UT Arlington is now a Texas Tier 1

LTK5H

LTK5H

M&G Gift Contributor
M&G Collective Member
UT-Arlington becomes latest emerging research university to reach “Texas Tier One” status

UT-Arlington is the fourth of eight public emerging research universities in the state to earn this distinction, allowing the school to tap into an additional $6.2 million in funding.

The University of Texas at Arlington has become the fourth university in the state to be considered a Texas Tier One university, a designation awarded to emerging research universities as part of the state’s effort to help them achieve national recognition as major research centers.

The designation will allow UT-Arlington to tap into an additional $6.2 million in state funding, a modest amount compared to the $125 million the university spent on research overall in 2020.

But university officials say the designation highlights the investment UT-Arlington is making in its research operations, which range from studies in aviation technology and Texas’ transportation infrastructure to natural disaster planning and health disparities.

“This is a game changer for UTA that has been nearly 12 years in the making,” said Teik C. Lim, interim president of The University of Texas at Arlington, in a press release. “Texas Tier One designation is a public invitation to take a fresh look at UTA’s academic and research excellence and the impact this special University is making on the region, the state of Texas and beyond.”

It also means Texas is making progress in state leaders’ goal of increasing the number of “tier one” universities in the state.

Universities reach this status under Texas’ National Research University Fund when they spend more than $45 million on restricted research two years in a row, and meet four of six optional requirements two years in a row, including awarding more than 200 doctorates every year and enrolling a “freshman class with high academic achievement.”

UT-Arlington joins Texas Tech University and the University of Houston, which qualified in 2012, and the University of Texas at Dallas, which qualified in 2018.

The Texas Legislature created the NRUF in 2009 to help funnel research dollars toward eight emerging research schools since that type of funding is often provided to flagship universities, like the University of Texas at Austin and Texas A&M University.

According to a March report by the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board, the University of Texas at San Antonio is the next closest to reaching this designation, and could be officially approved as early as 2022. In 2020, it met three of the four required criteria and spent $56 million on research.

The University of Texas at El Paso spent more than $45 million on research in 2019 and 2020, but met just one of the other four necessary criteria to qualify. It does not have the potential to reach those criteria in 2021. Texas State University and the University of North Texas did not meet the research spending threshold in 2020, and neither are on track to reach it in 2021 either, the report stated.

In an email to the UT-Arlington campus community, Lim said that achieving the Texas Tier One status was one of his four goals during his tenure as interim president. He took the helm after the previous president, Vistasp Karbhari, stepped down last March after the university system began investigating potential recruiting and enrollment practices at the university. The UT System recently announced it’s resuming a search for a new permanent president after pausing due to the COVID-19 pandemic.
 
LTK5H

LTK5H

M&G Gift Contributor
M&G Collective Member
Your question is answered in the text of the post directly above yours. Hidden in bold.
 
B

Bakertxst04

Guest
Wow, not even in the Top 10. That stings.

I really hope the new President is able to work with donors to help build up a successful platform to boost our research budget. Being bad at football is one thing, but not even being in the Top 10 research Universities in TX is a slap in the face considering our large student and alumni populations.
 
S

Someone

Member
the NRUF progress has actually been pretty good until the last few years

Texas State was not even an "emerging research university" when the NRUF program started and thus was not elegible at all and not eligible for TRIP matching money either

the issue with directly comparing with UTA in particular is the number of PhD programs offered and the number of PhDs awarded

Texas State does not and did not offer near the number of PhD programs that UTA does......that means Texas State is not and will not be close to one of the 6 secondary metrics which you need to meet 4 of to qualify

It will be extremely difficult for Texas State to meet the # of PhDs awarded secondary metric thus that means Texas State really has 5 secondary metrics to choose from to try and meet 4 of.......another metrics having a specific number of graduate programs that are judged to be "equal to AAU metrics" will also be hard to qualify for so really that means Texas State has 4 secondary metrics they can concentrate on

freshman class, member of Phi Kappa Phi (or other harder organizations), $400 million endowment, and faculty quality

