Analyse comparative des performances académiques des universités publiques et privées en Europe et en Amérique du Nord

Thesis Abstract

This study addresses the persistent gap in understanding comparative academic performance across public and private universities in Europe and North America, focusing on how institutional governance, funding structures, and student selection processes shape learning outcomes, research productivity, and graduate employability. The aim is to provide a robust cross-regional assessment that disentangles the influence of institutional type from macro-level contextual factors such as higher education policy environments, funding formulas, and market-driven university strategies. Specific objectives are to (1) quantify differences in undergraduate and graduate outcomes between public and private institutions across Europe and North America, (2) examine the mediating role of funding intensity, faculty-to-student ratios, and research expenditure on academic performance, (3) analyze the impact of student selectivity and demographic composition on learning and research outputs, (4) assess variations in graduate employability and long-run career trajectories, and (5) develop a cross-regional conceptual model linking governance, funding, and performance. The methodology adopts a mixed-methods, cross-sectional design integrating quantitative analysis of large-scale institutional data and qualitative insights from stakeholder interviews. The population comprises all accredited universities in 14 European Union member states and four North American jurisdictions with publicly available performance indicators for the 2018–2022 period. A stratified random sample includes 120 higher education institutions (60 public and 60 private) per region, totaling 240 institutions. Quantitative data are drawn from institutional annual reports, national higher education statistics, and the Times Higher Education/ARWU-style rankings, complemented by standardized indicators such as graduation rates, average time-to-degree, publication output (scaled by field-normalized metrics), citation impact, and graduate employment rates 12 months post-graduation. Qualitative data come from semi-structured interviews with 40 senior administrators (deans and provosts) and 80 faculty researchers, selected to maximize representation across disciplines and institutional types. Instruments include a standardized institutional survey to measure governance practices, funding composition (public subsidy, tuition revenue, external grants), and student demographics; a validated performance index aggregating teaching, research, and employability metrics; and interview guides designed to elicit contextual experiences of governance, funding incentives, and strategic priorities. Validity and reliability are ensured through pilot testing, triangulation of multiple data sources, and confirmatory factor analysis to validate the performance index. Quantitative analysis employs multilevel linear modeling to account for clustering of programs within universities, with fixed effects for region and random effects for institutions. Regression analyses will test the mediating roles of funding intensity, faculty resources, and student selectivity. ANOVA tests compare performance across institutional types and regions, while propensity-score matching addresses potential selection bias. The qualitative data will be analyzed using thematic analysis, with codes derived deductively from the theoretical framework and inductively from interview transcripts. The study expects to find that, after controlling for macro-level context and program mix, private universities exhibit higher research output per faculty member in North America due to greater research funding intensity and more flexible recruitment, while European public universities may outperform private counterparts in teaching quality and student satisfaction driven by policy-led governance and student support mechanisms. Differences in graduate employability are anticipated to reflect regional labor market tightness and industry–university linkages rather than institutional type alone. The research aims to contribute to knowledge by offering a cross-regional, theory-driven understanding of how governance and funding configurations influence academic performance, resulting in a policy-relevant framework for evaluating institutional strategies. The study’s contribution to knowledge lies in (a) bridging a regional gap in comparative HE performance research through a unified analytical model, (b) clarifying the relative importance of funding structures and governance practices for teaching, research, and employability, and (c) informing policymakers and university leaders about effective strategies for balancing public accountability with institutional autonomy. The main conclusion is that institutional performance is contingent on the interplay between governance flexibility, funding composition, and regional policy ecosystems; therefore, tailored policy prescriptions and strategic planning are required for public and private universities in Europe and North America. Recommendations include fostering transparent funding formulas aligned with performance incentives, enhancing cross-border data sharing for benchmarking, and strengthening industry–university partnerships to improve graduate employability, while safeguarding equity in access and quality across institutional typologies.