7. Purpose: Step one was designed to develop an Results: Steps one and three were not 1975. Harvard University Study Purpose: To use a merged machine-readable data base and relevant historical documents to identify the institutional effects of funds from Title III of the Higher Education Act of 1965. Results: Four areas of college and university characteristics relevant to the broad policy concerns of the Title III, "Developing Institutions, program were cited. They are: 1. 2. the structural development of the levels of various collegiate 3. the relative efficiency with which colleges and universities provide instruction and, where appropriate, public service and research, and 4. the determinants of student demand with a special focus on those institutional actions which affect individuals' college-going choices. 1 Major sources outside the categories listed above relate to a problem of recent interest, but one which was destined to come to the fore given the prevailing attitudes toward federal aid to institutions of higher education. This problem is fund replacement. Dr. F. D. Patterson's work on endowment building strategies, The College Endowment Funding Plan (1976), and the Title III Task Force report on "Endowment Building at Developing Institutions" are the major sources supporting the endowment option as a fund replacement strategy. Finally, the "transcript" of the Meeting of the Title III Study Group was a helpful source. The studies cited are important for policy development. All relate in some way to the issues raised in the list of fourteen questions for which the Bureau of Higher and Continuing Education needs answers. All provide in sights for dealing with two persistent problems that have troubled the operation of the program to Strengthen Developing Institutions since its inception. The first of these problems has persisted throughout the history of the Title III program: the inability of either civil servants or specialists to come up with a definition of "developing institution" that could be applied as a cut-off measure. In the face of this failure, administrators have had to rely on less substantive attributes in the selection process. The second persistent problem in making policy decisions and other administrative judgements related to the Developing Institutions Program has been the tension between forces aligned to keep the program true to what is deemed as the original legislative intent and forces aligned to expand the original meaning and utilize the Title III programs as a more generalized vehicle for providing Federal aid to institutions of higher education. Something of this ambivalence may be seen in the growth pattern of the program and its current operational style. Organization of the Study and Report I. Introduction The introduction sets forth the purpose of the study, describes the circumstances under which the examination was carried out, gives pertinent details concerning the methodology, and offers a preview of some of the major sources on which the study was based. The introduction also points up the chronic problem areas with which the study had to be concerned. II. The Historical Background of the Title III This section provides a useful perspective for examining the Title III program and an analysis of the origin, the original intent, and evolution of the Title III legislation. III. Identification, Development Stages, and This section attempts to provide a workable definition of a "developing institution," analyzes probable stages of institutional development, and offers critical comments on problems of eligibility. IV. Program Organization and Operation This section deals with both the unique and standard procedures associated with the operational routine of the Developing Institutions Program. The section also provides a view of the mesh formed by the interaction among institutions, assisting agencies, and other cooperating mechanisms which make the Developing Institutions Program what it is. ས. Funding Strategies and Funds Replacement This section describes the process and magnitude of funding employed by the program and offers two alternative funding plans. Included also in this section is a strong plea for the special funding of some developing institutions. VI. Title III and Special Problems of Black Colleges This section provides a discussion of the double jeopardy in which some Black colleges have been placed by the Adams Criteria, and a brief delineation of the historical and current role of Black institutions of higher education. Pertinent suggestions for utilizing the membership of these institutions in the Title III program as an effective strategy for providing special supports are also discussed. VII. The Report of the Developing Institutions Study Group and Section VIII need no prior explanations, and Section IX stands for itself. Section X, Appendices, contains much information illustrative of points made in the text and special data supportive of the Conclusions and Recommendations. Implicit in the nature of the report is the idea that a Federal role in American higher education today is a necessary and positive feature. A Title III policy should reflect the appropriate expression of this role. Explicit in the nature of the report is the basic assumption that there is extant and available sufficient data on which to base a policy examination of Title III and that the results of such an examination should be a useful device in the administrative arsenal of the Bureau of Higher and Continuing Education. |