Several years ago I asked President Hargis that question in an email. Never expected a response, but got one within 48 hours. He said that it isn't that they aren't striving for those memberships or higher USNWR rankings (which he somewhat dismissed as BS), he said that with OSU's mission as part of their land grant they must first be concerned with providing opportunities for Oklahoma students to receive an education that is targeted to the needs of Oklahomans, and that sometimes that mission isn't in line with what AAU values. I took this to mean that the large amount of AG research that is necessary for our school was not in line with the research AAU figures into their membership evaluations.
Well, I can answer a part of your question. Although, you might already know the answer.
The USNWR rankings, IMO, are bogus also. Here’s just 1 reason why: your academic reputation is taken into consideration. You will find that to always be the case in most all college academic rankings. Who votes on academic reputation? Professors, etc.
So, if you’re now considered a 3rd rate school and Harvard a 1st rate school - guess what - nothing is EVER going to change on those rankings.
Secondly, those rankings of quality of school is heavily influenced by the SAT & ACT rankings of incoming students. The smarter the students coming into a school, the higher the academic reputation and status of that school will be rated. It’s like, as I read one expert say one time - it’s like ranking hospitals effectiveness on how healthy their incoming patients are.
OSU , and OU, are primarily schools for the general, average, Oklahoma High school student that wishes a higher education. Period. Plainly put.
So OSU and OU are going to admit the average ACT & SAT school students. Therefore, we WILL ALWAYS have an average ACT range (middle 50%) of around 23-28. Give or take 1 point. The Average ACT Range (middle 50% of incoming students) at “elite” high ranking schools are more like between 29-33. Notre Dame is between 31-35. Which means only 25% of their students scored below 31 on the ACT and 25% of their students scored 35 or 36 (highest possible) on the ACT.
Therefore, OKlahoma legislature does not want to fund a NOtre DAme type school along with an OU and OSU. Therefore, OU and OSU MUST admit more average students. Which means this in rankings: WE’re always going to be a considered inferior school because our students aren’t so high scoring on ACT/SAT.
U. of Michigan is highly rated and it’s a public school. They are MUCH HARDER to get into than an OU or OSU. Therefore, MIchigan has elite status and is considered academically superior. THerefore, it’s easier for them to get Research $$ money and are, therefore, in the AAU.
The only way OSU can get into the AAU is to stop admitting about 1/2 of their students (lowest scores on the ACT) and then hire a bunch of famous research scholars to do research, then go apply for research $$ and get a bunch of money. THEN, and ONLY THEN - will we get considered for AAU status.
The Oklahoma legislature can not afford to fund OSU or OU and start another school (or say just UCO). NOt enough $$. OUr taxes would have to sky-rocket.
And guess what is in USNWR rankings? The AMOUNT of Research Dollars received. Theoretically you are a better school if you get more Research $$. That will be one of their criteria.
IN summary - to get “status”, higher USN&WR rankings, & AAU membership we would need to do this:
1. LImit incoming students to only those making above 26 to 28 on ACT.
2. Fire a bunch of professors because # of students enrolled would plummett.
3. Go hire new faculty anyway, because we need “name” research scholars who DO NOT TEACH MUCH - in order to get research $$ because we’re having ot compete against other schools for said research $$.
4. Wait about 15 to 30 years for research to pay-off at OSU so that the AAU would be tempted to invite us in to their exclusive club.
5. Result: You’ll have to Pay about 3 to 6 times more in STate taxes than you’re paying now in order to pay for all this and to go hire all those fired professors to teach at UCO - which would then grow to about U.Houston size of 50,000 Undergrads. And, of course, go pay for the buildings and dorm rooms needed to go with all those students down at UCO.
That’s what Burns HArgis meant about our “role” in Oklahoma.
