 |
|
 |
|
| Independent Colleges and Universities of Texas, (ICUT) Inc. Response to A Roadmap to Responsible Reform Texas Conservative Coalition Research Institute (TCCRI) |
| |
The Texas Conservative Coalition Research Institute (TCCRI) recently released a report for consideration by the 78th Legislature. The purpose of Roadmap to Responsible Reform is to provide "a framework for members by reviewing state spending priorities, laying out possible structural changes in state appropriations and management and pointing to other areas for possible cost savings".
Independent Colleges and Universities of Texas, (ICUT), Inc. takes exception with one of recommendations related to higher education in the report. TCCRI recommends eliminating the Tuition Equalization Grant (TEG) program (p. 104). The recommendation is based on invalid assertions, and ICUT respectfully submits the following response to TCCRI's analysis of the TEG program.
TCCRI asserts that TEG is no longer necessary because capacity at public universities is no longer an issue. The Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board (THECB) refutes this assertion.
In December 2002, the THECB published Regional Plan for Texas Higher Education as required by HB 1799, 77th Legislature. That report states, "future enrollment growth will stress the resources of Texas higher education institutions" (p. 52). The report continues, "At the university level, projected statewide space needs through 2015 indicate a 15 million square-foot deficit to accommodate an additional 168,600 students…. The current space deficit totals 2.0 million square-feet…. A slight space surplus currently exists in four regions of the state…. However, all 10 regions are projected to reach deficits by 2015" (p.53). Additionally, the report notes that Texas will need an additional 21,000 faculty members if enrollment targets are achieved (p. 57). Furthermore, achieving the goals of Closing the Gaps will create an even more severe space deficit at public institutions.
The independent sector of higher education is prepared to assist the state in educating its citizens, as it always has. Some independent institutions have unused capacity and others expect to grow in coming years. Independent colleges leaders intend to serve the needs of Texas students with that capacity and potential growth. However, students who lose TEG will leave private colleges and universities and enroll in public institutions. That will not only exacerbate the existing space deficit at public institutions but will dampen the willingness of private institutions to undertake even modest growth to accommodate Texas' growing student population.
While limited capacity at public universities during the baby boomers' college years was one of the reasons for creating the TEG program in 1971 and providing an initial biennial appropriation of $4 million, it was not the sole reason, as TCCRI asserts. In addition to easing the capacity shortage at public universities, legislators created the TEG program to help students with financial need attend Texas colleges of their choice, regardless of cost, by using TEG to bridge the tuition gap between state universities and private institutions. The program has repeatedly met this goal. The average family income of TEG recipients hovered in the $22,000-$23,000 range between 1984 and 1995. It then began a slow upward crawl to a high $29,400 in fiscal year 2001. That amount is still far below the $41,000 Texas median household income for which the University of Texas System proposes waiving tuition as part of its plan to deregulate public university tuition. Considering this income information, it is clear that TEG has met the goal of providing low- and moderate-income Texans access to the state's private colleges and universities.
Simultaneously, the Legislature hoped the TEG program would help the private sector of higher education maintain its part of the student market, sharing the burden of higher education with the state and reducing the pressure to build multiple state universities. Early literature about TEG referred to the program as a "partnership" between the state and the private institutions. The program succeeded at meeting that goal, even during the state's lean years (1985-1994) when the program was under-funded. During those years, the private sector of higher education continued to attract between 10%-12% of an economically diverse student population in Texas.
In establishing TEG, legislators also wanted to insure that all Texas colleges and universities, including private ones, had ethnically and economically diverse student populations. Again, the program has succeeded at meeting the Legislature's goal. As the number of TEG recipients has grown, the percentage of minority recipients has increased from about 29% in the 1980's to over 45% today without using race as a factor in choosing TEG recipients. Recipients qualify on the basis of residency status, financial need and enrollment status. As the face of Texas changes and the state strives to welcome and enroll a record number of students to higher education by 2015 (see THECB Closing the Gaps strategic plan), the premises upon which TEG was created more than 30 years ago are even more important today.
