This essay discusses a goal of higher education that is for students to be in an environment where they can focus on their academic success. Pressure has been placed on many universities to ensure that all students complete their degree. The growing importance of degree completion has led to the increased need for leaders to ensure that the mission and goals of their institutions are aligned with students completing their education. Within universities, departments such as athletics are examining their role in providing student athletes with opportunities for full participation in the college experience. Leaders within the university are challenged to provide a student athlete with an environment where they focus on their academic success. Other challenges include ensuring institutional practices and policies are not being compromised for the sake of athletic programs and to ensure student athletes are being fully engaged through the integration within their campus academic communities. Some of the challenges that leaders face in higher education today are law, distance learning, response to change, gender, diversity and retention. The implementation of change in higher education can be quite costly and initiate faculty and personnel changes within the pedgological construct and dynamic of the university. This paper will address the challenges leaders face in organizing a successful preparation to these dynamics. However, prior to dealing more on this issue, the essential background of some of the problems in US higher education shall be discussed first. Background of some of the problems in US higher education In the United States, higher education is under local government control and capitalism, and a gateway to transform an individual into a middle-class (Eckel and King, 2004). In this regard, the US higher education has become a reflection of American character which primarily depicts independence, suspicion of government, ambition, inclusiveness and competitions (Eckel and King, 2004). This makes US higher education so complex and diverse that in one way or another it is difficult to describe standard practice for all those exercised in the states. The US higher education is subdivided into three different institutions which includes four-year, two-year and less than two-year courses which can be public, private and not-for-profit, and private and for profit. Considering that the US higher education is not controlled by the federal government, each of the 50 states is therefore responsible for its local management and control on higher education. This resulted to the fact that there is a significant variation in the degree of control for higher education from state to state (Eckel and King, 2004). As a result, there is variation of policies from different states regarding the establishment and management and control of colleges and universities. These variations although would not be so much of an issue at some point, but have significant impacts on the US higher education in the future. This could be explained further through the following situations. Although higher education remains to be at the third priority of the most states in the US in the budget allocation, it is also the first priority to undergo budget cut especially in bad economic times and fall of state tax revenue (Eckel and King, 2004). This is a corresponding problem in higher education for having the full potential to organize itself and achieve substantial amount of profit for its self provision. Today, colleges and universities in the US are trying to expand their revenue stream through different strategies including online education system, niche-oriented degree and non-degree academic programs, expansion of research capacities, engagement in licensing and sponsorship agreement, and obtaining auxiliary enterprises (Eckel and King, 2004). These strategies could prove as substantial evidences that the US higher education is highly commercialized and has become intended for profit-making activity.