USF is also the school that our President worked at previously, and the one that looks most similar to us. All the metrics that our President points to as our objectives are things that they have recently achieved. They’re clearly our model, like it or not. Do you even listen to anything that Dr. Khator says? Or do you just project your own opinions?
1 Like
YES!
She gives a State of the University Adress every single year spelling out her policies/goals and most of her chair’s presentations, like the head of Campus Planning and Development repeatedly State they are echoing her vision.
Do you guys even watch them?
These universities specifically are all public land grant flagships, which places them far ahead than non-land grants because they’ve historically received much more government support. UH is not a land grant.
With that said, what sets Texas universities apart from the rest of the country is that they rely on their own state population for enrollment, while the other schools you listed have far more out-of-state kids. UT has a higher share of out-of-states compared to A&M and UH, but that’s because their most competitive programs like Business and Stem are top 10 programs nationally. That’s an achievement that takes generations.
With that said, I think UH is doing everything it can to propel itself forward, but the reason UH is so far behind is because we have lacked support for multiple generations.
I am confused as to what your definition of “traditional university” is, but UH has just as much if not extremely close # of on-campus housing as UT and A&M.
The difference between UH and UT/A&M is that the city of Houston is not built around UH.
Austin and College Station were 100% built around UT and A&M, but Austin is slowly transitioning into a suburban growth model with a below-par tech-focused economy.
The only way UH will become a “traditional university” is if the city of Houston changes its development that benefits UH, which of course, there’s no sign that’s happening other than the densification of the inner loop. However, most of the people who can afford to own homes in the wealthier areas of the inner loop are likely to not send their kids to UH, but instead to private schools or UT at the very least.
UH’s largest demographic I would assume is predominantly from the outer suburbs, and when you have a school that relies on so many commuters from far away, it will feel less like a true college experience than say A&M where residential housing is much closer to campus → I assume this is what you mean by “traditional university”
My final thoughts - metropolitan / city-style universities are the future as climate change gets worse and worse, but the catch is that Houston, TX is going to be one of the cities that will feel the impacts the most, possibly causing kids to not want to go to school here. East and West coast universities whether public or private have far better weather and transit options for students than the south does.
Unfortunately, athletics is one of the few ways that UH can significantly improve its brand nationally, which is why the board of regents is choosing to spend so much on athletics. It’s not just to win games for the sake of winning games, but it’s because achieving athletic accomplishments improves the brand and benefits non-athletic initiatives.
AAU designation will be a turning point for the university, but there’s a long road ahead.
Do you even read what you post? You didn’t talk to Khator.
No…i watch the hour long presentations she gives where she is talking to ALL of us and in great detail
Khator is trying to get the grad rates up for rankings and AAU and top 50 so it’s a must to get more traditional students and it helps future giving.
1 Like
Who is saying anything about open admissions? We’re far from that. Many enroll at Tech, LSU, OSU, Ole Miss or HCC if they can’t get in. It keeps getting tougher. Consistently Top 50 next.
1 Like
This is true, but a lot of people also enroll at HCC even if they do get accepted to UH
We basically have the same acceptance rate as Texas AM, LSU, TT. So I don’t get why dotes say we are open enrollment or equivalent to HCC. The self loathing is so irritating. Far from helping UH, all they do is throw more wood on the fire, to perpetuate the notion that we’re cougar high.
1 Like
I’m also of the opinion that urban universities are the future of higher ed, although I’m unconvinced that that it has much to do with climate change. The overwhelming bulk of top-tier universities globally are in cities, or in nominal “college towns” that immediately border cities, simply because education and industrial development are complementary. Interaction effects between research and industry combined with the easier access to potential talent means that it’s basically inevitable for top-tier universities to build cities around themselves. You’re seeing it now with Austin, Madison, and Raleigh-Durham.
2 Likes
Acceptance rate does not equal enrollment rate.
While UH is technically more competitive than LSU from an acceptance standpoint, LSU has a far richer alumni base.
This is proven because all you have to do is look at their racial demographic as well as their out-of-state percentage, which is around 30-40%.
Schools like Alabama, Auburn, LSU, etc… (most SEC and some ACC territory schools) have generational wealth and alumni networks that are far more significant than an acceptance rate. Many of those schools while they may not have the most intelligent students, have kids that come from money which keeps those schools afloat essentially.
UH has a more competitive acceptance rate, but many of our students are first gen college students with infantile alumni networks and lack of generational wealth. Is this changing? Yes it is, but it’s happening slowly.
In order for UH to truly compete against other schools, it has to essentially do the following:
- Develop better relationships with local F500 corporations in Houston (which it is)
- Achieve AAU designation (will take another decade possibly 2 decades)
- Continue to propel its brand athletically (athletics is the front porch of a public school)
- Continue to slowly raise academic standards with its competitive schools such as Bauer and Cullen, thus reducing the amount of community college transfers
- Continue to invest in the school’s social infrastructure
That’s really all UH can do to improve itself, but if UH wants to be a “destination school”, then the city of Houston has to do more to attract kids to want to not only come to school here, but to also live and work here which a lot of native Houstonians do.
