Literaturnachweis - Detailanzeige
| Autor/inn/en | Holzhacker, Denilde; Chornoivan, Olena; Yazilitas, Demet; Dayan-Ochir, Khishigbuyan |
|---|---|
| Institution | Institute for Higher Education Policy |
| Titel | Privatization in Higher Education: Cross-Country Analysis of Trends, Policies, Problems, and Solutions. Issue Brief |
| Quelle | (2009), (31 Seiten)
PDF als Volltext kostenfreie Datei |
| Sprache | englisch |
| Dokumenttyp | gedruckt; online; Monographie |
| Schlagwörter | Higher Education; Privatization; Foreign Countries; Trend Analysis; Barriers; Comparative Education; Educational Policy; Policy Analysis; Change Strategies; Politics of Education; Institutional Characteristics; Brazil; Mongolia; Netherlands; Ukraine |
| Abstract | Privatization is one of the main global trends in higher education. Aspects of privatization include the development and expansion of private institutions, increased reliance of public institutions on private funding, and the operation of the institutions in a businesslike manner. The rapid spread of privatization in higher education systems of the world and the growing variation of its forms and practices raise a set of complex questions for researchers, practitioners, and policymakers in education. Should the government or other educational authorities be involved in regulating privatization processes? If so, to what extent is this involvement justified? Should the government encourage or discourage privatization in higher education? Should it support some forms of privatization and curb the development of others? This paper examines privatization issues in the context of four countries: Brazil, Mongolia, the Netherlands, and Ukraine. The countries' experiences are quite different from each other, which helps illustrate different aspects of privatization. This examination identifies some common problems with privatization in these countries and the ways in which these problems are being addressed. Findings include the following: (1) Some governments (Brazil, Ukraine) are actively involved in the regulation of privatization; others (the Netherlands) allow higher education institutions and independent agencies to regulate their activities; still others (Mongolia) leave regulation to the market; (2) The most widespread forms of privatization in developing and postcommunist countries are private higher education institutions, with a particular focus on proprietary institutions and cost-recovery mechanisms: tuition and fees, and student loans. Proprietary higher education does not play a significant role in more developed countries such as the Netherlands; and (3) The privatization process in higher education seems to take on a more conservative (Brazil) character or a more liberal one (Mongolia, Ukraine), depending on whether privatization is encouraged or discouraged in the broader economy. (Contains 1 figure, 3 boxes, and 74 footnotes.) (ERIC). |
| Anmerkungen | Institute for Higher Education Policy. 1320 19th Street NW Suite 400, Washington, DC 20036. Tel: 202-861-8223; Fax: 202-861-9307; e-mail: institute@ihep.org; Web site: http://www.ihep.org |
| Erfasst von | ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC |
| Update | 2017/4/10 |
Literaturbeschaffung und Bestandsnachweise in Bibliotheken prüfen
Permalink als QR-Code
Inhalt auf sozialen Plattformen teilen (nur vorhanden, wenn Javascript eingeschaltet ist)
Teile diese Seite:
