The purpose of this study is to analyze the changes of the various pressure groups which have been participating in the governance of colleges and universities ill America. In dealing with this problem the writer discusses first how the major internal pressure groups that are the boards of trustees, the administrators, the faculty, and the students, have participated in the governance and policy control of colleges and universities, and second, how the alumni, the state government, the federal government, and the accrediting agencies have become powerful outside influences on the internal operations of colleges and universities, and finally the trends of academic governance are analyzed in a conclusion. The governing forces in the American university has changed considerably since the university grew from a rather small institution to a multiversity. The number of participants in the governing forces has. increased considerably and the relationship between the participants has changed as well. In the early period of American universities, the number of persons involved in the academic governance was usually limited to two or three. Private universities established by wealthy individuals had the founder, the president, and the board of trustees as their governing forces, whereas state universities had the legislature and the president as strong bodies of governance and the board of trustees as weak bodies of control. However, the modern university is run by many internal and external groups which demonstrate their vigorous interest in higher education. Lately there has been less power and influence on the campus since the major gains in the quest for academic power have been made by the federal government. The federal government now supplies one-fourth of all expenses spent by higher educational institutions. Each federal grant and contract carries with it controlling rules and regulations. So far the federal government has tried only to utilize the expertise and facilities of higher education institutions in the pursuit of its own programs, with little attention to the overall effect of federal support on the function-ing of the educational institutions involved, or of the national higher education system. The federal on the campus has reduced administrative control over budgeting and allocations of faculty time and institutional physical facilities, and thereby has interfered with the institution’s autonomy. Internally the power of the boards of trustees and the psesident has been greatly reduced, particularly in financial matters where their voices have been most strong. It is now shared with the state government, the federal government, the faculty, and the students. The selection of the president which has been the trustees’ single most important prerogative is now shared with the faculty, the students, and the almni. The power of the president is delegated to the vice presidends of various functions and the directors of many agencies. The faculty is no longer enjoying a substantial responsibility for making decisions as to academic policy. The faculty now must share it with the students, accrediting agencies, the state government, and the federal government. There is no area of decision-making which is under the control of only one group. Each group involved in the governance has moved from one of competition toward one of cooperation. This change is a result of both the increasing bureaucratization of the university and the increasing democratization within the institution. As many pressure groups get involved in the process of policy making in higher education, there will be increasing internal and external pressure for efficient management. Which groups should be held accountable for what decisions on higher education must be made clear if the governance of colleges and universities is to strive for efficient management.