TCCTA Blog

Speaker Announces House Interim Charges

Speaker of the House Joe Straus assigned the interim charges to Texas House committees on November 4, formally launching preparations for the Regular Session that will convene in January 2017. Standing committees will soon commence hearings on the topics included in the charges. 

For community and technical colleges, several panels are especially pertinent, beginning with the Committee on Appropriations, which shares a key charge with the Committee on Higher Education. These charges appear below. 

Here is an earlier post on the Senate Charges, which were announced previously. 

Although these topics are important, bills will certainly be introduced on a host of subjects not found in the formal list—some of which will undoubtedly be controversial. 

Below are the charges of the Higher Education Committee, which include many references to community colleges. You will note especially an emphasis on student access and success, and the subject of bachelor's degrees at two-year schools. Language is also included on taxing jurisdictions, addressing the fact that some community college campuses and facilities are outside the institution's taxing authority. 

House Committee on Higher Education

1. Conduct a review of current funding formulas for community colleges. Specifically, focus on the elements of the instructional funding structure created by the 83rd Legislature: core operations, student success points, and contact hour funding and also the adequacy of state funding to sustain community colleges in light of the variance in resources available to individual colleges. Make recommendations for possible changes to the funding structure of community colleges or changes in the levels of current funding given the future workforce and higher educational needs of the state. (Joint charge with the House Committee on Appropriations)
2. Review the state's community college system, including a discussion of taxing districts, service areas and any barriers to access. Examine the governance structure to ensure that campuses in multi campus districts that are outside of a college taxing district receive fair and equitable treatment. Review the accounting and reporting requirements of community college districts to ensure open government and transparency. Study ways community colleges could offer accessible and affordable baccalaureate degree programs in areas where the state has a significant workforce shortage without compromising quality of education and training. Make recommendations to maximize efficient student pathways and to offer more affordable educational opportunities such as through dual credit and early college start programs.
3. Study the affordability and accessibility of undergraduate college education in Texas, including a focus on middle-class students. Analyze the cost of attendance and tuition rates, comparing Texas institutions to their national peers. Review the availability and effectiveness of financial aid programs, and analyze student debt and default rates. Study and recommend ways to promote timely and cost efficient graduation.
4. Study current policies and initiatives at institutions of higher education, including community colleges, and make recommendations toward the prevention and elimination of sexual assault on college campuses. Identify, evaluate, and recommend reporting mechanisms to ensure that students have safe, appropriate, and accessible avenues for reporting sexual assault. Study the existing campus support systems in place for students who are victims of assault, and provide recommendations of best practices. Evaluate the effectiveness of current policies and make recommendations to support the prevention and elimination of sexual assault at institutions of higher education in Texas.
5. Study the long-term viability of the Hazlewood Act, in particular the legacy tuition exemption provision. Review eligibility requirements and recommend changes to ensure that the program can remain solvent. Examine the costs of the program to institutions of higher education, including foregone tuition, additional infrastructure, administrative and instructional support costs, and the financial impact on nonveteran/legacy students. Analyze and report any effect changes to this program would have for veterans and their families. Review current data systems related to this exemption and recommend improvements to ensure quality and accuracy of information. (Joint charge with the House Committee on Defense & Veterans’ Affairs)
6. Review educational opportunities for non-traditional students, including adult learners who did not complete a secondary education credential. Recommend possible funding options to promote degree, credential, and/or certification completion. Develop recommendations to promote programs that simultaneously allow adult learners to complete degrees, credentials, and/or certifications for the purpose of promoting and increasing workforce ready graduates.
7. Conduct legislative oversight and monitoring of the agencies and programs under the committee’s jurisdiction and the implementation of relevant legislation passed by the 84th Legislature, including HB 700, SB 18, HB 100, and the new higher education strategic plan for Texas as proposed by the Higher Education Coordinating Board, 60x30TX. In conducting this oversight, the committee should:
1. consider any reforms to state agencies to make them more responsive to Texas taxpayers and citizens;
2. identify issues regarding the agency or its governance that may be appropriate to investigate, improve, remedy, or eliminate;
3. determine whether an agency is operating in a transparent and efficient manner; and
4. identify opportunities to streamline programs and services while maintaining the mission of the agency and its programs.

Senate Interim Charges Released

Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick has unveiled his third round of interim charges for Texas state senators to study over the next year. The latest list includes topics for the Committee on Higher Education. Absent any surprises, these are the most salient issues for community and technical college educators to watch closely prior to the next Regular Session, which convenes in January 2017. 