Texas State can easily meet the freshman class metric , but they have let that slide back and forth to hold up enrollment numbers which is no big deal unless they were to screw that up and somehow not meet that metric all the sudden when they need to, but I doubt that happens

Texas State is Phi Kappa Phi so they meet that one

the two where Texas State has dropped the ball is getting $400 million in endowment and 5 faculty members that are a part of The National Academies

really those two go hand and hand you are going to need private dollars to hire those type of faculty, but if you have the dollars you can hire 2 in a year or even 3 if you really go for it......but you have to raise those dollars and that is a MAJOR TRAUTH WEAKNESS

you can also meet the faulty quality metric with faculty awards, but that is too unreliable to count on meeting it in the years when you really need to the proper thing to do is get the National Academy members locked down and meet that metric like that

UTA met the freshman class, Phi Kappa Phi, 200 PhDs awarded, and 5 National Academy metrics because raising private dollars has also been a major weakness of theirs

UTSA is most likely going to do the same thing

UTSA met the freshman class metric for the latest report, they are Phi Kappa Phi, and they had 2 National Academy members in 2019 and 5 for 2020 so they meet that metric now......they are 47 PhDs awarded away from that metric

so they will most likely qualify in 3 years fro now at the latest

north Texas state is very far away from the primary metric of $45 million in restricted research and that is hard to just ramp up fast, but they reported a large jump in "research", but they tend to report research AND development as their "research" number when they give out president hype to the faculty reports and who knows how much of that is "restricted" or "competitively awarded"

north Texas state has 3 national academy members as well.....the UTA and UTSA members are almost all relatively recent members so most likely they are young.....north Texas has 2 that are most likely younger and one that is whay they were trying to pull off when the NRUF started and that is old retired guys fro other universities they can hire in for a brief period for a sweetheart deal and hope they qualify.....that has bitten them in the ass twice already though, but they were never close to qualifying anyway so it did not matter

north Texas state hands out the liberal arts and social sciences PhDs like candy on Halloween so they meet that metric now

Texas State needs to start a major fund raiser very publicly NOW and start hiring 2 National Academy members per year and they would be able to meet the NRUF metrics in 4 or 5 years at the latest and probably before north Texas state and UTEP
 
V

vp98

Active member
No mention of Texas State or TSUS here but a good illustration of how everybody else is screwed by the good ole boy UT/A&M PUF set up. The other member institutions of the UT/A&M systems also do not get funding the same way that the flagships do. If you ask me all public universities in Texas should get the same shot at this $24 billion dollar endowment.

Dallas Morning News

‘It’s obscene’: Lubbock lawmakers want change in higher ed funding tilted heavily toward UT, A&M (dallasnews.com)

‘It’s obscene’: Lubbock lawmakers want change in higher ed funding tilted heavily toward UT, A&M
Disparities in funding between UT, A&M systems and smaller Texas Tech and Houston systems stunt not only research funds but might affect the schools’ athletic futures.

The University of Texas’ decision to leave the Big 12 athletic conference is causing some potentially unwelcome political repercussions: Two Lubbock lawmakers want change in higher education funding, now tilted heavily toward UT and Texas A&M, to benefit the smaller Texas Tech and Houston systems. Lack of state research funding clouds their athletic futures.(File 2012 - The Associated Press)
By Robert T. Garrett
5:30 AM on Oct 8, 2021


AUSTIN — The University of Texas’ decision to leave the Big 12 athletic conference is causing what one expert calls “the plebeians” among state universities to revolt.
Long-simmering disgruntlement over short state rations has erupted into rage – and demands that the Legislature debate the fairness of a nearly 150-year-old funding system tilted heavily toward UT, Texas A&M University and their systems of four-year colleges and medical centers.
“There’s been discontent about this for quite some time, and particularly for Tech and U of H,” noted Rice University political scientist Mark Jones, speaking of Texas Tech and the University of Houston.
“But for at least the Tech supporters, the departure of UT from the Big 12 was the straw that broke the camel’s back, converting that anger inside them into loud shouts,” Jones said. He referred to decisions unveiled this past summer by UT and the University of Oklahoma that they were bolting the Big 12 and joining the uber-rich Southeastern Conference.

