Translate

Showing posts with label University of Texas (UT) at Austin. Show all posts
Showing posts with label University of Texas (UT) at Austin. Show all posts

Saturday, July 26, 2025

Our Texas DREAM Act Youth and Allies are Not Done Dreaming: UT - Austin Students Deserve a Fair Process

 Rooted: Immigrant Student Liberation Collective 

rootedtx.org | Founded in 2019 by a group of students, alumni, and allies at UT Austin

Image

Friends:

On behalf of Rooted and United We Dream leader, Julieta Garibay, the repeal of the Texas Dream Act for certain immigrant youth is moving forward. She is currently working with Barbara Hines, who many of you will recognize as former Director of the UT Immigration Clinic in the UT School of Law, as well as with the Texas Immigration Law Council, IDRA, ImmSchools, and others to respond to this moment.

We’ve created a resource hub that includes fact sheets and checklists in English and Spanish (recursos en español)

👉 https://linktr.ee/TXdreamact

She is currently supporting UT Austin students who are urgently calling for an extension on the implementation of this repeal of the Texas DREAM Act. The University of Texas at Austin is now requiring lawful status instead of lawful presence to qualify for in-state tuition, and using an outdated residency questionnaire that would wrongly disqualify students who should remain eligible. Meanwhile, the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board just released an “updated affidavit” last Friday and promised further guidance—yet universities are expected to enforce changes as early as this fall.

The request is whether your organization would be willing to support these students by emailing UT officials and urging an extension? It would be very helpful to send a message to the contacts below, Cc’ing txstudentsfordei@gmail.com, and including a statement like:

"[Organization Name] supports the student-led call for an extension on implementation of the repeal."

To:


SAMPLE E-Mail

From: [YOUR ORGANIZATION]
SUBJECT: Urgent Request to Extend Residency Documentation Deadline to Spring 2026

Hello, we write to formally request that you extend the documentation deadline from July 24th to Spring 2026 for students to provide evidence of their legal presence. 

The facts are straightforward: UT Austin initially requested proof of "lawful status" when the actual requirement was "lawful presence." This fundamental error created confusion that persists today. Meanwhile, THECB continues to release guidance updates—the most recent came on July 18th, less than a week before the deadline. Students cannot reasonably be expected to comply with requirements that regulatory bodies are still clarifying.

The situation:

Students are calling the residency office repeatedly, receiving different information each time. This isn't because staff lack dedication—it's because the implementation timeline didn't allow for proper training and systems development. Students don’t have access to lawyers who can straighten out the legal mess that the repeal of the Texas DREAM Act has done. 

Other students need to get required documents that take weeks to obtain from government offices abroad. The current timeline makes compliance nearly impossible regardless of a student's diligence or good faith efforts.

Our ask: extend the documentation deadline to the start of Spring 2026. 

You have the authority to fix this situation. An extension to Spring 2026 acknowledges the real challenges created by the rushed initial timeline while ensuring compliance can be achieved properly. This isn't about avoiding responsibility—it's about executing responsibility well.

Students chose UT Austin because they believed in the institution's commitment to their success. That commitment is tested in moments like these, when systems fail and leaders must choose between convenience and doing right by their students – especially the most vulnerable ones. 

Our request is simple and reasonable:

Extend the deadline to Spring 2026. Give students the time they need to comply properly. Give your staff the resources to help effectively. Give the university the chance to handle this transition with the excellence that should define our institution.

We trust you will make the decision to extend the deadline, which best serves students and the university's long-term interests.

Respectfully, 

[Organization name]

Tuesday, July 04, 2023

Wondering What Will Likely Happen to Higher Ed in the wake of the SCOTUS Anti-Affirmative action Ruling?

 Friends:

Are you wondering what will likely happen to higher education in the wake of the SCOTUS anti-affirmative action decision?

