Editorial: Student Enrollment Claims Unfounded

 

(Source: James Hescock)

On Sept. 11, the University of Texas at Tyler claimed credit for the institution's historic student enrollment growth in a press release titled “UT Tyler Celebrates Largest Enrollment in Institutional History.” However, this publication found these claims to be unfounded given that the University is not even measuring the causes behind student enrollment.

In the Sept. 11 press release, UT-Tyler President Julie V. Philley, M.D. responded to the news of historic enrollment and credited the institution and its efforts for making the historic growth happen. She said, “I want to thank our admissions team, faculty and staff for their dedication to supporting our students, as well as our recruitment and retention initiatives.” 

However, according to a Texas Public Information Act (TPIA) response this publication received on Sept. 17, the University returned no documents that measured why students choose to enroll at UT-Tyler. In other words, when the publication asked for surveys or measurements that the University has used to measure why students choose to enroll at UT-Tyler, the institution responded with no document, meaning the University did not measure why students choose UT-Tyler for the fall semester.

Therefore, without a proper evaluation of the enrollment data, then how can Dr. Philley know what caused the new enrollment? For instance, while the University sought to increase its enrollment through recruitment efforts, why isn’t enrollment due to the state’s population growth or to Gen Z’s population size increasing the numbers instead?

The point is, without measuring a phenomena, all one can know is that the phenomena happened. That’s it. He cannot determine the causes behind—or at least, which causes were primarily responsible for the effect. It takes measurement to know why.

In light of the absence of conclusive evaluation, Patriot Weekly determines the president’s claims as unsupported by available data.

Without the support of proper measurement, Dr. Philley’s claims mislead the public about the enrollment data and now raise legitimate questions about competence within the University’s management. It also raises legitimate questions about leadership’s ethical commitments.

For instance, will leadership follow the data in its oversight of a significant public institution or will it pursue its own preferences as it follows a biased interpretation favorable to both itself and its institution? These are legitimate questions of competence that rise in the light of this misinterpretation.

On another note, Dr. Philley crediting the University’s efforts without proper support appears to be a reminder to students about the competing interests that exist within the university community, namely that each entity within the University seeks to justify itself as worthy of funding. This biases administrators towards a narrative of success. The University is a realm of education, but also of public relations, which means politics. Students should be aware.

The University’s claim of credit in the absence of empirical data is a reminder to students of how important it is that they think critically about the information they receive in this environment, even information from leadership. Such is the task of students who wish to maintain control over their own future.