Texas Senate Bill SB1730

Texas 2011 - 82nd Regular

• Out of Senate Committee: 4/19/11
• Introduced: 3/11/11
• Voted on by Senate: 4/28/11
• Refer: 3/23/11
• Out of House Committee: 5/19/11
• Report Pass: 4/19/11
• Engrossed: 4/28/11
• Refer: 5/2/11
• Report Pass: 5/19/11

Caption

Relating to requiring the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board to create a tool to allow prospective students to compare general academic teaching institutions by certain criteria.

Impact

The introduction of this legislation signifies a move toward increased accountability and accessibility in higher education within Texas. By allowing students to compare institutions based on criteria such as tuition rates, graduation rates, and student support services, SB1730 aims to foster a more competitive and equitable educational environment. This could potentially lead to improved educational outcomes, as institutions may feel inclined to enhance their offerings to attract students. Overall, this bill may contribute to more informed student enrollment practices throughout the state.

Summary

SB1730 aims to enhance transparency among general academic teaching institutions in Texas by establishing a tool that allows prospective students to compare these institutions based on specific criteria. This tool is intended to empower students to make informed decisions regarding their educational choices, by providing readily accessible information regarding various institutions. Through this initiative, the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board will play a pivotal role in ensuring that students can evaluate institutions on factors important to their educational pursuits.

Contention

While proponents of SB1730 argue that the bill supports student choice and informs prospective students about their options, there are concerns regarding the feasibility and implementation of such a tool. Critics may point out that the criteria selected for comparison could unduly emphasize certain metrics while neglecting others, thereby steering students toward particular institutions based on incomplete or potentially misleading data. There may also be apprehensions about how effectively these comparisons reflect the quality of the educational experience offered by each institution.