentives Right. Enschede, the Netherlands: Center for Higher Education Policy Studies (CHEPS). Available at: http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d0284sp.pdf

The volume provides an overview of the various options for orga-nizing higher education systems that involve governments as well as markets. In addition to the description of higher education pol-icy in several countries, the book includes a concise discussion of the economics of higher education. In regards to particular policies, it focuses on the Dutch higher education sector and suggests what are the lessons from international experiences that Dutch policy-makers can draw upon to get the incentives in higher education right. The Australian Higher Education Contribution Scheme is examined in great detail as is the decentralized higher education sector in the United States. The volume also looks at the Danish taximeter-model in which the financial flows are directly linked to student performance. The UK system is studied in regards to public research funding allocations, while the US is examined in terms of the impact of university and industry ties on academic research.


New Zealand Vice-Chancellors’ Committee. (1999). Discussion Paper: Student Loan Scheme. Wellington, New Zealand: Vice-Chancellors’ Committee. Available at: http://www.nzvcc.ac.nz/pubaffpol/loans.html

The report focuses on developments related to the New Zealand’s student loans program, which was introduced in 1992. It discusses the administration of the program, loan interest rates, repayment mode, rates of borrowing, macroeconomics impacts of student bor-rowing, as well as changes in the program prior to 1999. Separate discussion in this study is devoted to the higher education rates of return and the issue of student debt aversion. This discussion paper provides suggestions for student loan program reform, as well as indicates areas where more research is needed in order to make an informed policy decision.

Ng’ethe, Njuguna, N’Dri Assie-Lumumba, George Subotzky and Esi Sutherland-Addy. (2003). Higher Education Innovations in Sub-Saharan Africa: With Specific Reference to Universities. New York: Partnership for Higher Education in Africa.

A regional survey of higher education innovations in sub-Saharan Africa that reviews the problems facing the continent and examines the extent to which innovations are taking place in African univer-sities to address these challenges. The information in the report is based on responses to questionnaires administered to university Vice Chancellors, Rectors, Presidents and Chancellors, and site visits following the return of the questionnaires. They survey found that financial contracts appear to be the most important explanation of innovations in most African universities and cautions that inno-vations in this area may be in conflict with innovations aimed at addressing educational needs.

Njeuma, Dorothy L. (1999). Reforming a National System of Higher Education: the Case of Cameroon. Washington, DC: Association for the Development of Higher Education in Africa (ADEA) Working Group on Higher Education. Available at: http://www.adeanet.org/publications/wghe/wghe_cameroon.pdf

In 1993, the government of Cameroon launched a major reform of its higher education system. The reform was the outcome of several factors including the exponential rise in the student population at the country’s only university (i.e. the University of Yaounde’) and the relative stagnation in infrastructure. Six regional universities were created to increase access to higher education in under-served


regions. The reform also includes the granting of more academic and management autonomy to universities, the redeployment of teachers and students to the different universities, the introduction of registration fees, the elimination of bursaries, the re-organization of the academic year and teaching programs and the professionaliza-tion of teaching programs. The major impediments to the reform include the limited number of programs available in the new uni-versities, the lack of sustainable sources of funding, restrictions on the introduction of tuition fees, and the absence of administrative staff with appropriate managerial skills. The paper emphasizes the importance of political will, societal support, financial sustainability, appropriate information management, and liberalized revenue gen-eration as critical factors in the success of the educational reforms.

Obasi, Isaac N. and Eric Eboh (2002). Cost Sharing Crises in Nigerian Universities: Policy Lessons from an Empirical Study. Accra, Ghana: Association of African Universities’ Study Program on Higher Education Management in Africa Research Paper Series. Available at: http://www.aau.org/studyprogram/notpubl/OBASI.pdf

A well documented empirical study that provides a clear picture of the attitudes of students and parents towards cost sharing in higher edu-cation and the reasons behind these attitudes. It also provides detailed suggestions that should be taken into consideration when formulating successful policies for cost sharing in higher education.

Odebiyi, Adetanwa and Olabusi I. Aina. (1999). Alternative Modes of Financing Higher Education in Nigeria and Implications for University Governance. Unpublished research report. Accra, Ghana: Association of African Universities’ Study Program on Higher Education Management in Africa. Available at: http://www.aau.org/studyprogram/notpub/ode-baina.pdf

The report describes the various income-generating activities adopted by Nigerian universities to address the under-funding that had led to inadequate infrastructures and facilities. It discusses the implications of these strategies for universities, parents and the pub-lic. The report provides insightful recommendations for the use of alternative modes of financing higher education in Nigeria.

Oketch, Moses O. (2003). Affording the Unaffordable: Cost Sharing in Higher Education in Sub-Saharan Africa. Peabody Journal of Education. 78(3), 88-106.

The article discusses the financing of higher education in Africa in the 21st century in the face of decreasing government subsidization


and rapidly increasing demand. It traces the cost sharing policies (most notably the introduction of tuition fees where hitherto there were none) undertaken by universities in recent years to deal with shortfalls in funding for critical inputs and stem the deterioration of the universities physical facilities. The article emphasizes the impor-tance of flexible tuition fees, well-designed student loan schemes and proactive measures to promote access and quality.

Oketch, Moses. (2000). Costing and Financing Higher Education for Development in Sub-Saharan Africa: Kenya’s Case. International Education Journal, 4(3), 1-10.

Possible alternatives through which Kenya can cost and finance her higher education are discussed in this article. Attention is given to the high level of expenditure that has already been reached, the con-stant rise in unit costs, increasing rates of graduate unemployment and the increasing competition within sector budgets themselves that higher education has to compete with. Other issues addressed in the paper include problems of debt servicing, other unpredictable expenditures, and donor fatigue.

Olivas, Michael A. (Ed.) (1993). Prepaid College Tuition Plans, Promise and Problems. New York: College Examination Board.

Collection of papers presented at a 1992 symposium on prepaid tuition plan. The papers look at the reasons for the popularity of these plans, the impact of certain program features on participation by different socio-economic groups, and their tax implications. All of the papers agree that such plans have been underpriced, which undermines their long-term financial viability unless the program’s bank is able to generate positive real returns in its portfolio opera-tions; something that is almost impossible to accomplish year after year. Time has shown the validity of the authors’ concerns. As of 2003, five states had to suspend or close their prepaid tuition plans due to inadequate investment returns and rampant tuition inflation.

Oliveira, Tania and Pedro Telhado Pereira. (1999). Who Pays the Bill? Costs and Students’ Income in Portuguese Higher Education. European Journal of Education, 34(1), 111-121.

This paper introduces the higher education system in Portugal, and provides an overview of student expenditures, direct public financial support for students (the national support scheme, total amount of national economic support, and other economic support schemes) and other direct and indirect support for students (general direct and indirect support, health insurance, discounts, low-cost accom-


modation, living costs, culture and leisure, and the role of higher education institution in student support). It also analyzes financial support from parents and relatives and the students’ financial contri-bution, and compares the students’ income and expenditure (student support by social background, general assessment of the effects of the system of study costs and student finance, and developments in study costs and support for students in the last two decades).

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development and UNESCO. (2002). Financing Education – Investments and Returns, Analysis of the World Education Indicators. Executive Summary. Paris: OECD.

This is an executive summary of the complete report that seeks to analyze the education indicators developed through the OECD/UNESCO World Education Indicators (WEI) program. The report addresses the financing of education systems by examining spend-ing and investment strategies in WEI countries (Argentina, Brazil, Chile, China, Egypt, India, Indonesia, Jamaica, Jordon, Malaysia, Paraguay, Peru, the Philippines, the Russian Federation, Sri Lanka, Thailand, Tunisia, Uruguay and Zimbabwe). It looks at the rationale for public spending, how public resources are distributed across lev-els of education and the role of the private sector both as a provider of educational services and a source of educational expenditure.

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (1999a). Financing Lifelong Learning in Tertiary Education, Alternative Approaches to Financing Lifelong Learning. Paris, France: OECD.

This report outlines the financial issues that arise in implementing the lifelong learning society, and the strategies that the public and private sectors are pursuing to achieve it. It deals with issues such as individual learning accounts, recognition of non-formal learning, and measures to raise rates of return to lifelong learning. The aim of the report is to provide a basis for continued in-depth discussion by public authorities and their social partners. It aims to inspire future actions that ensure that lifelong learning serves as a sustainable and equitable strategy for human development.

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (1999b). Financing Higher Education. In Tertiary Education and Research in the Russian Federation (pp. 139-156). Paris, France: OECD.

The chapter on financing higher education in Russia looks at a) the current status of higher education and its major sources of revenue (sponsored research, research collaboration with industry, entre-preneurial earnings, student tuition and fees, and regional and


community support); b) the major reasons for government inter-vention and the forms of intervention; and c) key policy issues. The paper explains the importance of broad based demand side gov-ernment intervention including information provision, vouchers, targeted subsidies, loan assistance and general tuition subven-tions as a vehicle to capture positive externalities from the sector. Key policy issues discussed in the paper include the aggregate fis-cal challenge faced by higher educational institutions, the loss of institutional focus due to the conflict among major stakeholders, managerial problems, the unpredictability of government support, the lack of management budgetary control systems within institu-tions, and the diseconomies of scale.

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (1999c). Tertiary Education: Extending the Benefits of Growth to New Groups. Education Policy Analysis, 64‑83. Paris, France: OECD.

This study considers the three main components involved in deci-sions to invest in tertiary education: (1) the degree to which the visible costs are being borne by students and their families compared to the past; (2) the patterns of how these costs point to important varia-tion according to the situation of each student; and (3) the impact of private financing on participation and overall spending levels. It describes a complex picture that does not clearly show the effects of the imposition of costs on studies and households. The study includes comparative data on private contributions to tertiary higher education. The study concludes that caution should be used in shift-ing the burden of financing higher education from the government to students and their families, so that it does not reduce the oppor-tunity for some groups to study.

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (1998a). Paying for Tertiary Education: The Learner Perspective. Education Policy Analysis, 57‑82.

The paper discusses the issue of access to higher education as a function of financial and educational resources. It examines the participation issue in tertiary education by looking at patterns and trends of access to different study options, learning resources and financial support.

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (1998b). Redefining Tertiary Education. Paris: Organization for Economic Co-oper-ation and Development.

This is a comparative review of the first years of tertiary education


in ten member countries: Australia, New Zealand, Norway, Japan, Belgium (Flemish community), Denmark, Germany, Sweden, the United Kingdom and the United States. The term “first years” refers to those programs leading to initial qualification recognized as being of value in the labor market. This study addresses the challenges of higher education and discusses the need to reform tertiary educa-tion to increase accessibility, quality, efficiency and responsiveness. The conclusion suggests a framework for reforming tertiary educa-tion in different countries, taking into consideration each country’s priority queue.

Otieno, Wycliffe. (2004). Student Loans in Kenya: Past Experiences, Current Hurdles and Opportunities for the Future. Journal of Higher Education in Africa, 2(2), 75-100. Available at: http://www.bc.edu/bc_org/avp/soe/cihe/africaHEjournal/journal_home.htm

This article provides a description of the history and administration of the Kenyan loan scheme by the Higher Education Loans Board (HELB). It also discusses the challenges facing the board while high-lighting strategies for improving equity and access.

Palacios Lleras, Miguel. (2004). Investing in Human Capital: A Capital Markets Approach to Student Funding. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

The “capital markets approach” is a recent expression of the policy generally attributed to conservative economist Milton Freedman’s work from the 1950s and 60s advocating greatly diminished or even the elimination of most public subsidy to higher education, pricing college and university education on a full or near-full cost reimbursement basis and financing the expenses—to be borne principally by students—through income contingent loans. While income contingent loans are the chosen form of student loans in Australia, New Zealand, UK, South Africa, and elsewhere and exist as an infrequently selected option in the US, these income contin-gent loans--featuring a repayment obligation expressed as some percentage of either earnings or income--are nevertheless subsidized for all earners, with those high earners repaying at something less than the borrower’s cost of money, and the low earners repaying ulti-mately even less, but with the shortfall covered by government. The Palacios “capital markets approach,” however, is quite different, and abdicates a total “equity” approach to higher education financing, where shortfalls from low lifetime earners are made up by profits, or surplus effective interest, paid by borrowers who turn out to have high lifetime earnings.


Palfreyman, David. (2004). The Economics of Higher Education: Affordability and Access: Costing, Pricing and Accountability. Oxford, UK: Oxford Centre for Higher Education Policy Studies. Available at: http://oxcheps.new.ox.ac.uk/MainSite%20pages/Resources/EconHEprot.pdf

Palfreyman is Bursar and Fellow of New College, Oxford University, and Director of the Oxford Centre for Higher Education Policy Studies (OXCHEPS). This is a book length monograph written about the debates surrounding the UK 2003 White Paper on Education, and preceding the enactment in the summer of 2004 of UK’s Higher Education Act. This work discusses the economics and politics sur-rounding the issues of cost sharing and “marketization” of higher education drawing on many European and especially American examples. While clearly in favor of a more “liberal” approach to higher education, providing some cost sharing and allowing more market forces to enter, Palfreyman gives a balanced accounting of some of the objections both in the UK and in the United States to the increasing cost of higher education and the increasing portions of that increasing cost being passed on to parents and especially on to students.

Passi, F. O. (1994, October). Implementing Change to Improve the Financial Management of Makerere University, Uganda. IIEP Occasional Papers. UNESCO. Paris: International Institute for Educational Planning.

A documented case study of Makerere University’s bold attempt to improve financial management by adopting self-accounting, decen-tralization and multiple approaches of cost sharing, and the book bank system. This report provides good insights to policy makers in their decisions when implementing changes that strive to pro-mote cost effectiveness and efficiency in universities in developing countries.

Patrinos, Harry Anthony and David Lakshmanan Ariasingam. (1997). Decentralization of Education: Demand-side Financing. Washington, DC: The World Bank.

The book defines demand-side financing in public education as the mechanisms through which public funds are channeled directly to the individual or institutions based on some expression of demand. Example of such mechanisms include vouchers, public assistance to private schools, targeted bursaries etc. The authors review World Bank projects in the mid-1990s that included demand-side financ-ing components.


Payne, Joan and Claire Callender. (1997). Student Loans, Who Borrows, and Why? London: Policy Study Institute.

This book on student borrowing in the UK was written in the context of changing student aid policy that increased the use of loans. The publication concentrates on the impact of borrowing on students. Among other findings, looking at student behaviors related to the take-up of student loans, the study concludes that women were less likely to take out loan than men. The same was true for Asian students in comparison to members of other ethnic groups. At the same time having dependent children may possibly have increased take-up, and students who were single parents had a high loan take-up rate. The likelihood of taking out a student loan increased with each subsequent year of study, and the level of loan take-up differed between different age groups. The authors suggest that deci-sions about whether to take out a loan are likely to be influenced by expected future earnings. Analyzing the reasons for borrowing and not borrowing, the authors refer to different rationales for stu-dents from poorer families and students from more prosperous backgrounds. They conclude that because students from poorer backgrounds incur bigger debts than students from more wealthy families, the fear of debt might deter some young people from enter-ing higher education.

Pechar, Hans. (1998). Funding Higher Education in Austria: Present Mechanisms and Future Trends. European Journal of Education, 33(1), 41-53.

The article reviews the evolution of higher education finance in Austria and recent strategies for dealing with cuts in public expen-diture in its different sectors. Written four years before tuition fees were introduced in Austria, the article discusses the cost sharing measures that the government had undertaken at that point includ-ing cuts in indirect and direct student assistance and goes on to identify strategies for coping with continued and increasing finan-cial stringency. The article concludes by looking at the arguments for and against the imposition of tuition fees in higher education.

Pell Institute for the Study of Opportunity in Higher Education. (2004). Indicators of Opportunity in Higher Education. Fall 2004 Status Report. Washington, DC: The Pell Institute.

The report seeks to measure the opportunities for low-income stu-dents to access and success in higher education, to track progress and improvement over time and to use the findings to advocate for


increased understanding and support of programs that improve access to higher education. Four key questions are used as indicators of access: who goes to college, where do they go, what do students pay for college and who graduates from college. It was found that relative to other groups, low income students have less opportunity for post-secondary education, have a lower college participation rate, more frequently attend for-profit institutions and two-year institu-tions and take longer to complete their degrees.

Ping, Charles. (1995). African Universities Beset by Financial, and Social Calamities. Black Issues in Higher Education, 12 (15), 34-7.

The article examines the major financial problems besetting African universities. For example, there has been an 85 percent drop in library books acquisition since the 1980’s and a 30 percent decrease in faculty salaries. In the face of these and other issues, the author calls for immediate action.

Pillay, Pundy. (1989). Reassessing Strategies for Financing Education in South Africa. Social Dynamics, 15(2), 25-39.

