University Debates: Sports, Fundings, And Developments

[kdog08]

I don't understand why so many people are for the status quo that was established a hundred years ago and that no other state with a significant investment in higher education follows. Does any one agree that higher education has kept up with our population? 

 

Edited February 14, 2016 by kdog08

[gmac]

If this was Texas State bitching about the PUF, none of you would care.

[kdog08]

If this was Texas State bitching about the PUF, none of you would care.

 

I would slightly care as I'm an alumni.   However, I have no disillusions that Tx State could run with the big boys.  

 

I think people would be more supportive if UT didn't put the cart before the horse and had a bit more transparency. 

[monarch]

First of all, the PUF was created in 1876 and the mineral rights on "UT's land" was established in 1901. Frankly, I don't much care about the context and history surrounding the PUF as it is outdated. Compared to California's system it is a joke and I don't think most of the country would mistake Texas's higher education for that of Mass/NE or the Research Triangle given our population size. 

 

The PUF doesn't allow flexibility and we have essentially this two tiered system with PUF being a much larger fund than HEAF. If you think this type of system is good for Texas than I don't know what to tell you if you want to base funding that was set a hundred years ago. It should have been decided to either adopt a California based system or to disperse the funds, but that sort of long term planning makes Texas legislatures allergic/upsets the good ole boys entrenched in UT and TAMU. 

 

You're the one is claiming UTHSC is mediocre, not me. As I said..... There is already land in the TMC set aside for an "innovation campus" and UT already has a presence in the TMC.... With as you pointed out is UTHSC and UT MD Anderson. Why not consolidate what UT already has onto the land within TMC's boundaries and work with the TMC to create a fantastic biotech/health care university? 

 

If UT is dead set on buying the land (as it clearly is) then why didn't it actually have a plan put forth? It just reeks of shadiness. I think it's dumb what UT did, but I would be much more supportive if they came out and said what they are doing. It makes perfect sense for UT to expand into Houston, especially with a focus on biotech, but the implementation has been p*ss poor. As I said, how much has Houston/Texas grown in the last 25 years? 15 years? The timing and implementation raises eyebrows. 

 

So... LULZ. 

 

Do the Mods seriously allow this poster to troll like this? There has been zero input from this individual, just a bunch of cowardly, snarky images. 

^^^ pardon me mr. KDOG dude, but as you may carefully attest below, this most highly super charged thread is now upon it's 17th page.

therefore, i have provided plenty of imput throughout... not to mention many many many images of satire / humor.  however, should you like step-up from behind your computer keys just to 

witness for yourself upon whether or not if i am an actual "coward"... then shall we make a private PM appointment??

i shall be happy to fly in from the middle east to meet you.  and for what it's worth, i can assure you that this is no "troll" post...

[kdog08]

 

^^^ pardon me mr. KDOG dude, but as you may carefully attest below, this most highly super charged thread is now upon it's 17th page.

therefore, i have provided plenty of imput throughout... not to mention many many many images of satire / humor.  however, should you like step-up from behind your computer keys just to 

witness for yourself upon whether or not if i am an actual "coward"... then shall we make a private PM appointment??

i shall be happy to fly in from the middle east to meet you.  and for what it's worth, i can assure you that this is no "troll" post...

 

 

Anyone can view all of your posts. I usually like your cute little images that accompany updates but it's pretty clear in taking just a mere few minutes to view your posts in the "view content" of your profile, you've constantly been on one side of the issue while doing little hit and run attacks. 

 

You say "many, many, many, many images of 'satire/humor'", but your last image a few posts above was taken down after I reported it. Maybe in the Middle East it is satire, but here it comes off as trolling. You're cute little images usually add some humor to the updates, but it's not cute in this thread. Take care and peace in the Middle East yo. 

Edited February 15, 2016 by kdog08

[jmitch94]

The PUF gets royalties as a percentage of revenue. Profit or loss doesn't matter. The effect of lower prices is a reduction in revenue. The only way revenue goes to zero is if the wells no longer produce.