Schools like UCLA, Washington, PITT, and certain SEC schools have many kids that don’t remain in the city where they attended college. → UH doesn’t have this attribute, which can actually be a good thing.
If most kids that went to NYU or Columbia could remain in NYC post graduation, they most likely would. Same with Los Angeles. The caviet is that most kids going to college in those cities are likely to be of wealth anyway
Rice has a lot of rich kids. UH does not.
If Houston wants to attract more kids to come to college here, then it needs to work with UH. Houston needs to change zoning laws to allow more affordable housing and apartments. Obviously, Third Ward needs to massively improve, while also doing all it can to assist residents who are displaced.
I agree, but I don’t think Austin has the foundation to build a true economy.
There are a handful of companies headquartered in Austin, but it’s not enough for the city to become a true professional city like Houston or Dallas.
Dallas is a finance hub, and Houston is an Energy/Medical hub with a decent finance hub.
Austin has been struggling to decide if it wants to be a college town, arts/entertainment town, or a tech hub.
Regarding climate change, the main reason I bring it up in regards to UH’s future is because it’s going to be more and more expensive to not only attend universities in rural college towns, but there will likely be more incentives for public transit in the future for students to get around the city.
Houston has an awesome tunnel system in downtown, but downtown is still only active during working hours. If Houston could change downtown from a professional hub to a both professional and residential hub, then Houston has potential to truly be a special place. There’s just unfortunately so much resistance against making Houston anything but a car-dependent sprawling highway machine
https://www.chron.com/business/article/downtown-houston-world-cup-19862967.php
Downtown is trying to be more of a destination/ residential area. By the time the World Cup is here around 2026 or so Main Street will have 7 or so blocks cut off to traffic with trees and outdoor seating at restaurants.The goal is to make downtown a destination.
After the baylor game I noticed rows and rows of new townhouses near UH . Some were across 45 guessing east downtown and some near 59 so there isn’t hardly anything left to grab but the 3 rd ward.
We’re building another on campus dorm which when done by 2027 will give UH approx. 9400 students on campus not counting off campus which equals 12k or so total.
1 Like
LSU has to recruit out of state because it doesn’t have enough capable graduates in state. Yes, it’s the flagship public U of Louisiana but overall its students aren’t as academically strong as UH’s.
It will take a lot to make UH a destination for wealthier, traditional students. The Honors College is a draw. Big 12 is a draw. Greek? BSN Nursing program is a great draw.
1 Like
Pitt is not a land grant, nor is Washington.
We should aspire to be the “Pitt” of Houston.
1 Like
Not sure I agree based on how many top liberal arts colleges are located in quaint rural villages, and how many AAU public flagships are land grant schools in smaller settings (Illinois, Penn State, aTm).
But IF you are correct, then that would be good news for schools in inner city locations like Case Western Reserve U., right?
Texas A&M isn’t a top-tier university on a global scale. If we’re talking top global schools, I’m talking like this tier. (UIUC dips in and out of there, as does UT.)
Depending on how you count it, something like 90% of those schools are in major cities, or immediately adjacent to them. That’s not a coincidence. It’s also not a coincidence that every Alpha+ or Alpha++ city except for Dubai has a university on that list. (UCL would be on there if UK unis were eligible, as would Oxford and Cambridge.)
Illinois is a consensus Public Ivy bro.
Every ranking of “world” universities ranks them highly. Times, QS, Shanghai, USNEWS, etc.
USNEWS also ranks the as the 15th best public for undergrad.
Its library holdings are the second largest of any university in the country behind only Harvard.
The dot.com boom largely started there.
Guess what?
Urbana-Champaign is in the middle of nowhere.
As I said….I’m skeptical of your theory given both that…AND the fact that most of America’s top liberal arts colleges are located in quaint rural villages.
The idea that universities in the USA should be judged based on some UK Visa formula (that’s what you presented here, right?) is a bit far out there, in my view. Do those limeys hold some special expertise or authority in that regard?
To be clear, that list is just a list of schools that are T50 in two of three among QS, ARWU, and THE, which feels like a fair way to determine consensus globally-elite universities to me. UIUC is on there some years and not others, which seems right. Some actual Ivies (Brown, Dartmouth) aren’t on there, much less public Ivies. If you wanna draw the line for “globally elite” at T100 instead of T50 or whatever, that’s your prerogative, but at the end of the day, it doesn’t change the results much. Whichever ranking you prefer, the overwhelming bulk of elite global universities are in cities, and that’s not a coincidence.
As far as LACs…they’re not super relevant, globally. Nobody in Australia or Spain or whatever is gonna be impressed that you studied at Williams or Amherst. They also operate differently in a way that makes them unlikely to serve as an economic engine for an urban area in the way that a Research University can.
Apparently European royalty disagrees.
Just ask Prince Albert of Monaco!