UT’s conference switch infuriated Baylor and Texas Christian fans, not just Red Raiders in Lubbock, because it jeopardized the Big 12′s future TV contracts and ability to remain a “Power Five” conference – one that usually competes for an NCAA Division I football championship.
Political repercussions for UT, though, may just be beginning. In the year’s third special legislative session, two influential Lubbock lawmakers filed measures that would cut in half the sprawling UT System’s $1.7 billion drawdown from the Permanent University Fund in the current two-year budget cycle.

The endowment, mostly consisting of state-owned lands in West Texas where oil and gas was discovered, had an investment portfolio worth $24 billion in August 2020. The fund, whose land values are believed to be worth as much or more, also is scheduled to spin off $828.4 million to the Texas A&M University System in the two-year budget cycle that began last month.
But “the PUF,” as it’s called, does nothing for the state universities such as Texas Tech and UH that are “flagships” of much smaller public higher education systems – and also avidly desire more money for pure research, which is the ticket to both prestige and, as it turns out, the best football conferences.
Tech, UH, UT-Dallas and UT-Arlington are eligible to receive from the state’s National Research University Fund, created in 2009. Budget documents, though, show the fund will distribute only about $25 million a year – total – in the current cycle.

“That’s a drop in the bucket compared to what A&M and UT get from the PUF,” said Jones, the Rice professor.
He called National Research University Fund recipient schools, which soon could also include UT El Paso and UT San Antonio, “the plebeians of the state university system.”
Sen. Charles Perry and Rep. Dustin Burrows, both Lubbock Republicans, have begun a push to let those schools share in the PUF or, short of that, shove some new state dollars their way.

‘Misallocation of resources’?
In the past week, House Appropriations Committee Chairman Greg Bonnen put into his supplemental appropriations bills a provision that would help the Texas Tech and UH systems augment their research efforts with a new $2 billion endowment.
Bonnen’s language assumes that Burrows could pass a separate bill and that voters next May would approve the concept, submitted to them as a constitutional amendment. In Bonnen’s first draft, the money would come from the state’s “rainy day fund.” But more recently, he proposed taking $2 billion of the more than $16 billion that is Texas’ share of President Joe Biden’s pandemic relief money, and using it to seed the proposed Texas University Fund.

Lubbock lawmakers Perry and Burrows are sharing with colleagues a one page document called “Comparison of State Support.”
In the next fiscal year, the flagship campuses of four systems would get widely disparate amounts of institutional enhancement and research money from the state, it shows: UT Austin, about $505 million; A&M College Station, $208 million; UH’s main campus, $26 million; and Tech’s Lubbock campus, $21 million.
The Lubbockites’ sheet omits amounts that Tech and UH get – about $50 million a year each – from the Higher Education Fund, created in 1985 for non-PUF schools. And UT and A&M’s larger enrollments aren’t factored in. Burrows, though, said he left out the Higher Education Fund because he wanted to focus on research funding. He also omitted “the funding UT Austin & TAMU receive in PUF [construction] bond proceeds,” he tweeted. However they are viewed, he insisted, the funding gaps are large.
“It’s obscene,” added Perry, who is a Senate budget writer and chairman of the chamber’s Water, Agriculture and Rural Affairs Committee. “The average person would know that it is. Most people, if they’re honest, would say it’s not right.”

"It's time to have a real conversation about where we want to be as a state, how many universities can we support," said Sen. Charles Perry. The Lubbock Republican is second from left in photo from opening day of the year's first special session in July.
Burrows, who is chairman of the influential House Calendars Committee, observed, “Do we have a misallocation of resources amongst the universities? I don’t think anybody ever dreamed the PUF would grow as big as it has become.”
Both noted the irony that West Texas’ mineral wealth has flowed to build fine buildings and support operations at the “40 Acres” in Austin and at Aggieland in College Station.