The items include a review of the 60×30 TX higher education plan, dual credit, bachelor's degrees for community colleges, credit transferability, and fields of study. The committee will also "study performance-based funding for higher education institutions while keeping the student debt ratio lower than other states," according to the official announcement. During the last Session, community colleges were required to implement "outcomes-based funding," but public universities were exempted. 

Readers may want to know if campus carry of firearms will be taken up again. If so, it will likely be in another committee. 

Here is the complete list of Senate higher education charges:

Higher Education

HB 5 Implementation, 60x30TX/Higher Education Alignment: Monitor the ongoing implementation of HB 5 (83R), and examine current projections for preparation of Texas high school students for postsecondary education and workforce training. Examine best practices and recommend strategies to align the implementation with the 60x30TX higher education plan, including, but not limited to, dual credit, credit transferability, and fields of study. (Joint Charge with Senate Education)

Performance Funding for GAIs and Community Colleges: Study current funding methods for both general academic institutions and community colleges, examining current performance-based methods of funding for community colleges. Review funding methods used in other states and make recommendations on how to incorporate and/or change student outcome measures in institutional funding to benefit students and promote the education needs of a rapidly growing and changing workforce.

Tuition Deregulation and Student Debt: Examine and make recommendations regarding tuition and student debt at public institutions of higher education in Texas. Specifically, study how Texas compares to peer states, variance between institutions, how accountability measures can be used to impact tuition, and increases in tuition since 2003.

Tuition/Fee Waivers, Tuition Set-Asides, Financial Aid: Conduct a review of all tuition and fee waivers and exemptions, as well as tuition set-asides currently in law, and examine how students who do not receive the benefits of either bear these resulting costs. Study how other states treat similar populations, whether federal benefits are available, and make recommendations to ensure the efficacy of waivers and exemptions, and tuition set-asides. Examine current financial aid programs, studying their efficacy, and make recommendations on how to provide programs to meet the needs of all students in light of the recent repeal of the state's Top 10% Scholarship program and B-On-Time program.

General Academic Institution(GAI)/Health Related Institution(HRI) Funding: Conduct a comprehensive review of funding for GAIs and HRIs, examining whether the methodology for funding the same courses is equitable and productive. Make recommendations on how to update and streamline the current funding methods, to provide a consistent methodology that focuses on student success and innovative strategies. Include in the review a focus on tuition-revenue generating special items and formula and research funding for new medical schools.

Baccalaureate Degrees at Community Colleges: Study regional workforce needs in the state and make recommendations on whether metrics should be applied to authorize public community colleges to offer certain baccalaureate degrees in order to meet the regional workforce needs.

Monitoring Charge: Monitor the implementation of legislation addressed by the Senate Committee on Higher Education and make recommendations for any legislation needed to improve, enhance, and/or complete implementation. Specifically, monitor the following: 1) Initiatives designed to create effective, clear transfer pathways for students, including the newly enacted multidisciplinary studies associate degree; 2) Implementation and progress of the Math and Science Scholars Loan Repayment Program; and 3) The progress of the pilot program enacted by the 83rd legislature relating to improving student loan default rates and financial aid literacy among postsecondary students.  Teacher Preparation, Retention, Shortages: Study teacher shortage and retention issues in Texas and evaluate educator preparation programs to determine if these programs are preparing educators for the rigors of the 21st century classroom. In particular, examine the shortages of ELL, special education, and STEM educators across the state and identify the issues creating a shortage. Make recommendations to improve educator preparation throughout the state and increase certification rates. (Joint Charge with Senate Education)

Law Plans to Reduce College Credit Loss

A law that took effect Sept. 1 directs the Coordinating Board to ensure that students can seamlessly transfer their credits from community colleges to four-year institutions, as long as the classes are taken within a “field of study.” As you will note below, the law has broader scope as well.

The sponsor, Rep. Travis Clardy (R-Nacogdoches) said the legislation is aimed at helping ease the transfer from a junior college to a university, as reported in the Dallas Morning News by Bobby Blanchard.

However, according to the official summary of the bill, you can see that it involves workforce training programs and not just transfer to universities:

House Bill 2628 amends the Education Code to require the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board, with the assistance of institutions of higher education, career and technical education experts, and college and career readiness experts, to establish alignment between the college and career readiness standards and the knowledge, skills, and abilities students are expected to demonstrate in career and technical education by establishing programs of study that, among other things, culminate in the attainment of an industry-recognized certification, credential, or license, a registered apprenticeship or credit-bearing postsecondary certificate, or an associate or baccalaureate degree. The bill requires the coordinating board, with the assistance of advisory committees, to develop career and technical education program of study curricula. The bill provides for the composition of the advisory committees, requires the advisory committees to identify the knowledge, skills, and abilities required to prepare students for high-skill, high-wage jobs in high-demand occupations, and requires the coordinating board, in developing such curricula, to pursue a management strategy that maximizes efficiency. The bill authorizes the coordinating board to partner with the Texas Education Agency, the Texas Workforce Commission, and other state agencies to develop such programs of study.

