scholarly journals HIGHER EDUCATION: FUNDING TENDENCIES, OPPORTUNITIES AND SOURCES

2011 ◽  
Vol 1 (3) ◽  
pp. 168
Author(s):  
Jeļena Lonska
Keyword(s):  
Higher Education ◽  
Higher Education Policy ◽  
Student Loan ◽  
The State ◽  
Education Funding ◽  
Higher Education Funding ◽  
Use Of Resources ◽  
State Participation ◽  
Educational Product ◽  
The Impact

The issues regarding the funding mechanisms of higher education, their application and efficiency have recently become topical in many countries worldwide. Mobilization and efficient use of resources in higher education policy are the priority patterns all over the world. Society is trying to find answers to the questions considering the state participation in higher education funding. How to determine the impact of the state participation and levels of state regarding higher education funding? Is centralized planning necessary for higher education: does the state or consumers of educational services allocate financial resources at universities? There is an opinion that a consumer group has an effective financial tool for resource allocation. Another significant question is whether a person is able to choose the educational ‘product’, which corresponds to the needs of economics. What should an effective student loan system be like? Should the future students’ loan repayments depend on students' future incomes? This study provides information on the global higher education funding trends and opportunities, looking for the answers to the issues mentioned above.

What Are The Alternatives To Student Loans In Higher Education Funding?

2010 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 19 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anthony Stokes ◽  
Sarah Wright
Keyword(s):  
Higher Education ◽  
Financial Market ◽  
Financial Support ◽  
Student Loans ◽  
Student Loan ◽  
Education Funding ◽  
Higher Education Funding ◽  
The Government ◽  
Market Instability ◽  
The Cost

In a period of student loan scandals and U.S. financial market instability impacting on the cost and availability of student loans, this paper looks at alternative models of higher education funding. In this context, it also considers the level of financial support that the government should provide to higher education.

scholarly journals The impact of impact

2010 ◽  
Vol 32 (3) ◽  
pp. 46-48
Author(s):  
Rebecca Smith
Keyword(s):  
Higher Education ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Education Funding ◽  
Higher Education Funding ◽  
Related Research ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Funding Council

The proposed introduction of impact into research funding assessments has been controversial. The current proposals for the new quality-related research (QR) framework contribute to a very tense environment which also includes looming cuts to higher education budgets. There are widespread concerns about how the Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE) will allocate the resulting budget.

scholarly journals The Nexus Between Higher Education Funding and Return Migration Examined

2019 ◽  
pp. 283-298
Author(s):  
Rita Kaša
Keyword(s):  
Higher Education ◽  
International Students ◽  
Return Migration ◽  
Student Loan ◽  
Education Funding ◽  
Higher Education Funding ◽  
Funding Sources ◽  
Migration Decisions ◽  
Return Intentions ◽  
Loan Forgiveness

Abstract Asymmetrical international student mobility poses a challenge to the governments of countries sending students abroad to ensure their return home after graduation. Financial assistance tools such as student loan forgiveness are viewed as a solution to this challenge. Drawing on evidence in the case of Latvia, this chapter contributes to the literature testing the policy assumption that sending governments can influence the return migration decisions of international students by cancelling their student loans. This chapter presents The Emigrant Communities of Latvia survey data on higher education funding sources among international students from Latvia and the relationship between these sources and their return intentions. Using qualitative interview data, this chapter examines the effectiveness of student loan forgiveness in influencing the return migration decisions of global graduates from Latvia. The chapter concludes that the existing student loan forgiveness policy does little to prompt return migration.

scholarly journals The mechanism of higher education funding in Ukraine: nationwide and local perspective

2018 ◽  
Vol 15 (3) ◽  
pp. 223-236
Author(s):  
Iryna Degtyarova ◽  
Olha Hryhorash ◽  
Victor Chentsov
Keyword(s):  
Higher Education ◽  
Net Present Value ◽  
Current System ◽  
The State ◽  
Education Funding ◽  
Higher Education Funding ◽  
State Planning ◽  
Fair Competition ◽  
Local Perspective ◽  
The Government

Despite positive transformations in higher education in Ukraine since 2014 when a new Law was introduced, the system of public funding still remains a highly centralized and strongly budgetary dependent based on the state planning methods, which in the situation of lack of resources becomes more imbalanced and inefficient.The current system of allocation of the “state order for training the specialists with higher education” does not ensure an equal and fair competition among top 10 universities and the rest, especially regional, and the system cannot guarantee state-funded places to all applicants with high results of the External Independent Testing exams. At the same time, only a small share of graduates work on the specialty they acquired. The situation on the labor market does not encourage graduates to be employed in public institutions, which is harmful for the public sector of economy, especially in the regions. It proves that the system of distribution and allocation of government funding between higher education institutions in Ukraine needs urgent reforming.The objective is to analyze the current system of higher education funding in Ukraine in its national dimension and local perspective, and to develop proposals for its improvement, considering the selected good practices and using the following methods: literature analysis, method of retrospective analysis to research budgetary expenditures, determining the Net Present Value for calculating the government cost. Finally, a feasible proposal to reform the mechanism of public higher education funding was developed.