After describing the inequity and inefficiency of present educational financing methods in developing countries, some alternatives are suggested. Policy options to address these problems are discussed: user fees, loans, block grants & categorical grants, education vouch-ers, tax-related financing, foreign aid & donor dependence, & decentralized education. The similarities between patterns of educa-tion financing in developing countries & South Africa are reviewed. Crucial areas in the formulation of new policy options in South Africa are identified, including (1) cost recovery, (2) more effective use of grants and subsidies, (3) designing an appropriate student loan program, (4) establishing an education bank, & (5) private & community schools. The role of the South African state in providing education to its citizens is examined.

Postiglione, Gerard A. (Ed.). (2006). Education and Social Change in China. Inequality in a Market Economy. Armonk, New York and London, England: M.E. Sharpe.

The book describes the findings from a sociological study of the effects of government policies and market reforms on the education system in China in terms of equity and access. Its eight chapters (each by a different author) illustrate that critical educational inequal-ities continue to be present with the rural poor, ethnic minorities, girls and migrants suffering from low enrollment and high dropout


rates, despite the fact that access to schooling has never been more widespread.

Powar, K.B. and K.L. Johar. (Eds.). (2004). Private Initiatives in Higher Education. Yamuna Nagar, India: Sneh Prakashan.

This book examines India’s large and growing private sector for higher education including its legal environment and its commer-cialization. The book also includes discussion of international private higher education trends.

Prairie Research Associates. (2005). Canadian College Student Finances (3rd ed.). Montreal, Canada: Canada Millennium Scholarship Foundation and the Canadian College Student Survey Consortium. Available at: http://www.millenniumscholarships.ca/images/Publications/colleges-2004_en.pdf

This paper examines the results of a second survey of about 9,900 Canadian college students in 27 colleges, conducted by the Canadian College Student Survey Consortium (CCSSC), in terms of the students academic and personal profiles, financing strategies, expen-ditures, debt, and use of time. This paper concludes that students’ financial situations and time use vary greatly by program type as well as by region. Many of the differences arise because students’ personal characteristics are correlated with the program they are enrolled in. The fact that some programs are more predominant in certain regions adds another dimension to this variation.

Price, Derek V. (2003). Borrowing Inequality: Race, Class, and Student Loans. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner Publishers.

This book critically looks at current student loan programs in the United States and argues that they reproduce the very patterns of inequality among races, ethnic groups, genders and classes that they were intended to alleviate. It concludes with financial aid proposals that the author feels would address these problems and support higher education’s role as a vehicle for individual opportunity and social change.

Psacharopoulos, George and Harry Anthony Patrinos. (2004). Returns to Investment in Education: A Further Update. Education Economics, 12(2), 111-134.

Psacharopoulos, a Greek Parliament member in the early 2000s, was also a senior economist in the World Bank. He is identified with the Bank’s reliance in the 1970s and 80s on rate rate-of-return analyses to show the relatively low payoff to public investments in higher as


opposed to elementary and secondary education. This article pres-ents the latest estimates and patterns on social and private returns to investment in education.

Psacharopoulos, George. (2002). The Social Cost of an Outdated Law: Article 16 of the Greek Constitution. Paper presented at the 19th Annual Conference European Association of Law and Economics, Athens, Greece.

The paper argues that Article 16 of the Greek Constitution, which guarantees free public higher education and prohibits private universities, has resulted in limited access, declining quality, unemployment, brain drain, foreign exchange loss, misallocation of resources, reduced human capital investment and social agony. The paper concludes that article 16 is an economically inefficient and social inequitable law, but that public opinion continues to be against private universities.

Public Funding and Private Returns to Education. (2001). Final Report. Helsinki, Finland: Public Funding and Private Returns to Education (PURE). Available at: http://www.etla.fi/PURE/

The Final report on the public funding and private returns to edu-cation project in 15 European countries. The project found that the private returns to education vary across Europe and there is no sign of a convergence of returns. In addition, project research revealed that while enrollment in higher education is strongly influenced by public funding, entry exams in the high-school system and tuition fees, current returns to education and current unemployment rates do not appear to affect current enrollment.

R.A. Maltest and Associates Ltd. (2004). Aboriginal Peoples and Post-Secondary Education, What Educators have Learned. Montreal, Canada: Canada Millennium Scholarship Foundation.

This article examines Aboriginal post-secondary education in Canada and discusses the barriers to their participation in, and comple-tion of, post-secondary education. The author discusses the federal government’s Post-Secondary Student Support Program and its shortcomings in terms of the quantity of funding and the process used to award grants. Finally, the article outlines five main strategies to make post-secondary education more accessible for Aboriginal peoples: Access Program, Community Delivery, Aboriginal Control of Education, Partnerships between Aboriginal Communities and Mainstream Educational Institutions, and Student Support that Addresses Aboriginal Needs.


Redd, Kenneth E. (2000). Discounting Toward Disaster: Tuition Discounting, College Finances, and Enrollments of Low-Income Undergraduates. USA Group Foundation New Agenda Series, Volume 3, Number 2. Indianapolis, IN: USA Group Foundation. Available at: http://www.luminafoundation.org/publications/discoun tingtowarddisaster.pdf

Using data from the National Association of College and University Business Officers’(NACUBO) annual Institutional Student Aid Survey database, the report evaluates the results of tuition discount-ing plans (whereby colleges provide grants to students to help them pay their tuition and fee charges) in terms of tuition revenue and the profile of students who receive such awards. It finds that for at least one quarter of private colleges and universities use of discounting strategies resulted in large losses of tuition revenue. While many institutions are looking to raise their academic profiles and rankings, the research indicates that tuition discounting did not appear to have made much of an impact on academic profiles, though it did appear to have helped institutions get more low-income undergrads and to have made it possible for more students from all income levels to enter higher education.

Rees, Teresa. (2002). The Independent Investigation Group on Student Hardship and Funding in Wales: Reflections from the Chair. Welsh Journal of Education (Special International Issue on Paying for Learning: The Debate on Student Fees, Grants and Loans in International Perspective), 11(1), 10-17.

A first hand account of the Welsh government inquiry into student hardship and funding that took place in early 2001 and that culmi-nated in a well-documented report that included 54 recommendations for the UK government and the National Assembly for Wales. The committee found that the Welsh higher education funding system favors wealthier students who are able to enjoy the benefits of publicly subsidized student loans, while poorer students receive only a fraction of the money that they need and this only after applying to several dif-ferent and uncoordinated programs. The committee recommended that upfront tuition fees be replaced with deferred fees to be paid by graduates once they reached a certain income level.

Rhoads, Robert A. and Carlos Alberto Torres. (Eds.). (2006). The University, State, and Market. The Political Economy of Globalization in the Americas. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

The book uses critical theory and political economy approaches to


look at the direct and indirect impact of globalization and marketi-zation on colleges and universities in the United States and Latin America (Argentina, Brazil and Mexico). Particular attention is paid some of the expressions of globalization such as privatization that the authors argue jeopardize access for the poor.

Richards, Ken. (2002). Reforming Higher Education Student Finance in the UK: The Impact of Recent Changes and Proposals for the Future. Welsh Journal of Education (Special International Issue on Paying for Learning: The Debate on Student Fees, Grants and Loans in International Perspective), 11(1), 48-63.

Ken Richards, of the University of Wales, Aberystwyth, served (along with Journal editor Maureen Woodhall), on the Independent Investigation Group on Student Hardship and Funding in Wales [The Rees Report] in 2001, designed to move toward a possible distinc-tive system of student finance in Wales, similar to what was brought to Scotland through the CUBIE Report in 2000. This article is an excellent example of the problems in the current (as of 2002) UK system of student finance, particularly the parental means test and its reliance only on income and not at all on assets or wealth, and on the complex and at least partly unintended effects of the changes in Scotland that replaced the upfront tuition fees with an income contin-gent loan. Richards illustrates, how, in Scotland, the abandonment of an upfront, but means-tested, tuition fee was to the substantial finan-cial advantage to upper middle income families who formerly paid tuition but were now excused from doing so, and to the disadvantage to all students, who now were assessed the tuition, albeit in the form of a loan, and a special disadvantage to low income students, who heretofore (or whose families were heretofore) excused from tuition via the means test, but who now had to pay the full amount of tuition. It is also a good treatment of the complexity of means testing, pre-senting, in the end, proposals for reform both for Wales and for the remainder of the UK (England and Northern Ireland).

Rodrigues, Anthony J., and Shim O. Wandiga. (1997). Cost Sharing in Public Universities: A Kenyan Case. Higher Education Policy Journal, (1997) 10 (1), 55-80.

Using the Kenya case, this article discusses government policies and existing cost sharing mechanisms within a framework of the key policy issues (access, equity and educational quality) involved in the cost and financing of university education. Based on simu-lations of loan schemes at the micro and macro levels the article


recommends that the Higher Education Loans Board strengthen its means-testing procedures, development an efficient loan recovery system and retain interest below the market rate. It also recom-mends that universities set aside 5 percent of the income that they receive from tuition fees to award scholarships based on academic merit.

Rozada, Martin Gonzalez and Alicia Menendez. (2002). Public University in Argentina: Subsidizing the Rich. Economics of Education Review, 21, 341-351.

The article points out that given that 90 percent of the students in the tuition free higher education sector have higher than median per capita family income and that the poor tend to be excluded from higher education, there is an implicit transfer of wealth to the rich. The authors argue that charging tuition fees and implementing mean-tested scholarships and student loan programs would improve the system’s equity and efficiency.

Ruch, Richard S. (2001). Higher Ed, Inc. The Rise of the For-Profit University. Baltimore and London: The Johns Hopkins University Press.

The book examines the rise of the for-profit higher education sector and specifically those colleges and universities that are regionally accredited, degree-granting institutions that offer associate, bach-elors, master’s and doctorate degrees and are owned and operated by publicly traded for-profit corporations. The author identifies 10 distinctions between private for-profit and non-profit higher educa-tion institutions including, most importantly, the fact that private institutions are tax paying rather than tax exempt, have investors versus donors, and have private investment capital instead of endow-ment. He shows that for-profits institutions have leaned much from traditional non-profit institutions and have “taken the traditional model of higher education… and subjected it to modern principles of operations management, cost accounting, financial management and marketing.” He theorizes that non-profit colleges and universi-ties could learn from the for-profit sector in terms improving their responses to market forces, adapting their organizational structure, redefining their governance structure, and developing a strong cus-tomer orientation.

Ruppert, Sandra S. (2003). Closing the College Participation Gap, A National Summary. Denver, CO: Center for Community College Policy.

The report identifies three warning signs for the future of US higher education. The first is that the US is falling behind other developed


nations in terms of college participation. The second is evidence that adults, low-income populations and members of certain ethnic groups are most at risk for losing access to higher education. The third is the fact that demographic and economic forces are limiting states’ ability to protect, much less expand, college access. The report, which is aimed in particular at state policy makers, outlines five priorities that can help them address these challenges.

St. John, Edward P. (2003). Refinancing the College Dream, Access, Equal Opportunity, and Justice for Taxpayers. Baltimore, MD and London: The Johns Hopkins University Press.

The book argues that the growing gap in higher education partici-pation rates between low- and high-income groups over the past thirty years is due to the decreased availability of federal funds. The author suggests that improved coordination between state and fed-eral agencies and better targeting of grant aid can improve access for low-income students without penalizing taxpayers.

St. John, Edward P. (1994). Prices, Productivity, and Investment: Assessing Financial Strategies in Higher Education. ASHE ERIC Higher Education Reports, no. 3, pp. 1‑135.

College costs are extremely controversial. St. John explains why and assesses differing financial strategy contributions and deterrents to the major issues in higher education finance, one of the most important being how to mediate the negative effects of increased privatization.

St. John, Edward P., Choong-Geun Chung, Glenda D. Musoba, Ada B. Simmons, Ontario S. Wooden and Jesse P. Mendex. (2004). Expanding College Access: the Impact of State Finance Strategies. Indianapolis, IN: Lumina Foundation for Education Research Report. Available at: http://www.luminafoundation.org/publications/fiscalindicators/FiscalIndicators.pdf

The report looks at the impact of state finance strategies (tuition, need-based grants and non-need grants) on academic preparation for, and access to, higher education. Using NCES, NASSGAP and other data for the 1992, 1994, 1996, 1998 and 2000 fiscal years, the study found that college enrollment rates for high school graduates were influenced by system capacity and state financial strategies. The findings support the case for coordination of need-based state grants with public sector tuition charges and for state-federal collaboration.


St. John, Edward P. and Michael D. Parsons (Eds.). (2004). Public Funding of Higher Education, Changing Context and New Rationales. Baltimore, MD and London: The Johns Hopkins University Press.

The editors argue that the rationale for public funding of higher education has broken down in recent years and that both liberals and conservatives are questioning its legitimacy, albeit for different reasons. Contributors describe the changing nature of the politics of higher education and the ways in which policy decisions are informed more by political rationales that are in line with specific interests than by policy research. In the final chapter, St. John argues that three steps are necessary to generate policy research. The first is to recognize that there are divergent claims about policies and outcomes. The second is to design studies that test these claims. The third is to avoid interpreting all information in terms of a single pri-ority (be it the basic right for education, the equity aspects of college finance or the efficiency aspect of finance and education reform) and instead use it to facilitate debate about the interactions and potential balance between the three issues.

Salerno, Carlo. (2004). Rapid Expansion and Extensive Deregulation: The Development of Markets for Higher Education in the Netherlands. In Pedro Teixeira, Ben Jongbloed, David Dill and Alberto Amaral (Eds.), Markets in Higher Education. Rhetoric or Reality? (pp. 271-290). Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

The paper looks at the transformation of the Dutch higher education system from one characterized by state control to one guided by the market resulting in more choice for students, more institutional autonomy, increased competition among institutions and retained quality. The paper points out that there are still some regulatory poli-cies, like tuition setting, that should be phased out and that some results of rapid deregulation need to be looked at.

Salerno, Carlo. (2002). Higher Education in Sweden. Country Report. Higher Education Monitor. Enschede, the Netherlands: Center for Higher Education Policy Studies. Available at: http://www.utwente.nl/cheps/documenten/sweden.pdf

Country study for Sweden produced as part of the CHEPS Higher Education Monitor, an ongoing research project that aims at provid-ing education policy makers with current information on national higher educational systems. The study provides information on the structure of the Swedish tertiary education sector and on institu-tional finance and student support.


Salmi, Jamil. (1999). Student Loans in International Perspective: The World Bank Experience. Washington, DC: The World Bank. Available at: www1.worldbank.org/education/lifelong_learning/publications/stu-dent_loans.pdf

This report reviews the international experience with student loan schemes in terms of (a) types of ownership and purpose of the insti-tution managing the program, (b) scope of the program in terms of geographical or institutional eligibility, and (c) the organizational setup. It points out common problems in student loans, and dis-cusses the World Bank’s experience of and suggestions about the principal challenges in the course of developing or strengthening student loan schemes.

Samoff, Joel and Bidemi Carrol. (2004). Conditions, Coalitions, and Influence: The World Bank and Higher Education in Africa. Paper pre-sented at the Annual Conference of the Comparative and International Education Society, March 8 –12 in Salt Lake City.

Prepared for UNESCO’s Forum on Higher Education, Research and Knowledge and presented at the 2004 CIES conference, the paper addresses the view that the World Bank is partially account-able for the deterioration of Africa’s universities and the decline in its higher education sector in general. The paper traces the World Bank’s higher education policy shifts over the past thirty years and concludes that while it has both directly and indirectly influenced higher education in Africa, its policies have generally also responded to significant local interests. The authors caution that accepting World Bank funding also implies accepting an external orientation that can undermine intellectual independence.

Sanyal, Bikas C. (1998). Diversification of Sources and the Role of Privatization in Financing Higher Education in the Arab States Region. IIEP Contributions No. 30. Paris, France: International Institute for Educational Planning – UNESCO. Available at: http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0011/001142/114203e.pdf

Despite the economic weakness of 16 Arab countries discussed in the book, the region continues to expand its higher education facili-ties. Most striking about this expansion is that it is done at a time that the share of the public purse allocated to higher education is decreasing. To enable the higher education system to educate as many students as possible, several policies could be adopted, but different modes of privatization, the book argues, would appear to be the most effective. The advantages and disadvantages of privati-


zation are discussed, and the strategies that Arab states could adopt regarding privatization are outlined.

Sanyal, Bikas and Michaela Martin. (1998). Managing Higher Education with Special Reference to Financial Management in African Universities. In UNESCO Regional Office (Dakar-Senegal) Higher Education in Africa: Achievements, Challenges, and Prospects. Paris: UNESCO.

This article presents diverse concepts and issues encompassing financial management in African universities. Included in the article are: the context of financial management, mechanisms of govern-ment finance, functions and practices of financial management, acquisition and mobilization of resources, management of cash reserves, allocation of resources, and evaluation and auditing.

