University Debates: Sports, Fundings, And Developments

[cloud713]

SMU just raised 1 billion

I assume he's talking about public universities.. if not, yeah, Baylor has been raising well over that amount too..

[mkultra25]

Their Ph.D. programs don't get ranked in the top 20 in nearly every field just because they're big. Size doesn't hurt, but there are plenty of very large schools that don't have UT's academic standing.

 

I wish Rice would continue expanding its grad programs and aim to be a major university across a wide range of fields, but that kind of change takes a generation.

 

Rice has come a long way from where it was a generation or so ago, when engineering disciplines ruled the roost and everything else was almost an afterthought. I have no doubt that a generation from now, they'll have undergone equally significant changes for the better. 

[Houston?]

I'm still a little confused about what UH is worried about. If someone wants a UT degree today they currently leave Houston. Now, we'll just have more students stay in Houston. It will make for a more vibrant city and could enhance UH by encouraging more redevelopment in the third ward. They'd anchor a triangle (Rice, UT, UH) that could host thousands of students and encourage even more student life.

 

Again, you are forgetting about TSU!

[Houston19514]

Sorry, but your list is missing quite a few public schools in our area. If you are including schools in Wisconsin for Chicago and Commerce for DFW, then A&M Galveston, Prairie View A&M, Sam Houston State and even Texas A&M should be on Houston's list. If you live in Cypress, you can drive to A&M more quickly than UH's main campus.

 

I included schools that are in each city's combined metropolitan area  (and I acknowledged earlier that I had improperly left out but Sam Houston and Prairie View and added both to my list.)

 

Texas A&M Galveston is not a separate university.  It is just a campus. 

Texas A&M (College Station) is not in our combined area, so not properly included.  If we start including additional schools based on driving distance from the furthest edge of the metro area, quite a few additional schools would need to be added to Chicago's list as well (and D-FW's too).

 

[The Ozone Files]

<Edit: Removed redundant link>

Edited November 23, 2015 by The Ozone Files

[Moonb007]

UH will be fine.  Even if UT opens a school here it will take a long time before they can build out the campus infrastructure to the level of UH or Rice.  Plus the UT system school will always be a secondary school to Austin, so I don't see a student who just wanted to go to UT for the sake of the name saying Houston is an acceptable alternative.  It's mostly about research dollars in the end, but as long as UH keeps growing that should not be an issue.  For example, UTA is easy the second largest UT system school and it was a big deal in DFW when the UT president said they are going to do a mass expansion on UTD as everyone said it would hurt UTA.  In the end, UTA is still by far larger and only lost a little research money and if anything it made the school more focused on staying a top tiered institution.  I don't ever see A&M building a main campus school in Houston because their main campus is basically a suburb to Houston.  I think they will just focus on their specialty schools that they already have.

[kdog08]

UH has the vast head start in the Houston region and as long as it keeps building on success from academics and athletics then it should over time become a flagship Texas university with the research status and athletic status that comes along with it. I'm not particularly concerned about a UT expansion if it's a research campus or other specialized campus (biomedical/biotechnology). I would welcome this UT expansion if it was going to be more like the UT Dallas campus which also is research campus. UT Dallas has 23000 students of which 8700 are postgrads to give one an idea of the long term potential as a public research institute calling Houston home. 

 

UH needs to focus on becoming a more complete campus, especially in terms of residential living in and around the area, while increasing the quality of education and beefing up it's research institutions. Lastly, whether one wants to admit it or not, but athletics plays a large in shaping perception. UH reaching the big 12 or similarly tiered conference will only elevate its status so hopefully UH football will continue to grow, along with basketball and baseball. 

[ADCS]

It's all a power play to either get PUF access or Big 12 membership. Think the local leadership is shooting themselves in the foot here.

[bobruss]

No were not shooting ourselves in the foot.

I am curious about what this does to the med centers plans to build its research center since UT was

supposed to play a major role.

I think its interesting that they chose to go behind TMC's backs and make this obvious end around move

to bypass the TMC's plans and make that harder to accomplish.

U.T. just wants to play by themselves.

So its not just the U. Of H., Rice and T.S.U. that would lose but also the med center.

[shasta]

I will make it very  simple to understand.........would Texas A&M be OK with UT building a UT-College Station Campus miles from Texas A&M?

 

The reasons they would NOT be OK with it are the exact same reasons why UH would not be OK with it. They are both LARGE State schools paid for by the tax payers of the state of Texas.

 

UT can build a campus in any city in TEXAS except for:

 

Houston (University of Houston)

Lubbock (Texas Tech)

College Station (Texas A&M)

San Marcos (Texas State)

 

BECAUSE the state of Texas already has millions (if not billions) of tax payers money invested in public schools in those markets. Make those schools BETTER...don't dilute the product by making them worse with more state school competition.

