Which Way for Higher Education in Ohio?
With much fanfare, the Ohio Board of Regents has presented a long-term
plan for higher education in the State of Ohio. There are a number of
things that are very positive about this development. For example, the
very act of thinking about the long-term higher education needs of the
state and planning how to meet them is commendable, and Ohio has not
had a well articulated long-term "master plan" for higher education
since the 1960s. Some of the specifics within the report are common
sense ideas to promote efficiency, such as improving the ability of
students to transfer between institutions of higher learning in the
state.
At the same time, however, the proposal proceeds from several assumptions, some of them implicit, that are highly questionable. This leads to conclusions and potential policy recommendations that, in turn, are dubious in nature. Let us highlight three of those assumptions. First, the plan envisions very large enrollment growth over the next decade or so. However, it does not conclusively demonstrate that there is a need for that many more college-educated Ohioans. Second, the study assumes that a massive increase in higher education investment is necessary to reverse Ohio's relative economic decline, and increase economic growth in the Buckeye State. Third, it is implicitly assumed that the massive enrollment growth largely will take place at public institutions, ignoring the impact that private schools, including proprietary ones, can and likely will have.
It is our contention that these assumptions are dubious, and, indeed, in some cases downright wrong. This leads to potential policy conclusions inconsistent with what factual evidence would suggest is appropriate. Below we elaborate briefly on the problems with these assumptions.
The full report is available here.
Dr. Richard Vedder is a professor of economic at Ohio University and Buckeye Institute academic advisor. Marc Kilmer is a Buckeye Institute Policy Analyst.