Presentation on theme: "1 Accreditation and Private Higher Education Development: A Comparison Between Argentina, Chile and Uruguay Pablo Landoni Couture Carlos Romero Rostagno."— Presentation transcript:
1 Accreditation and Private Higher Education Development: A Comparison Between Argentina, Chile and Uruguay Pablo Landoni Couture Carlos Romero Rostagno Catholic University of Uruguay November 2005
2 At the Crossroads of Trends Private Higher Education Growth in Latin America. Increasing societal demand for accountability in higher education: Accreditation –Quality assurance –Authorization and accreditation Interactions: proliferation and limits
3 Private Higher Education Evolution in Latin America Origins: National Public Universities Wave I: Catholic Universities Wave II: Elite reaction Wave III: Demand-absorbing institutions
4 Private Higher Education Evolution in Latin America (Table 1) Growth Country EnrollmentEnrollment rate EnrollmentEnrollment rate Argentina 82, % 1,269, %1438 % Chile 9, % (*) 452, % 4648 % Uruguay 11,7226.0% 79, %580 % Sources: For 1950 Schwartzman (1994); for 2000, Argentina Fernández Lamarra (2003), Chile Bernasconi (2003) and Uruguay AEE (2000). (*) Includes students from universities and professional institutes.
5 Argentina: Public / Private Distinctiveness Institutional Proliferation (Table 2) Sources: For 1970 Cosentino (2003); for 2003 Caillon (2005) Public Universities University institutes Private Universities University institutes Total 3999
6 Argentina: Public / Private Distinctiveness Growth of Enrollments (Table 3) Source: Caillon (2005) Growth Enrollment Share Enrollment Share Public 675, %1,278, %89 % Private 112, %215, %91 % Total 787, %1,493, %89 %
7 Chile: at the Forefront of Market driven Reforms Impact of Reform (Table 4) Source: Bernasconi (2003) Public 216 Old private (publicly funded) 69 New Private 38 Total863
8 Chile: at the Forefront of Market driven Reforms Increasing Private Share (Table 5) Source: Bernasconi (2003) Growth EnrollmentShareEnrollmentShare Public65,89750 %131,12841 %99 % Traditional private 46,29435 %84,15826 %82 % Private19,50915 %103,80533 %432 % Total131, %319, %142 %
9 Uruguay: Recent Private Sector Changing System (Table 6) Source: Caillon (2005) Growth EnrollmentShareEnrollmentShare Public 62, %70,15687,7 %13 % Private 2, %9,79112,3 %356 % Total 64, %79, %24 %
10 The Wave of Accreditation in the Southern Cone Argentina: Concentration of Functions in an Agency (CONEAU) Chile: Proliferation and State Reactions (Agencies: CSE, CNAP, CONAP) Uruguay: Private authorization and Experimental Accreditation (CCETP and Commission) MERCOSUR Experimental Accreditation Mechanism
11 Argentina: Concentration of Functions in an Agency (CONEAU) Institutional evaluation Accreditation of new higher education institutions (Private and Public) Program evaluation and accreditation (Graduate and Undergraduate levels) Impacts on private proliferation (Table 7) Provisional AuthorizationsPermanent recognition ProposalsApprovedProposalsApproved Sources: Fernández Lamarra (2004) and Caillon (2005).
12 Chile: Proliferation and State Reactions State approval of private institutions (CSE) Undergraduate Programs Accreditation (CNAP) Graduate Programs Accreditation (CONAP) Institutional Accreditation (CNAP) Impacts on private proliferation (Table 8) Universities created before CSE ( )43 Universities authorized by CSE ( )10 Universities granted full autonomy24 Universities closed by CSE13 Source: Lemaitre (2005)
13 Uruguay: Private Authorization and Experimental Accreditation State approval of private institutions and programs (CCTEP) MERCOSUR Experimental Accreditation (Accreditation Commission) Impacts on private proliferation (Table 9) Source: Data provided by the Ministry of Education ProposalsAuthorizedRejectedClosedUnder review
Summary of Findings: (1) Common Trends State involvement in the process of private higher education institution’s authorization: Impacts on proliferation Continuous enrollment growth in the private sector. Launching of Accreditation agencies.
15 State Authorization of Private Higher Education Institutions: Impacts on Proliferation (Table 10) Institutions created before Agency Institutions authorized by agencies Argentina (1990 – 1995) CONEAU (1995) 229 Chile (1980 – 1990) CSE (1990) 4010 Uruguay (1985 – 1995) CCETP (1995) 113 Sources: Fernández Lamarra 2004; Lemaitre 2005: data provided by the Ministry of Education of Uruguay.
16 Continuous Enrollment Growth in Higher Education, including the Private Sector (Table 11) Sources: Tables 3, 5 and 6. Private enrollment growth last decade Last decade’s enrollment growth for the total system Actual private enrollment share Argentina 91%89%14.4% Chile 182%142%59% Uruguay 356%24%12.3%
17 Moving into Accreditation: the Creation of Accreditation Agencies (Table 12) ArgentinaChileUruguay Level Agency / Status ApplicationAgency / Status ApplicationAgency / Status Application Institutional CONEAU voluntary Public and private autonomy CNAP voluntary Public and private (autonomy) Not available Program Undergraduate Graduate CONEAU mandatory CONEAU mandatory Public and private (Only professions regulated by law) Public and private CNAP voluntary CONAP voluntary Public and private Public and private Commission voluntary MERCOSUR (3 programs)
18 Summary of Findings: (2) Impacts of Accreditation Authorization constrained private institution’s proliferation – Coercive isomorphism. Accreditation has limited impact on private growth and homogenization – Mimetic isomorphism. Private institutions included accreditation in their strategy for legitimacy. Policy implications: Unanticipated private development and State reactions.