President Obama announced his budget proposal a few weeks ago with over $11 billion in incentives for colleges and states to drive performance in higher education. This is a continuation of the desire by many to improve student outcomes in higher education. In 2013 no fewer than 27 states used performance as a factor in their appropriations formula, a concept that originated in Tennessee, and that is growing into other states across the nation. On the surface this is a concept that is very much supported by both boards of trustees and college administrators, but when those groups look deeper into the idea of performance based funding institutional challenges become apparent. The challenge arises in the understanding of how performance should be measured and defined. Most of the appropriation formulas from the states and the incentives from the federal government define performance as completion and reward institutions with additional appropriations and grants based on the number of certificates and degrees awarded. Again this is a general concept that is widely accepted, but what about those institutions that, by virtue of their mission, do not equate performance or success with completion. According to the Higher Learning Commission, one of the regional higher education accrediting agencies, among the Core Criteria for Accreditation is “The institution’s mission is clear and articulated publicly; it guides the institution’s operations”. This criteria requires colleges and universities to develop and use their mission as a guiding force in the operation of their institution, but what if, by the nature of their mission the institution’s operational objectives are counterproductive to the appropriation agencies definition of performance. There are many educational institutions, such as community and technical colleges, who focus on workforce development, dual credit for high school students, adult and continuing education, and correctional education (just to name a few areas), that are all under- or non-funded in a purely performance based model when performance is measured by degree completion. Without these focus areas of educational delivery communities and society as a whole will not realize the full potential of improvement through education, and without a mechanism for colleges to fund these forms of education their viability will come into question. It is time for our nation’s higher education institutions to find ways to improve outcomes, and performance based funding is a very viable vehicle to address these challenges, but we can’t be to quick to establishing a one-size fits all approach to defining performance, because if we do the unintended consequences of that definition will be counterproductive to our purpose.
References
HigherEdJournals 