As closely examined in this 2022 piece by Los Angeles Times writer, Teresa Watanabe, we can already gain important insights from what happened in California following the passage in November, 1996, of Proposition 209 that ended affirmative action based on race, sex, national origin, and ethnicity. Watanabe takes a close look at enrollment numbers in California universities, particularly within the prestigious University of California system. The short of it is that the enrollment of Black and Brown students plummeted by close to 50 percent with the eventual attainment of pre-1996 levels of student enrollment occurring 25 years later! 

When we think of the cost to the otherwise qualified potential Black and Brown students who were discouraged and either applied to the Cal State University System (with lower graduation rates compared to the UC system) or opted out of a higher education degree altogether, the negative impact of earnings denied to these groups have been not solely been substantial, but permanent. Based on Bleemer's (2020) longitudinal research in California on the earnings consequences of Prop. 209, it is a story of lost earning power that limited these individuals' prospects for economic mobility.

With California's response in the rearview window, a comeback in light of the SCOTUS ruling need not take that long for other states. Similarly, worthy of note, is Texas' comeback response—of instituting Texas' Top Ten Percent Plan—to the elimination of affirmative action by the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals in 1996 (that you can read and learn about here), yielded positive results.

What I think is getting largely overlooked from all that I'm reading right now on the impact of the SCOTUS decision and how to respond to it, is the vital role that our community, advocacy, and civil rights organizations can play in demanding universities to be aggressive in their responses to what will clearly be an immediate negative impact of the court ruling. After all, we all pay taxes that go toward higher education. Despite challenges, they are still public institutions and should therefore serve the public.

In addition to partnerships, aggressive recruitment strategies, and greater student financial education supports, another might be to demand that our flagship institutions save seats for in-state, as opposed to international and out-of-state, students (Watanabe, 2022). This may be an uphill climb considering that universities rely, in particular, on out-of-state tuitions to keep afloat. It's encouraging to read that in California, this very type of advocacy has made a difference (Watanabe, 2022).

In Texas, we must therefore further advocate for increased higher education funding while also holding fast to what remains of Texas' Top Ten Percent Plan that originated with House Bill 588 passed in 1997 and that was reduced to, roughly, six percent with Senate Bill 175 in 2009 that exclusively pertained to higher education admissions at the University of Texas at Austin beginning in 2011.

Our research, truth-telling, and advocacy continue.

-Angela Valenzuela

Reference

Bleemer, Z. (2020). Affirmative action, mismatch, and economic mobility after California's Proposition 209. Research & Occasional Paper Series, Center for the Study of Higher Education, UC Berkeley Retrieved from https://cshe.berkeley.edu/publications/affirmative-action-mismatch-and-economic-mobility-after-california%E2%80%99s-proposition-209

Watanabe, T. (2022, Aug. 10) UC admits record number of Californians and far fewer out-of-state students, Los Angeles Times. Retrieved: https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2022-08-10/uc-admits-record-number-of-california-first-year-students-narrows-entry-to-nonresidents

California banned affirmative action in 1996. Inside the UC struggle for diversity


As the U.S. Supreme Court opens oral arguments Monday on whether to strike down affirmative action, UC’s long struggle to bring diversity to its 10 campuses offers lessons on race-neutral admission practices.


 TERESA WATANABESTAFF WRITER | Los Angeles Times 

 
(Genaro Molina / Los Angeles Times)

For nearly half a century, the University of California has been at the center of national debates over affirmative action and who is entitled to coveted seats in the premier public higher education system.

In 1974, after Allan Bakke, a white applicant, was rejected from the UC Davis medical school, he alleged reverse discrimination and sued, becoming the namesake of a landmark U.S. Supreme Court case curbing racial quotas. In 1995, UC regents voted to eliminate affirmative action and one of them, Ward Connerly, championed a successful campaign a year later to pass Proposition 209, the nation’s first ballot initiative to ban consideration of race and gender in public education, hiring and contracting. Over the last decade, California legislators have launched at least three attempts to restore affirmative action in college admissions — all have failed.

As the U.S. Supreme Court opens oral arguments Monday on whether to strike down affirmative action in cases involving Harvard and the University of North Carolina, UC’s long struggle to bring diversity to its 10 campuses offers lessons on the promise and limitations of race-neutral admission practices.