 

But if revenue can't cover the expenses to produce then how will they have a percentage of revenue to give away without taking on debt. 

 

P.S. This is purely an intellectual conversation unlike the rest of this thread. I don't want to argue with anyone just discuss.  

[cloud713]

5% of the PUFs "value" gets transferred to the AUF each year, and that is the money that the schools receive. The PUF was valued to be over $17 billion at the end of 2015, so they've got plenty of reserves to keep the money flowing while prices/production are down.

[samagon]

Even with the bevy of on-campus options, UH still gets a "commuter" rap because the area around campus doesn't offer much in the way of student residential options that parents would consider safe given the crime rate in the adjacent areas. It makes it feel less like a community once you step past the edge of campus. With A&M, probably 95% of students live within 10 or 15 minutes of the campus. With UT, there are a host of housing options for students just off campus, particularly on its western edge. For UH, I wouldn't be surprised if fewer than 50% of students are within a 15 minute driving radius of the university, mainly because a lot of students are from Houston and would rather save the money on housing and instead live with their parents. I don't necessarily see this as a bad thing.

 

To be true, the university will undoubtedly see expansion of on-campus and campus-adjacent living options in the near future, especially if the adjoining area can be redeveloped. Redevelopment of Scott Street is a must. Same with the areas along Holman, Alabama, and Elgin up through at least the Rail Trail. Additionally, almost the entire area between 45, Scott, Cullen, and Elgin would need some sort of redevelopment. If some of these planned off campus projects can get started, like the one on the corner of Elgin and Scott, it will be cool to see, and it could spur a clean-up of the areas immediately surrounding the university. If something can develop along Scott that can be likened to Northgate in College Station or the Drag in Austin, it would be most beneficial in creating a college vibe that could benefit both UH and TSU.

 

You would be shocked at how many people live on the other side of 45 and go to school at UH, walking on Lockwood/Elgin underneath 45.

 

It seems you would also be shocked to see how safe that neighborhood is.

 

Hell, you'd also be shocked to find out how many students are starting to move into 3rd ward. (admittedly, this is only happening because the east end is starting to be priced out of what they can afford)

 

Anyway, a lot of UH students are paying their own way through school, no help from parents, of if so, it's meager. So they work jobs and go to school, and since the parents aren't paying, where their parents perceive as safe is not really relevant. The students may still be students, but they are adults making adult decisions.

Edited February 15, 2016 by samagon

[ADCS]

First of all, the PUF was created in 1876 and the mineral rights on "UT's land" was established in 1901. Frankly, I don't much care about the context and history surrounding the PUF as it is outdated. Compared to California's system it is a joke

 

You want to follow the California system? I'm all in favor. Dissolve the UH regents and incorporate it into the UT system as an autonomous university, like UCLA. Texas Tech can be added to the A&M system. 

 

Of course, I don't think Mr. Fertitta will like that idea too much.

[JJxvi]

Following the California system would be more like combining the A&M and Texas systems into one, and moving Texas Tech and UH, etc back into the State University system.  You wouldnt even have to mess with the PUF or HEF.

Edited February 15, 2016 by JJxvi

[ADCS]

Following the California system would be more like combining the A&M and Texas systems into one, and moving Texas Tech and UH, etc back into the State University system.  You wouldnt even have to mess with the PUF or HEF.

 

I'd probably divvy up the State University system between the UT and A&M systems, leaning heavily toward the latter (I'd reckon that they're feeder schools for A&M more than UT).

[DNAguy]

Following the California system would be more like combining the A&M and Texas systems into one, and moving Texas Tech and UH, etc back into the State University system.  You wouldnt even have to mess with the PUF or HEF.

 

More than likely it would consist of A&M's main campus w/ the Galveston extension along with Tech in Lubbock and UH all joining the UT system.

 

There would then probably be some horse trading with the loss of schools like UT Permian basin and/or UT Arlington and/or UT Tyler.

 

Then the separate Medical schools would be combined w/ an institution or something....

 

Southwestern w/ UT Dallas, UTMB with A&M College Station+Galveston and UT Houston + MD Anderson with UH.