Sawyerr, Akilagpa. (2004). Challenges Facing African Universities, Selected Issues. Accra, Ghana: Association of African Universities.Available at: http://www.aau.org/english/documents/asa-challengesfigs.pdf

A wide-ranging overview of the issues facing African universities in the context of globalization, rising demand for enrollment and decreasing government resources. The challenges of access and social equity, quality and relevance, and system diversification are explored and the coping strategies that universities adapt in the face of these challenges are described.

Schaferbarthold, Dieter. (1999). The Financing and Cost of Studies in Germany. European Journal of Education, 34(1), 69-74.

This paper analyzes the cost of postsecondary studies in Germany, direct public support for students, other forms of financial support to students and their parents, and parental support and the finan-cial contribution of students. It summarizes the different models currently under discussion. Priority seems to be given to an arrange-ment whereby each student would receive a contribution of some DM 400, independent of parental income and a second amount (half of which would be a grant and half an interest free loan) related to parental income. This public system of financial support would also cover periods spent studying abroad.

Scherschel, Patricia M. (2000). Student Debt Levels Continue to Rise, Stafford Indebtedness: 1999 Update. USA Group Foundation New Agenda Series, Volume 2, No. 3. Indianapolis, IN: USA Group. Available at: http://www.luminafoundation.org/publications/debtburden.pdf

This report is based on a series of statistical reports drawn from the borrower account database of USA Group Loan Services, and there-


fore does not cover any Stafford loans served by other companies, Federal Perkins loans, private education loans, or credit card debts. It presents the indebtedness figures for four different categories of bor-rowers (graduate students, undergraduates, proprietary students, and students enrolled in community college and other two- and three-year institutions), as well as several payment-stress indicators.

Schofield, Allan. (1996). Private Post-Secondary Education in Four Commonwealth Countries. UNESCO/ACU-CHEMS Joint Action Plan in Higher Education Management. Paris, France: UNESCO.

This study report is aimed at providing updated information about private post-secondary education in selected Commonwealth coun-tries (Australia, Nigeria, Pakistan, and Malaysia), and in particular at examining both trends and operational issues in some detail. The study was undertaken to design, disseminate and analyze an international survey in private post-secondary education, and to prepare a report containing summaries of country data, and the criteria used by governments to authorize the establishment, accreditation and monitoring of private post-secondary education institutions.

Schrag, Philip G. (2001). The Federal Income-Contingent Repayment Option for Law Student Loans. Hofstra Law Review, 29(3), 771-772.

Aimed at exploring the potential of the income contingent loan repayment (ICR) option to help law students with high-debts, this study describes the objectives and history of ICR legislation and analyzes findings from a survey of law students and their financial advisors. The study identifies the advantages and disadvantages of ICR compared with standard repayment and with other long-term repayment plans and concludes with recommendations on ICR for students, financial aid advisors, and policy makers.

Shattock, Michael (Ed.). (2004). Entrepreneurialism and the Transformation of Russian Universities. Paris: International Institute for Educational Planning. Available at: http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0013/001390/139013e.pdf

A series of case studies by Russian and non-Russian authors that document the financing and management transformations that are taking place in Russian higher education.

Shen, Hong and Wenli Li. (2003). A Review of the Student Loans Scheme in China. Policy Research and Dialogue, Student Loan Schemes in Asia, Vol. 1, N. 2. Bangkok, Thailand: UNESCO Asia and Pacific Regional


Bureau for Education and Paris: IIEP. Available at: http://www2.unescobkk.org/ips/ebooks/documents/studentloan/index.htm

Part of a new series on government-sponsored student loan schemes in Asia, the monograph reviews the student loans scheme in China. The monograph provides background on China’s aggressive entry into cost sharing with its 1997 imposition of fees on all students throughout the country and describes its attempts to introduce some kind of student loans in order to maintain accessibility in the face of tuition charges that are quite high, given the per capita income of most Chinese families. The monograph describes the two prin-cipal student loan schemes: the General Commercial Student Loan Scheme (GCSLS) and the Government Subsidized Student Loan Scheme (GSSLS). Although the GSSLS program is very new, the monograph identifies major problems including the absence of government guarantees, and very short repayment periods that will likely limit its ability to make much of a difference in the enhancement of ter-tiary-level educational participation in China. A useful and detailed report on China’s initial attempts to implement their own version of what is always a complex program of capitalization, cost recovery, and attempts to expand university participation.

Shouxin, Li and Mark Bray. (1992). Attempting a Capitalist Form of Financing in a Socialist System: Student Loans in The Peoples Republic of China. Higher Education, 23(4), 375‑387.

Written in 1992 just five years after the initiation of the first stu-dent loan program in China, the article looks at what it calls a very capitalist form of financing higher education and its operation in a socialist system. The main characteristics of the loan program are reviewed and several problems pointed out. While the loan pro-gram was ostensibly created to allow for some recovery of higher education costs, the authors argue that given its fairly relaxed terms (interest free, one year grace period, and provisions for cancellation), the program in fact puts more emphasis on non-economic objec-tives. The program in no longer operative and has been superceded by the government-subsidized student loan program begun experi-mentally in several cities in 1998, and then nationwide in 2000. The new program is described in Shen, Hong and Wenli Li (2002) A Review of the Student Loan Scheme in China, Final Report prepared for UNESCO-Bangkok.

Ssebuwufu, John P. M. (2002). University Financing and Management Reforms: The Experience of Makerere University. In Mwamila, Burton, Issa Omari and Eva Mbuya (Eds.), International Conference on Financing


Higher Education in Eastern and Southern Africa (pp. 86-95). Dar es Salaam, Tanzania: University of Dar es Salaam.

The article gives a historical background of Makerere University in Uganda from the time it was established as a technical school to its present status as one of best universities in East Africa. It further discusses the administrative, academic, and financial reforms that the university has carried out in its transformation from a publicly funded to a partially private institution.

State PIRGs’ Higher Education Project. (2002). Private Loans: Who’s Borrowing and Why: Private Label Borrowing by Students Outside the Federal Loan Programs. Washington, DC: State PIRGs’ Higher Education Project. Available at: http://pirg.org/highered/highered.asp?id2=9609&id3=highered&

This report analyzes private borrowing by students, using data from the 1999-2000 Department of Education’s National Postsecondary Student Aid Survey (NPSAS), to better understand what factors drive students to take out private education loans. Family income, students’ costs of attendance, and borrowing in the federal programs are some of the factors discussed in this analysis. The report presents three key findings: small percentages of students took out private loans: 3.6 percent of students overall took on private debt, and among Stafford borrowers, only 10 percent borrowed privately. Nearly 24 percent of students with private debt did not borrow any Stafford loans, and 26 percent borrowed less than the available maximum Stafford loan; nearly three quarters of private borrowers did not have demonstrated financial need, defined by the federal government as additional costs of attendance beyond federal loan, work-study and grant assistance.

Steyn, Gert and Pierre de Villiers. (2006). The Impact of Changing Funding Sources on Higher Education Institutions in South Africa. Pretoria, South Africa: The Council on Higher Education.

This research report, prepared as part of a larger Rockefeller Foundation funded project, describes the different sources of higher education funding in South Africa, how they have changed over time and the impact of these changes on the institutions and the students. It concludes that even in light of the global trend of decreas-ing government investment in higher education, the level of higher education funding by the South African government is low compared to international standards, that higher education institutions are increasing tuition fees to compensate for lower government funding, and that both trends have worrying implications for access.


Stringer, William L., Alisa F. Cunningham with Jamie P. Merisotis, Jane V. Wellman and Colleen T. O’Brian. (1999). Cost, Price and Public Policy: Peering into the Higher Education Black Box. USA Group Foundation New Agenda Series, Vol. 1, No. 3. Indianapolis, IN: USA Group Foundation. Available at: http://www.luminafoundation.org/publica-tions/blackbox.pdf

This report is intended to serve as a primer on costs (the overall expenditure patterns, or what institutions spend in support of their missions) and prices (the charges to students and other consumers). It includes a conceptual framework for analyzing costs and prices by evaluating the higher education production function, and the determinants of both prices and costs. The analysis suggests that greater use of available data will enhance understanding of cost and price structures within higher education and help individual insti-tutions ensure that their financing decisions are compatible with institutional goals. In addition, it can inform decisions about public finance strategies, such as aligning subsidies with other resources to achieve the greatest good.

Stumpf, Rolf. (1996). An Overview of Financing the Higher Education System in Education Reform in South Africa. A Salzburg Seminar Special Report of Reform Recommendations of the South African National Commission on Higher Education, May 4-11, 1996.

In this overview, three issues related to financing of higher edu-cation in Africa are discussed. The issues in question are: cost sharing principles, private provision of higher education, and ear-marked funding, all of these discussed in the context of redress and equity. Regarding cost sharing principles, it is recommended that it is appropriate for South Africa to continue financing higher education through state subsidy, tuition, and other fees because of the widely-accepted notion that private and public benefits accrue from higher education. On private provision of higher education and funding, the report raises concern about subsidization of pri-vate higher education through public funds. An argument that state subsidization of private higher education may degenerate into state control and interference is also raised.

Sundt, Melora. (1993). Postsecondary Education Financing: International Comparative Models. In Background Papers and Reports. Washington, DC: National Commission on Responsibilities for Financing Postsecondary Education.

This chapter is in a volume of background papers and reports complied and published by the National Commission on


Responsibilities for Financing Postsecondary Education as a sup-plement to its main published report, which was requested by the US Congress and reported in 1993. The National Commission, while independent, was clearly expected by a partisan Republican congress to find considerable fault with US higher education and its presumed profligacy. The commission did not find the expected (and presumably hoped for) wastefulness, although it did cau-tion universities to make more effort both to contain costs and to preserve accessibility. Sundt’s chapter provides some interesting perspectives on European countries facing similar dilemmas in higher education finance, including increasing costs and growing demand.

Sutherland, Carla. (2001). The Limits of Marketization of Higher Education in Sub-Saharan Africa. A Case Study of Student Financing at Makerere University in Uganda. Paper presented at Conference on Globalization and Higher Education: Views from the South. Cape Town, South Africa, March 27-29, 2001.

This paper primarily based on fieldwork undertaken in 1998, explores the impact of marketization of higher education in Uganda, and questions of equity and efficiency. The paper also addresses the question of sustainable marketization of higher education by look-ing at the way in which students are currently financing their studies through costs bone to themselves and their families.

Swail, Watson Scott. (2003). The Affordability of University Education, An Analysis of Higher Education in Canada and the United States. Washington, DC: Educational Policy Institute supported by the Canada Millennium Scholarship Foundation. Available at: http://www.educationalpolicy.org/pdf/Affordability.pdf

The study deals with two questions: how do Canadians differ in access to postsecondary education, specifically at the university level, compared to Americans, and how affordable is the Canadian system compared to that of the United States. Data in this report confirm that access rates in Canada and the United States are strikingly similar. With respect to affordability, tuition and fee charges and total costs of attendance are considerably lower in Canada. However, American students receive almost twice as much grant aid as do Canadian students, and have access to significantly more loan aid. When compared with costs of attendance, total aid covers 33 percent of the bill in Canada, and 60 percent in the United States. The study finds that the net cost for a university education in Canada is 32 percent higher than in the United States.


Swail, Watson Scott and Donald Heller. (2004). Changes in Tuition Policy, Natural Policy Experiments in Five Countries. Washington, DC: Educational Policy Institute. Available at: http://www.educationalpolicy.org/pdf/tuitionpolicy.pdf

This study is focused on the relationship between tuition pricing and enrollment trends in ten regions of five countries. The researchers collected data from each jurisdiction to analyze the impact of fees on enrollment. Five policy strategies in ten international jurisdictions are elaborated in this report: 1) Tuition freezes in Quebec and British Columbia, 2) tuition reductions in Manitoba and Newfoundland and Labrador, 3) abolition of tuition fees in Ireland, 4) introduction of tuition fees in UK and Australia, and 5) tuition in a competitive, free environment in USA. This report concludes with discussions and implications for public policy.

System Three. (1999). Attitudes to Student Financial Support Systems. Interim report prepared for: Independent Committee of Inquiry into Student Finance, Edinburgh, Scotland: Independent Committee of Inquiry into Student Finance.

This qualitative study explores the experience of being a student in Scotland, and more specifically, it focuses on student attitudes towards, and experiences of, student loans, tuition fees and debt. In exploring these issues, the study examines which factors influ-ence the students’ decisions to enter higher education. There are a number of different groups included in the research on this ques-tion – school pupils, students, parents, and “rejecters” (the name given by researchers for those young people who, despite having sufficient qualifications to enter further or higher education had opted for paid employment). In addition, the study looks at actual and perceived costs of being a student, and how students meet these costs. Separate sections in the study are devoted to student debt, and the perceived value of education in terms of income foregone, debt and potential earnings.

Task Force on Financial Sustainability of Higher Education in Tanzania. (1998). Financial Sustainability of Higher Education in Tanzania. Ministry of Science, Technology and Higher Education, Dar es Salaam.

The report grew out of the research and consultative work carried out over a period of five months in 1998 by the Task Force on Financial Sustainability of Higher Education in Tanzania. The report’s recom-mendations address both demand and supply side reforms in order to address what they define as the precarious state of higher educa-tion. These recommendations include an increase in the proportion


of GDP spent on education and an increase in the portion of the education budget allocated to higher education, a decrease in unit costs by higher education institutions and use of an output based allocation strategy and the introduction of cost-sharing Phase III to increase student contributions.

Task Force on Higher Education and Society. (2000). Higher Education in Developing Countries, Peril and Promises. Washington, DC: World Bank. Available at: http://www.tfhe.net/report/readreport.htm

Convened by the World Bank and UNESCO to examine the current state of higher education in developing countries and its expected future, the Task Force produced this report based on two years of research and intensive discussion and hearings. The report emphasizes the critical, and often under-recognized, importance of higher education to national social and economic development and reviews the continuing problems and new challenges that it faces (poor quality faculty, overcrowding, inadequate infrastructure, insufficient resources and autonomy, rapidly increasing enroll-ments etc.) The report goes on to identify four main areas where immediate action is needed including funding, resources, gover-nance and curriculum development in science and technology and general education. Although not an official report of the World Bank, this report continues the Bank’s efforts since the mid 1990s to seem more supportive of public investments in higher education in developing countries.

Task Force on Improvement of Higher Education. (2002, March). Improvement of Higher Education in Pakistan: Challenges and Opportunities. Islamabad, Pakistan: Task Force on Improvement of Higher Education.

This report identifies some prominent issues afflicting higher educa-tion in Pakistan: ineffective governance and management structures and practices, inefficient use of available resources, inadequate funding, poor recruitment practices and inadequate development of faculty and staff, inadequate attention to research and support for it, and politicization of faculty, staff and students. Some recom-mendations are made for both public and private institutions.

Teekens, Hanneke and Ben Jongbloed (Eds.). (2000). The Financing of Higher Education in Sub-Saharan Africa. Utretch, the Netherlands: Lemma.

This book contains the proceedings of a two-day conference (The Hague, March 21-23, 2000) held under the auspices of NUFFIC and


CHEPS that focused on the financing of higher education in sub-Saharan Africa. The book proposes changes in funding policies and strategies for managing and generating resources that are required for stimulating African universities to make a greater contribution to the development of their nations.

Teferra, Damtew and Philip Altbach (Eds.). (2003). African Higher Education Reference Guide and Handbook. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.

This book is a basic source and guide on various themes in African higher education. The major portion of the book consists of chapters on each African nation. Financing and funding patterns of higher education are among the major themes discussed in this book.

Teixeira, Pedro, Bruce Johnstone, Maria Joao Rosa and Hans Vossensteyn (Eds.). (2006). Cost-Sharing and Accessibility in Western Higher Education: A Fairer Deal. Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Springer Science + business Media (formerly Klewer Academic Publishing).

A collection of papers on cost-sharing in the so-called mature econo-mies (essentially the countries of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development [OECD]), written for the Fourth Annual Douro (Portugal) Seminar held in August 2004, organized under the auspices of the Center for Higher Education Policy Studies in Matosinhos Portugal and HEDDA, a consortium of European centers on higher education research based at the University of Oslo. Chapters are by Per Olaf Aamodt (Norway), Alberto Amaral (Portugal), Claire Callendar (UK), Bruce Chapman (Australia), Ross Finnie (Canada), Donald Heller (US), Ben Jongbloed (the Netherlands), Bruce Johnstone (US), Pedro Teixeira (Portugal), Alex Usher (Canada), Hans Vossensteyn (the Netherlands), Maureen Woodhall (UK), Frank Ziegele (Germany).

Teixeira, Pedro, Ben Jongbloed, Alberto Amaral and David Dill (Eds.). (2004). Markets in Higher Education. Rhetoric or Reality? Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

A collection of papers that were presented at the Douro III: Markets in Higher Education – Mature Economies seminar held in Portugal in September 2003. The papers review the advantages and disad-vantages of the market’s introduction into higher education and its implications for access, equity and quality.

