If voters approve a proposition next month, Texas’ higher education landscape will undoubtedly change forever. How it changes and what those changes mean for the state’s universities and students, however, is unclear.
On Nov. 3, Texas voters will decide whether to amend the Texas Constitution to allow the establishment of more national research, or “tier one,” universities in the state. Given the bill’s unanimous passage in the Texas House and Senate and the fact that the seven universities the bill names as possible future tier-one schools are located in areas heavily populated with voters, it’s safe to predict that the proposition — which will allow schools to compete for nearly $500 million in higher education funds — will pass.
The Texas Legislature’s acknowledgement of the need to fund higher education in Texas is promising — UT has seen first-hand the fiscal problems that arise when a state commits less and less to its universities. But the methods and motives behind the current tier-one plan give rise to several concerns, starting with the process of allocating funds to the seven competing universities.
The proposition lists several criteria universities must meet to qualify for receiving the funding. These include offering 200 doctoral degrees per year and having an endowment of at least $400 million. These criteria favor universities such as Texas Tech and the University of Houston, which are much closer to meeting these benchmarks than other schools such as the University of Texas at San Antonio and the University of Texas at Arlington.
Additionally, one of the funding incentives includes the state’s promise to match donations of $2 million or more to the competing universities while only matching a portion of smaller gifts. The University of Texas at El Paso, for instance, rarely receives gifts of that size, making the rewards it will be eligible to receive significantly smaller than other schools’.
While universities such as Texas Tech certainly shouldn’t be punished for being closer to meeting the benchmarks, the continued neglect of South Texas and border schools is troubling. UTEP is the only border school among the seven eligible for funds, and no schools south of UT-San Antonio make the list. As state Sen. Eliot Shapleigh, D-El Paso, told the San Antonio Express-News regarding the lack of attention paid to the regions, “When Lubbock has 60 Ph.D. programs, and the 5 million people who live in border counties combined have 50, that tells the story.”
Considering rising tuition costs and inadequate state grants and funding, students have to wonder if the funds would be better directed toward attracting and assisting students rather than research. UT President William Powers mentioned that “more research universities would obviously benefit the state.” But ignoring the emphasis on attracting top students does nothing to create the strong alumni bases so often associated with the best schools.
The idea that top research rankings will attract students is certainly valid, but it won’t matter if students can’t afford the schools in the first place.
The proposition leaves many questions unanswered, including whether or not the state will keep its promise to fund every institution that meets the necessary criteria after the initial money is spent. But while UT would certainly like to see increased state funding in the future as well, the Legislature’s goal to provide more for up-and-coming universities is ultimately a step in the right direction. A national research institution in Lubbock would provide a great hub for higher education in the Texas panhandle and surrounding areas, and the same could be said for El Paso. They may even relieve some of the pressure on UT to facilitate a constantly increasing population.
If these questions go unanswered for too long, the bill may devolve into a
problem rather than a solution. But if the Legislature keeps its promise to fund
these institutions, and if schools ensure that the money ultimately goes toward
furthering education and student enrollment, the bill may serve as a catalyst
for increased emphasis on Texas higher education. Pay attention to Proposition
4, and on Nov. 3, cast a vote for state progress — limited as it may be — in
funding higher education.
