couch 'em wrote:Considering the post above where SMU rejected ties to two of the major academic elements in the city, perhaps SMU's goal was not always elite status.
How affordable was SMU in 1965?
Honestly, had SMU been better endowed from the beginning, it could have kept its fledging medical school.
The rejection of the Graduate Research Center of the Southwest is more perplexing. Texas Instruments needed a larger, local source of engineering graduates; however, President Tate was apparently concerned that SMU might stray too far from its liberal arts roots if the school went along with the TI execs. Tate did not want to see SMU become a tech school like MIT; obviously, a totally irrational concern.
Pye, during his presidency, actually tried to dissolve two engineering programs to save money. The Board of Trustees did kill the civil engineering department as a result of Pye's recommendations.
By 1989 university debt was steadily mounting (costing $4 million annually to service the debt), and President Pye called for sweeping budget cuts affecting multiple university departments and services. Pye recommended a halt on new campus construction; discontinuing SMU’s major in public relations and its minors in social sciences and linguistics; spending cuts on programs such as physical education and criminal justice; and reduced funding for the university cafeteria and physical plant. Pye also noted his willingness to cut athletic program budgets as well, commenting, "I have no intention in the world of cutting back on academics and not applying the same scrutiny to athletics."
The university community seemed generally supportive of the measures, but Pye’s proposed elimination of two of SMU’s engineering programs met with resistance from the engineering faculty. Although the proposal was not intended to undermine engineering as whole, the faculty argued that the cuts could fatally weaken the department due to reduced student enrollment. They further noted that a region of the state that boasted many high-tech companies would suddenly be without a source of engineering graduates if the two programs were cut. The Board of Trustees later opted to eliminate only the civil engineering program. In addition, a weaker economy in the early 1990s led to some budget cuts around campus to maintain a balanced budget, and in 1991 the university laid off roughly 80 administrative staff members.
http://www.lib.utexas.edu/taro/smu/00115/smu-00115.html
So yes, through the years, STEM programs have not received enthusiastic support from SMU administrators.
Interestingly, SMU was not alone. Baylor jettisoned its medical school, which was originally located in Dallas, in 1969 and its dental school in 1971. The dental school is now part of the Texas A&M Health Science Center. Baylor College of Medicine remains an independent institution although it did consider merging with Rice Uinversity in 2009.
