Texas Administrative Code
Title 19 - EDUCATION
Part 1 - TEXAS HIGHER EDUCATION COORDINATING BOARD
Chapter 2 - ACADEMIC AND WORKFORCE EDUCATION
Subchapter G - APPROVAL PROCESS FOR NEW DOCTORAL AND PROFESSIONAL DEGREE PROGRAMS
Section 2.146 - Criteria for New Doctoral and Professional Degree Programs
Universal Citation: 19 TX Admin Code § 2.146
Current through Reg. 50, No. 13; March 28, 2025
(a) All proposed doctoral and professional degree programs must meet the criteria set out in this subsection, in addition to the general criteria in subchapter A, § 2.5 of this chapter (relating to General Criteria for Program Approval).
(b) Each institution must provide evidence in its application that a proposed doctoral and professional program meets the following criteria.
(1) Program Need. To meet
the requirements of subchapter A, §
2.5(a)(1) and (2)
of this chapter, the institution must be able to demonstrate present and future
workforce need of the state and nation. There should be a ready job market for
graduates of the program. In assessing the need for the program, the
institution should consider labor market information and other data provided by
Board Staff in response to the institution's Planning Notification. While Board
Staff may also recommend or use generally available information to assess the
need for the program, particularly in cases where labor market needs are
changing rapidly, it is the responsibility of the institution requesting a
doctoral or professional program to demonstrate that a workforce need for the
proposed program exists. Acceptable documentation includes:
(A) An analysis of national data showing the
number of doctoral or professional degrees being produced annually in the
discipline and comparing that to the numbers of professional job openings for
those degrees in the discipline as indicated by sources such as the main
professional journal(s) of the discipline.
(B) The institution must also provide data on
the enrollments, number of graduates, and capacity to accept additional
students of other similar doctoral programs in Texas, demonstrating that
current production levels of graduates are insufficient to meet projected
workforce needs. The Board may consider local, state, or national workforce
needs in this analysis.
(C) The
institution should also provide evidence of student demand for a doctoral
program in the discipline, such as potential student survey results and
documentation that qualified students are not gaining admission to existing
programs in Texas.
(2)
Adequate Financing. In assessing whether the program meets the requirements of
subchapter A, §
2.5(a)(4) and (5)
of this chapter, the program must demonstrate that there is adequate financing
available to initiate the proposed program without reducing funds for existing
programs or weakening them in any way. For doctoral programs, institutions
shall offer comprehensive financial assistance packages to recruit and retain
high-quality doctoral students.
(3)
Faculty and Resources. In assessing the criteria under subchapter A, §
2.5(a)(7) of
this chapter, Board Staff shall ensure that each institution demonstrates a
strong core of qualified doctoral faculty capable of guaranteeing a
high-quality doctoral program with the potential to attain national prominence.
The institution must employ at least one core faculty member active in the
department or unit offering the proposed program at the time of application.
The institution must also provide an approved hiring schedule demonstrating the
ability to hire any additional faculty appropriate to support the projected
number of enrolled students. The institution must provide documentation on a
schedule determined by Board Staff of the faculty hires through submission of a
letter of intent, curriculum vitae or equivalent documentation of faculty
credentials in a format determined by the Board, and a list of courses in the
curriculum that the faculty hire would be qualified to teach. The program must
not result in such a high ratio of doctoral students to faculty as to make
individual guidance prohibitive. Evidence of quality faculty may include:
(A) Doctoral faculty, holding the Doctor of
Philosophy degree or its equivalent from a variety of graduate schools of
recognized reputation.
(B)
Professors and associate professors have achieved national or regional
professional recognition.
(C) Core
faculty are currently engaged in productive research and have published the
results of such research in the main professional journals of their
discipline.
(D) Faculty come from a
variety of academic backgrounds and have complementary areas of specialization
within their field.
(E) Some
doctoral faculty have experience directing doctoral dissertations.
(F) In evaluating faculty resources for
proposed degree programs, the Board shall consider only those degrees held by
the faculty that were issued by:
(i) United
States institutions accredited by accrediting agencies recognized by the Board;
or
(ii) institutions located
outside the United States that have demonstrated that their degrees are
equivalent to degrees issued from an institution in the United States
accredited by accrediting agencies recognized by the Board.
(4) Support Staff. Each
program must have an adequate number of support staff to provide sufficient
services for both existing programs and any proposed increases in students and
faculty in the proposed program.
(5) Facilities and Resources. To meet the
criteria in subchapter A, §
2.5(a)(7) of
this chapter, each program must include adequate facilities and resources to
accommodate the program, including:
(A)
Office space for the faculty, teaching assistants, and administrative and
technical support staff; seminar rooms; computer and electronic resources; and
other appropriate facilities such as laboratories.
(B) Library and IT Resources. Library and
information technology resources must be adequate for the proposed program and
meet the standards of the appropriate accrediting agencies. Library resources
should be strong in the proposed doctoral program field and in related and
supporting fields.
(6)
Quality of the Program and Alignment with the Long-Range Plan. In addition to
meeting the criteria in subchapter A, §
2.5(a)(6) and (8)
of this chapter, an institution must demonstrate the quality of a proposed
program by the meeting the following:
(A) An
institution shall be required to utilize disciplinary experts to review the
proposed program to assess the overall quality of the program.
(B) Elements of a high-quality program, may
include, but are not limited to:
(i) Design
of proposed program as evidenced by the program's ability to prepare a graduate
student for teaching, creative activities, research, or other professional
activities. The program must be characterized by freedom of inquiry and
expression.
(ii) Availability of
quality undergraduate and graduate programs in a wide number of disciplines at
the undergraduate and master's levels. The institution must also offer
high-quality programs in other related and supporting doctoral areas.
(iii) Quality Planning. The proposed program
shall be carefully planned and result in a degree plan that is clear,
comprehensive, and generally uniform. The program may include flexibility to
meet the legitimate professional interests of doctoral-level degree or
professional degree students. Evidence of a carefully planned, high-quality
program includes:
(I) A logical sequence of
degree requirements;
(II)
Alternative methods of determining mastery of program content, such as
competency-based education, prior learning assessment, and other options for
reducing students' time to degree;
(III) Specialization and breadth of
education, with rules for the distribution of study to achieve both, including
interdisciplinary programs if indicated; and
(IV) A research dissertation or equivalent
requirements to be judged by the doctoral faculty on the basis of
quality.
(iv) External
Learning Experiences. In disciplines that require them program must include
plans for external learning experiences for students, such as internships,
clerkships, or clinical experiences, in disciplines that require
them.
(v) Accreditation Standards.
Each proposed program shall meet the criteria of its accrediting Board and
doctoral or professional program criteria of relevant professional groups and
organizations, such as the Council of Graduate Schools, the Modern Language
Association, the American Historical Association, the Accreditation Board for
Engineering and Technology, or other bodies where relevant to the particular
discipline.
(vi) Teaching Loads of
Faculty. Unless justification is provided in the application, teaching loads of
faculty in the doctoral or professional program should not exceed two courses
per term. The mix of courses shall include advanced courses and seminars with
low enrollments.
Disclaimer: These regulations may not be the most recent version. Texas may have more current or accurate information. We make no warranties or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of the information contained on this site or the information linked to on the state site. Please check official sources.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
