Getting to Graduation: The Completion Agenda in Higher Education

10. Efforts to Improve Productivity: The Impact of Higher Education Reform in Texas

chapter ten Efforts to Improve Productivity The Impact of Higher Education Reform in Texas geri hockfield malandra Texas is a reform-minded and action-oriented state where change occurs on a very large scale: today, Texas is home to 1 in every 12 U.S. residents.1 In 2010, there were over 1.4 million postsecondary students enrolled in the state’s colleges and universities, 40 percent more than in 2000. A decade ago, anticipating this rapid growth, the state of Texas embarked on a targeted strategy to improve the diversity, quality, and productivity of higher education through the implementation and updating of its “Closing the Gaps by 2015” higher education plan. Within this policy framework, the efforts of higher education reformers, coupled with strategic initiatives and investments, have led to significant and more diverse enrollment growth, improved persistence and completion rates, and increased degree production. Between 2000 and 2009, the number of degrees awarded increased 42 percent—to nearly 210,000— and more minority students are enrolled than ever before. The results have been tracked and, some might argue, amplified by a noteworthy statewide higher education accountability system that shines a bright light on results. These efforts to improve Texas’s system of higher education are both ongoing and subject to regular enhancements. Currently, higher education reform is becoming increasingly focused on the productivity of higher education. In a recent update, the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board noted that despite positive results over the last 10 years, the state “has a long way to go to meet other targets by 2015.”2 Updated targets are designed to help drive Texas toward higher levels of overall participation and success, including higher rates of enrollment and degree completion among African American men and Hispanic students. Meeting these targets will also contribute to the nationwide goals laid out by the Obama administration to increase postsecondary creden246 Efforts to Improve Productivity 247 tials.3 In light of the tough economic times, considerable attention has also been paid to cost-effectiveness; in September 2009, Texas Governor Rick Perry issued an executive order that called for a comprehensive review of higher education cost efficiencies and laid out numerous specific recommendations to enhance the productivity of higher education in Texas.4 The experience of policymakers and higher education leaders suggests that this progress can be attributed to a combination of three elements : reform-oriented leadership; a robust and flexible statewide planning framework; and persistence in pursuing a goal-oriented agenda via decision-making processes that engage state, system, and institution leaders . Underlying these factors is Texas’s distinctive political culture of low taxes, light regulation, and openness to new business, which encourages innovation and participation in change.5 The Driving Force: 10 Years of “Closing the Gaps” Since its adoption in 2000, the Closing the Gaps plan has served as the framework underlying the strategic expansion of higher education in Texas. The framework has been adjusted and enhanced, leading the state to continued improvements in access, success, and quality. The persistent effort to reach the plan’s goals and the related, highly transparent reporting framework led to Texas’s very high scores in a recent study of higher education accountability systems.6 Closing the Gaps was intended to close gaps in participation within Texas, and also between Texas and other leading states. The plan emphasized four broad areas: participation (adding 630,000 higher education students), success, excellence, and research. Statewide benchmarks and goals for enrollment growth, diversity, and degrees conferred were set in each area; and these goals were then customized for the specific mission of each institution. The legislative funding formula provided incentives for enrollment growth, tying increases in funding to gains in enrollments. Campuses must also report their progress under rigorous reporting requirements , and these data make progress and results tangible, transparent , and accessible.7 The Higher Education Coordinating Board functions as an agency of Texas government, and it was this body that proposed the Closing the Gaps plan that was adopted by the legislature. Closing the Gaps became the state’s higher education master plan, laying out official, specific ideas 248 the lessons from three states and goals.8 The Texas plan has been flexible enough to evolve in light of new developments, and its goals are periodically adjusted to reflect changes in population projections and institutional progress in achieving targets. It gained...