UNT is Now a Carnegie Doctoral University: Highest Research Activity (R1)

[Eagle-96]

2 minutes ago, Texas Stranger said:

I can't, I'm too amped up.  I'm dyne to find out more.

I am positive that I don't have the capacitor to follow current conversation.

[ForneyGreen]

13 minutes ago, Eagle-96 said:

I am positive that I don't have the capacitor to follow current conversation.

I volt this as one of the better threads of 2016

[NorthTexan95]

Just now, ForneyGreen said:

I volt this as one of the better threads of 2016

I cannot offer any resistance to that on my ohm. 

[PlummMeanGreen]

Still, what is our research university tier status using the state of Texas or (is  it THECB) criteria?  

What killed us on that tier-granting status program previously was our school's total endowment coffers were very deficient.

[TreeFiddy]

21 minutes ago, ForneyGreen said:

I volt this as one of the better threads of 2016

It certainly has potential.  I will be shocked if it doesn't make the first coulomb of top threads.

[meangreenacct]

With all the brain power displayed in this thread and on this board in general, can't believe it took so long for these academic accolades to start rolling in!

[Texas Stranger]

25 minutes ago, TreeFiddy said:

It certainly has potential.  I will be shocked if it doesn't make the first coulomb of top threads.

I'll volt for that, even though it hertz to admit it.

[dmaxel]

37 minutes ago, PlummMeanGreen said:

Still, what is our research university tier status using the state of Texas or (is  it THECB) criteria?  

What killed us on that tier-granting status program previously was our school's total endowment coffers were very deficient.

Endowment is still one of the issues. It needs to be at least $400 million for Texas's criteria. We're currently at ~$150 million. I think number of PhDs granted annually is another metric that needs improvement. Maybe a few other criteria points as well but I forgot which ones are mandatory and which ones are "achieve x out of y points".

Edited November 30, 2016 by dmaxel

[forevereagle]

23 minutes ago, Texas Stranger said:

I'll volt for that, even though it hertz to admit it.

It is a charged issue, but we all need to stay grounded.

[ChristopherRyanWilkes]

3 hours ago, laxtonto said:

 

This has actually been in the works for 3-5 years. The issue has always been that is you split Arts and Sciences the Arts lose their funding arm. The success of the current grant programs in the Sciences have essentially forced this split because they finally realized that they did not want to share their hard earned winnings. Much like how the C of Business floats at least one additional college as far as operating revenue, the sciences side of the  C of A and S is the major money making arm and it impacts what they can do from an internal hiring and scholastic requirements standpoint.

This is great news in many regards and will have much greater of an impact than people think. It will now allow the College of Science to up their entrance requirements into the college and change how they give their scholarships vs how they have in the past under the old A and S label.  Ill ask those that I know in the Provost office if they are decided on the College of Liberal Arts or if they are trying to find a more progressive name to avoid the historic backlash to that name.

 

On a purely selfish note this makes it much easier for my wife and I to consider to be able to come back as faculty to UNT

As a graduate on the "A" side, I'm totally for the "S" side getting the bulk of the funding and being separate. One of the biggest positives I pointed out when Smastresk was hired was his scientific background. Those positions are generally the ones that will be making major breakthroughs in research that get you recognized as an institution. Nothing against the arts, again I'm a graduate with a degree in one, but it's just a fact of life. Hope we continue funding and focusing on STEM education, our arts programs are strong.

[letsgiveacheer]

Not one to shunt my responsibilities, I felt obligated to post in this thread, hoping for some positive feedback. 

[Graddean]

The Southern Regional Education Board (SREB) lists as a four year 1 university. There are six other Texas public universities in this category.  Ratings are based on the number and diversity of graduate degrees.  Both UTEP and UTSA are four year 2, and Texas State at San Marcos is a four year 3.  The only other four year 2 institution is TWU.

[malonish]

I object to all these puns.

 

(Software engineer)

[PlummMeanGreen]

18 hours ago, Graddean said:

The Southern Regional Education Board (SREB) lists as a four year 1 university. There are six other Texas public universities in this category.  Ratings are based on the number and diversity of graduate degrees.  Both UTEP and UTSA are four year 2, and Texas State at San Marcos is a four year 3.  The only other four year 2 institution is TWU.

Who are the 6?  

[Aldo]

41 minutes ago, malonish said:

I object to all these puns.

I don't understand how these people function

[forevereagle]

13 minutes ago, Aldo said:

I don't understand how these people function

It's all relational.