The California takeaway: Nothing can fully substitute for affirmative action practices that allow universities to admit a diverse student body, including using income and parent educational levels as proxies for race. But after passage of Proposition 209 touched off UC’s 25-year slog of trial and error — plus a massive investment of more than a half-billion dollars on diversity measures — a meaningful difference can be made.

As the U.S. Supreme Court opens oral arguments Monday on whether to strike down affirmative action in cases involving Harvard and the University of North Carolina, UC’s long struggle to bring diversity to its 10 campuses offers lessons on the promise and limitations of race-neutral admission practices.

The California takeaway: Nothing can fully substitute for affirmative action practices that allow universities to admit a diverse student body, including using income and parent educational levels as proxies for race. But after passage of Proposition 209 touched off UC’s 25-year slog of trial and error — plus a massive investment of more than a half-billion dollars on diversity measures — a meaningful difference can be made.

“While California has not identified a really effective policy to promote diversity other than affirmative action, it has shown experimentation is beneficial for targeted students,” said Zachary Bleemer, a Yale University assistant professor of economics and research associate at the Center for Studies in Higher Education at UC Berkeley. “And so it’s worth it.”

UC President Michael V. Drake and all 10 chancellors have submitted an amicus brief in support of Harvard and UNC’s affirmative action policies. Calling UC a “laboratory for experimentation” on using race-neutral measures to promote diversity, the university leaders said that decades of outreach programs to low-income students and re-crafted admissions policies have fallen short.

“Those programs have enabled UC to make significant gains in its system-wide diversity,” the brief said. “Yet despite its extensive efforts, UC struggles to enroll a student body that is sufficiently racially diverse to attain the educational benefits of diversity.”For some private universities, which are allowed to use affirmative action, the looming high court decision is causing consternation. Many experts predict the court’s conservative majority will strike down race-based preferences in a case that could affect not only higher education, but potentially the workplace as well.

“You are talking about the devastation of the American admissions process for students of color, full stop,” said Pomona College President G. Gabrielle Starr. “Affirmation action is hands down the best tool we have for maintaining racial and ethnic diversity in colleges in the United States.”

Initially, Proposition 209 drastically reduced diversity at UC’s most competitive campuses. In 1998, the first admissions year affected by the ban, the number of California Black and Latino first-year students plunged by nearly half at UCLA and UC Berkeley. William Kidder, a UC Riverside civil rights investigator, recalled his shock when he entered UC Berkeley law school in 1998 and found that his first-year class of 270 included only six or seven Black students, compared with four times that many in the class two years ahead of him enrolled before Proposition 209.

“The lack of diversity in the classroom had a negative impact on my learning as a student,” said Kidder, who is white. “The range of viewpoints and quality of discussion about ideas were inhibited.”

California State University’s 23 campuses did not lose nearly as many Black and Latino students as UC did, and the system’s enrollment today nearly fully reflects the state’s diversity. Among its 422,391 undergraduates in fall 2021, 47% are Latino, 21% white, 16% Asian and 4% Black.

That closely mirrors the demographics of the state’s 217,910 California high school students who met UC and CSU eligibility standards in 2020-21: 45% are Latino, 26% white, 16% Asian and 4% Black. CSU’s wider access, more affordable price tag and greater ease of commuting from home may be some reasons behind the greater diversity.

But diversity varies, with proportions of Latino and Black students lower at several of the more selective CSU campuses. At Cal Poly San Luis Obispo — with a 31% admission rate in fall 2021 — 53% of undergraduates are white, 19% Latino, 14% Asian and 1% Black. At Cal State Los Angeles — with an 80% admission rate — 72% of students are Latino, 11% Asian, 4% Black and 4% white.

“While Proposition 209 promoted race neutrality in university student recruitment, admissions, financial aid, student academic support and employee hiring, the policy has made it more challenging to erase equity and opportunity gaps that exist in the CSU,” the university said in a statement. “Despite the challenges that have resulted, the CSU has continued to serve significant numbers of students from underrepresented communities over the years and we continue outreach efforts to provide access to students who are Black, indigenous or people of color and provide support once they are enrolled in the university.”