In addition, the bill specifies that a student enrolled in a board-established program of study who transfers from a public institution to another public institution that offers a similar program, regardless of whether the institution has adopted the board-established program of study, must receive academic credit from the institution to which the student transferred for each of the courses that the student has successfully completed in the program of study curriculum. The bill authorizes the student to complete the program of study at the institution to which the student transferred by completing only the remaining number of semester credit hours the student would need to complete the program of study at the institution from which the student transferred, unless otherwise required by the Commission on Colleges of the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools.

The bill had virtually no opponents in testimony and plenty of support from business leaders. Also, community college leaders approve. From the DMN piece:

Steven Johnson, vice president of public affairs at the Texas Association of Community Colleges, acknowledged the problem and called the legislation “a step in the right direction.”

“It is really the beginning of what is going to be a long process, but I think it is important to take that first step,” Johnson said. “It is going to take them a while to go through enough of the fields of study.”

You can expect any controversy to arise on the advisory committees established by the Coordinating Board. These panels will include faculty representatives from universities as well as community colleges. Fields of study involve required courses for academic majors, with plenty of turf at stake potentially.

Two Paths to Campus Carry

As we all know, a new state law will permit individuals with concealed handgun licenses to bring their weapons into campus buildings. However, universities and community colleges will take slightly different paths.

For one thing, two-year schools have an extra year to plan. Under the statute, public universities must implement campus carry by August 2016 and community colleges must comply by the following August. Here is a nice article on two Panhandle institutions and their tentative plans, as reported by Jim McBride, in the Amarillo Globe-News.

The two schools profiled in the article are West Texas A&M and Amarillo College.

In practical terms, the divergent time frame means universities may become the proverbial canaries in a coal mine. Community college educators will watch their behavior carefully. The two-year colleges' deadline of August 2017 will actually come after another Regular Session, with plenty of opportunities for further alterations, at least hypothetically.

However, keep in mind that any such changes can work both ways. Supporters of campus carry were unhappy with institutional exemptions under the law to create gun-free zones (which weapons advocates see as a sinister loophole) and will undoubtedly be working during the interim for broader allowance of firearms on campus. They will be collecting campaign promises during the next election cycle.

The gun-free zones will probably be more applicable to universities. According to numerous reports, the statute's authors did not intend to restrict access for licensed carriers in classrooms, libraries, or offices—the precise sites of concern to many community college faculty.

Testimony indicated a great deal of interest in restrictions regarding athletic facilities and university hospitals, for instance. Some witnesses stated that these particular sites can be filled with raw emotion. Perhaps they have never been in a classroom when exams are returned to students.

Another pertinent difference between universities and community colleges is that the latter enroll an older demographic profile of students. Licensed carriers must be 21 or have military experience. Therefore, the impact of additional guns will be felt more keenly at two-year schools.

At least two-year college educators will have time to observe implementation at universities before finalizing their own plans.

TRS Remains Strong

Sometimes, no news is good news—especially when it comes to the Legislature. 

Such may be the case with the Texas Teacher Retirement System, which, just a few years ago, was reportedly headed for financial trouble. Thanks to a law, passed in 2013, beefing up the TRS Fund with a new revenue stream and various actuarial adjustments, current members of this "defined benefits" plan can breathe a little easier for now.

As reported here earlier, conservative advocacy organizations nationwide believe that all public defined benefits pensions should be replaced by "defined contribution" plans (of which ORP is an example). However, the Legislature never seriously considered any such a move during the 2015 Regular Session. This is significant, given the political profile of today's House and Senate.

In fact, the TRS fund is healthy enough to perhaps provide a benefits enhancement at some point in the future, having earned more than $19 billion during the last fiscal year, according to the Texas Retired Teachers Association. The Board is not allowed to increase eligibility or benefits unless the Fund reaches a certain actuarial threshold.

The 2015 Session was somewhat disappointing to current retirees, however—many of whom have not had a cost of living increase in years.

Bills did pass adjusting the calendar of retirement eligibility and other matters, but nothing dramatic. TRS members should receive an update from the agency on these laws later this summer.

