Incentive Funding Plan Draws Criticism

Now that the governor has added his voice—along with the Commissioner of Higher Education and Coordinating Board—to the chorus praising incentive funding for higher education (see the previous day's post), it may be time to analyze a basic point of contention. 

The notion of rewarding conferred degrees with additional state funding underscores a fundamental distinction between selective universities and community colleges. Lawmakers complain each session about the length of time it takes for students to graduate, which in turn generates a plethora of proposed bills designed to speed up the process. Some policy makers undoubtedly wax nostalgic about the four years they spent in college, and perhaps assume that all students are the same. But two-year college students fit an entirely different profile. 

One respected journalist who gets it apparently is Paul Burka of Texas Monthly. Here's his response in a recent blog entry on the governor's recent State of the State address, on the subject of incentive funding for higher education:

Another issue was the proposal to tie funding for colleges and universities to graduation rates. The problem with this attempt to extend accountability to higher ed is that it penalizes entry-level institutions that attract students who are not the sort who attend UT and A&M. I heard testimony about this at the House Appropriations Committee hearings in 2007. The students who attend colleges like UT-Brownsville, UT-Pan American, and UTEP, are not the sort who drive their BMWs to Austin. Many of them have to work. The president of UTEP said that UT is like an express train: students get on, stay in school, and get off at graduation. UTEP is a local. A student gets on, may get off to work for a year, and may get back on for a year or two. Incentive funding based on graduation rates just doesn’t work for entry-level schools.

Mr. Burka doesn't include community colleges categorically here, but obviously his point would pertain to these schools even more profoundly than the universities he cites.

One of the most vital tasks facing community and technical college educators is highlighting this distinction to all representatives and senators. Many lawmakers already understand, but others could use some help.