 

Or something like that. IDK.

 

Everyone else would then be combined like Texas State, Sam Houston, SFA, North Texas, UH Victoria, UH Sugar Land, Sul Ross St., etc, etc.

 

ANDDDDDD then all community colleges would be rolled in together like San Jac, Lone Star, ACC, HCC, etc to form the 3rd tier.

 

Then you'd be right that the PUF would go squarely to the UT system.

[kdog08]

You want to follow the California system? I'm all in favor. Dissolve the UH regents and incorporate it into the UT system as an autonomous university, like UCLA. Texas Tech can be added to the A&M system. 

 

Of course, I don't think Mr. Fertitta will like that idea too much.

 

You are taking my words out of context, as you didn't quote the entire paragraph. Maybe it was intentional or maybe I didn't make it clear... But here's the rest.

 

 

 

 ...or to disperse the funds, but that sort of long term planning makes Texas legislatures allergic/upsets the good ole boys entrenched in UT and TAMU. 

 

I am talking about an option that should have been done and brought up how one of the world's most successful higher education system operates. DFW and Houston metro alone added ~ 5 mllion people in the last 25 years and how much state money has gone to these metros for higher education? If Texas was going to adopt a California based system, it should have been decades ago as it is virtually impossible to adopt one now. That shipped has long sailed to rebrand UH as a flagship school, UT-Houston. Now we are in a situation with a lopsided funding system that favors the entrenched interests and a bunch of poor planning for the explosive growth in population. 

 

Again, we are in a two tiered system that doesn't make much sense in 2016. Personally I would amend it so funding would be more based on where the population is and future growth. 

Edited February 16, 2016 by kdog08

[ADCS]

Why should they disperse the funds when it's only to the UT and A&M systems' detriment, and only to the UH/TTU systems' benefit? You're asking for something in exchange for nothing.

 

There is no reason that we couldn't have a mass higher education reorganization tomorrow. All it would take is negotiation. But, you have to understand, UT and A&M aren't going to give up their spots as the state's flagships. If you want them to give on something, you've got to give on something as well. I have not seen any pro-UH posters on here being willing to do so. The most that's being offered is an ultimatum of PUF access in exchange for us not throwing a hissy fit. Is that an even exchange?

 

Sacrificing independence while maintaining a bit of autonomy, on the other hand, would be. In all honesty, I don't know why any UH graduate would be opposed to it. It enhances the value of your degree overnight.

[BigFootsSocks]

Since this is the designated "Off-Topic" thread I'd like to take this opportunity to say The Life of Pablo is a solid album, but is not my favorite. If you'd have to pick one song to listen to let it be "Ultralight Beam" because it is such an uplifting and positive song.

Mods feel free to move to the off-topic Music thread as I've already typed this whole post out and half-expect it to be deleted.

[The Pragmatist]

You would be shocked at how many people live on the other side of 45 and go to school at UH, walking on Lockwood/Elgin underneath 45.

 

It seems you would also be shocked to see how safe that neighborhood is.

 

Hell, you'd also be shocked to find out how many students are starting to move into 3rd ward. (admittedly, this is only happening because the east end is starting to be priced out of what they can afford)

 

Anyway, a lot of UH students are paying their own way through school, no help from parents, of if so, it's meager. So they work jobs and go to school, and since the parents aren't paying, where their parents perceive as safe is not really relevant. The students may still be students, but they are adults making adult decisions.

 

I wouldn't be shocked as I am a student at UH right now. I also park off campus down Alabama (hate paying for parking passes), or I ride my bike from the Heights into class through the Second Ward/East Downtown area, so I don't think you're going to give me some giant revelation. I am not trying to disparage the university as I have an interest in it. I am telling it like it is. There is a large group of students who do have parents who care and worry about the safety of their children. It is a concern. There are students living in the Third Ward, sure, and there are students living down Cullen and Lockwood in the Eastwood/Second Ward area, but saying that doesn't mean that there isn't an elevated rate of crime in the area surrounding the university. For this reason, a lot of parents would rather their children live at home with them if they cannot live on campus. When you receive quite a few number of emails of students being robbed at gunpoint or physically assaulted while being robbed, it becomes disconcerting for parents.

