Part 1.
TEXAS HIGHER EDUCATION COORDINATING BOARD
Chapter 5.
PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT
Subchapter D. CRITERIA FOR APPROVAL OF NEW DOCTORAL DEGREE PROGRAMS
19 TAC §§5.68 - 5.73
The Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board adopts the
repeal of §§5.68 - 5.73 concerning Criteria for Approval of New
Doctoral Degree Programs without changes to the proposed text as published
in the May 12, 2000, issue of the
Texas Register
(25 TexReg 4270). The proposed repeal of the rules would require institutions
which offer doctoral programs to provide opportunities for significant and
regular interaction between program faculty and students and among students
themselves; to access and engage in depth a wide variety of educational resources
related to the program and associated fields; for significant exchange of
knowledge with the academic community; to broaden educational and cultural
perspectives; and to mentor and evaluate students in depth.
There were no comments received regarding the repeal of the rules.
The repeal of the rules is adopted under Texas Education Code, §61.027,
which provides the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board with the authority
to adopt rules concerning Criteria for Approval of New Doctoral Degree Programs.
This agency hereby certifies that the adoption has been reviewed
by legal counsel and found to be a valid exercise of the agency's legal authority.
Filed with the Office of
the Secretary of State on July 21, 2000.
TRD-200005054
James McWhorter
Assistant Commissioner for Administration
Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board
Effective date: August 10, 2000
Proposal publication date: May 12, 2000
For further information, please call: (512) 427-6162
19 TAC §§5.68 - 5.74
The Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board adopts new §§5.68
- 5.74 concerning Criteria for Approval of New Doctoral Degree Programs. Section
5.74 is adopted with changes to the proposed text as published in the May
12, 2000, issue of the
Texas Register
(25
TexReg 4270). Sections 5.68 - 5.73 are being adopted without changes and will
not be republished. These rules specify outcomes expected to result from doctoral
residency. Because of the growing use of distance education, the traditional
requirement that doctoral students should spend specified lengths of time
on campus is recast to focus on expected outcomes to accrue from such a residency.
Generally, those outcomes involve significant interaction between students
and faculty and substantial immersion in the particular field of study.
Comments were received from thirteen institutions concerning these rules.
Supportive comments were made by: University of Houston-Clear Lake, Texas
A&M University-Commerce, Stephen F. Austin State University, University
of Houston, The University of Texas at Dallas, The University of Texas at
San Antonio and Texas Woman's University. "No comment" replies were received
from: Texas Tech University, The University of Texas-Pan American, and Texas
A&M University-Kingsville.
Comment: The University of Texas-Arlington (UTA) said that most doctoral
students there were not full-time and felt that the attendance and enrollment
patterns for doctoral students may be shifting toward part-time doctoral study.
Response: The staff believes that the outcomes to be derived from doctoral
study should be the same regardless of whether a student is full-time or part-time.
Attainment of this level of education requires an in-depth immersion in the
appropriate field of study and substantial interaction between faculty and
students and among students themselves. Therefore, no change has been made
to the proposed rules.
Comment: UTA also challenged the statement that most doctoral students
should be full-time and should be supported (financially) to ensure they have
an opportunity to concentrate on their degree programs.
Response: This section of the rules states a desirable goal. Institutions
are not required to take any particular action as a result. Therefore, no
change has been made.
Comment: The University of Texas Health Science Center wanted to have §5.74
make explicit reference to the need for institutions to obtain planning authority
for doctoral programs before developing a proposal.
Response: A new paragraph, §5.74(a)(1) Approval by the CB of planning
authority for the proposed program; has been added to reflect this necessary
action. The other paragraphs in §5.74(a) are retained and their numbers
increase by one digit.
Comment: Texas A&M University (TAMU) believes that for the next few
years, current residency requirements for the PhD should be retained. For
other doctoral degrees (EdD, DEng), the residency requirements should be set
by each university and monitored individually.
Response: The staff believes that the proposed residency expectations are
central to any doctoral program and are integral to the educational process
at the doctoral level. In addition, the proposed residency expectations align
with the criteria from the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools (SACS).
TAMU or any other doctoral-granting institution may choose to disallow such
flexibility for their PhD program while allowing it for EdD programs. The
staff believes such flexibility will potentially benefit the state by enhancing
access to certain doctoral programs.
The new rules are adopted under Texas Education Code, §61.027,
which provides the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board with the authority
to adopt rules concerning Criteria for Approval of New Doctoral Degree Programs.
§5.74.Specific Steps for Implementation.
(a)
Strong support from the governing board, administration,
and faculty for the proposed program must be demonstrated, and, the following
specific steps must be taken before a new doctoral program can be initiated:
(1)
Approval by the Coordinating Board of planning authority
for the proposed program;
(2)
Approval of the program by the governing board of the institution
concerned;
(3)
Approval of the program by the Coordinating Board, with
such approval requiring consideration of the proposal by the appropriate board
committee at two quarterly meetings and the decision by the board being made
at the second of the two meetings; and
(4)
Certification of adequate funding of the program by the
institution.
(b)
When an institution has not previously offered doctoral
level work, notification to the executive secretary of the Commission on Colleges,
Southern Association of Colleges and Schools, is required at least one year
in advance of program implementation.
This agency hereby certifies that the adoption has been reviewed
by legal counsel and found to be a valid exercise of the agency's legal authority.
Filed with the Office of
the Secretary of State on July 21, 2000.
TRD-200005053
James McWhorter
Assistant Commissioner for Administration
Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board
Effective date: August 10, 2000
Proposal publication date: May 12, 2000
For further information, please call: (512) 427-6162
Subchapter AA. RECIPROCAL EDUCATIONAL EXCHANGE PROGRAM
Chapter 21.
STUDENT SERVICES