Edited December 15, 2015 by shasta

[ADCS]

I will make it very  simple to understand.........would Texas A&M be OK with UT building a UT-College Station Campus miles from Texas A&M?

 

The reasons they would NOT be OK with it are the exact same reasons why UH would not be OK with it. They are both LARGE State schools paid for by the tax payers of the state of Texas.

 

UT can build a campus in any city in TEXAS except for:

 

Houston (University of Houston)

Lubbock (Texas Tech)

College Station (Texas A&M)

San Marcos (Texas State)

 

BECAUSE the state of Texas already has millions (if not billions) of tax payers money invested in public schools in those markets. Make those schools BETTER...don't dilute the product by making them worse with more state school competition.

 

Says who?

 

Each one of those schools are serving a certain niche. A&M wouldn't like that campus because both schools are serving similar niches - drawing from a large population base to drive high levels of research, and serving high-caliber students who for whatever reason weren't able to make it into an elite private university.

 

UH doesn't serve that market, especially since Rice is next door - it's geared toward educating professionals who intend on staying in the Houston area. There's nothing wrong with this mission, as it allows for flexibility and innovation that wouldn't be available at the larger universities.

 

I think we just have a tendency to act strangely when we think others are looking down on us.

[urbanize713]

I am starting to believe this is just another shining fumble for Houston leadership. I wonder how many of the cities we compete with or would like to achive similar status to would turn down a university system opening a new campus in their city. Further, I wonder if any other school systems may have explored similar expansion but would look elsewhere now given the backlash.

 

I've said it once and i'll say it again this is about money and I am starting to believe envy. It really is sad

Edited December 15, 2015 by urbanize713

[Twinsanity02]

I still do not comprehend all the trepedation.  The Boston metro area has eight research universities. Excluding the Texas Medical center, I believe  the Houston area has two: U of H  and Rice.  There is no room for a third?

[bobruss]

Would someone please explain to me what will this do to the plans for the TMC research center with UT opting to build

their own center. Lets just leave the local schools out of this for a minute. Will this cause TMC to not go forward

without UT's cooperation and money?

[H-Town Man]

I still do not comprehend all the trepedation.  The Boston metro area has eight research universities. Excluding the Texas Medical center, I believe  the Houston area has two: U of H  and Rice.  There is no room for a third?

 

One big public university: UMass-Boston.

 

New York - one big public university - CUNY

 

Chicago - one big public university - UIC

[H-Town Man]

Would someone please explain to me what will this do to the plans for the TMC research center with UT opting to build

their own center. Lets just leave the local schools out of this for a minute. Will this cause TMC to not go forward

without UT's cooperation and money?

 

Both will likely happen to some degree. Neither will be nearly as exciting as the rendering. That's my pessimistic opinion. Hope I'm wrong.

 

Remember Southeast Texas Biotechnology Park?

[Twinsanity02]

One big public university: UMass-Boston.

 

New York - one big public university - CUNY

 

Chicago - one big public university - UIC

 

Thanks for the info.  Did not realize the number of private universities in most cities.

[ADCS]

Would someone please explain to me what will this do to the plans for the TMC research center with UT opting to build

their own center. Lets just leave the local schools out of this for a minute. Will this cause TMC to not go forward

without UT's cooperation and money?

 

I honestly think this will enhance whatever's going on at TMC. The two sites are separated by 3 miles as the crow flies, and already have light rail-ready infrastructure between them.

[Grizzly46]

Attached below is my reply to a facebook conversation I had regarding UT's expansion. It stems from an article I posted on several state legislators opposing the expansion.

 

His initial sarcastic comment was: "It's okay, competition is bad and better colleges closer to home don't help anyone. Neither do the construction jobs and local service jobs."

 

My reply:

 

__________, You raise some important issues, although I’m not sure they can be distilled in such a simplistic manner.

First, concerning competition. While competition is an economic boon in the private sector, it presents different considerations when dealing with publically funded institutions. Both UH and UT receive a large portion of funding through the state, and the state is responsible for ensuring that its higher-education resources are wisely allocated. Unlike many areas of the state, Houston has no lack of available higher-education opportunities. To name a few: UH, Rice, UH-Downtown, UH-Clearlake, the Houston Community College System, Houston Baptist University, Texas Southern University, the various colleges in the Medical Center, and numerous others. In short, competition exists, and with it brings opportunity. Might it be wise for UT to allocate some of its public dollars to be used in underserved areas of the state? I strongly believe that the state has a responsibility to its taxpayers to ensure that public funds are used in a wise and economical manner. It is unnecessary for taxpayers to fund UT’s expansion when such a wide variety of quality and accessible universities already exist.