Dual Credit Set to Expand

Current law stipulates that a high school student may not be enrolled in more than two dual credit courses per semester. This is about to change.

H.B. 505, authored by Rep. Eddie Rodriguez (D-Austin), takes effect immediately. It prohibits any limitation of the number of dual credit courses, dual credit hours, or grade levels in which a high school student could enroll each semester or academic year. The bill further repeals the present law prohibiting high school students from enrolling in more than three courses in a junior college if the junior college does not have a service area that includes the student's high school, according to the official analysis.

Supporters say that removing limits on how many dual credit courses students could take would allow them to earn a higher education degree in less time and save on tuition costs. Opponents say HB 505 could lead to students overloading their course schedules with rigorous college courses and could result in unanticipated costs and consequences for the students and their families, the analysis continues.

Studies indicate that students enrolled in dual credit courses are more likely to complete high school and enroll and succeed in college. In the past, at least some of this may have been due to "cherry-picking" the best students who would have succeeded anyway. Now that dual credit is about to expand, we will want to pay attention to the subsequent data on student success.

Undocumented Students to Keep In-State Tuition

One of the issues watched carefully by those in higher education during the recent Regular Session concerned the fate of a 2001 law allowing undocumented students to pay in-state tuition. Social conservatives urged repeal of the law, and Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick during his campaign also said the statute should be eliminated.

He argued in debate that the law resulted in Texas citizens losing seats at competitive universities to non-citizens. This possibility is obviously less pertinent to community colleges with open admissions, where the majority of these individuals are likely enrolled.

But the Legislature apparently had little stomach for such a move, as reported in the Texas Tribune, in its summary of higher education legislation for 2015. Significantly, the Texas Association of Business favored retaining the law, as a good thing for the future economy.

The statute is known as the DREAM Act, signed by former Gov. Rick Perry, who also remains in favor of keeping it. You may recall that, during his most recent campaign for president, the position got him jammed up with social conservatives.

We probably haven't heard the last of this issue. However, for now, these students can breathe a little easier. From the Trib piece:

But following Perry’s departure from the Governor's Mansion, the future of the Texas DREAM Act has been uncertain. Heading into the 2015 legislative session, Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick vowed to repeal it, and Gov. Greg Abbott indicated he would not veto a bill that did just that.

Still, the measure got little traction in the Legislature. House leadership had no appetite for it, and though a Senate bill to repeal in-state tuition for undocumented students made it out of committee, the more conservative upper chamber couldn't muster the votes to bring it up for a vote. By the final days of the session, the measure was effectively dead — at least until 2017.

Opponents of the DREAM Act argue that the law is, among other things, unfair to legal U.S. citizens from other states who must pay higher out-of-state tuition rates at Texas public universities. But supporters say it helps young people who ended up in Texas through no fault of their own become more productive participants in the workforce.

 

Campus Carry: Past, Present, and Future

During the coming months college and university leaders will begin planning for the fall 2016 deadline for implementation of the newly-passed campus carry bill.

Educators quoted in media reports interpret the measure's language as allowing schools, after internal consultation, to establish gun-free zones, but not to ban guns from offices, libraries, or classrooms generally. This demarcation will be debated and perhaps eventually litigated.

If you look for it on the Web, it's not hard to find commentary, satire, parody, and general bloviating (a term invented by H.L. Mencken) portraying the Lone Star State as a land of savages, nincompoops, knuckleheads, ignorami, and primitive humanoids from antiquity with walnut-sized brains. (These categories may overlap.) Presumably we sit around the camp fire at night, chewing on bones, grunting and barking, smoking Marlboros, watching "Duck Dynasty," shooting our guns.

Your Humble Scribe exaggerates.

Back to reality, some university leaders say it may become harder now to attract faculty from other states. Take, say, a Nobel laureate from MIT or Cal-Berkeley: "Texas? Seriously?"

It's also not difficult to find a celebration of the new victory for the Second Amendment. Such is the nature of today's polarized political culture. Some advocates for campus carry say the bill didn't go far enough.

The coming—and serious—discussion will hinge upon what might be called dueling scenarios—hypothetical projections of what might happen. Aggregate statistics won't be helpful, as tragic events tend to be thankfully minute in terms of numbers. Most unfortunately, the debate will be shaped also by any future tragedies, while college campuses remain just about the safest places individuals can spend their time.

But undoubtedly the number of guns will increase. In fact that's what proponents hope. Some faculty and administrators will now consider getting a license to carry, especially in areas with a shortage of campus police protection.