[GreenMachine]

20 hours ago, ChristopherRyanWilkes said:

As a graduate on the "A" side, I'm totally for the "S" side getting the bulk of the funding and being separate. One of the biggest positives I pointed out when Smastresk was hired was his scientific background. Those positions are generally the ones that will be making major breakthroughs in research that get you recognized as an institution. Nothing against the arts, again I'm a graduate with a degree in one, but it's just a fact of life. Hope we continue funding and focusing on STEM education, our arts programs are strong.

I am curious then, where/how will the art school get their funding?

[ChristopherRyanWilkes]

8 minutes ago, GreenMachine said:

I am curious then, where/how will the art school get their funding?

College specific donations, budget allocation? Not sure. But you have minimum expenses compared to science related fields. It's typically just professor salary and other misc expenses; science has lab equipment and all that stuff. 

[Cerebus]

20 minutes ago, GreenMachine said:

I am curious then, where/how will the art school get their funding?

Texas funds higher education through Semester Credit Hours (SCH).  The non science schools will have plenty of that since EVERYONE has to take English.  Very few people HAVE to take a chemistry course.  

On 11/30/2016 at 1:01 PM, laxtonto said:

Psych is their own beast entirely, and I am curious if they fight to be put into an Applied Sciences wing with something like Econ.

Psych could very well go to the CoS because they are very applied.  We have a clinic on campus.  However, they could also decide to stay with the arts/letters/humanities.  

 

On 11/30/2016 at 1:07 PM, laxtonto said:

Follow the money. It should have been a huge sign that in the last 12 months or so that both the Provost and Vice Provost have came out of the College of Business. Neal is trying to build the orginzational structure to get to the point that it becomes a money making machine

I think more than anything else this is to:

• Make sure we keep our Carnegie classification, and
• even more importantly help get to Texas Tier 1. 

 

We need to up federal grant expenditures, big time.  

[Graddean]

Plumm. The other six are A&M, Tech, Houston, UTA, UT Austin, UT Dallas.

[PlummMeanGreen]

44 minutes ago, Graddean said:

Plumm. The other six are A&M, Tech, Houston, UTA, UT Austin, UT Dallas.

I thought we were a 4 year/1 university, too?  Good gosh, if UTA is & we're  not?!?!  ?

Edited December 1, 2016 by PlummMeanGreen

[laxtonto]

2 hours ago, Cerebus said:

Texas funds higher education through Semester Credit Hours (SCH).  The non science schools will have plenty of that since EVERYONE has to take English.  Very few people HAVE to take a chemistry course.  

Psych could very well go to the CoS because they are very applied.  We have a clinic on campus.  However, they could also decide to stay with the arts/letters/humanities.  

 

I think more than anything else this is to:

• Make sure we keep our Carnegie classification, and
• even more importantly help get to Texas Tier 1. 

 

We need to up federal grant expenditures, big time.  

The problem is that there really isnt a easy way to do it.

Even by bringing in faculty with current grant funded projects will only get them so far. Right now there are some departments in the traditional grant generating areas that are WELL under-performing in both the number and total financial value of federal grant funding. The only way that gets fixed is to steadily push out some of the older non-revenue generating faculty into retirement and being willing to not give tenure to those not generating outside funding opportunities. That is a scary proposition that is hard to swallow when the university has lost several lawsuits in the past over those types of issues.

What needs to happen is to see UNT find a dominant area that we become know for in grant funding in the state of Texas. Right now we do well in Psych and a few specific areas in Chem and Bio, but we really don't own a lucrative area the grant funding hierarchy, even within the state of Texas.  How do we change that, I dont know. But part of the solution is how we hire, part is how hard we push our own grant office, part is how we restructure, and part is how we acquire student talent. It is such a complex issue that there is no real easy solution. The needs of the University and those who it services does not make this an easily attainable goal.

[Cerebus]

6 minutes ago, laxtonto said:

The problem is that there really isnt a easy way to do it.

I agree with you on that.  I also agree with you on what some of our significant stumbling blocks are.  While I don't know the solutions, I find comfort in the fact that some very smart people are looking for solutions.  

[dmaxel]

23 hours ago, Graddean said:

The Southern Regional Education Board (SREB) lists [us] as a four year 1 university. There are six other Texas public universities in this category.  Ratings are based on the number and diversity of graduate degrees.  Both UTEP and UTSA are four year 2, and Texas State at San Marcos is a four year 3.  The only other four year 2 institution is TWU.

 

9 minutes ago, PlummMeanGreen said:

I thought we were a 4 year/1 university, too?  Good gosh, if UTA is & we're  not?!?!  ?

See the emphasis in the above quote.

Edited December 1, 2016 by dmaxel

[TreeFiddy]

In order to be known for something you need to specialize (see college of music).

Psychology should be broken out into something like College of Behavioral Sciences to allow the to focus. Probably also include Sociology with them.