 

Beyond all of this, I was addressing the reason why there is a perception of the university as a commuter school, first and foremost. I'm not trying to argue with you about things I know firsthand.

Edited February 16, 2016 by The Pragmatist

[KinkaidAlum]

According to the prestigious World University Rankings which uses 13 performance indicators to rank schools according to teaching, research, citations, international outlook, and industry income, there are just SIX top 500 schools in Texas.

 

46) UT-Austin

101) Rice

193) Texas A&M

201-250) UT-Dallas

351-400) Houston and UTSA

 

There are THIRTEEN in California including the entire UC system, San Diego State, and Long Beach State. We need to change to get better or we'll continue to suffer a brain drain. 

 

 

 

[HoustonIsHome]

Why do people keep saying adding UH and TT to the PUF would be to the detriment of UT and A&M. So let me get this right. The two flagships get 5 percent of the revenue from the landholdings. Is that right?

UT already had more money than it knows what to do with, but anyway what if the PUF dispersement is increased to to 8 percent and then devided accordingly.

It didn't hurt UT when the other system schools were added so why would it hurt UT if UH was added? Is it because UH and TT are the closes to being Tier one?

[ADCS]

Why do people keep saying adding UH and TT to the PUF would be to the detriment of UT and A&M. So let me get this right. The two flagships get 5 percent of the revenue from the landholdings. Is that right?

UT already had more money than it knows what to do with, but anyway what if the PUF dispersement is increased to to 8 percent and then devided accordingly.

It didn't hurt UT when the other system schools were added so why would it hurt UT if UH was added? Is it because UH and TT are the closes to being Tier one?

 

No one's proposing to do it that way. Da Mare wanted to cut into UT's slice of the pie, to the order of hundreds of millions:

 

https://www.dailytexanonline.com/organization/permanent-university-fund

[Houston19514]

According to the prestigious World University Rankings which uses 13 performance indicators to rank schools according to teaching, research, citations, international outlook, and industry income, there are just SIX top 500 schools in Texas.

 

46) UT-Austin

101) Rice

193) Texas A&M

201-250) UT-Dallas

351-400) Houston and UTSA

 

There are THIRTEEN in California including the entire UC system, San Diego State, and Long Beach State. We need to change to get better or we'll continue to suffer a brain drain. 

 

Is there evidence somewhere that Texas is suffering a brain drain?

 

[Timoric]

-

Edited July 10, 2019 by Timoric

[KinkaidAlum]

Is there evidence somewhere that Texas is suffering a brain drain?

 

 

Yes. It's easy to find. 

 

Texas ranks #2 in the nation behind New Jersey with a net loss of college students each year. Nearly 18,000 a year leave the state for college. 

 

What's worse is how lousy our schools are at attracting out of state kids. Here are the latest figures for states luring out of state kids to attend their colleges.

 

30,408 Pennsylvania

30,259 New York

24,726 Massachusetts

13,502 California

13,474 Illinois

13,386 Indiana

13,166 Florida 

13,073 Virginia

12,255 North Carolina

12,218 Ohio

9,140 Connecticut

8,944 Wisconsin

8,423 Arizona

8,356 Rhode Island

8,161 Missouri 

8,097 DC

8,065 Alabama

8,022 Iowa

7,837 South Carolina

7,616 Minnesota

7,341 Tennessee

7,120 Georgia

7,118 Maryland

6,937 Colorado

6,600 Michigan

6,425 TEXAS

 

The second most populated state falls in 26th place with attracting college kids. That's a problem. One that could be fixed by elevating the stature of more schools.

[cspwal]

I wonder what the breakdown is between going out of state for public versus private schools

[Texas Wahoo]

Yes. It's easy to find. 

 

Texas ranks #2 in the nation behind New Jersey with a net loss of college students each year. Nearly 18,000 a year leave the state for college. 