UC enrollment still does not fully reflect the state’s racial and ethnic makeup — falling particularly short with Latinos, who made up just 30% of the system’s 189,173 California undergraduates in fall 2021. Students of Mexican heritage are by far the largest undergraduate ethnic group, however.

But campuses are making notable strides. Black and Latino students increased to 43% of the admitted first-year class of Californians for fall 2022 compared with about 20% before Proposition 209. For the third straight year, Latinos were the largest ethnic group of admitted students at 37%, followed by Asian Americans at 35%, white students at 19% and Black students at 6%.

The enrolled first-year class of fall 2021 was also the most diverse ever, with Black and Latino students making up 38% compared with about 20% in 1995 before Proposition 209.

Progress has been striking at UCLA, where the affirmative action ban hit particularly hard and swift. By 1998, the number of Black and Latino students in the campus’ first-year class of Californians had plummeted by nearly half.

But by 2021, UCLA’s California first-year class included more Black students — 346, or 7.6 % — than their 1995 numbers of 259, or 7.3%. The same is true for Latino students, whose numbers grew to 1,185, or 26%, from 790, or 22.4%, during that same period.

UCLA devotes up to $2 million annually to aggressively recruit diverse students and then convince them to accept their admission offers. In the early 2000s, the UC system launched two major reforms to boost diversity: an admission guarantee to top-performing students statewide and at most California high schools, and a comprehensive review process that uses several factors — including special talents and location of home and high school — in addition to grades and coursework to evaluate applicants.

In 2020, UC regents voted to eliminate standardized test scores as an admission requirement in another landmark step to widen access to underserved students.

“We’re very proud of the progress we’ve made,” UCLA Chancellor Gene Block said in an interview. “We also recognize how far there is to go.”

UC Berkeley also has gained ground, especially since 2019, when the campuses increased fall enrollment of first-year Black and Latino Californians by more than 30%.

But Femi Ogundele, UC Berkeley’s associate vice chancellor of enrollment management, remains frustrated by the affirmative action ban, saying it prevents his team from fully understanding their applicants whose identities are often deeply connected to their race and gender. Hearing how applicants navigated experiences of being the only students of color in their high schools, for instance, or plowing through male-dominated science or technology classes as a girl could provide valuable insight into their character, he said. Proposition 209 barred discrimination on the basis of race, sex, color, ethnicity, or national origin.

Some researchers have found that the Proposition 209 ban has had lasting negative consequences.

In a 2020 study, Bleemer found that the ban caused Black and Latino students who might otherwise have gotten into UCLA and UC Berkeley to cascade down into less competitive campuses; others chose not to apply for UC admission altogether. Such UC applicants ended up earning fewer undergraduate and graduate degrees and, for Latinos, lower wages. By the mid-2010s, the effects of Proposition 209 had reduced the number of early-career Black and Latino Californians earning more than $100,000 by about 3%, or as many as 1,000 earners, according to the study.

“This was a sort of a permanent shock to young Black and Hispanic workers,” Bleemer said. “And it didn’t lead to a symmetric boost for white and Asian students who gained access to these universities.”

Others, however, say the takeaway from UC’s experience is positive. Richard Sander, a UCLA law professor, argues that the affirmative action ban led to greater diversity at campuses throughout the system and better grades and higher graduation rates for Black and Latino students.

Starr, the Pomona College president, said affirmative action has helped the institution create a diverse class with Black students making up 9% — nearly twice the rate at UC. Latinos are at 16%, Asians 17% and whites 34%. She said that Pomona, one of the nation’s top-rated liberal arts colleges, is looking at ways to even opportunities for applicants if race can no longer be considered. They include possibly rethinking the use of standardized tests, which are now optional, and letters of recommendation — both measures found to favor more privileged students.

At USC, officials are thinking about revving up more aggressive recruiting practices and more generous financial aid packages to maintain diversity. In USC’s 2021-22 undergraduate class, Black students made up 6%, Latinos 17%, Asians 24% and whites 30%.