Tekleselassie, Abebayehu and D. Bruce Johnstone. (2004). Means Testing: The Dilemma of Targeting Subsidies in African Higher


Education. Journal of Higher Education in Africa. 2(2), 135-158. Abstract available at: http://www.bc.edu/bc_org/avp/soe/cihe/africaHEjournal/journal_home.htm

The article explores the difficulties inherent in the use of means testing, a form of subsidy targeting, to distribute higher education subsidies based on need or ability to pay in Africa. Given that income in Africa is often hidden due to the nature of the economy, the use of categorical indicators such as race/tribe/ethnicity, parents education, assets, etc. is often used to determine a student’s ability to pay for higher education. The article argues that while these measures are not perfect, they do provide some rough justice that is preferable to equal subsidies to all regardless of their ability to pay.

Theisens, Henno. (2003). Higher Education in the United Kingdom. Country Report. Higher Education Monitor. Enschede, the Netherlands: Center for Higher Education Policy Studies (CHEPS). Available at: http://www.utwente.nl/cheps/documenten/unitedkingdom.pdf

Country study for the United Kingdom produced as part of the CHEPS Higher Education Monitor, an ongoing research project that aims at providing education policy makers with current informa-tion on national higher educational systems. Each study provides information on the structure of the tertiary education sector. The reports provide excellent information on institutional finance and student support.

Thomas, Phil and Ashima Arora. (2002). Poverty, Privilege and Access to the Legal Profession: Barriers to Equality of Access for Law Students. Welsh Journal of Education (Special International Issue on Paying for Learning: The Debate on Student Fees, Grants and Loans in International Perspective), 11 (1), 95-106.

The article looks at the influence of poverty and student financial support on access to higher education and law training, student performance and subsequent employment. It finds that the over-whelming majority of law students come from wealthier families and that those less privileged student who must work during the semester generally receive lower results. It also finds that students from wealthier families, especially those that attended the older more prestigious universities, tend to find higher paying, more prestigious, jobs. Based on these findings, the author calls for mea-sures that would increase the number of poorer student enrolled in prestigious universities and provide adequate financial support during their studies.


Tight, Malcolm (Ed.). (2003). Access and Exclusion. International Perspectives on Higher Education Research Series, Volume 2, JAI, Elsevier Science.

The volume features some of the variety of research being under-taken on higher education systems and issues outside of North America. It covers developments in selected European countries, South Africa and Australia. The volume examines the impact of dif-ferential access to, or exclusion from, higher education based on students’ social class, wealth, ethnicity, sex, age, religion, and loca-tion on the students themselves, on academics and higher education managers, on the content of the curriculum and on teaching and learning approaches. It examines how access and exclusion relate to disciplines and what counts as academic knowledge; and how the issues of higher education are treated in mass media.

Tilak, Jandhyala B.G. (1997). The Dilemma of Reforms in Financing Higher Education. Higher Education Policy, 10 (1), 7‑2 1.

Higher education in India is at cross roads. It has started experienc-ing significant stress with respect to financing, particularly since the introduction of adjustment policies in India in 1990. Hence the need for mobilization of additional resources for higher education becomes more urgent. Tilak proposes measures/ solutions that can be experimented with caution. According to him, attempts can be made to mobilize non-governmental resources from students in the form of marginal increase in fees, student loan programs can be revitalized to generate some resources, and attempts may be made to augment resources from the private corporate sector by forging effect university- industry relations. Tilak cautions that these measures can be successful only if the government does not reduce its role in funding higher education significantly and if none of the measures aim to reduce the demand for higher education.

Tilak, Jandhyala B.G. and Geetha Rani (Eds.). (2000). University Finances in India: A Profile. New Delhi, India: National Institute of Educational Planning and Administration.

This book consists of a selection of papers presented at a National Seminar on Education Finance, organized by the National Institute of Education Planning and Administration (NIEPA). In the first chapter “Pattern of Financing Education”, Jandhyala Tilak provides a detailed statistical and analytical profile of various public education expenditure trends in India and Shailbala Debi reviews the trends


and problems of state financing of elementary education in Orissa. The second chapter “State Versus Markets in Education” discusses the changing roles of the public and private sectors in education. The third chapter “Financial Reforms in Higher Education” examines bet-ter methods of mobilizing and allocating non-government resources. The fourth chapter “Grants-in-aid to Education” reviews the pattern of grants-in-aid to education in Uttar Pradesh, examines the levels of grants-in-aid to local bodies for school education in several states in India, and reviews the role of the local bodies and the state gov-ernment in financing education in Tamilnadu. The final chapter

“Household Expenditure on Education” concentrates on various dimen-sions of household expenditures on education based on a national survey conducted by the NCAER.

Tiron, Stefan et al. (2003). Higher Education in the Republic of Moldova. UNESCO/European Center for Higher Education (CEPES). Bucharest, Romania: CEPES/UNESCO. Available at: http://www.cepes.ro/publica-tions/pdf/moldova.pdf

This volume is one in a series of monographs on higher education in different countries. This particular edition describes the develop-ment of the higher education system in the Republic of Moldova. Until the dissolution of Soviet Union, Moldova’s education was fully integrated into the Soviet system of education and science. Transition, that began when Moldova became an independent state in 1991, has led to market oriented changes in Moldova’s higher education enterprise. This volume discusses recent developments and addresses such aspects as governance and finance of higher education, institutional patterns and changes in student enrollments and mobility, access to higher education, faculty structure and aca-demic work.

Tres, Jaoquim and Francesco Lopez Segrera (Eds.). (2005). Higher Education in the World 2006: The Financing of Universities. Barcelona, Spain: Global University Network for Innovation (GUNI) published by Palgrave Macmillan.

This book is timely and well-edited compilation of papers pre-pared for the World Report on Higher Education: The Financing of Universities II international Barcelona Conference on Higher Education, Barcelona, Spain, November 28-December 2, 2005. Chapters include such international higher education finance experts as: Arthur Hauptman, Bruce Johnstone, Jan Sadlak, Bikas Sanyal, Jamil Salmi, Jandhyala Tilak, Maureen Woodhall and others.


Trombley, William. (2003). The Rising Price of Higher Education, College Affordability in Jeopardy, A Special Supplement to National Crosstalk. San Jose, CA: The National Center for Public Policy and Higher Education.

The article focuses on divergent trends in financing higher educa-tion in the US that emerged after the recession struck in 2001. Data presented in this article shows the worst fiscal news for the US public higher education and their students in at least a decade. According to this report state spending for public colleges and universities dropped sharply while tuition and required fee charges rose significantly in many states. In addition, many states reduced their student financial aid programs. The article also includes a summary on state-by-state appropriations for higher education, tuition and fees, and changes in state per capita personal income for fiscal years 2002 and 2003.

UNESCO Regional Office for Education in Africa. (1998). Higher Education in Africa: Achievements, Challenges and Prospects. Dakar, Senegal: UNESCO.

A compilation of articles on higher education in Africa published by the UNESCO Regional office in Dakar that covers such issues as rel-evance, quality, financing and accessibility. Case studies are included for a number of countries and the issues of revenue diversification and cost sharing are explicitly discussed.

UNESCO Institute for Statistics. (2003). Financing Education – Investments and Returns, Analysis of the World Education Indicators. 2002 Edition, Executive Summary, UNESCO and OECD.

This is an executive summary of the complete report that seeks to analyze the education indicators developed through the OECD/UNESCO World Education Indicators (WEI) program. The report addresses the financing of education systems by examining spend-ing and investment strategies in WEI countries (Argentina, Brazil, Chile, China, Egypt, India, Indonesia, Jamaica, Jordon, Malaysia, Paraguay, Peru, the Philippines, the Russian Federation, Sri Lanka, Thailand, Tunisia, Uruguay and Zimbabwe). It looks at the ratio-nale for public spending, how public resources are distributed across levels of education and the role of the private sector both as a provider of educational services and a source of educational expenditure.

United States Department of Education. (2001). National Postsecondary Student Aid Study: Student Financial Aid Estimates for 1999-2000. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics.

This report begins with a discussion of the percentage of undergrad-


uates receiving various types of financial aid, the sources of the aid, and the average award amounts in 1999-2000. The focus is on loans and grants at the four major types of institutions where undergradu-ates were enrolled: public 2-year, public 4-year, private not-for-profit 4-year, and private for-profit postsecondary institutions. In addition to the loans received in 1999-2000, there is also a description of the cumulative amount of federal loans that students had ever borrowed as undergraduates. The report also includes a compendium of tables that describe tuition, total price of attendance, and the various types and sources of financial aid in more detail by institutional and stu-dent characteristics.

United States Department of Education and the U.S. General Accounting Office. (2001). Alternative Market Mechanisms for the Student Loan Program. Report GAO-02-84SP. Washington, DC: U.S. General Accounting Office. Available at: http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d0284sp.pdf

A report by the US Department of Education and the US General Accounting Office that summarizes and evaluates four market mechanism models (loan origination rights auction, loan sale, fed-eral funding and market-set rate) for use in determining lender return on student loans. The report also reviews adjustments that could be made to the current system and includes a chapter on the income-contingent repayment option and its inclusion in the market mechanism models.

United States General Accounting Office. (2002). Student Aid and Tax Benefits, Report to Congressional Committees. Report GAO-02-751. Washington, DC: U.S. General Accounting Office. Available at: http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d02751.pdf

The report reports on the use of the U.S. tax code (tax credits, allowed deductions for interest on student loans, and income tax exclusions for earnings of state sponsored college savings and prepaid tuition plans) as a policy tool to assist students in financing higher educa-tion. The report concludes that more than 4 in 10 undergraduate students were provided with benefits via the Lifetime learning and HOPE tax credits and that 70 percent of undergraduate students are assisted by title IV student aid (federal grant and loan programs) and higher education tax credits taken together. Finally, the report points to the critical need for additional research on the effects of higher education tax credits on college attendance and choice, completion and costs.


United States General Accounting Office. (1997). Direct Student Loans. Analyses of Borrowers’ Use of the Income Contingent Repayment Option. GAOHEHS-97-155. Washington, DC: U.S. General Accounting Office.Available at: http://www.gao.gov/archive/1997/he97155.pdf

Report by the GAO on the extent to which borrowers are using the income contingent repayment (ICR) plan compared with other repayment plans available under the Federal Direct Loan Program, and how their loan delinquencies, defaults and loan payments compare to those of borrowers with other repayment plans. It was found that only about 9 percent of borrowers were using ICR and that 40 percent of those that were using it were placed into this plan because they were in default on loans from the Federal Family Education Loan Program, which largely explains why borrowers using ICR tended to be delinquent or in default at higher percent-ages than other borrowers.

Usher, Alex. (2006). Grants for Students. What They Do, Why They Work. Toronto, ON: Educational Policy Institute. Available at: http://www.edu-cationalpolicy.org

This paper summarizes the literature on grants (defined as pay-ments made to a student at the start of a period of schooling) and their access to education. The author emphasizes that the ability of grants to change cost-benefit ratios is a crucial indicator in evaluat-ing their effectiveness. He concludes from the literature that grants have significant and disproportionate access effects for low-income students (compared to more well off students) because they are less likely than wealthier students to see higher education in a positive light and more likely to underestimate the returns to higher educa-tion. Therefore, grants more than loans “tip the balance” in favor of higher education.

Usher, Alex. (2005a). Global Debt Patterns. An International Comparison of Student Loan Burdens and Repayment Conditions. Canadian Higher Education Report Series. Toronto, ON: Educational Policy Institute. Available at: http://www.educationalpolicy.org

Based on research conducted for the Government of Canada, the paper looks at the specific nature of the debt burden shouldered by students in eight different countries (Australia, Canada, Germany, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Sweden, the United Kingdom and the United States) in terms of what they owe, their loan repayment conditions and the proportion of their post-graduation income that they need to devote to repayment.


Usher, Alex. (2005b). Much Ado About a Very Small Idea: Straight Talk on Income-Contingent Loans. Toronto, Canada: Educational Policy Institute. Available at: http://www.educationalpolicy.org

This paper describes the concept of income contingent loans in higher education finance and the (not necessarily accurate) claims made for (they are more efficient and promote increased access to education) and against (they tend to go hand in hand with tuition increases and they force graduate into higher paying, less socially useful careers) them. It goes on to point out that while Canada already has an income contingent student loan system (albeit one that the author would define as “soft” in that repayments revert to mortgage-style repayment system once an income threshold is reached) and, therefore, in its upcoming debate about ICR should be discussing which, if any, additional ICR features it should adopt, the general discussion is bound to miss these subtleties and focus on the old pro and con positions stated above.

Usher, Alex. (2004a). A New Measuring Stick. Is Access to Higher Education in Canada More Equitable? Toronto, Canada: Educational Policy Institute. Available at: http://www.educationalpolicy.org

Making the distinction between type I access to post-secondary educa-tion (how many people are attending) and type II access (who attends post-secondary education), the author argues that while type I access is fairly easy to measure using raw enrollment numbers and partici-pation rates and also fairly easy to compare across jurisdictions, type II access is more problematic as different measures (income level, race, socio-economic status) are used within and across countries making comparisons of inequality and evaluations of the relative effectiveness of government funding policies almost impossible. The author proposes using parental educational attainment as a new mea-sure of equality of education opportunity given that it is reliable, easy to collect, easy to use and understand, can be easily categorized, can be collected in all jurisdictions and has the same meaning in all juris-dictions. He uses this measure to calculate Educational Equity Index scores by multiplying the ratio between the percentage of males (or females) ages 45-64 in the general population (of a particular jurisdic-tion) with university credentials to the percentage of the student body (of a particular jurisdiction) whose fathers (or mothers) have univer-sity credentials by 100. The higher the Index, the more equitable the participation in higher education. The author goes on to use this tool to look at educational equity in Canada and test popular assertions that education equity rises as costs decline.


Usher, Alex. (2004b). Are the Poor Needy? Are the Needy Poor? The Distribution of Student Loans and Grants by Family Income Quartile in Canada. Educational Policy Institute, Canadian Higher Education Report Series. Stafford and Toronto, Canada: Educational Policy Institute.Available at: http://www.educationalpolicy.org

The report examines the assumption at the root of Canada’s student financial assistance system that high need students are also low-income students. The author argues that several of the need-based criteria (attending a more expensive program, living away from home and being “independent” of parents) actually favor students from upper-income families and funnel aid away from low-income students. Using national income, loan and grant data, the author shows that while children from poorer families receive more assistance than chil-dren from richer families, students from higher income backgrounds still receive over 40 percent of loan expenditures and 40 percent of student grants and proposes that to reach more low-income students a more direct income-targeting methods should be adopted.

Usher, Alex. (2004c). Who Gets What? The Distribution of Government Subsidies for post-Secondary Education in Canada. Educational Policy Institute, Canadian Higher Education Report Series. Stafford and Toronto, Canada: Educational Policy Institute. Available at: http://www.educationalpolicy.org

In this report the author argues that the distribution of Canada’s student financial assistance (via need-based loans and grants and universal benefits including tax credits and the Canada Education Savings Grant) is slightly regressive overall (with over 40 percent of grants and loans and 62 percent of the universal benefits going to students from families with above median incomes) and inconsis-tent with Canada’s strategy of assisting low income students.

Varghese, N.V. (2001a). The Limits to Diversification of Sources of Funding in Higher Education. Paris: UNESCO/International Institute for Educational Planning. Available at: http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0012/001292/129279e.pdf#xml =http://unesdoc.unesco.org/ulis/cgi-bin/ulis.pl?database=ged&set =43F8E77A_0_33&hits_rec=3&hits_lng=eng

Presented at the IMHE General Conference, Beyond the Entrepreneurial University? Global Challenges and Institutional Responses, at the OECD in Paris in 2000, the paper analyzes the ability of institutions to create and sustain income-generating activities, and overcome shortfalls in public contributions to higher


education. The paper concludes that entrepreneurial universities are desirable as long as the resources that they raise do not substitute, but rather supplement, government funds.

Varghese, N.V. (2001b). Impact of the Economic Crisis on Higher Education in East Asia: Country Experiences. Paris: IIEP/UNESCO. Available at: http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0012/001261/126192e.pdf#xml=http://unesdoc.unesco.org/ulis/cgibin/ulis.pl?database=ged&set=43F8E70D_0_31&hits_rec=4&hits_lng=eng

This volume, including three papers, is based on an International Institute for Educational Planning Policy Forum in 2001. The first paper by Varghese provides an overview of the major changes in the higher education sector in selected countries stemming from the economic crisis in East Asia. The impact of the crisis on higher education is analyzed at the household, institutional and macro levels. The other two papers analyze the crisis and its impact on higher education in Indonesia and Korea. In general, these changes include: 1) increases in student drop out rates, 2) shrinking of private universities, 3) decreases in study-abroad fellowships, 4) regulation changes, 5) inflows of study-abroad students, and 6) budget cuts in many universities.