Second, concerning legislative oversight and transparency. In part to ensure the wise allocation of higher-education dollars, the state established the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board. The THECB maintains oversight of higher-education programs, and they are typically consulted (or at a minimum, advised) before a public universities add new programs. In this instance, the University of Texas System neither consulted nor advised the THECB or the state legislature before authorizing such a radical expansion. Because UT is a taxpayer funded institution, I believe that they should have conducted this process in a transparent, forthright manner. This process would include the appropriate oversight and vetting from our elected representatives.

Third, concerning unfair competition and the PUF fund. The playing field in Texas Higher Education is titled in UT’s favor because they have almost exclusive access to the Texas Permanent University Fund. No other higher-education institution in Houston has access to this enormous pool or resources. It is erroneous to claim that competition will bring out the best in a metro-area when state funding disproportionately favors one institution over all others.

Fourth, concerning misallocation of resources. The UT System has nine four-year component Universities that are fighting for their share of a limited public resource pool. UT’s encroachment into Houston will dilute—dollar for dollar—the amount of resources available to other UT component universities. At least two of those universities (UT Dallas and UT San Antonio) are designated as Texas emerging research universities. And yet, last legislative session those institutions went hat-in-hand to the Texas legislature requesting (and receiving) authority to issue tuition revenue bonds. Rather than pouring public resources into a brand new Houston campus, UT should support its already existing component universities and hone them into tier-one research institutions.

Finally, concerning the University of Houston. UH has recently emerged onto the national stage as a Tier-One Research University. This remarkable achievement (combined with numerous smaller academic achievements) has resulted in a substantial net economic benefit to the city and the state. Out-of-state students now recognize that Texas has three public tier-one institutions and they are pouring into Texas at a rate never before seen. More students are getting a top quality education than ever before. UT’s presence in Houston (with their extraordinary pool of taxpayer funds) would poach students and professors from UH and would interfere with UH’s extraordinary trajectory.

In conclusion, reasonable minds may disagree about whether UT’s expansion is good or bad. I happen to believe that UT’s expansion is detrimental to the state legislative process (setting bad precedent), to UT system component universities, to UH, and to all other universities in the Houston metro area. But that is just my opinion.

[Grizzly46]

they want what's best for their alma mater - that much is obvious. there are no real negatives to the proposed UT Research Campus at all.

 

Attached is a similar letter from Rep. James White opposing the expansion. Rep. White represents the Tyler area. No connection to UH. 

This expansion eats away funds that other UT component universities could use to acheive Tier One status.

 

Perhaps the UT expansion could benefit some underserved area of the state (unlike Houston)?  

Letter.pdf

[cspwal]

Attached is a similar letter from Rep. James White opposing the expansion. Rep. White represents the Tyler area. No connection to UH. 

This expansion eats away funds that other UT component universities could use to acheive Tier One status.

 

Perhaps the UT expansion could benefit some underserved area of the state (unlike Houston)?  

 

I'm not sure where you would want to put a new UT school.  There aren't many cities that aren't served by A&M or UT except Lubbock (Texas Tech) and Houston (UH).

 

Edit: To clarify, I liked your previous comment. I thought it very well laid out the negatives to having a new UT campus in Houston

 

UT schools:

 

A&M Schools:

Edited December 15, 2015 by cspwal

[OkieEric]

Attached is a similar letter from Rep. James White opposing the expansion. Rep. White represents the Tyler area. No connection to UH. 

This expansion eats away funds that other UT component universities could use to acheive Tier One status.

 

Perhaps the UT expansion could benefit some underserved area of the state (unlike Houston)?  

 

The Houston metro area is nearly 1/4 of the state's population.  Just thought i would throw that out there as to me it's difficult to really illustrate which areas of the state are "underserved".  If UT wants to create a research campus somewhere in the state to support all of its campuses, why not Houston? (I admit that it's not exactly clear to me how this hub will "support" the other schools in the system)

 

Also, James White is from Houston and has graduate degrees from UH:

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_White_(Texas_politician)

[shasta]

Here's the compromise:

 

UH allows UT to build a "research only" campus in exchange for the following 2 items:

 

1) The State of Texas amends the PUF fund to now also include the University of Houston System. it will now be split in 3 ways among the UH System, the UT System, and the Texas A&M system. The other 2 have had a 100 year advantage and it is time the state starts to invest in a Third Public university system to stay competitive with other states (i.e. California). This could go a long way in keeping Texas kids IN Texas as compared to going to LSU, OU, etc. Adding UH to the PUF could produce billions for the state of Texas

 

2) The University of Texas votes YES on Big 12 expansion and votes YES on the University of Houston's entry to the Big12

 

Those are the ONLY 2 items the University of Houston should be willing to accept.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited December 16, 2015 by shasta

[monarch]

Here's the compromise:

 

UH allows UT to build a "research only" campus in exchange for the following 2 items:

 

1) The State of Texas amends the PUF fund to now also include the University of Houston System. it will now be split in 3 ways among the UH System, the UT System, and the Texas A&M system. The other 2 have had a 100 year advantage and it is time the state starts to invest in a Third Public university system to stay competitive with other states (i.e. California). This could go a long way in keeping Texas kids IN Texas as compared to going to LSU, OU, etc. Adding UH to the PUF could produce billions for the state of Texas

 

2) The University of Texas votes YES on Big 12 expansion and votes YES on the University of Houston's entry to the Big12

 

Those are the ONLY 2 items the University of Houston should be willing to accept.

