Part 1.
TEXAS HIGHER EDUCATION COORDINATING BOARD
Chapter 5.
PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT
Subchapter D. CRITERIA FOR APPROVAL OF NEW DOCTORAL DEGREE PROGRAMS
(Editor's note: The text of the following sections proposed for
repeal will not be published. The sections may be examined in the offices
of the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board or in the Texas Register
office, Room 245, James Earl Rudder Building, 1019 Brazos Street, Austin.)
19 TAC §§5.68 - 5.73
The Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board proposes the
repeal of §§5.68 - 5.73 concerning Criteria for Approval of New
Doctoral Degree Programs.
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.
Marshall Hill, Assistant Commissioner for Universities and Health Related
Institutions has determined that for the first five-year period the rules
are in effect, there will be no fiscal implications to state or local government
as a result of enforcing or administering the rules.
Dr. Hill has also determined that for the first five years the rules are
in effect, the public benefit will be to clearly establish Board expectations
for important aspects of doctoral study; provide institutions opportunities
for increased flexibility in how they meet those expectations; and expand
access to doctoral study for some students in some programs. There will be
no effect on state and local government or small businesses. There is no anticipated
economic cost to the persons who are required to comply with the rules as
proposed.
Comments on the proposed repeal of the rules may be submitted to Dr. Don
W. Brown, Commissioner of Higher Education, Texas Higher Education Coordinating
Board, P.O. Box 12788, Capitol Station, Austin, Texas 78711.
The repeal of the rules is proposed 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.
The repeal of the rules affects Texas Education Code, §61.027.
§5.68. Adequate Financial Assistance for Doctoral Students.
§5.69. Carefully Planned Program of Study.
§5.70. Physical Facilities.
§5.71. Library Resources.
§5.72. Program Evaluation Standards.
§5.73. Specific Steps for Implementation.
This agency hereby certifies that the proposal has been
reviewed by legal counsel and found to be within the agency's legal authority
to adopt.
Filed with the Office of
the Secretary of State, on April 28, 2000.
TRD-200003015
James McWhorter
Assistant Commissioner for Administration
Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board
Proposed date of adoption: July 14, 2000
For further information, please call: (512) 483-6162
19 TAC §§5.68 - 5.74
The Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board proposes new §§5.68
- 5.74 concerning Criteria for Approval of New Doctoral Degree Programs. The
proposed new 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.
Marshall Hill, Assistant Commissioner for Universities and Health Related
Institutions has determined that for the first five-year period the rules
are in effect, there will be no fiscal implications to state or local government
as a result of enforcing or administering the rules.
Dr. Hill has also determined that for the first five years the rules are
in effect, the public benefit will be to clearly establish Board expectations
for important aspects of doctoral study; provide institutions opportunities
for increased flexibility in how they meet those expectations; and expand
access to doctoral study for some students in some programs. There will be
no effect on state and local government or small businesses. There is no anticipated
economic cost to the persons who are required to comply with the rules as
proposed.
Comments on the proposed new rules may be submitted to Dr. Don W. Brown,
Commissioner of Higher Education, Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board,
P.O. Box 12788, Capitol Station, Austin, Texas 78711.
The new rules are proposed 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.
These new sections affect Texas Education Code, §61.027.
§5.68. On-campus Residency Expectations.
(a)
Institutions which offer doctoral degrees must provide
through each doctoral program:
(1)
significant, sustained, and regular interaction between
faculty and students and among students themselves;
(2)
opportunities to access and engage in depth a wide
variety of educational resources related to the degree program and associated
fields;
(3)
opportunities for significant exchange of knowledge
with the academic community;
(4)
opportunities to broaden educational and cultural
perspectives; and
(5)
opportunities to mentor and evaluate students in
depth.
(b)
Institutions are traditionally expected to meet these
provisions through substantial on- campus residency requirements. Proposals
to meet them in other, non-traditional ways (e.g., to enable distant delivery
of a doctoral program) must provide persuasive and thorough documentation
as to how each provision would be met and evaluated for the particular program
and its students. Delivery of doctoral programs through distance education
and/or off-campus instruction requires prior approval of the Board (see Chapter
5, Subchapter H. §5.153(c)(3) relating to Approval of Distance Learning
for Public colleges and Universities).
§5.69. Adequate Financial Assistance for Doctoral Students.
There should be adequate financial assistance for doctoral students
so as to assure that most of them can be engaged in full-time study. Initially,
funds for financial assistance to the doctoral students usually must come
from institutional sources. As the program develops and achieves distinction,
it increasingly will attract support from government, industry, foundations,
and other sources.
§5.70. Carefully Planned Program of Study.
There should be a carefully planned and systematic program of study
and a degree plan which is clear, comprehensive, and generally uniform but
which permits sufficient flexibility to meet the legitimate professional interests
and special needs of doctoral level degree candidates. There should be a logical
sequence of stages by which degree requirements will be fulfilled. The plan
should require both specialization and breadth of education, with rules for
the distribution of study to achieve both, including interdisciplinary programs
if indicated. The plan should include a research dissertation or equivalent
requirements to be judged by the doctoral faculty on the basis of quality
rather than length.
§5.71. Physical Facilities.
There should be an adequate physical plant for the program. An adequate
plant would include reasonably located office space for the faculty, teaching
assistants, and secretarial staff; library carrels for faculty and students;
seminar rooms; laboratories, microfilm and microprint readers; computer resources;
and other appropriate facilities.
§5.72. Library Resources.
There should be an adequate library for the proposed program in terms
of volumes held, volumes added annually, and index of current periodicals.
Although standards of adequacy vary among fields, it is a generally accepted
rule of thumb that quality doctoral work in a variety of fields cannot be
carried on with less than 1/2 million volumes in the library collections and
annual book expenditures of less than $200,000 for all collections. In some
fields, such as science and engineering, laboratory facilities may be equally
or more important than books, whereas in the humanities, the reverse is true.
Quality of holdings and types of materials should also be taken into account
in evaluating library resources. For instance, older libraries may have impressive
numbers of volumes but be weak in modern collections. Microfilm and microprint
holdings must be taken into account. Library resources should be strong not
only in the doctoral program field but also in related and supporting fields.
Although nearby and other accessible library resources may constitute valuable
resources for the program, adequate library materials must be available at
the institution concerned.
§5.73. Program Evaluation Standards.
Proposed programs will be evaluated in terms of meeting the standards
of the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools, and specific programs
will be considered in light of the accrediting standards and doctoral program
criteria of appropriate professional groups and organizations, such as the
Council of Graduate Schools in the United States, the Modern Languages Association,
the American Historical Association, and the Engineers Council for Professional
Development. Out-of-state consultants may be used by the institution or the
Coordinating Board to assist in evaluating the quality of a proposed doctoral
level program.
§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 of the program by the governing board of the
institution concerned;
(2)
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
(3)
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 proposal has been reviewed
by legal counsel and found to be within the agency's legal authority to adopt.
Filed with the Office of
the Secretary of State, on April 28, 2000.
TRD-200003014
James McWhorter
Assistant Commissioner for Administration
Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board
Proposed date of adoption: July 14, 2000
For further information, please call: (512) 483-6162
Subchapter AA. RECIPROCAL EDUCATIONAL EXCHANGE PROGRAM
Chapter 21.
STUDENT SERVICES