Vossensteyn, Hans. (2005). Perceptions of Student Price-Responsiveness. Enschede, the Netherlands: The Center for Higher Education and Policy Studies (CHEPS). Available at: http://www.utwente.nl/cheps/publica-tions/downloadable_publications/downloadablesenglish.doc/

Using a behavioral economics framework to move beyond the tradi-tional economic theories of price theory and human capital theory, the author studies the relationships between financial incentives like tuition fees, grants and loans, students’ socio-economic status, other background variables, students’ perceptions of financial incentives and their actual study-related choices and explores the extent to which subjective perceptions play a role in these relationships. The study found that students from different socio-economic backgrounds do have different perceptions of financial incentives with students from lower SES backgrounds finding investment in higher education more risky, grants more important and expected future earnings lower. However, the study also found that these perceptual differences do not automatically lead to different choices and that there is no empiri-cal data in the Netherlands to support the argument that cost sharing has harmed access for disadvantaged students.


Vossensteyn, Hans. (2004a). Portability of Student Financial Support, An Inventory in 23 European Countries. Enschede, the Netherlands: The Center for Higher Education and Policy Studies (CHEPS). Available at: http://www.minocw.nl/documenten/bhw-106-bgo106.pdf

The report reviews the current practices in 23 European countries in terms of a student’s being permitted to carry his/her student aid abroad. The study found that student aid is much more portable for short-term study visits than for full-degree study abroad and that indirect support is much easier to use for study abroad than direct support.

Vossensteyn, Hans. (2004b). Student Financial Support, An Inventory in 24 European Countries. Enschede, the Netherlands: The Center for Higher Education and Policy Studies (CHEPS).Available at: http://www.minocw.nl/documenten/bhw-107-bgo107.pdf

Background report for the project on the portability of student finan-cial support that provides descriptions of the national tuition and student support arrangements in 24 countries.

Vossensteyn, Hans. (2003). Higher Education in Denmark, Country Report. The Higher Education Monitor. Enschede, the Netherlands: The Center for Higher Education and Policy Studies (CHEPS). Available at: http://www.utwente.nl/cheps/documenten/denmark.pdf

The study provides up-to-date information on higher education policy in Denmark and background information on the country’s educational infrastructure. Statistics and data analysis presented in the report highlight trends in Denmark’s higher education sector in the 1990s. It looks at access and selectivity, describes short, medium, and long cycle higher education, as well as the structure of post-grad-uate education. The study also describes the way higher education is financed in Denmark, paying special attention to student support policy. Separate parts of the report are devoted to research infrastruc-ture, higher education governance structures and quality assurance in Danish higher education.

Vossensteyn, Hans. (2002). Shared Interests, Shared Costs: Student Contributions in Dutch Higher Education. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 24(2), 145-154.

The article reviews the growing importance of the “cost sharing” phenomenon in the Netherlands in terms of rising tuition fees, decreased general grants, increased means-tested supplementary grants, the increased role of loans and the increased emphasis on parental contributions and students’ own resources and looks at


the impact of such cost sharing policies on student enrollment behavior. Similar to findings in a number of other countries, the article confirms that Dutch students (including those from lower socio-economic backgrounds) are not very sensitive to changes in financial arrangements in relation to their enrollment decisions and that student choice is more affected by level of parental education, performance in secondary education, and distance between home and higher education institutions.

Vossensteyn, Hans. (2001). Vouchers in Dutch Higher Education, from Debate to Experiment. Paper presented at FiBS-Conference 2001: Demand-led Education Financing, Cologne, Germany. Available at: http://www.utwente.nl/cheps/documenten/engpap01vouchers.pdf

Building on the assertion that demand driven funding of higher edu-cation institutions is becoming a fact in the Netherlands, Vossensteyn describes the discussion of, and ultimately experimentation with, vouchers, defined as the right of students to use a predetermined quantity of publicly funded education services, in higher education in the Netherlands. The experiment initiated in early 2001 involves ten institutions for professional higher education, six medium and small-scale business organizations and 1,000 students in the final two years of their programs. Vossensteyn reports on the varied pub-lic reactions to the current proposals and experiment.

Vossensteyn, Hans. (2000). Cost Sharing and Understanding Student Choice: Developments in Western Europe and Australia. Global Higher Education Exchange Conference: Paying for Higher Education: Emerging Trends, Challenges and Solutions. Enschede, the Netherlands: Center for Higher Education Policy Studies. Available at: http://www.gse.buffalo.edu/org/inthigheredfinance/publications2.html

The paper describes the major cost sharing trends in higher educa-tion in Europe and Australia and their impact on access. Based on the literature, it concludes that while students are relatively unre-sponsive to changes in financial arrangements in relation to their enrollment decisions, the results are ambiguous. For example, some studies have found that students from underprivileged backgrounds may be more likely to be deterred by price increases than students from middle- and high-income groups, that students may be more response to increases in tuition fees than to the increases in grants and that despite positive private rates of return to higher education, students – and especially those from poorer backgrounds - may be reluctant to take out loans. The paper proposes using a behavioral economic perspective that includes concepts such as loss aversion,


reference levels and the endowment effect to help explain the way that people react to financial incentives.

Vossensteyn, Hans. (1999a). Where in Europe Would People Like to Study? The Affordability of Higher Education in Nine Western European Countries. Higher Education, 37(2), 159‑76.

The focus of this article is the accessibility of higher education and the financial positions of students. In many countries, the afford-ability of higher education is an issue, particularly within those countries which have proposed to implement cost sharing policies. Within this context, nine Western European are examined repre-senting various systematic approaches to higher education and their impact on students and accessibility.

Vossensteyn, Hans. (1999b). The Financial Situation of Students in the Netherlands. European Journal of Education, 3(1), 59-68.

The article looks at the financial situation of students in the Netherlands in the late 1990s using data on student expenditure and sources of income (direct and indirect public support, support from parents, and student employment) from government and other institutional research. While it is difficult to provide an overview of the financial situation of all students in the Netherlands given the great variations between and within them, the data reveals that the income and expenses of students living at home comes closest to the norms used by the Ministry in their normative budget and that those living on their own have higher income and expenditure levels. It also reveals positive causal relationships between the par-ticipation of women and children from disadvantaged background in higher education and the introduction of the Student Finance Act in 1986 and between completion rates and duration of studies and the change toward an output-oriented funding of higher education institutions.

Vossensteyn, Hans and Carlo Salerno. (2002a). State Subsidence from the Federal Budget to Citizens of the Russian Federation to Cover Education, Tuition Fees, Considerations Regarding the Proposal for a System of State Subsidence for Education in the Russian Federation. Enschede, the Netherlands: Center for Higher Education Policy Studies.

A short summary of the authors’ conclusions regarding the Russian Federation’s plan to offer interest-free loans to tuition fee paying students in secondary professional or higher education. While impressed with the innovative nature of the plan, the authors are concerned by its complex nature and recommend the development


of a more transparent organization. They also recommend consider-ing scrapping the interest-free nature of the loan and adding a partial adjustment of outstanding debt for inflation.

Vossensteyn, Hans and Carlo Salerno. (2002b). State Subsidence in the Field of Education. A Commentary and International Reflection to the Proposal for a System of State Subsidence for Education in the Russian Federation. Enschede, the Netherlands: Center for Higher Education Policy Studies.

The paper analyzes the plan of the Russian Federation to offer inter-est-free loans to tuition fee-paying students (i.e. those students who do not qualify for free higher education) in secondary professional or higher education. These loans could be forgiven (or partially for-given) in the future if students study in certain locations or study certain subjects or if they accept certain jobs in particular areas after graduation. The loan system is aimed at widening access to stu-dents from particular areas and increasing participation in particular subjects. Regional and local authorities, education institutions, com-panies and public organizations would apply for the money and, in turn, pay the tuition fees (or part of the tuition fees) for particu-lar students who agree to repay that amount to the Federal Budget after graduation. Based on experiences in other countries, the paper reviews the strengths and weaknesses of the plan and concludes that some of the parameters of the loan program should be adjusted to strengthen its sustainability. These include limiting the number of loans that are forgiven, charging an interest rate equal to the rate of inflation and considering a more centralized system in which students only have to apply to one entity to avoid administrative confusion and politicization of the program.

Wagner, Alan. (1998). From Higher to Tertiary Education: Evolving Responses in the OECD Countries to Large Volume Participation. LCSHD Paper Series No. 34, The World Bank, Latin America and the Caribbean Regional Office.

Part of a series designed to offer policy options for Brazilian educa-tion, the paper looks at the responses of OECD countries to the expansion in tertiary education participation and demand in terms of meeting this demand (extending provision under current struc-tures, opening up the tertiary education sector to private providers, encouraging cross boarder enrollment etc.), overcoming persistent gaps in access (by socio-economic background, by region, and by age) and meeting the challenges in teaching and learning brought about by enrollment increases.


Wagner, Leslie. (1998, January). Dearing is Dead‑Blunkett is Born? The Future Funding of Higher Education. Higher Education Quarterly, 52, 64‑76.

The Dearing Report’s proposal for higher education funding was not adopted in favor of a different approach. However, the report’s proposals provide the case for cost sharing based on equity argu-ments. Wagner suggests more relevant proposals for funding may have been achieved within a life long learning model of education.

Weidman, John C. (1995). Diversifying Finance of Higher Education Systems in the Third World: The Case of Kenya and Mongolia. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 3(5). Available at: http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/v3n5.html

Drawing on some examples from Kenya and Mongolia, this paper suggests several strategies for reducing government expenditures on higher education, including direct cost recovery, grants, contracts with external agencies, voluntary private contributions, income producing enterprises, and expansion of the private sector. Policy implications of the above strategies are also presented for both devel-oping and developed countries.

Welch, Anthony. (1997). Class, Culture and the State in Australian Education, Reform or Crisis? Frankfurt am Main, Germany: Peter Lang Publishing.

The author offers a critical analysis of the reforms in Australian higher education over the last decade that, he argues, like reforms in all public sector services, have been characterized by the ascendance of economic and efficiency priorities at the expense of equality and social justice.

Wellman, Jane. (2002). Accounting for State Support Aid, How State Policy and Student Aid Connect, prepared for the New Millennium Project on Higher Education Costs, Pricing and Productivity. Washington, DC: Institute for Higher Education Policy. Available at: http://www.ihep.org/Pubs/PDF/StateAidRptFINAL.pdf

This report focuses on two main issues in state student aid: 1) the ways that states are using state-funded student aid in the current funding climate, and 2) whether and how states are adapting their policies and accountability structures for state-funded aid. State poli-cies and accountability strategies for student aid are examined in eleven states. Research for this report was accomplished by review-ing the published literature on the structure of these eleven state-aid programs, including annual reports, budget submissions, evalua-tions of effectiveness, and state accountability reports. Profiles for


each of the states were developed and used as the basis for inter-views with officials from each of the states to learn more about their approaches to aid. Opening with a general discussion of trends in state funding for student aid and rising college tuitions, the report then summarizes the findings from the survey of states and con-cludes with recommendations for state policymakers.

Wellman, Jane V. (2001). Looking Back, Going Forward: The Carnegie Commission Tuition Policy. The New Millennium Project on Higher Education Costs, Pricing, and Productivity. Washington, DC: Institute for Higher Education Policy.

Prepared for the New Millennium Project on Higher Education Costs, Pricing and Productivity, the report reviews the policy frame-work for higher education presented by the Carnegie Commission on Higher Education in the 1970s and the influence that it had on the policy debate and outcomes. The report proposes that one of the most important effects of the Commission’s work was its conceptualization of higher education finance in terms of prices (what students and families pay), costs (what institutions spend) and subsidies (general purpose revenues either from government or endowment sources). The report concludes that while it would not make sense to construct a new framework for the 21st century given the shift in focus from questions of social purpose or roles and responsibilities between the states, individuals and governments to technical and methodological issues and the much greater role that the private sector now plays in higher education, the basic questions that were addressed by the Commission remain vitally important and deserve continued attention by today’s leaders.

Wellman, Jane V. (1999). The Tuition Puzzle: Putting the Pieces Together. The New Millennium Project on Higher Education Costs, Pricing, and Productivity. Washington, DC: Institute for Higher Education Policy. Available at: http://www.ihep.org/Pubs/PDF/Puzzle.pdf

This report reviews two decades of trends in college tuition, the effects on student access and college choice, and how government institutions have responded. The report reveals its major finding and recommendations for planning and budgeting in response to higher prices.

Wilkinson, Rupert. (2005). Aiding Students, Buying Students. Financial Aid in America. Nashville, TN: Vanderbilt University Press.

The book examines the social and economic history of student aid (including grants, loans and jobs) in the United States and its three


main strands: the variety of motives for student aid, the struggle between need based aid and other educational spending and the entwining of mission and market (i.e. promoting access, but also promoting enrollment and helping to establish a reputation of social responsibility that is useful for fundraising). The final part of the book examines the lessons that can be learned from this history, and the author makes several proposals concerning student loans, student/program grants, use of rankings to measure institutional commitment to better access for low-income students, and revised antitrust legislation.

Williams, Gareth. (2004). The Higher Education Market in the United Kingdom. In Pedro Teixeira, Ben Jongbloed, David Dill and Alberto Amaral (Eds.), Markets in Higher Education. Rhetoric or Reality? (pp. 241-276). Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

This chapter, prepared for the Duoro III conference in Portugal held in September 2003, looks at the higher education market in the UK and how it has changed through the years. The author concludes that the marketization of British higher education has increased efficiency, expanded and lessened the boundaries of universities and higher education in general, contributed to simultaneous diversi-fication and standardization, changed management arrangements within higher education and institutions and changed the social and economic position of academic staff.

Williams, Gareth. (1998). Current Debates on the Funding of Mass Higher Education in the United Kingdom. European Journal of Education, 33(1), 77-87.

A discussion of the debates concerning higher education funding in Britain. The paper introduces the debates and developments in British higher education from 1988 to 1997, and discusses new policies and key proposals. The conclusions made by the Dearing Committee on the issue emphasize the necessity of funds from students/parents.

Williams, Gareth. (1992). Changing Patterns of Finance in Higher Education. Buckingham, UK: Society for Research into Higher Education and Open University Press.

Chapters 7 and 9 are of particular relevance to a higher education finance bibliography. Chapter 7: Effects of Funding Changes in Continuing Education covers a broad range of related issues that include finance and costing issues and modes of delivery. Chapter 9 looks at the British Experience in an international context high-


lighting Japan and US models along with a discussion on fees and formulae taken by Britain in recent years.

Williams, Gareth and Gregory Light. (1999). Student Income and Costs of Sudy in the United Kingdom. European Journal of Education, 34(1), 23‑41.

Part of a special issue on student costs and financing in Europe, the article discusses the financing of higher education in Great Britain during the 1990s. Data pertaining to teacher costs per student and per graduate and to the financial position of British students in the last years of the old system are provided, and the implications of this data within the country’s new developing system of higher education financing are discussed.

Winston, Gordon C. (1998). Higher Education Subsidies: Why All College Students Pay Less for their Education than it Costs. Connection: New England’s Journal of Higher Education & Economic Development, 13(1), 13‑15.

College and universities sell education at a price that is far less than the cost of its production. Student subsides are a permanent fea-ture of higher education economics, representing a large part of total costs. Cross-subsidizing, with one activity supporting another, is common, and even students who pay full costs and do not get direct government aid are subsidized. The author explains how this process occurs.

Wolanin, Thomas R. (2001). Rhetoric and Reality, Effects and Consequences of the HOPE Scholarship. Working Paper, The New Millennium Project on Higher Education Costs, Pricing and Productivity. Washington, DC: The Institute for Higher Education Policy. Available at: http://www.ihep.org/Pubs/PDF/Hope.pdf

A unique, comprehensive examination of the impact of the HOPE Scholarship Program through the eyes of several key players in the higher education financing process: students and their families; col-leges and universities; the states; federal higher education policy; and federal tax policy. The research concludes that, contrary to the rhetoric of the Clinton administration when the HOPE Scholarship was enacted, it does not fulfill its objectives and claimed goals. The HOPE scholarship is not justified by either of the two basic ratio-nales for federal support of students in higher education as it neither increased the enrollment of those who would not otherwise attend nor contributes to making the United States a more fair and equi-table society.


Wolanin, Thomas R. and Jamie P. Merisotis. (2001). Paying for Higher Education in Mozambique. Achieving the Goals of the Strategic Plan for Higher Education. Washington, DC: The Institute for Higher Education Policy.

The Strategic Plan for Higher Education in Mozambique for the period 2000-2010 focuses on several strategic goals for the future of higher education in Mozambique. These include expanded capacity in higher education; providing access to higher educa-tion on a more equitable basis; linking education needs to the labor market; and improving internal efficiency of public higher educa-tion. This report suggests specific policies for financing higher education.