scholarly journals FEATURES OF FUNDING FOR HIGHER EDUCATION IN EUROPEAN COUNTRIES AND IN THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION IN THE LIGHT OF REFORMS

2017 ◽  
pp. 139
Author(s):  
Olga Nikolaevna Rimskaya
Keyword(s):  
Higher Education ◽  
Simultaneous Increase ◽  
Education Funding ◽  
Higher Education Funding ◽  
Government Programs ◽  
State Budget ◽  
State Participation ◽  
Basic Approaches ◽  
Participation In Higher Education ◽  
Specific Country

Modern education reforms undertaken in the countries all over the world have inevitably affected the management and funding system of education. The tendency towards decentralization of management of education is the most expressed in many countries. However, the state budget is still responsible for education funding. Taking into account national peculiarities in the sphere of funding, there are various approaches and schemes. As international experience shows, a state participation in higher education funding leads to its gradual reduction with a simultaneous increase of the share of extrabudgetary funding at the expense of the entities, public granting organizations, government programs, and students. It should be noted that basic approaches and methods of education funding change, depending on the economic situation in the specific country.

scholarly journals The impact of high fee-low-subsidy and low fee-high-subsidy higher education funding models on higher education access in European Union countries

2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (4) ◽  
pp. 37-46
Author(s):  
Nadežda Kučaidze ◽  
Artūras Jurgelevičius
Keyword(s):  
Higher Education ◽  
European Union ◽  
Gdp Per Capita ◽  
Education Funding ◽  
Higher Education Funding ◽  
Tuition Fees ◽  
Funding Model ◽  
European Union Countries ◽  
Per Capita ◽  
The Impact

Introduction. Higher education funding is relevant topic and widely analysed by scientist all other the world. Nowadays there is very big difference between higher education funding models across European Union countries – students have to pay very high fees for their studies in one countries, while in other countries – students have no obligations to pay for their studies at all, or have to pay very low tuition fees. All EU member states declare importance of HE for the future of economic, individual and society wellbeing. With respect to cost-sharing principle in higher education funding, higher education funding models can be divided into four models: Low-fee-High-subsidy; Low-fees-Low-subsidy; High-fees-High-subsidy and High-fee-Low subsidy. Aim and tasks. The aim of this article is to perform comparative analysis of two extremely different higher education funding models, which are applied in European Union states – Low-fee-High-subsidy higher education funding model (LFHS model) and High-fee-Low-subsidy higher education funding model (HFLS model). Results. The results of scientific research shows, that LFHS and HFLS models, which were analysed, have a different impact on access to higher education (i.e. gross enrolment rate (GER), GER male, GER female and HE graduation rate (HEGR) in EU countries. Conclusions. Tuition fees (max., min., net, normative) have a statistically significant, but not only positive or negative impact on enrolment to HE and graduation of HE, as well as for women and men enrolment to HE (GER male, GER female) – it depends on funding model EU state applies. Max. need-based grants have positive impact only in LFHS model case as well as min. need-based grants. In addition, the results of research show, that there is gender inequality – women enrolment to HE exceed men enrolment at most in HFLS model. Men are more likely to study in countries with higher need-based grants (for instance, in LFHS model countries). Counties with higher GDP per capita are more likely to apply LFHS model, than countries with lower GDP  per capita.

scholarly journals Fees, fairness and the National Scholarship Programme: Higher education policy in England and the Coalition Government

2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
Helen Carasso ◽  
Andrew J Gunn
Keyword(s):  
Higher Education ◽  
Higher Education Policy ◽  
Financial Support ◽  
Prime Minister ◽  
Coalition Government ◽  
Education Funding ◽  
Lower Income ◽  
Higher Education Funding ◽  
Deputy Prime Minister ◽  
Student Contribution

Conservative and Liberal Democrat policies for higher education funding in the 2010 general election campaign offered voters a stark choice – with one party willing to consider raising the cap on undergraduate fees, while the other publicly committed to removing any student contribution. It is not surprising therefore that this was an area in which they found it impossible to agree a firm position as part of their coalition agreement (Cabinet Office, 2010). When parliament later voted on higher education funding, the view of the larger party prevailed and the cap on fees almost trebled to £9,000. The Liberal Democrat Deputy Prime Minister took responsibility for launching a National Scholarship Programme (NSP), providing financial support to undergraduates from lower-income backgrounds, to be introduced at the same time as the increase in fees. While this may have offered limited political credibility to his party, the structure of the scheme was criticized from the outset, and it ceased to operate after just three cohorts of students. This paper identifies the political and policy drivers behind the NSP. It explores the need for compromise in the context of the Coalition Government and the drive to embed a dimension of 'fairness' into policy change. From an analysis of the NSP's implementation, evolution, and ultimate closure, we consider the extent to which fairness can, and cannot, successfully be promoted through the design of undergraduate fees and financial support, an objective that was espoused by politicians responsible for the introduction of £1,000, £3,000 and, ultimately, £9,000 fees.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document