 

What's worse is how lousy our schools are at attracting out of state kids. Here are the latest figures for states luring out of state kids to attend their colleges.

 

30,408 Pennsylvania

30,259 New York

24,726 Massachusetts

13,502 California

13,474 Illinois

13,386 Indiana

13,166 Florida 

13,073 Virginia

12,255 North Carolina

12,218 Ohio

9,140 Connecticut

8,944 Wisconsin

8,423 Arizona

8,356 Rhode Island

8,161 Missouri 

8,097 DC

8,065 Alabama

8,022 Iowa

7,837 South Carolina

7,616 Minnesota

7,341 Tennessee

7,120 Georgia

7,118 Maryland

6,937 Colorado

6,600 Michigan

6,425 TEXAS

 

The second most populated state falls in 26th place with attracting college kids. That's a problem. One that could be fixed by elevating the stature of more schools.

 

One of the biggest problems is the Top Ten Percent Rule, as it limits the number of out-of-state kids a school like the University of Texas can accept to a very small percentage.

[Montrose1100]

I'm surprised Montana isn't on there, Their Tech school hands out acceptances like nobody's business. That's a bash on them as well as myself.

[The Pragmatist]

One of the biggest problems is the Top Ten Percent Rule, as it limits the number of out-of-state kids a school like the University of Texas can accept to a very small percentage.

 

 

To an extent, you can call that a problem. However, one must also consider the fact that the main goal of state-funded universities is to service the populace of the state. You can question the merits of the 10% rule, but you shouldn't speak badly of it and then encourage state universities to try to attract out-of-state students over in-state students. One of the main draws for those northeastern states (and California) for out-of-state students is the large number of prestigious private institutions located in their borders. For New York, you have schools such as NYU and Columbia. In Massachusetts, you have Harvard, Boston College, Boston University, MIT, and others. California has Stanford, Caltech, and the Claremont Colleges. Pennsylvania has schools such as Penn, Bryn Mawr, and Carnegie Mellon. The private schools in Texas don't have as much of a draw for out-of-state students. Rice enters into that tier, but few others have as much academic clout in the state. You see, private universities aren't as concerned (nor should they be) with relegating themselves to only the students of the state in which they reside.

 

I'm not saying that the state universities for these states don't also attract higher numbers of out-of-state students, but I'd wager that a larger segment of students leaving the state for college aren't leaving to head to public universities.

Edited February 16, 2016 by The Pragmatist

[cloud713]

Should UH go back to being a private school?

[KinkaidAlum]

The 10% rule is a factor. It isn't the only one though because even at UT, which is 95% in-state students, only 70% of the students entered via the 10% rule.

 

The private school factor is at play as well but again, it isn't the only one. Rice doesn't attract out of state kids like her peers (Ivies, Stanford, Chicago, Northwestern, Emory, Vandy, etc...). Ask any admissions person at Rice and they'll tell you, it is hard to recruit kids to Texas. 

 

Why is that? 

 

I have my ideas and I think one of them is how we treat education in this state. Hell, my social media has been blowing up about Mary Lou Bruner. If you don't know who she is, google her. It would be funny if it weren't so scary. 

 

So, yeah, the brain drain is real. It is measurable. It exists. We can either address if or ignore it but I'd prefer to try and make our state universities as attractive as possible. Maybe UH, Tech, UNT, etc... could go after bordering state kids like Arkansas and LSU do here. Heck, Arkansas offers 90% off out-of-state tuition to Texas kids who have a 3.6 and an ACT score of 26 or better. Since they instituted that policy, the number of Texans at UA has increased from 300 to over 1,700.

 

 

 

[cloud713]

My only question with that is.. If a prestigious, nationally renown university like UT has trouble recruiting out of state students.. What makes you think a school like UH would have better luck?

[KinkaidAlum]

My only question with that is.. If a prestigious, nationally renown university like UT has trouble recruiting out of state students.. What makes you think a school like UH would have better luck?

 

 

 

 

Edited February 17, 2016 by KinkaidAlum