Woo, Jennie, Jason Barnhart and Kathy Beasley. (2005). Missing the Boat. Why Some Make it to College and Others Don’t. Rancho Corova, CA: EdFund. Available at: https://www.edfund.org/pdfs/i-53.pdf

Based on research involving a random sample of high school stu-dents in California, the study identifies two main differentiators between those students who went on to enroll in college and those who did not. These differentiators were, not surprisingly, lower household income and lower academic achievement. Other sig-nificant factors that affected college enrollment identified by the research were parental influence and exposure to information about college during the high school years.

Woo, Jennie and Jason Barnhart. (2003). Borrowing Trouble, Examining the Indebtedness of College Students in California. Rancho Corova, CA: EdFund. Available at: https://www.edfund.org/pdfs/i-96.pdf

The study explores whether students are borrowing higher amounts from sources other than guaranteed student loans to meet tuition and living expenses in college. It compares the levels of student borrowing in 1998 and 2002. The study found that borrowers sur-veyed had significantly higher debt from all credit sources combined in 2002 than those in 1998. It also reports borrowing levels by the source, student enrollment status (i.e., part-time and full-time), and study program.

Woodhall, Maureen. (2003). Financing Higher Education: Old Challenges and New Message. Journal of Higher Education in Africa, Vol. 1, No. 1, 78-100. Abstract available at: http://www.bc.edu/bc_org/avp/soe/cihe/africaHEjournal/journal_home.htm

This article highlights the World Bank’s 2002 policy paper, Constructing Knowledge Societies: New Challenges for Tertiary Education,


and the UK Government’s 2003 White Paper, The Future of Higher Education, and points out parallels and similarities between them. Both reports assert that higher education is changing and needs to cope with financial and equity challenges. The author looks at international experiences with tuition fees and student financial sup-port systems and concludes that student support schemes need to be flexible in order not to discourage disadvantaged students from enrolling in higher education.

Woodhall, Maureen (Ed.). (2002). Welsh Journal of Education Special International Issue on Paying for Learning: The Debate on Student Fees, Grants and Loans in International Perspective, 11(1).

This special international issue of the Welsh Journal of Education edited by Maureen Woodhall addresses a variety of issues surrounding higher education funding in a time of financial austerity. The journal begins with an editorial by Woodhall in which she places the debate on pay-ing for higher education in Wales and the UK within an international context arguing that Wales must draw on lessons learned in other countries. Articles by Rees, Johnstone, Ziderman, Richards, Chapman and Ryan, Jackson and Thomas and Arora look at higher education student finance systems throughout the world and offer examples of successful and unsuccessful higher education finance policies.

Woodhall, Maureen. (2001). Financing and Economics of Higher Education in Africa. In Teferra, Damtew and Philip G. Altbach (Eds.), African Higher Education, An International Handbood and Reference Guide (pp. 44-52). Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.

Throughout the world, higher education has been experiencing major economic and financial challenges. Especially in Africa, these chal-lenges are severe, as higher education institutions have faced budget cuts and severe staff shortages, and the demand for higher education has been increasing. This article identifies key economic and finan-cial issues facing African higher education and considers proposals mainly by the World Bank to reform higher education financing. It reviews the changing patterns of financing higher education and examines African experience in mobilizing new sources of income.

Woodhall, Maureen. (1993). Student Loans in Higher Education: 4. Latin America and the Caribbean. Educational Forum Series No. 4. Paris: International Institute for Educational Planning.

Woodhall, Maureen. (1991a). Student Loans in Higher Education: 3. English Speaking Africa. Educational Forum Series No.3. Paris: International Institute for Educational Planning.


Woodhall, Maureen (1991b). Student Loans in Higher Education: 2. Asia. Educational Forum Series No.2. Paris: International Institute for Educational Planning.

Woodhall, Maureen. (1990). Student Loans in Higher Education: 1. Western Europe and the USA. Educational Forum Series No. 1. Paris: International Institute for Educational Planning.

These reports, divided by geographical region, cover the following themes on student loans in higher education: existing sources and methods of finance for higher education; systems of financial sup-port for students; reasons for introducing student loans including arguments for and against loans; design and administration of stu-dent loan programs; and feasibility of student loans.

Woodhall, Maureen. (1989). Financial Support for Students: Grants, Loans, or Graduate Tax? London, UK: Kogan Page.

Edited by Maureen Woodhall, this book examines the reasons for sharing higher education costs among stakeholders and the vari-ety of issues involved in the cost sharing debate. The authors, who include Nicholas Barr, Janet Hansen, Bruce Johnstone, Martin Moris, and Maureeen Woodhall, look at the US experience with cost shar-ing, as well as student financial support models from other countries including Sweden and the UK.

World Bank. (2006). Word Development Report 2006. Equity and Development. Washington, DC and New York: The World Bank and Oxford University Press.

The 2006 World Development Report focuses on the relationship between equity and sustainable development and the degree to which the former contributes to the latter. The report is divided into three sections. The first reviews evidence of inequality of opportunity in terms of health, education, work and income and political power, within and across countries. The second discusses why and illustrates how equity impacts development. The final sec-tion looks at how public policy can level the political and economic playing fields.

World Bank. (2003). Tertiary Education in Colombia, Paving the Way for Reform. Washington, DC: The World Bank.

This sector study examines the current state of the tertiary educa-tion system in Colombia describing the economic benefits that it provides to society and the individual students and the functioning of the higher education market. The study notes that the coverage of


the sector is constrained by the rationed number of university places in the public sector and the oversupply of places in the private higher education sector, which can be addressed by either expanding the number of seats available in the public sector (via increased fund-ing or increased efficiency) or addressing the stifled demand in the private sector (student finance programs). The final section outlines strategies and recommendations for tertiary education in Colombia. The study also includes seven appendices by various experts that provide additional information about the Colombian higher educa-tion sector in terms of its composition and governance, problems and challenges, position in the global market, and student assistance structure. This latter appendix, written by Arthur Haupman reviews the existing student aid structure (government scholarships, loans and institutional discounts) and its strengths and weaknesses and makes recommendations for reform.

World Bank. (2002). Constructing Knowledge Societies: New Challenges for Tertiary Education. A World Bank Report. Washington, DC: World Bank. Abstract available at: http://www1.worldbank.org/publications/pdfs/15143execsum.pdf

This 2002 official report from the World Bank is an effort to re-establish a more comprehensive, constructive, and visible World Bank approach to the support of tertiary education the Bank’s cli-ent countries. In the 1970’s, 80’s and through the early 90’s the Bank had earned a reputation of non-interest in tertiary education, based in part on its policy stance that scarce Bank resources were better devoted to basic education, as well as a corollary perception that tertiary education in many developing countries was inefficient, frequently inappropriate, and inequitably financed. The 1994 Bank report, entitled Higher Education: The Lessons of Experience, began to profess more interest in higher education, but it was a slim and internally-contested report that did little to overcome the sense that the Bank was insufficiently interested in tertiary education. The 2000 Task Force on Higher Education and Society report, co-sponsored by the World Bank and UNESCO, Higher Education in Developing Countries: Peril and Promise, further established a positive view toward the role of tertiary education in the economic, political, and social development of countries but was not an official World Bank report. This 2002 report, constructed under leadership of World Bank senior officer Jamil Salmi, is the Bank’s official declara-tion both of the importance of tertiary education to the economic and social development of the World Bank’s client countries, but


also an attempt to set a comprehensive agenda for these countries and for the World Bank’s potential role in helping to develop and reform their higher education systems. Most of the elements are the familiar ones, emphasizing efficiency, accountability, sector diversity, and cost-sharing, but the range of discussion is indeed comprehensive and positive, and constitutes an effective overview of what needs to be done in the critical realm of tertiary education in the developing world.

World Bank. (2001). A Chance to Learn: Knowledge and Finance for Education in Sub-Saharan Africa. Sector Assistance Strategy, Regional Human Development Family, Africa Region. Washington, DC: World Bank.

World Bank strategy paper based on two years of internal analysis and discussion on the impact of the Bank’s assistance in the edu-cation sector in Africa and on extensive consultation with African governments, civil society and UN agencies. The paper sets out a pro-gram of action for the Africa Region of the World Bank that would involve increases in the effectiveness of its nonlending services (knowledge sharing and support of local analytical and planning skills), more emphasis on its key priorities for the education sector (including equitable access) and design of education investments as part of poverty reduction programs.

World Bank. (1997). Republic of Tunisia Higher Education: Challenges and Opportunities. Human Development Group, Middle East and North Africa Region, Report No. 16522-TUN. Washington, DC: World Bank.

Problems of higher education in Tunisia and various methods for rectification of these problems are discussed in this report.

World Bank. (1994). Higher Education: Lessons of Experience. Washington, DC: The World Bank.

The report, based on a review of World Bank country experiences in the previous fifteen years, describes the crisis facing higher educa-tion in developing countries in the mid-1990s (dramatically increasing enrollments coupled with reduced government spending that led to a serious reduction in per student expenditures and the inefficient use of those resources that are available) and outlines four primary strategies for reform that the World Bank supports. These include the encouragement of greater differentiation of institutions at the post-secondary level, including the development of private institutions; the provision of incentives to institutions to diversify their sources of


funding, including cost-sharing with students; the redefinition of the government’s role in higher education; and the introductive of policies designed to give priority to quality and equity objectives.

Wright, Cream. (1998). Financing Higher Education and Partnerships with Production and Service Sectors. In UNESCO Regional Office (Dakar-Senegal) Higher Education in Africa: Achievements, Challenges, and Prospects. Paris: UNESCO.

Many higher educational institutions in Africa depend on govern-ments for the provision of finances necessary to cover their recurrent and development expenditures (capital budgets). Following ever deteriorating and stagnant economies in many African countries, universities failed to meet their financial expectations. Taking the University of Sierra Leone as an example, the article shows the gap between budget estimates put forward by the university and the actual government grant made available to the university. In the context of the above budget deficiencies, the article recommends diversification of sources of income for higher education institu-tions in Africa.

Zeleza, Paul Tiyambe and Adebay Olukoshi (Eds.). (2004). African Universities in the Twenty-first Century. Volume I: Liberalisation and Internationalisation and Volume II: Knowledge and Society. Oxford: African Books Collective.

This two volume series addresses some of the critical issues facing African higher education institutions in a context of increasing lib-eralization and privatization. These issues include the competing demands of autonomy and accountability, expansion and excellence, equity and efficiency, diversification and differentiation, and inter-nationalization and indigenization. Among other topics, Volume I looks at higher education finance and cost sharing policies in a number of countries and Volume II addresses the issue of gender equity in higher education in Africa.

Ziderman, Adrian. (2004). Policy Options for Student Loan Schemes: Lessons from Five Asian Case Studies. Policy Research and Dialogue, Student Loan Schemes in Asia, Vol. 1, N. 6. Bangkok, Thailand: UNESCO Asia and Pacific Regional Bureau for Education and Paris: International Institute for Educational Planning (IIEP). Available at: http://www2.unescobkk.org/ips/ebooks/documents/studentloan/index.htm

This synthesis study of five in-depth case studies of student loan


schemes in Mainland China and the Special Administrative Region of Hong Kong, the Republic of Korea, the Philippines and Thailand reviews the schemes in terms of their objectives, organizational structure, funding, allocation, and repayment. It also assesses the financial viability of the individual loan schemes, the role of subsi-dies and the schemes’ use of targeting to ration limited funds or to reach poor students. After identifying the principle strengths and weaknesses of each scheme, the study reviews a number of lessons learned and issues that need to be considered when designing stu-dent loan schemes.

Ziderman, Adrian. (2003). Student Loans in Thailand: Are They Effective, Equitable and Sustainable? Policy Research and Dialogue, Student Loan Schemes in Asia, Vol. 1, N. 1. Bangkok, Thailand: UNESCO Asia and Pacific Regional Bureau for Education and Paris: International Institute for Educational Planning (IIEP). Available at: http://www2.unescobkk.org/ips/ebooks/documents/ studentloan/index.htm

The first in a new series on government-sponsored student loan schemes in Asia, the monograph reviews the student loans scheme in Thailand and assesses its success in meeting its objectives of increasing the poor’s educational opportunities, increasing equality among the population, and enhancing the country’s human capi-tal, competitiveness and development. The monograph outlines organization and financial reforms that could address some of the scheme’s weaknesses.

Ziderman, Adrian. (2002). Alternative Objectives of National Student Loan Schemes: Implications for Design, Evaluation and Policy. Welsh Journal of Education (Special International Issue on Paying for Learning: The Debate on Student Fees, Grants and Loans in International Perspective), 11(1), 37-47.

The article explains the differences across student loan schemes throughout the world as being the result of the different objectives they are designed to pursue. The author identifies five main catego-ries of objectives including budgetary objectives (income generation), university expansion objectives, social objectives (equity/access), manpower needs and student assistance. Given these differing objectives, the article argues that it is not possible to use a standard approach to evaluate the efficacy of all loan schemes as they can only be evaluated in terms of the individual objectives that they were designed to achieve.


Ziderman, Adrian. (2000). Financing Student Loans in Thailand: Revolving Fund or Open-Ended Commitment. Economics of Education Review, 21, 367-380.

The recently launched student loan scheme in Thailand covers both upper and tertiary level schooling. The average repayment ratio on loans is only about 20 percent, while the overall loan recovery, tak-ing into account repayment defaults and administrative costs, is 10 percent or less. In his paper, Ziderman recommends that the loans scheme for the upper secondary schooling be converted into to a grants scheme, and that alternative reforms be implemented to raise the average repayment and recovery ratios on loans for tertiary level students, more in line with international experience.

Ziderman, Adrian and Douglas Albrecht. (1995). Financing Universities in Developing Countries. Bristol, PA: The Falmer Press.

This book deals head on with the major dilemma facing almost all governments in both developing and industrialized countries too: how to continue to expand university provision to meet the ever growing demand for higher education, in the absence of sufficient additional public funding to sustain the growth. He authors survey the financial problems and constraints confronting higher educa-tion in developing countries, as well as exploring a variety of policy options to address these problems. Data is provided on a variety of countries throughout the world.

Ziyaev, Muzafar K., Ahadjon Rakhmonov and Murtazo S. Sultanov. (2000). Educational financing and budgeting in Uzbekistan. Financial management of education systems. Paris, France: International Institute for Educational Planning – UNESCO. Available at: http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0012/001206/120649e.pdf

The volume describes changes within the education sector in Uzbekistan that have taken place since 1991. It outlines institutional reforms, changes in curriculum, enrollment dynamics, as well as education finance policies. The volume also provides detailed sta-tistical data that illustrates developments in education sector in Uzbekistan during the last decade of the 20th century.

Zumeta, William. (1996). Meeting the Demand for Higher Education Without Breaking the Bank: A Framework for the Design of Higher Education Policies for an Era of Increasing Demand. The Journal of Higher Education, 67, 367-425.

This article outlines models for state policy making for private higher


education. The first is the laissez-faire model whereby states take a hands-off approach to private colleges. The second is the central planning strategy whereby the state heavily regulates both finance and planning, and thirdly, a market competitive situation that strad-dles the former two by utilizing but not.

