The Cost-Effectiveness of Public Higher Education: Integrating Accounting and Quality to Assess Value

2018 ◽  
Vol 18 (10) ◽  
1973 ◽  
Vol 4 (3) ◽  
pp. 158-176 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard Layard ◽  
Michael Oatey

2010 ◽  
Vol 3 (10) ◽  
pp. 57 ◽  
Author(s):  
Noah Kasraie ◽  
Esrafill Kasraie

The Internet and advancements in the field of information technology have opened up unprecedented opportunities for every citizen to succeed in the 21st Century.  Higher education has been utilizing the new technology by offering web-based education.  Many universities today offer online classes and even online degrees using eLearning.  But how can we measure the cost effectiveness and efficiency of eLearning?  The purpose of this article is to review a model to measure the cost effectiveness and efficiency of eLearning by investigating the three major sectors of the eLearning industry and discuss the impacts of economy on the growth of this newly developed industry.


Author(s):  
Fiona M. Hollands ◽  
Devayani Tirthali

<p>Given the ongoing alarm regarding uncontrollable costs of higher education, it would be reasonable to expect not only concern about the impact of MOOCs on educational outcomes, but also systematic efforts to document the resources expended on their development and delivery. However, there is little publicly available information on MOOC costs that is based on rigorous analysis. In this article, we first address what institutional resources are required for the development and delivery of MOOCs, based on interviews conducted with 83 administrators, faculty members, researchers, and other actors in the MOOCspace. Subsequently, we use the ingredients method to present cost analyses of MOOC production and delivery at four institutions. We find costs ranging from $38,980 to $325,330 per MOOC, and costs per completer of $74-$272, substantially lower than costs per completer of regular online courses, by merit of scalability. Based on this metric, MOOCs appear more cost-effective than online courses, but we recommend judging MOOCs by impact on learning and caution that they may only be cost-effective for the most self-motivated learners. By demonstrating the methods of cost analysis as applied to MOOCs, we hope that future assessments of the value of MOOCs will combine both cost information and effectiveness data to yield cost-effectiveness ratios that can be compared with the cost-effectiveness of alternative modes of education delivery. Such information will help decision-makers in higher education make rational decisions regarding the most productive use of limited educational resources, to the benefit of both learners and taxpayers.</p>


Author(s):  
C. Edward Watson ◽  
Denise P. Domizi ◽  
Sherry A. Clouser

<p class="3">As public funding for higher education decreases and the cost to students to attend college increases, universities are searching for strategies that save students money while also increasing their chances for success. Using free online textbooks is one such strategy, and the OpenStax College initiative at Rice University is one of the most widely recognized producers of such materials. Through a mixed method approach, this article examines the student and faculty experiences of adopting and using an OpenStax textbook. With 1,299 student participants, it was found that students greatly value the quality, attributes, and the cost of the OpenStax Biology textbook, though minor concerns were raised about its online format. Faculty adoption of a free textbook provides unique opportunities for course redesign and improvement, and the approach employed in this course transformation context resulted in clearly articulated learning outcomes, a fully realized structure in the course’s learning management system, and improvements to instructional practice. The student, faculty, and course benefits of this study offer a compelling argument for the adoption of high quality open education resources (OER) in public higher education contexts.</p>


Author(s):  
Liubov Kozoriz

The subject of the study is the process of preparing applicants for higher education in the context of assessing its effectiveness. The purpose of the study is to develop a balanced system of non-financial indicators suitable for analyzing the costs of training applicants for higher education. Method or methodology of the work.General scientific methods (scientific abstraction, comparison, analysis, synthesis, generalization) and a specific method of key performance indicators (KPI). The results.The article describes modern approaches to understanding the phenomenon of nonfinancial indicators applied to the education system effectiveness analysis in Ukraine, in particular it deals with the issues of the higher education applicants training effectiveness. The key elements of the strategic goals of educational institutions are considered. Author reveals basic stages of non-financial indicators balanced system formation including formation of strategy, determination of the most important factors of success, definition of efficiency indicators system, which corresponds to the needs and opportunities of the institution of higher education. The main risks and peculiarities of the implementation of non-financial indicators are investigated. An indicative list of key performance indicators is proposed, which can become the basis for effective monitoring of the cost effectiveness of training for higher education. Scope of the results: for development of a strategy for managing higher education at the macro and micro levels by state and regional authorities. Conclusions.The method of key performance indicators is acceptable for analyzing the cost-effectiveness of training applicants for higher education. Existing methodological approaches allow to develop a system of efficiency analysis both at the macro level (analysis of the entire higher school) and at the level of individual institutions. Using developed system of indicators, it is possible to go beyond the naive quantitative assessment of indicators and to achieve a real assessment of the return on state investment in training.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document