skip to main content
US FlagAn official website of the United States government
dot gov icon
Official websites use .gov
A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.
https lock icon
Secure .gov websites use HTTPS
A lock ( lock ) or https:// means you've safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Explore Research Products in the PAR
It may take a few hours for recently added research products to appear in PAR search results.


Title: Systematic shifts in scaling behavior based on organizational strategy in universities
To build better theories of cities, companies, and other social institutions such as universities, requires that we understand the tradeoffs and complementarities that exist between their core functions, and that we understand bounds to their growth. Scaling theory has been a powerful tool for addressing such questions in diverse physical, biological and urban systems, revealing systematic quantitative regularities between size and function. Here we apply scaling theory to the social sciences, taking a synoptic view of an entire class of institutions. The United States higher education system serves as an ideal case study, since it includes over 5,800 institutions with shared broad objectives, but ranges in strategy from vocational training to the production of novel research, contains public, nonprofit and for-profit models, and spans sizes from 10 to roughly 100,000 enrolled students. We show that, like organisms, ecosystems and cities, universities and colleges scale in a surprisingly systematic fashion following simple power-law behavior. Comparing seven commonly accepted sectors of higher education organizations, we find distinct regimes of scaling between a school’s total enrollment and its expenditures, revenues, graduation rates and economic added value. Our results quantify how each sector leverages specific economies of scale to address distinct priorities. Taken together, the scaling of features within a sector along with the shifts in scaling across sectors implies that there are generic mechanisms and constraints shared by all sectors, which lead to tradeoffs between their different societal functions and roles. We highlight the strong complementarity between public and private research universities, and community and state colleges, that all display superlinear returns to scale. In contrast to the scaling of biological systems, our results highlight that much of the observed scaling behavior is modulated by the particular strategies of organizations rather than an immutable set of constraints.  more » « less
Award ID(s):
1838420 1757923 1656284
PAR ID:
10309394
Author(s) / Creator(s):
; ; ; ; ;
Editor(s):
Amaral, Luís A.
Date Published:
Journal Name:
PLOS ONE
Volume:
16
Issue:
10
ISSN:
1932-6203
Format(s):
Medium: X
Sponsoring Org:
National Science Foundation
More Like this
  1. ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; et al (, Workshop: Bridging the Digital and Data Divide)
    A report summarizing the “Keeping Data Science Broad” series including data science challenges, visions for the future, and community asks. The goal of the Keeping Data Science Broad series was to garner community input into pathways for keeping data science education broadly inclusive across sectors, institutions, and populations. Input was collected from a community input survey, three webinars (Data Science in the Traditional Context, Alternative Avenues for Development of Data Science Education Capacity, and Big Picture for a Big Data Science Education Network available to view through the South Big Data Hub YouTube channel) and an interactive workshop (Negotiating the Digital and Data Divide). Through these venues, we explore the future of data science education and workforce at institutions of higher learning that are primarily teaching-focused. The workshop included representatives from sixty data science programs across the nation, either traditional or alternative, and from a range of institution types including community colleges, Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCU’s), Hispanic-Serving Institutions (HSI’s), other minority-led and minority-serving institutions, liberal arts colleges, tribal colleges, universities, and industry partners. 
    more » « less
  2. ; ; ; ; ; (, Journal of Policy Analysis and Management)
    Abstract This paper introduces a new measure of the labor markets served by colleges and universities across the United States. About 50% of recent college graduates are living and working in the metro area nearest the institution they attended, with this figure climbing to 67% in‐state. The geographic dispersion of alumni is more than twice as great for highly selective 4‐year institutions as for 2‐year institutions. However, more than one quarter of 2‐year institutions disperse alumni more diversely than the average public 4‐year institution. In one application of these data, we find that the average strength of the labor market to which a college sends its graduates predicts college‐specific intergenerational economic mobility. In a second application, we quantify the extent of “brain drain” across areas and illustrate the importance of considering migration patterns of college graduates when estimating the social return on public investment in higher education. 
    more » « less
  3. ; ; (, American Educational Research Journal)
    null (Ed.)
