Social Contract & Higher Education in the U.S.

• Changing times necessitate a renewed social contract between society and higher education, characterized by a strong historical bond in the U.S.
• Universities have traditionally been shaped by and accountable to the communities they serve, with each generation establishing its own version of this contract.
• Despite state constitutional power over education, the federal government has significantly influenced the social contract with universities.
• The Federal Ordinance of 1785 defined the university's public role in sustaining democracy.
• The Morrill Act stimulated states to create public universities for resource development and broadened educational access to the working class.
• Post-WWII, the government expanded higher education's role via the GI Bill, Higher Education Acts, and federal financial aid.
• A social contract evolved where the federal government supported faculty research, expecting societal benefits in security, health, and prosperity.
• Social, economic, and technological forces necessitate a reconsideration of the social contract; federal policy will likely be needed.

The Age of Knowledge

• The U.S. is rapidly becoming a knowledge-based society, shifting from material- and labor-intensive industries to knowledge-intensive ones.
• Wealth creation now hinges on the creation and application of new knowledge.
• Knowledge, unlike natural resources, is inexhaustible and multiplies with use, but it requires educated minds to absorb and apply it.
• As society becomes more knowledge-intensive, dependence on universities and similar institutions increases.

Demographic Change

• The U.S. population is becoming more diverse, with women, minorities, and immigrants accounting for most of the labor force growth.
• Full participation of underrepresented groups is crucial for equity, social justice, and national strength.
• Segregation and nonassimilation of minority cultures hinder societal evolution.
• Affirmative action and equal opportunity programs face challenges in courts and legislatures.
• Social pluralism presents vitality and energy.
• Universities have a unique role in developing multicultural communities, fostering understanding and tolerance.
• The development of multicultural communities must occur within a new political context that requires new policies and practices.

The Globalization of the United States

• The U.S. is increasingly linked globally via travel, communication, arts, culture, and commerce.
• A completely domestic U.S. economy no longer exists.
• Worldwide communication networks have created an international market for products, knowledge professionals, research, and educational services.
• The U.S. is evolving into a "world nation" with economic, political, and ethnic ties globally.
• Universities are international institutions at the center of a world learning and scholarship system.
• Universities must enable students to appreciate diverse cultural contributions and thrive in multicultural settings.

The Post-Cold War World

• National security concerns drove major public investments in infrastructure for half a century.
• The research university, laboratories, highway systems, telecommunications, airports, and space programs were all stimulated by the arms race.
• The end of the Soviet Union and steps toward peace have weakened national security as a driving force.
• Motivation for major public investment has weakened, and the nation seeks new driving imperatives.
• Societal concerns such as economic competitiveness, health care, crime, and education lack the urgency to set new priorities for public investment.

Market Forces

• Higher education is a public enterprise shaped by policy but also influenced by market forces.
• Academic institutions compete for students, faculty, and resources.
• The market is heavily subsidized, leading to prices below true costs.
• Education's value is often based on myths and perceptions, such as a degree guaranteeing success.
• The public expects both the range of choice and subsidies that lower the price of higher education.
• Education itself may replace natural resources or national defense as the 21st-century priority.
• Universities' monopoly over advanced education is challenged by geographical factors and control of accreditation.
• Information technology eliminates barriers, and new competitors like virtual universities challenge credentialing.
• Weakening regulations and new competitive forces may restructure higher education.
• A global knowledge and learning industry may emerge, merging academic institutions with telecommunications, entertainment, and information services.
• Market-driven restructuring is important for considering the university's future.
• The postsecondary education market can reward those who adapt to change and punish those who do not.
• Universities must cope with competitive pressures while preserving traditional values.
• More people seek education, yet support for commitments like academic freedom is eroding.
• Faculty feel stress due to declining research support and increasing demands of grantsmanship.
• Higher education as a public good is being challenged by a view of college as an individual benefit determined by the marketplace.
• States spend more on prisons than on higher education, and federal aid programs shift to loans and tax incentives.
• Colleges and universities are evolving, but change may not be responsive enough.
• Societal forces may transform the university in unforeseen ways, creating new institutional forms.
• Market forces unleashed by technology and driven by demand for higher education are powerful and could reshape the higher education enterprise.
• A commercial model of a university may meet workplace needs but not higher purposes.
• Universities preserve cultural heritage, generate new knowledge, serve as social critics, and provide knowledge-based services.
• The escalating costs of residential education could make it unaffordable for most, relegating many to low-cost alternatives.
• The residential college campus could become exclusive to the affluent.

The Future of Higher Education

• There will be diverse forms and types of institutions serving society.
• Colleges and universities are undertaking strategic efforts to transform themselves.
• New participants are entering the learning landscape.
• Access to advanced learning could become a defining domestic policy issue.
• The nation might aspire to a "society of learning," where people are continually engaged in learning experiences.
• The government-university research partnership may need to be reconsidered.
• Stakeholders in the university have drifted apart without adequate communication.
• Political pressures may reduce funding for university-based research.
• Government officials worry about rising costs and reluctance to set priorities.
• While the partnership made U.S. research universities world leaders, it has downsides.
• Pressure for success has changed university culture and governance.
• The grant system has fostered competition and shifted faculty loyalties.
• Publication and grantsmanship have become the primary criteria for performance.
• The needs of the public may not have been adequately addressed.
• Society seeks professional degrees over liberal education.
• Politicians value productivity measures, and cost is increasingly important.
• A culture of excellence may no longer be sustained by the public.
• A shift to cost-competitive forces may broaden the mission but affect the excellence of top institutions.
• The land-grant university model should be reconsidered in order to address the current profound transition from an industrial to a knowledge-based society.
• A new federal act may be needed to address the needs of the 21st century.
• The nation's most important national resource for the future will be its people.
• A "learn-grant" university might be designed to develop human resources and infrastructure.
• Land-grant Universities, and cooperative extension programs could be directed to the needs and development of the people in the region.
• New interdisciplinary fields, such as complexity and global change, might be developed to provide the necessary knowledge and associated problem-solving services in the land-grant tradition.

The Challenges Ahead

• New investments are unlikely to be made within the old models.
• The theme would be to broaden the base, not simply channel more resources into established institutions.
• Congress and the White House are unlikely to abandon budget-balancing constraints.
• Tax policy could be used as an alternative mechanism to invest in education.
• The federal government could provide a permanent R&D tax credit to industry for research and educational activities undertaken jointly with public universities in special research parks or networked organizations.
• The states would commit to matching the federal contributions, Universities would commit to industry and would restructure their intellectual property ownership policies to facilitate such partnerships.
• Universities would build the capacity to provide more universal educational opportunities, perhaps through network-based learning or virtual universities.
• Universities would agree to form alliances with other universities, as well as K-12 education and workplace training programs.
• Institutions and academic researchers would then commit to research and professional service associated with such national priorities.
• Faculties would be called on to set new priorities, collaborate across campus boundaries, and build on their diverse capabilities.
• Change has always characterized the university, even as it sought to preserve and propagate the intellectual achievements of civilization.
• Undergraduate education has been improved, costs have been cut, administrations streamlined, and campuses are more diverse.
• These changes have been largely reactive rather than strategic.
• Institutions still have not grappled with the extraordinary implications of a society of learning.
• Higher education will flourish, and the university will change to serve a changing world.
• The real question is how and by whom that change will be transformed.
• If the university can transform itself, the challenge of change may become the opportunity for a renaissance in higher education.
• Diversifying representation in science and engineering requires initiatives that increase diversity of thought.
• An analytical framework for comparison can help rather than comparing universities based entirely on arbitrary rankings.