The comparatively paltry state support of Texas Tech and UH’s research efforts inflicts a double-whammy, noted Jones, who is chairman of the Rice Faculty Senate’s athletics committee.
A peculiar credential needed to get into a good athletic conference is an invitation to belong to the American Association of Universities, he explained. Founded in 1900, the AAU, with 66 public and private schools as members, touts itself as a group of “leading comprehensive research universities distinguished by the breadth and quality of their programs of research and graduate education.”
https://www.dallasnews.com/sports/other-schools/2021/09/10/life-after-ut-and-ou-breaking-down-big-12-expansion-and-how-new-schools-fit-in-the-conference/
In theory, schools “whose research and education profile falls significantly below that of other current members” can be expelled. And similarly, up and comers who raise their academic “profiles” can be admitted, the group’s website says. There’s no set number of slots but the members want to keep it as small as possible.
“From a pure research perspective, Texas is substantially behind California but also even New York,” Jones said. “California has 10 AAU members. New York has six. We have three,” which are UT, A&M and, since 1985, Rice. “Iowa has as many public universities in AAU as Texas does, with one-seventh of Texas’ population,” he said.

“It's a very unfair system – perhaps fair 150 years ago, when created, because UT was ‘the university’ and the same for Texas A&M, too,” Rice University political scientist Mark Jones said of the Permanent University Fund. “It made sense back then, when the U of H and Texas Tech didn’t exist. Over time, Texas as a state has grown yet its university system has not grown with its population, the way California's university system grew with its population.” In 2017 File Photo, Texas A&M Aggies Corps of Cadets lock arms before before a football game at Kyle Field in College Station.

‘Insult to injury’
For Texas Tech, which is worried the Big 12 is no longer going to be considered a top athletic conference, and UH, which is set to leave the American Athletic Conference and join the Big 12, being excluded from the academically elite AAU hurts, Jones noted.
The Big 10 requires a new member to be in the AAU, and the Pac 12 strongly prefers it, he said.
“That just adds insult to injury” for Tech and UH, he said. “Not only does the lack of resources allow UT to leave them behind but then their two best options, to move to a ‘now-Power Four conference,’ are thwarted by the fact that they aren’t AAU institutions.”
Spokesmen for UT Austin and the UT System declined to respond to queries about the fairness of current state funding of higher education, the accuracy of Perry and Burrows’ report and the two lawmakers’ bills that would reallocate UT’s PUF money to the emerging research schools or Burrow’s House Joint Resolution 13, which would create the proposed Texas Education Fund.

Speaker Dade Phelan, a UT Austin graduate, has not referred HJR 13 to a committee. On Thursday, Phelan was said to be traveling and could not be reached for comment.
Perry, an accountant and land developer, and Tech alumnus, said that even if he and Burrows can’t achieve any forward movement in the time remaining in the current special session, they intend to engage lawmakers in a comprehensive discussion of funding fairness before the 2023 regular session.

“Football is football. We all like our football. But when you’re told you don’t meet the research standards in order to even qualify for a conference conversation somewhere else,” it’s infuriating, he said. “There’s no reason we shouldn’t have four AAU-qualified universities in Texas. Or however many qualify. We are too wealthy, too rich, too forward-thinking.”
Burrows, a trial lawyer who’s also a Tech alum, also urged the state to aspire to more.
“I’m not necessarily saying that I want to take something from UT to teach them a lesson,” he said. “The point is, there’s other schools out there, there’s other systems out there. If everybody’s getting all the resources and these other ones are left out, it’s no wonder they’re not able to achieve this recognition and grow. And we as a state should want more than just two [public schools in the AAU], in my opinion.”
CORRECTION, 1:20 p.m., Oct. 8, 2021: An earlier version of this story incorrectly said that the Texas Tech and University of Houston main campuses receive about $10 million annually from the Higher Education Fund. Each receives about $50 million a year.


Robert T. Garrett, Austin Bureau Chief. Bob has covered state government and politics for The Dallas Morning News since 2002. Earlier, he was a statehouse reporter for three newspapers, including the Dallas Times Herald. A fifth-generation Texan, Bob earned a bachelor’s degree from Harvard University. He covers Gov. Greg Abbott, the state budget and CPS and foster care.
rtgarrett@dallasnews.com /bob.garrett.39 @RobertTGarrett
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top