Eagle Editorial Board
Texas A&M University has the support of its former students that is the envy of many universities. Aggies love their alma mater and it shows in many ways. One Aggie, however, should love his school less and, in fact, should stay out of its business. Gov. Rick Perry's obsession and interference in A&M has caused great harm, damage some observers feel could take a generation to undo.
From his appointment of regents with greater fealty to him than to the university system they are supposed to represent to his constant meddling in the day-to-day operations of the flagship university to his infatuation with the Texas Public Policy Foundation -- an ultraconservative think tank that seeks to insinuate itself into every corner of state government -- Perry has proven not to be a friend of A&M, but rather a hindrance.
Never before has a governor of Texas had such deadly influence on a major state university, and Perry's meddling blocks the way of A&M's oft-stated efforts to achieve greatness.
The Texas Public Policy Foundation seems harmless on the surface, with its stated goals of limited government, individual liberties, free markets, personal responsibility and private property rights. Most Texans probably would subscribe to those goals. Dig below the surface, however, and you see just how radical its efforts are.
Founded by arch-conservative physician James Leininger, the foundation board is chaired by Wendy Gramm, former Texas A&M regent and wife of former Sen. Phil Gramm. Current Regent Phil Adams of Bryan is a board member, a clear conflict of interest to his responsibilities to A&M.
The foundations website says, "The public is demanding a different direction for their government, and the Texas Public Policy Foundation is providing the ideas that enable policymakers to chart that new course."
Unfortunately, thanks to Perry's influence, those ideas become mandates, without discussion and input from the people of this great state.
For instance, the foundation is pushing its "Seven Breakthrough Solutions" for reforming higher education. At first reading, the
"solutions" appear to make sense -- and, indeed, are carefully written to cloak their insidious nature. Texans need to look beyond the soothing words, however.
Solution 1, for example, calls for measuring teaching efficiency and effectiveness. Of course, we all want good teachers in our college classrooms, and most of them are. On closer examination, though, the foundation wants to measure the value of a teacher by dividing his or her total salary and benefits by the number of students taught in the past 12 months, factor in average student satisfaction ratings -- not always a reliable measure because tough teachers may not always be the most popular -- as well as the average percentage of A's and B's awarded by the teacher.
Good teachers should challenge their students to become independent thinkers, whether that teacher teaches 100 students or 1,500. An arbitrary number derived by the foundation's formula is not a fair or satisfactory way to measure the value of a university faculty member.
In a chilling message to faculty, the foundation says, "For high-cost faculty, collect and read all research articles published in the last
12 months."
Are faculty members only supposed to write about matters that meet the approval of the Texas Public Policy Foundation?
What a perverse twist on the purpose and effectiveness of faculty research.
The foundation also would split university teaching and research budgets, apparently in an effort to downplay research, a familiar target of the far right. But research is critical, not only to the universities, but also to this nation. And it isn't separate from teaching.
By interacting with great researchers in the classroom and the laboratory, university students help develop their independent thinking skills and learn ways to help advance science and society. In a column on this page last Sunday, A&M political science professor Kim Hill, recipient of one of this year's teaching excellence awards, showed just how linked teaching and research are, not only at A&M but at every university of any consequence around the world.
Research and teaching cannot, must not be separated. As A&M President R. Bowen Loftin has written, they go hand in hand and both are critical to a successful university education.
At closer examination, the "breakthrough" solutions are an affront to A&M and all the other Texas universities that work hard to prepare our young people for the future. They should be rejected outright. Politicians such as Rick Perry should not be running our colleges and universities.
A college education is increasingly expensive, due in large part because politicians such as Perry have shirked their responsibility to provide adequate state support to our universities.
Perry has been in thrall to the Texas Public Policy Foundation and its backers since he began accepting generous contributions from them in his first statewide race. Texas cannot, however, be run by contribution and those most able to spend big bucks to help buy elections, no matter which side of the political spectrum they are on.
A&M is well on its way to achieving greatness. It would be a shame to let Rick Perry and his cohorts derail that with their interference.
Rick Perry can love Texas A&M more by meddling less -- preferably not at all. Beyond appointing the best regents he can find -- no matter who they contributed to in the last gubernatorial election -- and attending football games at Kyle Field, Perry should leave A&M alone.
RSS
Mobile
Daily Emails
Twitter
Facebook