Campus officials plan to decide by next spring or early summer whether to continue optional testing policies for fall 2024 applicants, said Kedra Ishop, USC vice president for enrollment management.

Ishop said one lesson she learned from her administrative experience at the University of Texas at Austin during multiple conflicts over affirmative action is to be ready to send out clear messages to potential applicants about the value of diversity. “We want a diverse student body on our campus, and we’ll pursue that through whatever the legal means we have after this decision,” she said.

At UC Berkeley, Ogundele said affected universities should “double down” on comprehensive review systems to evaluate a student beyond academic metrics and use data aggressively. Admission officials will need to understand the environment not only in various ZIP Codes but also individual high schools to place a student’s academic experiences in full context, he said.

“I recognize that’s a big ask,” Ogundele said, noting there are hundreds of high schools across California. “But that’s what’s going to be necessary if your process is going to be equitable.”

Block said UCLA is also ready to share its experiences. A precipitous drop in California Black first-year students in 2006 — down to 95, lower even than immediately after Proposition 209 — prompted the campus to refine its comprehensive review system to pay greater attention to an applicant’s learning environment. Then, in 2012, Block hired Youlonda Copeland-Morgan, who reshaped the university’s outreach, recruitment and enrollment strategies. Copeland-Morgan, who retired last month as vice provost for enrollment management, called her approach “intrusive recruiting” to pursue applicants as college coaches do highly prized athletes.

She and her team launched collaboratives with more than two dozen Los Angeles Unified high schools and several African American churches in the Inland Empire to scout promising students and keep them on track, for instance. They look for diverse talent not only at college fairs, but also community events such as the Taste of Soul street festival in the Crenshaw neighborhood. They meet families at Starbucks in Compton, South L.A., Ladera Heights, South Gate. A few years ago, the team started a texting program to students as young as eighth grade to prepare them for college and possible UCLA admission.

Over the last decade, the number of Black students from California who apply, are admitted and enroll at UCLA has swelled. Black first-year student enrollment, for instance, grew by more than 100%, from 169 students, or 4.2%, of the 2012 first-year class to 346, or 7.6%, in 2021. Latino enrollment, however, grew only by 19% during that period.

Both UCLA and UC Berkeley admit enough Black and Latino applicants to fill their classes with representative shares, but need more to accept their admission offers. Those rates have grown more quickly for Black students than Latinos.

The campuses say they are reaping big payoffs — 75% commitment rates — by holding in-person activities that connect admitted students with faculty, staff and other students of similar backgrounds.

Block said UCLA is also hiring more Latino faculty and working to become a so-called Hispanic-serving institution, which will open the door to federal grants to enrich Latino educational opportunities. To address family financial concerns, the campus launched a pilot program this year offering low-income students up to $2,000 annually or $10,000 during an undergraduate career to reduce their financial burdens.

How much such measures will help institutions make the transition to higher education without affirmative action is, however, unclear.

Ogundele experienced both worlds as an admissions professional at Stanford University, where he used affirmative action, and UC Berkeley, where it is banned.

“What I’m learning in this environment is that there is no alternative,” Ogundele said. “There is no race-neutral alternative to being able to consider race.”

Teresa Watanabe covers education for the Los Angeles Times. Since joining the Times in 1989, she has covered immigration, ethnic communities, religion, Pacific Rim business and served as Tokyo correspondent and bureau chief. She also covered Asia, national affairs and state government for the San Jose Mercury News and wrote editorials for the Los Angeles Herald Examiner. A Seattle native, she graduated from USC in journalism and in East Asian languages and culture.

Tuesday, March 21, 2023

Calling out the elephant (or the "Bevo") in the room: UT's Budget and Where the Money Comes From?

Students, Friends and Colleagues:

Give this a close read, compliments of the Texas Exes. 

Government officials want to have ever more control over what we do in higher education such as through all the current anti-DEI bills despite their declining share of support for public higher education. 

Ouch! Students and parents are bearing an increasing brunt of the cost!