While many fine public institutions exist to address student needs in the state, those institutions do not accomplish that task comprehensively. The state's private institutions continue to meet student needs in distinctive ways, from smaller campus and classroom settings to unique course and program offerings to opportunities to learn in environments supportive of personal religious beliefs. No institution can be all things to all students, but among Texas public and private institutions, there is a college or university that will meet the needs of every student. The TEG makes that fact a reality for the state's neediest students.
The TCCRI also claims that TEG is no longer needed because "the vast majority of four-year college students attend a public university." On its face, this statement is true. However, in 1971 the Legislature recognized that part of the strength of Texas higher education was the diversity of its institutions and it has continued to recognize that diversity as an asset.
Across the Texas higher education landscape there is a wide range of sizes, selectivity, program emphasis, innovation and traditions among institutions. Much of that diversity is provided by Texas private institutions whose missions, ambitions and visions are not focused on becoming Tier I flagship institutions in the state. The majority of private institutions are focused on developing individual students as whole persons and on providing those students the skills and values to become productive, creative and thoughtful citizens.
Whether or not "the vast majority of four-year college students attend a public university" is beside the point. The issue is whether each Texas student can find an institution in the state that meets his or her educational and personal needs and supports his or her long-term goals. The diversity the private sector of higher education brings to Texas higher education increases the probability that every Texas student will find a college here rather than in another state. That keeps Texas brainpower in Texas. It also increases the odds that more young Texans will find colleges, go to college, earn degrees and become a part of the educated work force this state desperately needs.
Perhaps TCCRI's most erroneous assertion about the TEG program is "only 50% of TEG recipients earn a baccalaureate degree within six academic years." It appears that the writers of A Responsible Roadmap to Reform were unable to distinguish between a performance measure in the appropriations bill (a target to meet or exceed) and a fact.
In the 2002-2003 Appropriations Act, the Legislature set performance measures for the TEG program for the first time. One of the measures is that 50% of TEG recipients graduate with a baccalaureate degree within 6 academic years. In December 2002, the THECB collected the data to track the first student cohort for this measure, TEG recipients who received their first grants in Fall 2001. Most of this cohort will begin graduating in Spring 2005. At that time we will know what percentage of TEG recipients graduate within four, five or six academic years. Currently, however, no one has the data to cite the graduation rate of TEG recipients.
While we do not have the data to state the graduation rate of TEG recipients, we can speculate about it, based on other available information. Nationally, nearly 65 % of all students at independent colleges and universities graduate within 4 years compared to just 34.5% of students at state universities. Among TEG recipients, there is a higher percentage of minority and low-income students than the percentage of those students among the total enrollment at independent colleges. Low-income students often require more time to earn baccalaureate degrees than the larger population of independent college students; however, it would not be surprising for TEG recipients to exceed the measure set in the Appropriation Act.
TCCRI's third assertion about the TEG program is that entire public universities can be funded with the money appropriated to TEG. Again, on its face, this statement is true. However, only public institutions with significantly lower enrollments than the number of TEG recipients could be funded with the amount of money appropriated for TEG. Since 1995, state universities with enrollments approximately equal to the number of TEG recipients have required at least twice as much general revenue to fund their operations as was appropriated for the TEG program. For example, 33,034 students received $82.2 million in TEG during fiscal year 2002; the University of Houston enrolled 33,007 students that year but required an appropriation of $194.6 million.
Viewed another way, over the last 32 years, the TEG program has enabled between 17,000 and 18,000 students to enroll in independent colleges and universities annually. To put that in perspective, that is an enrollment the size of The University of Texas at San Antonio (UT-SA). However, the state and its taxpayers were not required to build that new institution. Depending on location, it would cost over $500 million to acquire land, build facilities and equip laboratories, libraries, classrooms and offices for a campus that size. The 77th Legislature appropriated nearly $100 million in general revenue to fund operating expenses for UT-SA (including employee group insurance) for fiscal year 2002.
In light of the many benefits independent higher education provides Texas higher education and the savings that result from enabling students to choose independent institutions, the TEG program is a proven cost-effective and positive investment. Eliminating a program that has stretched Texas tax dollars and created opportunities for so many Texans would be both unwise and shortsighted.
|
| |
|
|
