One of my undergraduate students is doing a research project on R1 institutions this semester (Research One: those designated in the Carnegie Classification as doctoral universities having Very High Research Output). There is a lot to study, whether nationwide or at the Texas level. 15 universities achieved R1 status from R1 (High Research Output) in the latest update of the classification in 2018: Auburn, Binghamton, Dartmouth, Drexel, Mississippi State, Montana State, Oklahoma State, Rensselaer (RPI), University of Alabama, UT El Paso, UC Denver / Anschutz Medical Campus, U. Nevada - Las Vegas, U. Nevada - Reno, University of New Hampshire and University of Southern Mississippi.
Locally, UT Dallas, UT Arlington and University of North Texas are all R1, and all three achieved that designation for the first time in 2015 - only five years ago. (In Texas, the R1 universities are Rice, UT Austin, UT Arlington, University of Houston, U. North Texas, Texas A&M, UT Dallas, UT El Paso and Texas Tech.) The research landscape of the Dallas-Fort Worth metropolis is being transformed at lightning speed and it is exhilarating to be part of an area with such vibrant interest in research and innovation. Maybe I'll write a post about how they managed that feat some day soon, but for now I thought it would be best to focus on private universities that have achieved or aspire to achieving R1 status. I am particularly interested in universities like Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Drexel and Dartmouth, which have recently received the R1 designation, but also in local universities like Baylor, that publicly announced their commitment to R1 goals last year, only months after Baylor alumna Nancy Brickhouse became provost and two years after Linda Livingstone became President ("Baylor officially announces pursuit of Research 1/Tier 1 goals".)
In its Illuminate fundraising campaign, Baylor articulates four pillars (Christian environment, transformational education, research & scholarship and arts & athletics) and five initiatives for the university (health, data sciences, material sciences, human flourishing, leadershipðics, and Baylor in Latin America). What I like about this strategy is that it allows donors to support broad themes while avoiding too narrow projects that would fail to build momentum for the university as a whole or too vague endeavors that would not galvanize would-be donors. For instance, I think it is very smart from Baylor to focus an internationalization strategy on a specific part of the world where it believes it can make a difference. Many universities have launched campuses abroad, but given Texas's current and projected demographics, building links with Spanish-speaking parts of the world seems very wise.
I haven't studied R1 universities to be able to judge whether those goals are tightly coupled with R1 status or if other goals would have been more appropriate first, so I can't say whether this approach will lead Baylor to R1 or not, and if it does, in what timeframe. But there is no doubt that a clear plan will always help motivate donors to contribute money, because it gives them confidence that various scenarios have been carefully considered and the donors are now being presented with (what people in the know view as) the best one. I don't know when Carnegie plans to publish the next update to its classification, and there are certainly pitfalls to a university's announcing so publicly it is going after R1 goals if that goal won't be achieved for many more years, because of the risk of losing momentum. So I suppose Baylor has a timeline to achieve R1 status that is, as far as academic timelines go, on the short side. (I don't know anyone at Baylor. This is just my assumption.) I can't measure Baylor's chances of making good on its promises, but there is no doubt few things can rally the troops more effectively than a bold, inspiring project presented by a fairly new, enthusiastic leadership team. It will definitely be fun to watch Baylor's progress toward R1 in the years to come!
Comments