Just calling out the elephant (or the "Bevo") in the room. 

-Angela Valenzuela


UT's Budget: Where does the money come from? 

The university’s ability to educate students, deliver cutting-edge research, and innovate for the people and businesses of our great state depends on consistent and appropriate funding from the state, donors, grants, and tuition. Since 2009, the state and tuition revenue sources of UT Austin have declined or remained flat. In 2011, higher education suffered substantial cuts to base funding levels. In 2018, the state of Texas provides 12 percent of the university’s revenue, whereas in 1984, it provided 47 percent.






Formula Funding: How are state funds split by the Legislature?  

Formula funding is how state higher-education institutions equitably distribute available state funds. They allocate a base level of funding primarily based on enrollment. The formula is calculated by the Higher Education Coordinating Board and its recommendations are presented to the Legislative Budget Board in June of even years. As an example, in the 84th Texas Legislative Session, the legislature’s finalized budget included Dell Medical School in health-related formula funding, appropriating $12.1 million for the first medical school to be built on an AAU-recognized research university in 50 years.

The PUF: Where does this money come from and how is it divided? 

The Permanent University Fund (PUF) was established in 1876 to provide resources for The University of Texas. The PUF’s value comes from oil and minerals from 2 million acres of landed granted by the Texas Constitution. Revenue from the PUF is invested and the annual return is placed in the AUF, the Available University Fund. UT Austin’s budget is 10 percent funded by the AUF, after sharing with The University of Texas System and the Texas A&M system.

Tuition Reregulation: What is the benefit of tuition-setting ability for public universities? 

In 2003, the Capitol granted tuition-setting authority to the governing boards of public colleges and universities instead of the Texas State Legislature under HB 3015. This was due in part to a handicap posed on universities from deep cuts in state funding to higher education and the need for flexibility for institutions to remain competitive with national peers. Legislators understood that this vote would result in decreased state support and increased tuition. UT Austin continues to support the flexibility of setting tuition and fees, upon approval by the corresponding board of regents.

Saturday, October 02, 2021

UT sets enrollment record for underrepresented students in largest first-year class

This piece adds detail to an earlier post titled, "University of Texas hits record undergraduate Hispanic student enrollment." The numbers tell the story, but here are a couple of key quotes:

"Overall, the university’s number and percentage of historically underrepresented students — who identify as Black, Hispanic, American Indian or Alaska Native, or Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander — rose to their highest levels ever, representing 32.7% of the undergraduate population and 29.6% of the university as a whole.

At the undergraduate level alone, UT Austin will educate 13,366 historically underrepresented students in 2021, one of the largest totals of any state flagship university or member of the prestigious Association of American Universities."

It may not occur to the casual observer that what must also be addressed internally is increasing the four- and six-year graduation rates. UT Austin is trending positively on these indicators, as well, achieving historic highs in both categories. How fortunate for these students coming through these days.

Praise and appreciation to all the UT recruitment staff who are working hard to diversify our campus. Attracting, retaining, and supporting students are key. 

-Angela Valenzuela

UT sets enrollment record for underrepresented students in largest first-year class



by Stephanie Becerra

The University of Texas at Austin announced Monday they have been able to expand its capacity and admitted its largest-ever incoming class and a record number of underrepresented students.

The press release states the university has 9,060 first-time freshmen undergraduates, according to data collected on the 12th class day of this semester. The previous high for the entering first-year class was 8,960 in 2018.

Total university enrollment rose 3% over last year from 50,476 to 51,992, which is close to the all-time high of 52,261 set in 2002.

The increases, which followed record-high application numbers, were made possible in large part by rising four- and six-year graduation rates. UT Austin once again set all-time highs in both categories. The four-year rate rose from 72.2% to 72.7%. The six-year rate rose from 87.6% to 87.7%.

“By helping more students graduate on time, we are increasing access to UT,” said UT Austin President Jay Hartzell. “This is especially important now because more outstanding students than ever are seeking the rigorous education, in-person learning, and residential college experience that UT offers.”