 

^^^ here's the reality:

UH has absolutely no power / leverage / influence / where with all.. to stop anything that TEXAS wants to do within this most wonderful / gracious city of houston.

hook'em!

[august948]

 

^^^ here's the reality:

UH has absolutely no power / leverage / influence / where with all.. to stop anything that TEXAS wants to do within this most wonderful / gracious city of houston.

hook'em!

 

 

Agreed.  But still...

 

 

[KinkaidAlum]

Sorry, but the world is never just black or white. There are always shades of gray. The truth of the matter is UH backers have every reason to not trust UT. Additionally, the timing is beyond coincidental... Just when UH reaches the highest level of Carnegie classification for research, earns a Phi Beta Kappa chapter, is seeing not only its highest enrollment ever but also with the most highly qualified students in its history, and is rumored to be wanting to get into the medical field beyond the current fields of basic science, optometry, and pharmacy and NOW UT wants into Houston?

 

Seems to me as if people are asking the right questions. Where is this money coming from? Could it be better spent in other areas without as much educational overlap? What exactly are the plans? Just saying "research campus" means nothing at all.

 

UT and its backers need to realize this is not 1895, 1945, or even 1988. Times have changed. The state has changed. The balance of power has shifted to the two major metropolitan areas in this state. Houstonians deserve some answers before we take massive acreage off the tax rolls. If UT can answer these questions properly, then more power to them and welcome to town. If they do as Monarch posts, then GTFO with your "We're Texas." 

 

Edited December 17, 2015 by KinkaidAlum

[monarch]

Sorry, but the world is never just black or white. There are always shades of gray. The truth of the matter is UH backers have every reason to not trust UT. Additionally, the timing is beyond coincidental... Just when UH reaches the highest level of Carnegie classification for research, earns a Phi Beta Kappa chapter, is seeing not only its highest enrollment ever but also with the most highly qualified students in its history, and is rumored to be wanting to get into the medical field beyond the current fields of basic science, optometry, and pharmacy and NOW UT wants into Houston?

 

Seems to me as if people are asking the right questions. Where is this money coming from? Could it be better spent in other areas without as much educational overlap? What exactly are the plans? Just saying "research campus" means nothing at all.

 

UT and its backers need to realize this is not 1895, 1945, or even 1988. Times have changed. The state has changed. The balance of power has shifted to the two major metropolitan areas in this state. Houstonians deserve some answers before we take massive acreage off the tax rolls. If UT can answer these questions properly, then more power to them and welcome to town. If they do as Monarch posts, then GTFO with your "We're Texas." 

 

^^^ now i know that i have stated this.. at least a GAZILLION times...

"i love the university of houston.  always have and always will".

however, if you want to know the REAL truth to this ongoing and yet burgeoning matter...

then please take the initiative and reference three spots above you.  because in the very end, no matter what the circumstances.. it shall always come back to...

WE'RE TEXAS!

Edited December 17, 2015 by monarch

[HoustonIsHome]

I still don't think UT's long time goal is not a full fledged University, and I have no problem with two large full fledged public Universities in Houston, but it would be more fair if U of Houston got more funding.

It would be decades before a new university would catch up to uh, but with additional funding UH would not be seriously disadvantaged

[ADCS]

Sorry, but the world is never just black or white. There are always shades of gray. The truth of the matter is UH backers have every reason to not trust UT. Additionally, the timing is beyond coincidental...

 

In what way? UT is a huge organization, one that most likely doesn't pay much attention to UH in its decision making.

 

I'd be inclined to take the criticism more seriously if it weren't so flimsy, and I weren't 90% sure it's primarily about Big 12 football.

 

Some of these pro-UH comments border on paranoid conspiracy theory.

[H-Town Man]

 

^^^ now i know that i have stated this.. at least a GAZILLION times...

"i love the university of houston.  always have and always will".

however, if you want to know the REAL truth to this ongoing and yet burgeoning matter...

then please take the initiative and reference three spots above you.  because in the very end, no matter what the circumstances.. it shall always come back to...

WE'RE TEXAS!

 

 

...and our school song is "I've Been Working on the Railroad."