Section 2 Cross Referenced by Subject


A1 Economics of Education and/or Higher Education

author year pageAdams, Don 2002 3

Barr, Nicholas 2000 12


Belfield, Clive R. and Henry M. Levin 2003 15

Carnoy, Martin (Ed.) 1995 23

Cheeseman Day, Jennifer and Eric C. Newburger 2002 27

College Board 2004 30

Dill, David D. and Maarja Soo 2003 37

Harmon, C., I. Walker and N. Westergard-Nielsen (eds.) 2001 47

Institute for Higher Education Policy and Scholarship America 2004 56

Johnstone, D. Bruce 1999 64

Lebel, Phillip 1999 79

Leslie, Larry and P. Brinkman 1989 79

Palacios Lleras, Miguel 2004 102

Palfreyman, David 2004 103

Patrinos, H.A. & D.L. Ariasingam 1997 103

Psacharopoulos, George and Harry Anthony Patrinos 2004 106

Public Funding and Private Returns to Education 2001 107

Vossensteyn, Hans 2005 131

A2 Higher Educational Finance

author year pageAgarwal, Pawan 2006 4

Alexander, F. King and Ronald G. Ehrenberg 2003 5

Altbach, Philip G. and D. Bruce Johnstone 1993 6

Amonoo-Neizer, Eugene H. 1998 8

Association of African Universities 1997 9

Babaloloa, Joel B. 1998 10

Balan, Jorge 1993 11

Banya, Kingsley and Juliet Elu 2001 11


Baum, Sandy 2004 13

Beerkens, Eric 2003 14

Berryman, Sue E. 2000 16

Bevc, Milena 2004 16

Boezerooy, Petra 2003 17


Bollag, Burton 2003 18

Bouapao, L., O. Sengchandavong and S. Sihavong 2000 18

Bray, Mark 2002 19

Bray, Mark and Nina Boresvskaya 2001 20

Bray, Mark and R. Murray Thomas 1998 20

Callan, Patrick M. & Joni Finney 1997 22

Chapman, David 2002 26

Chudgar, Amita 2004 27

Collins, Susan E., T.C. Leitzel, S.D. Morgan & R.J. Stalcup 1994 31

Committee of Vice-Chancellors and Principals in Tanzania 1997 31

Dobson, Ian 2001 38

Eicher, Jean-Claude 1998 38

File, Jon and Leo Goedegebuure 2003 40

Gill, T.K. and S.S. Gill 2000 44

Greenaway, David and Michelle Haynes 2000 45

Heath, Julia.A. 1998 49

Heyneman, Stephen.P. and Alan J. De Young (Eds.) 2004 51

Hochschul-Informations-System (HIS) 2002 52

Hinchliffe, Keith 2002 52

Hoffman, Adonis 1995 52

Holtta, Seppo 1998 52

Huisman, Jeroen 2003 54

Independent Institute for Social Policy 2004 56

Ipsos-Reid 2004 58

Johnstone, D. Bruce 2001a 63

Johnstone, D. Bruce 2001b 63




Johnstone, D. Bruce and Olga Bain 2001 66

Johnstone, D.Bruce, Alka Arora and William Experton 1998 67

Jongbloed, Ben 2003 67

Jongbloed, Ben and Carlo Salerno 2002 68

Kagia, Ruth 1997 69

Kaiser, Frans 2003 69

Kaiser, Frans et al. 2003 70



Kajubi, Senteza 1992 71


Kane, Thomas J. and Peter R. Orszag 2003 71

Kasozi, A.B.K 2004 72

Kezar, Adrianna J. 2000 72

Kusherbaev, K. et al. 2001 78

LaRocque, Norman 2001 78

McKeown-Moak, Mary 2002 85

Merisotis, Jamie and Dianne S. Gilleland 2000 87

Min, Weifing 2004 88

Ministry of Education, Science and Technology (Kenya) 2005 88

Ministry of Higher Ed and Scientific Research, Palestinian 2002 88

Mizikaci, Fatma 2006 89

Mkude, Daniel et. al. 2003 89

Mok, Ka-Ho and Jasan Tan 2004 90

Mokgwathi, G.M.G. 1992 90

Nanzaddorj, Buluut 2001 92

Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy and CHEPS 2001 96

Ng’ethe, Njuguna et. al. 2003 97

Njeuma, Dorothy L. 1999 97

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development 2002 100

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development 1999a 100

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development 1999b 100

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and UNESCO 2002 100


Pechar, Hans 1998 104

Pillay, Pundy 1989 105

Ping, Charles 1995 105

Psacharopoulos, George 2002 106

St. John, Edward P. 1994 111

St. John, Edward P. and Michael D. Parsons 2004 112

Salerno, Carlo 2004 112


Samoff, Joel and Bidemi Carrol 2004 113

Sanyal, Bikas and Michaela Martin 1998 114

Sawyerr, Akilagpa 2004 114

Schaferbarthold, Dieter 1999 114

Steyn, Gert and Pierre de Villiers 2006 117

Stringer, William L. et. al. 1999 118

Stumpf, Rolf 1996 118

Sundt, Melora 1993 118


Task Force on Financial Sustainability of Higher Education… 1998 120

Task Force on Higher Education and Society 2000 121

Task Force on Improvement of Higher Education in Pakistan 2002 121

Teekens, Hanneke and Ben Jongbloed 2000 121

Teferra, Damtew and Philip Altbach 2003 122

Teixeira, Pedro et al. 2004 122

Theisens, Henno 2003 123

Tilak, Jandhyala B.G. 1997 124

Tilak, Jandhyala B.G. and Geetha Rani 2000 124

Tres, Jaoquim and Francesco Lopez Segrera 2005 125

UNESCO Regional Office for Education in Africa 1998 126

UNESCO Institute for Statistics 2003 126

Varghese, N.V. 2001b 131


Wagner, Leslie 1998 136

Williams, Gareth 1998 138


Winston, Gordon C. 1998 139

Wolanin, Thomas R. and Jamie P. Merisotis 2001 139

Woodhall, Maureen 2003 140


World Bank 2002 143

World Bank 2001 144

World Bank 1997 144

World Bank 1994 144

Wright, Cream 1998 145

Zeleza, Paul Tiyambe and Adebay Olukoshi 2004 145

Ziderman, Adrian and Douglas Albrecht 1995 147

Ziyaev, Muzafar K., Ahadjon. Rakhmonov & Murtazo S. Sultanov 2000 147

Zumeta, William 1996 147

A3 Higher Education Finance: Cost-Sharing and Revenue Diversification

author year pageAltbach, Philip G., Patricia J. Gumport and D.B. Johnstone 2001 6