Officials also say the university is also serving more first-generation and historically underrepresented groups than ever while continuing to serve some of its highest numbers of students eligible for Pell grants, which are available to low-income families.

Enrollment of first-generation undergraduate students rose from 9,122 to 9,387, 22.9% of all undergraduates.

Hispanic enrollment reached all-time highs, jumping a full percentage point from 26.1% to 27.1%, even as overall university enrollment increased significantly.

Last year, UT Austin reached the undergraduate enrollment threshold of 25% Hispanic to qualify as a Hispanic-Serving Institution (HSI). The university also received the prestigious Seal of Excelencia, granted to a small group of colleges and universities committed to accelerating Latino student success. This year’s enrollment gains further cement the university’s trajectory as one of the country’s largest and most academically prestigious HSIs.

Overall, the university’s number and percentage of historically underrepresented students — who identify as Black, Hispanic, American Indian or Alaska Native, or Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander — rose to their highest levels ever, representing 32.7% of the undergraduate population and 29.6% of the university as a whole.

At the undergraduate level alone, UT Austin will educate 13,366 historically underrepresented students in 2021, one of the largest totals of any state flagship university or member of the prestigious Association of American Universities.

“People all across the UT community have been working hard to recruit, attract, retain and support even more talented and diverse students, staff members, and faculty members who can change the world,” said Hartzell. “I’m proud that our combined enrollment of historically underrepresented groups has reached record levels for the second year in a row.”

To view statistical figures over the years at UT Austin, click here.

Thursday, August 12, 2021

Thousands of UT students could get COVID-19 this fall, new report says by Megan Menchaca, Aug. 12, 2021

Unsettling news in today's Austin American-StatesmanHere's what's key:

"If we have an initial condition of around 200 initial infections, 60% vaccination rates and relatively little mitigation measures, then we would expect exponential growth," said Kaitlyn Johnson, a postdoctoral fellow at UT and a lead author of the report. "And we would expect a high, high percent of the student body, part of it vaccinated and part of it unvaccinated, to become infected."

Of course, we want to have strong mitigation measures. For the first time today, I heard and learned the word, "Multidemic." That's what we're entering into—a pandemic of different variants. 

All of us must wear masks and social distance. We should all get the vaccine, too. This should not be an issue of personal liberty, but social responsibility.

You can't kill a virus. It's not a bacteria that you can kill with penicillin or medicine. You can only eliminate its home, meaning keeping our bodies from being hosts to it. 

Take care, my friends. Masking up needs to be an expression of love and caring. We owe that to our students, fellow staff and faculty, as well as to each other and our children and grandchildren.

-Angela Valenzuela


Thousands of UT students could get COVID-19 this fall, new report says

Megan Menchaca
Aug. 12, 2021 | Austin American-Statesman

Thousands of University of Texas students could become infected with the coronavirus during the fall semester if university leaders don't take any mitigation measures and if students don't change behavior, according to a new report by UT's COVID-19 Modeling Consortium.

That scenario could occur if UT administrators do not implement proactive testing of unvaccinated students twice a week and if students do not wear masks in response to an increased presence of the virus, the report says.

The report, released Wednesday, doesn't go as far as to say that UT needs to require masks.

The report estimates that an average of 57% of UT students will be vaccinated when the fall semester begins. Under those vaccination rate projections, the average total number of students infected with COVID-19 during the fall semester is expected to be 11,200, with a range from 5,000 to 16,300, without proactive testing.


More:Travis County hits record high for COVID patients in ICU; Texas hospitalizations continue to climb

If unvaccinated students were tested twice a week, the report estimates that the number of infected students in the fall semester under the same vaccination conditions would drop to a range of 900 to 3,900, with an average of 1,700. A vaccination rate of 80% among UT students could lead to an average of 1,500 infected students, even without testing of the unvaccinated.

"If we have an initial condition of around 200 initial infections, 60% vaccination rates and relatively little mitigation measures, then we would expect exponential growth," said Kaitlyn Johnson, a postdoctoral fellow at UT and a lead author of the report. "And we would expect a high, high percent of the student body, part of it vaccinated and part of it unvaccinated, to become infected."