And since private colleges are allowed to opt out of campus carry, it's possible that parents will choose these schools for their kids in greater numbers. Public opinion polls might be helpful eventually to measure this.

Speaking of polls, one question the media hasn't done a good job of covering is how such a bill could pass so overwhelmingly, when support from the general public is so iffy?

This one's easy. Campus carry passed largely (if not totally) on partisan votes. If a Republican were to vote against it, it's entirely possible he or she would be challenged immediately in the next GOP primary, based on this issue alone. This incumbent would be vilified as squishy on Amendment Two. Keep in mind that March primary elections have an extremely low turnout (November presidential elections are highest), so a determined group can make it happen, especially if money is in play.

Party primaries and general elections are like two different countries. And remember also how carefully district lines are drawn these days, thanks to computer programs crunching sophisticated demographic data. They know who you are and what you do, based on where you live.

One more thing: Blaming a politician for wanting to be elected (and to be elected, one must first be nominated in a March primary) is like blaming a fish for wanting to be wet.

We could easily quote Shakespeare here on "the fault in ourselves." But no need to bloviate any further.

Block Scheduling Bill Enacted

Before adjournment on June 1, the Legislature passed a bill mandating a block scheduling plan for certain workforce development programs at community colleges.

HB 1583 was introduced by Rep. Travis Clardy (R-Nacogdoches) with support from the advocacy group Complete College America. The basic idea is to offer courses within a more compressed time frame. Some studies have indicated that student completion rates improve using this model.

The bill is not very long and you can inspect it here in pdf format. An earlier version generated consternation with some community college educators who were concerned about the practical difficulties and cost of implementing such a plan across the mandated curriculum, plus the potential effect upon contact hour funding, and the task of finding part-time faculty to teach at the times offered.

Importantly, the enacted version allows colleges, under new rules of the Coordinating Board, to petition for an institutional exception to the number of mandated new block programs (set at five by the bill), due to "hardship." It's easy to see how smaller colleges, for instance, would encounter problems with implementation. Other schools might already be fulfilling the basic intent of the measure.

Regarding the scope of the new law, here is a key passage from HB 1583:

To facilitate timely degree completion by students at public junior colleges, from among the allied health, nursing, and career and technology associate degree or certificate programs offered by a public junior college, the college shall establish, for at least five of those programs not previously offered as a block schedule curriculum, a block schedule curriculum under which:

(1) courses required for a student’s enrollment in the program as a full-time student are offered each semester in scheduled blocks, such as a morning, full-day, afternoon, evening, or weekend block schedule, designed to provide scheduling predictability from semester to semester to students enrolled in the program; and

(2) students may enroll in an entire block schedule curriculum offered under the program in a semester, rather than enrolling in individual courses leading toward the degree or certificate.

"Campus Carry" to Become Law

Senate Bill 11, the controversial measure to allow licensed carriers of concealed firearms to bring their weapons into campus buildings, has passed both chambers in identical form and will be sent to Gov. Abbott, who reportedly says he intends to sign it.

Interesting language was added to the bill in conference committee, allowing schools to designate specific sites on campus where guns will not be allowed. However, the sponsor of the measure, Sen. Brian Birdwell (R-Granbury), told Morgan Smith of the Texas Tribune that he does not intend any narrowing of the bill's scope:

He said his intent was that public college campuses would be as “permissive and accessible” as possible to handgun license holders and that universities would be as “specific and as minimalistic as possible” in defining restricted areas.

Words are obviously subject to interpretation, but the allowance of "reasonable regulations"—as stipulated in the bill for college leaders to determine—probably precludes any attempt to "generally prohibit" (also proscribed in the bill) guns on campus.

Educators are rightfully concerned about classrooms and offices. It's likely that a broad, local and categorical restriction involving generic sites will not be allowed under the new law, absent precise physical designations. During debate on the bill in the House and Senate, discussion emerged about athletic facilities and university hospitals as potential gun-free zones.

Here is the most recent copy of the bill that has been posted. You can scroll down to the new language, found in Section 1,d-1 (page 2, lines 9-26 of the Conference Committee Report in pdf format).

Licensed carriers of concealed firearms must be at least 21 years old or have military experience, go through background checks, and pass written and range tests. Approximately 850,000 Texans have concealed handgun licenses, around three percent of the state's population, according to Lauren McGaughy in the Houston Chronicle.

Although lawfully licensed individuals almost never commit crimes of violence, the new law will undoubtedly result in more guns on campus. Furthermore, community college students tend to be older than those at universities, so hence are more likely to fit in this demographic cohort.