American Association of State Colleges and Universities 2005 7

Bain, Olga 2001 10

Blair, Robert D.D. 1992 17



Brown, Roger 2004 20

Brown, Nigel and Charles River Associates 2003 21

Canada Millennium Scholarship Foundation 2002 23

Cerdeira, Maria Luisa and L. Pereira 2003 24

Choy, Susan P. 2004 27

Chuta, E.J. 1998 28

Clancy, Patrick and Deirdre Kehoe 1999 29

Clark, Burton 1998 29


College Board (2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005) 31

Congressional Budget Office 2004a 32

Correia, Fernanda, Alberto Amaral and Antonio Magalhaes 2002 33

Court, David 1999 33

Daka, J.S.J et al. 2000 34

Daniel, Hans-Dieter, Stefanie Schwarz & Ulrich Teichler 2001 35

Davis, Jerry S. 2003 35

Department for Education and Skills (UK) 2004b 36

Department for Education and Skills (UK) 2003 37

Deutsches Studentenwerk (Ed.). 1997 37

Dobson, Ian 2001 38

Ehrenberg, Ronald G. 2000 38

Eurydice 1999 40

Finnie, Ross 2004 41

Finnie, Ross, Alex Usher and Hans Vossensteyn 2004 40

Foose, Robert A. and Joel W. Meyerson 1986 42

Fred Hemingway Consulting and Kathryn McMullen 2004 42

Fred Hemingway Consulting 2004 43


Fry, Peter and Rogerio Utui 1999 44

Gladieux, Lawrence E. and Arthur M. Hauptman 1995 44

Hansen, Janet S. 1990 46

Hauptman, Arthur 1998b 48

Hearn, James C. 2003 48

Hauptman, Arthur 1990 48

Huang, Lihong 2002 54

Iacobucci, Frank and Carolyn Tuohy 2005 54

Ikenberry, Stanley and Terry W. Hartle 1998 55

Institute for Higher Education Policy and Scholarship America 2000 56

Ishengoma, Johnson 2002 58




Johnstone, D. Bruce 2005c 60







Kaul, Rekha 1993 72

Kiamba, Crispus 2004 72

Kiiza, Julius 1997 73


Levy, Jan S. 2004 80

Lund, Helen 1999 82

Mateju, Petr and Natalie Simonova 2003 84

Mayanja, Muhammad K. 1998 84

McMahon, Walter W. 1988 86

McPherson, Michael S. and Morton O. Schapiro 1998 86

McPherson, Michael S., Morton Owen Shapiro and Gordon C. 1993 87


Minxuan, Zhang 2000 88

Mora, Jose-Gines and Michael Nugent 1998 91

Mumper, Michael 1996 91

Musisi, Nakanyike and Nansozi K. Muwanga 2003 91

Mwamila, Burton, Issa Omari and Eva Mbuya 2002 92

National Center for Education Statistics 2004 93



National Commission on the Costs of Higher Education 1998 95

Obasi, Isaac and Eric C. Eboh 2002 98

Odebiyi, Adetanwa I. and Olabisi I. Aina 1999 98

Oketch, Moses O. 2003 98


Olivas, Michael A. 1993 99

Oliveira, T. and P.T. Pereira 1999 99

Passi, F.O. 1994 103

Prairie Research Associates 2005 106

Redd, Kenneth E. 2000 108


Richards, Ken 2002 109

Rodrigues, Anthony J., and Shim O. Wandiga 1997 109

Sanyal, Bikas C. 1998 113


Shattock, Michael 2004 115

Ssebuwufu, John P.M. 2002 116

Sutherland, Carla 2001 119

Swail, Watson Scott and Heller, Donald 2004 119



Tekleselassie, Abebayehu and D. Bruce Johnstone 2004 122

Varghese, N.V. 2001a 130

Vossensteyn, Hans 2004a 132

Vossensteyn, Hans 2004b 132





Weidman, John C. 1995 136

Wellman, Jane V. 2001 137


Wilkinson, Rupert 2005 137

Williams, Gareth and Gregory Light 1999 139




A4 Student Loans

author year pageAhmed, Eliza 2000 5

Albrecht, D and A. Ziderman 1991 5

Andrews, Les 1999 9

Archibald, Robert B. 2002 9

Anthony, Susanne 1999 9

Avery, Christopher and Caroline M. Hoxby 2003 10

Baum, Sandy and Saul Schwartz 2006 13

Baum, Sandy and Marie O’Malley 2003 13

Berkner, Lutz and Larry Bobbitt 2000 15

Callender, Claire 2003 22


Callender, Claire and Martin Kemp 2000 22

Caliber Associates 2003 21

Center for International Higher Education 2001 23

Cervenan, Amy and Alex Usher 2004 24

Chapman, Bruce 2006 25




Chapman, Bruce and Chris Ryan 2002 26


Chung, Yue Ping 2003 28

Chuta, E.J. 1998 28

Chuta, E.J. 1992 28

Colclough, Christopher 1999 29

College Board (2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005) 31

Congressional Budget Office 2004b 32

Council of Australian Postgraduate Associations 2003 33

Department for Education and Skills 2004a 36

EKOS Research Associates 2003 39


Fossey, Richard and Mark Bateman 1998 42


Glennerster, Howard 2003 44

Guillé, Marianne 2001 45

Harding, Ann 1995 46

Hauptman, Authur 1999 47

Heller, Donald E. 2001b 49


Institute for Higher Education Policy et. al. 1997 57

Jackson, Roy 2002 59





Johnstone, D. Bruce 2004d 62


Kim, Anna and Young Lee 2003 73

King, Jacqueline 2003a 74

King, Tracey and Ellynne Bannon 2002 75


Kirshstein, Rita et al. 2004 76

Kitaev, Igor and Teresita Nadurata, Virginia Resurrection, 2003 77



Metcalf, Hilary 2005 87

Monks, James 2001 90

Narayana, M.R. 2005 92

National Union of Students 2000 95


New Zealand Vice-Chancellors’ Committee 1999 97

Otieno, Wycliffe 2004 102


Payne, Joan and Claire Callender 1997 104

Price, Derek V. 2003 106

Salmi, Jamil 1999 113

Scherschel, Patricia M. 2000 114

Schrag, Philip G. 2002 115

Shen, Hong and Wenli Li 2003 115

Shouxin, Li and Bray, Mark 1992 116

State PIRGs’ Higher Education Project 2002 117

Teckleselassie, Abebayehu A. and D. Bruce Johnstone 2004 122

US Department of Education 2001 126

US Department of Education and the the US General 2001 127

US General Accounting Office 1997 127

Usher, Alex 2005a 128

Usher, Alex 2005b 129


Vossensteyn, Hans and Carlo Salerno 2002a 134

Vossensteyn, Hans and Carlo Salerno 2002b 135

Woo, Jennie and Jason Barnhart 2005 140


Woodhall, Maureen 1991a 141

Woodhall, Maureen 1991b 142



Ziderman, Adrian 2004 145





A5 Grants and Other Forms of Student Assistance Other than Loans

author year pageAbraham, Katherine and Melissa Clark 2003 3

Advisory Committee on Student Financial Assistance 2002 3


American Association of State Colleges and Universities… 2005 7





College Board (2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005) 31

Cunningham, Alisa, Christina Redmond and Jamie Merisotis 2003 34

Davis, Jerry Sheehan 2000 35

Deutsches Studentenwerk 1997 37


Eurydice 1999 40





Gladieux, Lawrence E. and Arthur Hauptman 1995 44


Hauptman, Authur M. 1990 47

Heller, Donald E. 2001a 49

Herbert, Alicia and Claire Callender 1997 51


Ifill, Roberto M. and Michael S. McPherson 2004 55

Institute for Higher Education Policy and Scholarship American 2004 56





Jongbloed, Ben and Jos Koelman 2000 68

Junor, Sean and Alex Usher 2002 69

Junor, Sean and Alex Usher 2004 69

Kezar, Adrianna 2000 72

King, Jacqueline E. 2003b 74


Kirshstein, Rita J. et al. 2004 76

McPherson, Michael S. and Morton Owen Shapiro 2001 86

McPherson, Michael S. and Morton Owen Shapiro 1998 86



National Commission on the Cost of Higher Education 1998 95

Olivas, Michael A. 1993 99


St. John, Edward P. et al 2004 112

Swail, Watson Scott 2003 119

Trombley, William 2003 126

United States Department of Education 2001 126

United States General Accounting Office 2002 127

Usher, Alex 2006 128


Usher, Alex 2004c 130




Wellman, Jane 2002 136




Wolanin, Thomas R. 2001 139


A6 Privatization and Private Forms of Higher Education

author year pageAltbach, Philip G. 1999 6

American Council on Education 2004b 7

American Council on Education 2004c 8

Banya, Kingsley 2001 11

Belfield, Clive and Henry M. Levin 2002 15

Breneman, David and Chester E. Finn Jr 1998 20

Correia, Fernanda, Alberto Amaral and Antonio Magalhaes 2002 32

European Centre for Higher Education (CEPES) 1999 39

International Finance Corporation 1999 58

Kinser, Kevin and Daniel C. Levy 2005 76

Kitaev, Igor 1999 77


Kruss, Glenda and Andre Kraak 2003 77

Levy, Daniel C. 2004 80




Mabizela, Mahlubi and George Subotzky 2002 83

Maldonado, Alma, Yingxia Cao, and Philip G. Altbach 2004 83

Marginson, Simon 1997 83

Massy, William F. 2003 84

McEwan, Patrick J. and Martin Carnoy 2000 85

Mkude, Daniel 2003 89

Powar, K.B. and K.L. Johar 2004 106


Ruch, Richard S. 2001 110



Schofield, Allan 1996 115


Zumeta, Willism 1996 147

A7 Access and Participation

author year pageAbraham, Katharine G. and Melissa A. Clark 2003 3



American Council on Education 2004a 7



Bekhradnia, Bahram 2003 14

Boezerooy, Petra & H. Vossensteyn 1999 17

Bowen, William G, Martin A. Kurzweil and Eugene M. Tobin 2005 18

Boxall, Mike, Shahid Amin and Aamir Baloch 2002 19

Bray, Mark 2001 19

Brown, Richard and Wendy Piatt 2001 21

Cloete, Nico, Pundy Pillay and Saleem Badat 2004 29

Congressional Report 2004 32



De Dios Jimenez, Juan and Manuel Salas-Velasco 2000 35


Eisemon, Thomas Owen and Jamil Salmi 2002 39


European Centre for Higher Education 1999 39

Fiske, Edward B. and Helen F. Ladd 2004 42




Gladieux, L.E. and A.M. Hauptman 1995 44

Guhr, Daniel 2001 45

Hauptman, Arthur 1998a 47


Heller, Donald E. 2000 50



Herbert, A. and C. Callender 1997 51

Herz, Barbara 2005 51

Horn, Laura J., Xianglei Chen and Chris Chapman 2003 53


Ikenberry, Stanley and Terry W. Hartle 1998 55

Independent Committee of Inquiry into Student Finance 2000 56


Johnes, Geraint 2003 59


Junor, Sean and Alexander Usher 2004 69


Kane, Thomas J. 1995 71

Kasozi, A.B.K. 2003 72

King, Jacqueline E. 2004 73



Kipp, Samuel M., Derek V. Price and Jill K. Wohlford 2002 76

LaRocque, Noorman 2001 78

Lee, W.O. 2002 79

Lewis, D.R. and H. Dundar 1999 81

Li, Wenli and Weifang Min 2000 82

Looker, E. Dianne 2004 82

Matthews, Rebecca 2001 84

Mayanja, Muhammad 1998 84

Mayhew, Ken, Cecile Deer and Mehak Dua 2004 85


McPherson, Michael S. and Morton Owen Schapiro 2001 86

Mumper, Micheal 1996 91


National Center for Public Policy and Higher Education 2004 94



Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development 1999c 101



Pell Institute for the Study of Opportunity in Higher Education 2004 104

Postiglione, Gerard A. 2006 105


R.A. Malatest and Associates Ltd. 2004 107

Rees, Teresa 2002 108

Rhoads, Rober A. and Carlos Alberto Torres 2006 108

Rozada, Martin Gonzalez and Alicia Menendez 2002 110

Ruppert, Sandra S. 2003 110


St. John, Edward P. et al. 2004 111


System Three 1999 120


Thomas, Phil and Ashima Arora 2002 123

Tight, Malcolm 2003 124






Wagner, Alan 1998 135

Welch, Anthony 1997 136

Woo, Jennie, Jason Barnhart and Kathy Beasley 2005 140

World Bank 2006 142

Section 3 Cross Referenced by Geographical Area


B1 No Setting: General, Theoretical, Universal or Conceptual

author year pageBarr, Nicholas 2000 12



Bray, Mark 2001 19

Carnoy, Martin 1995 23

Center for International Higher Education 2001 23

Eisemon, Thomas Owen and Jamil Salmi 2002 39

Glennerster, Howard 2003 44

Johnes, Geraint 2003 59














Johnstone, D.B., Alka Arora and Experton, W. 1998 67

Leslie, Larry and Paul Brinkman 1989 79



Lund, Helen 1999 82

Maldonado, Alma, Yingxia Cao, Philip G. Altbach, Daniel C. 2004 83


Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development 1999c 101




Patrinos, Harry A. & David L. Ariasingam 1997 103

Ruch, Richard S. 2001 110

Salmi, Jamil 1999 113

Sundt, Melora 1993 118





World Bank 1994 144


Zumeta, William 1996 147

B2 Comprehensive or Encyclopedic

author year pageAltbach, Philip G. and D. Bruce Johnstone 1993 6

Belfield, Clive and Henry M. Levin 2002 15

Lebel, Philip 1999 79


Maldonado, Alma et al. 2004 83

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development 2002 100

Psacharopoulos, George and Harry Anthony Patrinos 2004 106

Schofield, Allen 1996 115


Tres, Jaoquim and Francesco Lopez Segrera 2005 125

UNESCO Institute for Statistics 2003 126

World Bank 2006 142

B3 High-Income/Industrialized Other than United States

author year pageAhmed, Eliza 2000 5

Andrews, Les 1999 9




Beerkens, Eric 2003 14

Bekhradnia, Bahram 2003 14

Boezerooy, Petra 2003 17

Boezerooy, Petra & H. Vossensteyn 1999 17

Boxall, Mike and Shahid Amin, Aamir Baloch 2002 19

Brown, Nigel and Charles River Associates 2003 21

Brown, Richard and Wendy Piatt 2001 21

Brown, Roger 2004 20

Callender, Claire 2003 22

Callender, Claire and Martin Kemp 2000 22

Canada Millennium Scholarship Foundation 2002 23


Cerdeira, Maria Luisa and L. Pereira 2003 24

Cervenan, Amy and Alex Usher 2004 24






Chung, Yue Ping 2003 28

Clancy, Patrick and Deirdre Kehoe 1999 29

Clark, Burton 1998 29

Correia, Fernanda et. al. 2002 32

Council of Australian Postgraduate Associations 2003 33


Daniel, Hans-Dieter, Stefanie Schwarz & Ulrich Teichler 2001 34

De Dios Jimenez, Juan and Manuel Salas-Velasco 2000 35

Department for Education and Skills (UK) 2004a 36

Department for Education and Skills (UK) 2004b 36

Department for Education and Skills (UK) 2003 36

Deutsches Studentenwerk 1997 37

Dill, David D. and Maarja Soo 2003 37

Dobson, Ian 2001 38

Eicher, Jean-Claude 1998 38


European Centre for Higher Education (CEPES) 1999 39

Eurydice 1999 40

File, Jon and Leo Goedegebuure 2003 40







Greenaway, David and Michelle Haynes 2000 45


Guille, Marianne 2001 45

Harding, A. 1995 46

Harmon, C., I. Walker and N. Westergard-Nielsen 2001 46

Hochschul-Informations-System (HIS) 2002 52

Holtta, Seppo 1998 52


Huisman, Jeroen 2003 54


Independent Committee of Inquiry into Student Finance 2000 56

Ipsos Reid 2004 58






Jongbloed, Ben and Carlo Salerno 2002 68




Kaiser, Frans 2002 69

Kaiser, Frans et. al. 2003 70





Levy, Jan S. 2004 80

Looker, E. Dianne 2004 82

Marginson, Simon 1997 83

Massey, William F. 2004 84

Matthews, Rebecca 2001 84

Metcalf, Hilary 2005 87

Minxuan, Zhang 2000 88

Mizikaci, Fatma 2006 89

Mora, Jose-Gines and Michael Nugent 1998 91



Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis and CHEPS 2001 96

New Zealand Vice-Chancellors Committee 1999 97

Oliveira, Tanya and Pedro Telhado Pereira 1999 99





Payne, Joan and Claire Callender 1997 104

Pechar, Hans 1998 104




Public Funding and Private Returns to Education 2001 107

R.A. Maltest and Associates Ltd. 2004 107

Rees, Teresa 2002 108

Richards, Ken 2002 109





Swail, Watson Scott and Donald Heller 2003 120

System Three 1999 120


Theisens, Henno 2003 123

Thomas, Phil and Ashima Arora 2002 123

















Wagner, Alan 1998 135

Wagner, Leslie 1998 136

Welch, Anthony 1997 136




Williams, Gareth and Gregory Light 1999 139




B4 United States Only

author year pageAbraham, Katharine and Melissa Clark 2003 3



Alexander, F. King and Ronald G. Ehrenberg 2003 5

Altbach, P.G., P.J. Gumport and D.B. Johnstone 2001 6

American Association of State Colleges and Universities 2005 7

American Council on Education 2004a 7

American Council on Education 2004b 7

American Council on Education 2004c 8

Archibald, Robert B. 2002 9


Baum, Sandy and Saul Schwartz 2006 13

Baum, Sandy 2004 13

Baum, Sandy and Marie O’Malley 2003 13


Berkner, Lutz and Larry Bobbitt 2000 15

Bowen, William G., Martin A. Kurzweil and Eugene M. Tobin 2005 18

Breneman, David and Chester E. Finn Jr 1998 20

Caliber Associates 2003 21

Callan, Patrick M. & Finney, Joni 1997 22

Cheeseman Day, Jennifer and Eric C. Newburger 2002 27




College Board (2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005) 31

Collins, Susan E., Leitzel, Thomas C. and Morgan, Samuel D. 1994 31

Congressional Budget Office 2004a 32

Congressional Budget Office 2004b 32

Congressional Report 2004 32



Ehrenberg, Ronald G. 2000 38


Fossey, Richard and Mark Bateman 1998 42

Gladieux, Lawrence E. and Arthur M. Hauptman 1995 44






Hauptman, Arthur 1998b 48


Hearn, James C. 2003 48


Heller, Donald E. 2001b 49



Herbert, Alicia and Claire Callender 1997 51

Horn, Laura J., Xianglei Chen and Chris Chapman 2003 53

Ifill, Roberto M. and Michael S. McPherson 2004 55

Ikenberry, Stanley O. and Terry W. Hartle 1998 55

Institute for Higher Education Policy 2000 57

Institute for Higher Education Policy and Scholarship 2004 56

Institute for Higher Education Policy et al. 1997 57





Kaiser, Frans, Hans Vossensteyn and Jos Koelman 2001 70

Kane, Thomas J. 1995 71

Kane, Thomas J. and Peter R. Orszag 2003 71

Kezar, Adrianna J. 2000 72


King, Jacqueline E. 2003a 74

King, Jacqueline E. 2003b 74



King, Tracey and Ellynne Bannon 2002 75

Kinser, Kevin and Daniel C. Levy 2005 76

Kipp, Samuel M., Derek V. Price and Jill K. Wohlford 2002 76

Kirshstein, Rita J. et al. 2004 76


McKeown-Moak, Mary 2002 85



McPherson, Michael S., Morton Owen Shapiro and Gordon C. Wilson 1993 87


Monks, James 2001 90







National Commission on the Costs of Higher Education 1998 95

Olivas, Michael 1993 99


Pell Institute for the Study of Opportunity in Higher Education 2004 104

Price, Derek V. 2003 106


Rhoads, Robert A. and Carlos Alberto Torres 2006 108

Ruppert, Sandra S. 2003 110



St. John, Edward P. et. al 2004 111

St. John, Edward P. and Michael D. Parsons 2004 112


Schrag, Philip G. 2002 115

State PIRGs’ Higher Education Project 2002 117

Stringer, William L. et al. 1999 118 Sundt, Melora 1993 118


Swail, Watson Scott and Donald Heller 2004 120



US Department of Education 2001 126

US Department of Education and the the US General 2001 127









Wolanin, Thomas R. 2001 139


Woo, Jennie, Jason Barnhart and Kathy Beasley 2005 140

Woo, Jennie and Jason Barnhart 2003 140


B5 Low and/or Middle Income Other than Transitional


Agarwal, Pawan 2006 4

Albrecht, Douglas and Adrian Ziderman 1991 5

Altbach, Philip G. 1999 6

Amonoo-Neizer, Eugene 1998 8

Association of African Universities 1997 9

Babaloloa, Joel B. 1998 10

Balan, Jorge 1993 11

Banya, Kingsley 2001 11

Banya, Kingsley and Juliet Elu 2001 11



Bollag, Burton 2003 18

Bouapao, L., O. Sengchandavong and S. Sihavong 2000 18

Bray, Mark 2002 19

Bray, Mark 2001 19

Mark, Bray and R. Murray Thomas 1998 20


Chapman, David 2002 26

Chudgar, Amita 2004 27

Chuta, E.J. 1992 28

Chuta, E.J. 1998 28

Cloete, Nico, Pundy Pillay, and Saleem Badat 2004 29

Colclough, Christopher 1999 29

Committee of Vice-Chancellors and Principals in Tanzania 1997 31

Court, David 1999 33

Daka, J.S.J. et al. 2000 34

Fiske, Edward B. and Helen F. Ladd 2004 42


Gill, T.K. and S.S. Gill 2000 44


Heath, Julia A. 1998 49

Herz, Barbara 2005 51


Heyneman, S.P. and Alan J. De Young 2004 51

Hinchliffe, Keith 2002 52

Hoffman, Adonis 1995 52

International Finance Corporation 1999 58

Ishengoma, Johnson 2002 58

Jackson, Roy 2002 59


Johnstone, D. Bruce 2004d 62

Kagia, Ruth 1997 69

Kajubi, Senteza 1992 71

Kasozi, A.B.K. 2004 72

Kaul, Rekha 1993 72

Kiamba, Crispus 2004 72

Kiiza, Julius 1997 73

Kim, Anna and Young Lee 2003 73

Kitaev, Igor 1999 77

Kitaev, Igor et al. 2003 77

Kruss, Glenda and Andre Kraak 2003 77

Lee, W.O. 2002 79


Lewis, Darrel R. and Halil Dundar 1999 81

Mabizela, Mahlubi, George Subotzky and Beverly Thaver 2002 83

Mayanja, Muhammad K. 1998 84

McEwan, Patrick J. and Martin Carnoy 2000 85

McMahon, Walter W. 1988 86

Merisotis, Jamie and Dianne S. Gilleland 2000 87


Ministry of Higher Ed and Scientific Research, Palestinian 2002 88

Mkude, Daniel 2003 89

Mokkgwathi, G.M.G. 1992 90

Musisi, Nakanyike B. and Nansozi K. Muwanga 2003 91

Mwamila, Burton et al. 2002 92

Narayana, M.R. 2005 92

Ng’ethe, Njuguna et. al. 2003 97

Njeuma, Dorothy L. 1999 97

Obasi, Isaac and Eric C. Eboh 2002 98

Odebiyi, Adetanwa I. and Olabisi I. Aina 1999 98




Otieno, Wycliffe 2004 102

Passi, F.O. 1994 103

Pillay, Pundy 1989 105

Ping, Charles 1995 105

Powar, K.B. and K.L. Johar 2004 106

Rhoads, Robert A. and Carlos Alberto Torres 2006 108

Rodrigues, Anthony J., and Shim O. Wandiga 1997 109

Rozada, Martin Gonzalez and Alicia Menendez 2002 110

Samoff, Joel and Bidemi Carrol 2004 113


Sanyal, Bikas and Michaela Martin 1998 114

Sawyerr, Akilagpa 2004 114


Schofield, Allan 1996 115

Ssebuwufu, John P.M. 2002 116

Steyn, Gert and Pierre de Villiers 2006 117

Stumpf, Rolf 1996 118

Sutherland, Carla 2001 119

Task Force on Financial Sustainability of Higher Education in 1998 120

Task Force on Higher Education and Society 2000 121

Task Force on Improvement of Higher Education in Pakistan 2002 121

Teckleselassie, Abebayehu A. and D. Bruce Johnstone 2004 122

Teekens, Hanneke and Ben Jongbloed 2000 121

Teferra, Damtew and Philip G. Altbach 2003 122


Tilak, Jandhyala B.G. 1997 124

Tilak, Jandhyala B.G. and Geetha Rani 2000 124

UNESCO Regional Office for Education in Africa 1998 126


Varghese, N.V. 2001b 131

Weidman, John C. 1995 136





Woodhall, Maureen 1991a 141

Woodhall, Maureen 1991b 142

World Bank 2003 142

World Bank 2002 143


World Bank 2001 144

World Bank 1997 144

World Bank 1994 144

Wright, Cream 1998 145

Zeleza, Paul Tiyambe and Adebay Olukoshi 2004 145




Ziderman, Adrian and Douglas Albrecht 1995 147

B6 Transitional Countries


Bain, Olga 2001 10

Berryman, Sue E. 2000 16

Bray, M. and N. Boresvskaya 2001 20





Kusherbaev, Krymbek et al. 2001 78

Li, Wenli and Weifang Min 2000 82

Mateju, Petr and Natalie Simonova 2003 84

Min, Weifing 2004 88

Mok, Ka-Ho and Jasan Tan 2004 90

Nanzaddorj, Buluut 2001 92


Postiglione, Gerard A. 2006 105

Shattock, Michael 2004 115

Shen, Hong and Wenli LI 2003 115

Shouxin, Li and Bray, Mark 1992 116

Tiron, Stefan et. al. 2003 125

Vossensteyn, Hans and Carlo Salerno 2002a 134

Vossensteyn, Hans and Carlo Salerno 2002b 135

Ziyaev, Muzafar K., Ahadjon Rakhmonov & Murtazo S. Sultanov 2000 147

author biographies

pamelan.marcucci

Pamela Marcucci is the Project Manager for the International Comparative Higher Education Finance and Accessibility Project (ICHEFAP) at the State University of New York at Buffalo. Working closely with Bruce Johnstone, the project director, Ms. Marcucci coordi-nates the project workflow, supervises project graduate students, edits project reports, and writes certain of the country studies. Ms. Marcucci handles the project budget and all official communication with both the University Office of Sponsored Programs Administration and the Ford Foundation and was the principal US coordinator of the March 2002 con-ference in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania; the June 2003 conference in Prague, Czech Republic; and the July 2006 conference in Nairobi, Kenya. She has co-authored papers with Bruce Johnstone on tuition policies worldwide and their impact on access to higher education and has presented on this topic at several international higher education conferences.

Prior to moving to Buffalo and commencing work at the project, Ms. Marcucci spent two years living and working in New York City and more than eight years living and working in Rome, Italy. Her experience at the Italian Association for Women in Development (AIDOS) in Rome and at the African American Institute (AAI) in New York focused on program development, and international education and training.

d.brucejohnstone

D. Bruce Johnstone is SUNY Distinguished Service Professor of Higher and Comparative Education Emeritus at the State University of New York at Buffalo. He retired from active teaching in July 2006, but continues to direct Ph.D. dissertations and to direct the International Comparative Higher Education Finance and Accessibility Project (ICHEFAP). He is presently the Distinguished Scholar Leader of the Fulbright New Century Scholars Program (part time July 2006 – 2008) and Lecturer, at the University of Oslo’s Erasmus Mundus European Master’s in Higher Education.

In a 25-year administrative career, Dr. Johnstone has held posts of vice president for administration at the University of Pennsylvania, president of the State University College of Buffalo, and chancellor of the State University of New York system, the latter from 1988 through 1994. From 1995 through 2006, he taught courses in higher education finance, governance, curriculum, and international comparative higher


education and directed the Center for Comparative and Global Studies in Education.

Dr. Johnstone has written more than 70 books, monographs, articles, chapters, and book reviews. He is best known for his works on the finan-cial condition of higher education, the concept of learning productivity, student financial assistance policy, system governance, and interna-tional comparative higher education finance.

International Higher Education Finance: An Annotated ...€¦ · center for international higher...

Documents

Transcript of International Higher Education Finance: An Annotated ...€¦ · center for international higher...