Details of UT modeling consortium's report

The consortium, a network of researchers and health professionals, made the model of COVID-19 transmission to project the health and economic costs associated with UT’s reopening. The models do not predict any viral, policy or behavioral changes and assume that vaccine coverage, vaccine efficacy and transmission rates remain constant through the end of the semester.


Details of UT modeling consortium's report

The consortium, a network of researchers and health professionals, made the model of COVID-19 transmission to project the health and economic costs associated with UT’s reopening. The models do not predict any viral, policy or behavioral changes and assume that vaccine coverage, vaccine efficacy and transmission rates remain constant through the end of the semester.More:Texas now has the fewest ICU beds available it's had during the entire COVID-19 pandemic

"These findings highlight the need for continued mitigation measures such as testing prior to returning to campus, wearing of face masks, social distancing, frequent testing throughout the semester, self-isolation when symptomatic and other risk-reduction measures as UT reopens during a time of high levels of community spread," the report said.

The report says that, if vaccination rates remain at about 60%, proactive testing for COVID-19 should be offered to students at least two times per week, or about 20,000 tests a week, to provide a 95% guarantee that symptomatic infections will not exceed the "very high risk threshold."

Exclusively symptomatic testing would be enough to control the spread if 80% of students were vaccinated, the report says. The report defines a very high transmission threshold as 140 symptomatic cases per 100,000 people over seven days.

"Our projections suggest that proactive testing of unvaccinated students can help to suppress transmission and be cost saving overall, particularly if vaccination levels remain relatively low. However, increasing vaccination coverage among students is likely the most effective means of reducing the burden of COVID-19 and keeping costs low," the report said.

COVID-19 testing required for first day at University of Texas

UT will be requiring all students to be tested before the first day of classes on Aug. 25, but UT spokesperson Eliska Padilla said the university does not plan to require regular testing of students after the first day. Gov. Greg Abbott has prohibited agencies that receive state funding from requiring vaccinations.

More:Austin ISD to mandate masks in defiance of Gov. Greg Abbott

"The university continues to encourage and offer vaccination as the best tool to contain the spread of COVID-19, has made living in a campus residence hall conditional upon receiving a negative COVID-19 test prior to move-in, is asking all students returning to campus to get tested before classes start, as well as continues proactive community testing for people with no symptoms," Padilla said.

The report estimates the prevalence of COVID-19 among UT students in Austin during the first day of classes will be between 0.38% and 0.47%, or a range of 187 and 236 UT students in Austin infected with COVID-19

The current modeling assumes that 50,000 students will be on campus in about two weeks. The vaccination estimates were based on vaccination rates reported for 16- to 49-year-olds in Texas and for people older than 18 in the home counties of students from outside of Texas.

The report assumes nearly all students will isolate after a positive COVID-19 test result, and that 50% of unvaccinated students would be willing to participate in proactive testing while acknowledging that percentage might not be attainable.


More COVID-19 cases projected this fall

Last year, a similar report by the consortium before the beginning of the fall 2020 semester said between 82 and 183 students could arrive infected with COVID-19 during the first week of fall classes. The report assumed that 12,000 students were already in Austin and 5,000 to 15,000 students would arrive in Austin before the first day of class in fall 2020. At the time, COVID-19 vaccinations were not available.

It's impossible to say how many students arrived infected at the start of classes last year because UT did not require all students to be tested when they arrived.

More:UT to require COVID-19 tests for all students prior to first day of school

Johnson said the higher numbers for fall 2021 are due to significantly more students on campus and surging COVID-19 cases.

Assuming only symptomatic cases are detected and that about 60% of students are vaccinated, the model projects a peak occupancy of 13 to 45 students living in UT residence halls requiring an isolation room in a single day. That range could decrease to a peak of 2 and 11 students in dorms requiring isolation if 80% of them were vaccinated, the report states.

These estimates do not account for any additional cases identified through contact tracing or proactive testing, which could increase the number of students requiring isolation.