    Scholarship on college choice largely focuses on how students search for colleges but less is known about how colleges recruit students. This article analyzes off-campus recruiting visits for 15 public research universities. We Web-scrape university admissions websites and issue public records requests to collect data on recruiting visits. Analyses explore the similarities and differences in off-campus recruiting patterns across universities in the study. Results reveal socioeconomic, racial, and geographic disparities in recruiting patterns. In particular, most universities made more out-of-state than in-state visits, and out-of-state visits systematically targeted affluent, predominantly White localities. We recommend that future research should exploit new data collection methodologies to develop a systematic literature on marketing and recruiting practices in higher education. 
    more » « less
  4. ; ; (, NSF Workshop Reports)
    Modern societies rely extensively on computing technologies. As such, there is a need to identify and develop strategies for addressing fairness, ethics, accountability, and transparency (FEAT) in computing-based research, practice, and educational efforts. To achieve this aim, a workshop, funded by the National Science Foundation, convened a working group of experts to document best practices and integrate disparate approaches to FEAT. The working group included different disciplines, demographics, and institutional types, including large research-intensive universities, Historically Black Colleges and Universities, Hispanic-Serving Institutions, teaching institutions, and liberal arts colleges. The workshop brought academics and members of industry together along with government representatives, which is vitally important given the role and impact that each sector can have on the future of computing. Relevant insights were gained by drawing on the experience of policy scholars, lawyers, statisticians, sociologists, and philosophers along with the more traditional sources of expertise in the computing realm (such as computer scientists and engineers). The working group examined best practices and sought to articulate strategies for addressing FEAT in computing-based research and education. This included identifying methodological approaches that researchers could employ to facilitate FEAT, instituting guidelines on what problem definition practices work best, and highlighting best practices for data access and data inclusion. The resulting report is the culmination of the working group activities in identifying systematic methods and effective approaches to incorporate FEAT considerations into the design and implementation of computing artifacts. 
    more » « less
  5. ; ; ; ; (, ASEE Conferences)
    Since 1973, the Carnegie Classification® has been the guiding framework for determining which U.S.-based higher education institutions are considered the top in the country. The complex and multi-layered calculation gives institutions the designation of labeled research one (R1) or research two (R2) institutions, requiring institutions to grant doctoral degrees. These designations are pivotal in determining which institutions obtain high-quality resources through ongoing decisions by many organizations, including federal agencies, private sector organizations, and philanthropists. Additionally, the designations are instrumental in crucial policy decisions that have the future, mobility, and overall sustainability of operations within institutions, including its various stakeholders (i.e., faculty, staff, and students) at its core. As of 2023, while none of the nation’s 101 historically black colleges and universities (HBCUs) have received the highest designation of R1 status, 11 hold the status of R2. Notably, over the past decade, several of those 11 institutions have made obtaining R1 status a top priority for their organization, with many embedding the goal in their critical strategic plans or key initiatives within their leadership teams’ organizational priorities. Despite such efforts, an integral ingredient to achieving R1 status – leadership – is under-researched in the field. Thus, our study aims to acknowledge the vital role of transformational and distributed leadership within HBCUs and their broader stakeholder community in achieving their goal of reaching R1 status. The goal of this research study is to (1) conduct an analysis of data available within the Carnegie Classification®, (2) provide a thorough review of the literature surrounding this phenomenon, (3) explain the role of engineering-related expenditures and engineering education within this phenomenon, (4) ascertain the capabilities of the institutional leadership and motivations towards R1 status, and (5) use that information, all inclusively, to determine who will be the first of the eleven R2 and three R3 HBCUs to receive the R1 designation. Thus, the research questions guiding this study are: (1) Which historically black college and/or university (HBCU) is most likely to obtain Carnegie Classification® R1: doctoral universities – very high research activity status first? (2) How do engineering-related expenditures and education impact or influence HBCUs' Research 1 status potential? Results explain which of the 14 R2 and R2 HBCUs will be the first and most likely to obtain the designation for the upcoming results and why. Implications for this research study and its results, recommendations for future research, and a concluding statement are provided. 
    more » « less
  • Citation Formats
  • MLA
  • APA
  • Chicago
  • BibTeX
  • Save / Share this Record
  • Send to Email