Performance-Based Funding of Higher Education: Analyses of Policy Discourse Across Four Case Studies

Performance-based funding (PBF) for public colleges and universities is increasingly prevalent worldwide, as a part of a broader pattern of marketisation in public education. This study focused on developing an empirical view of how, and in what contexts, policy makers use the concepts of neoliberal economics to design and support PerformanceBased Funding (PBF) policies in higher education. We analysed 121 policy documents, white papers, evaluation reports, and news items related to PBF policies in four case jurisdictions: Tennessee, Washington, United Kingdom, and Italy. We employed critical discourse analysis methods as framed by Fairclough and colleagues and implemented this approach within the broader methodological guidance of Carspecken’s critical qualitative research. Grounded in social theory, this study illuminates the role PBF policies play internationally in moving higher education institutions closer to markets. Moreover, it provides an empirical view of the mechanisms and networks built into PBF policy debates. Finally, it contributes to a theoretically and empirically grounded view on the discursive uses of neoliberalism in education policy

Catalyzing Change Through Engaged Department Cohorts: Overcoming the One-and-Done Model

This article examines the merits and challenges of catalyzing institution-wide community engagement through onboarding successive engaged department cohorts. Building upon previous findings, it tests the hypothesis that deep and integrated community engagement within departments can be leveraged into pervasive engagement across an institution, exploring critical challenges to fostering collaborative, scaffolded, and sustained community engagement and offering recommendations. Such initiatives have been designed and piloted across the United States as a possible starting point for shifting often temporary, fragmented, and isolated community engagement efforts to collaborative and sustainable engagement opportunities that span programs of study. This cross-institutional and multi-departmental case study analyzes these claims, documenting the lessons learned from two successive initiatives encompassing 10 engaged departments across three institutions of higher education in the Midwest. Research harnesses traditional surveys, faculty, community, and leadership interviews, initiative reporting documents, as well as systemic action research practices. Through a cross-departmental and institutional comparison analysis, the researchers highlight the most challenging barriers and promising interventions to overcome the one-and-done model of previous engagement efforts