Senator Reverend Warnock wrote to the American Council on Education, which oversees the Carnegie Classification of Institutions of Higher Education
In new letter, Senator Reverend Warnock highlighted his concerns with the classification methodology for higher education, urging them to make needed reforms
Currently, the Carnegie Classification of Institutions of Higher Education has 146 universities who achieved “R1” or “very high research activity” status — none of which are HBCUs
Senator Reverend Warnock is a proud product of Atlanta HBCU Morehouse College and one of only two HBCU graduates currently serving in the U.S. Senate
Senator Reverend Warnock also recently introduced the bipartisan Increase America’s Research Capacity Act of 2023, which instructs the Department of Commerce and Comptroller General of the United States to conduct studies to identify how HBCUs can achieve R1 status
Senator Reverend Warnock: “There are many incredible research institutions, especially MSIs and HBCUs, that do tremendous research, but are not recognized by the current methodology, which accounts for research dollars spent and the number of research faculty, but not necessarily research quality or utility”
Washington, D.C. – Today, U.S. Senator Reverend Raphael Warnock (D-GA) urged the American Council on Education, which oversees the Carnegie Classification of Institutions of Higher Education, to make needed reforms to its classification methodology for higher education to reflect the importance and potential of the nation’s Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs). In a new letter, Senator Warnock—a proud product of Georgia’s Morehouse College—highlighted his concerns with the current classification system and its lack of a single HBCU.
“The Carnegie Classification of Institutions of Higher Education’s “very high research activity” and “high research activity” (R1/R2) designations are viewed as an indication that an institution of higher education is at the forefront of academic research and innovation…[w]hile the R1 designation is not meant to classify the best or worst research institutions, many use the classification this way. Moreover, these rankings, which are meant to help institutions identify their peers, have had the unintended consequence of pitting them against each other. There are many incredible research institutions, especially MSIs and HBCUs, that do tremendous research, but are not recognized by the current methodology, which accounts for research dollars spent and the number of research faculty, but not necessarily research quality or utility,” Senator Warnock wrote to the American Council on Education.
The “R1” or “very high research activity” status is a designation created by the Carnegie Classification of Institutions of Higher Education, which is now being revamped by the American Council on Education (ACE). “R1” institutions have “very high research activity,” which is the highest designation of research activity. Currently, the Carnegie Classification of Institutions of Higher Education has 146 universities who achieved “R1” or “very high research activity” status — none of which are HBCUs. Clark Atlanta University is the closest institution to becoming an R1 in Georgia, but the current classification system does not fully reward the holistic contributions, of Clark Atlanta or similarly positioned institutions, to reach the R1 level. In his letter, Senator Warnock highlighted three concerns with the current classification system that should be addressed, including:
- The existing methodology is overly complex and is not easily replicable, making it difficult for institutions to understand how to improve their standings.
- The methodology penalizes specialized institutions like agricultural universities for a lack of education and research that may fall outside of their founding purpose, possibly driving institutions to change how they allocate resources.
- The relative (rather than absolute) way the classification ranks institutions can pit them against each other, creating competition that could adversely impact strategic planning.
The Senator’s letter follows the recent introduction of his bipartisan Increase America’s Research Capacity Act of 2023, which instructs the Department of Commerce and Comptroller General of the United States to conduct studies to identify how HBCUs can achieve R1 status.
“I urge you to update this methodology in a manner that reflects the importance of economic and social mobility in higher education and recognizes the groundbreaking research contributions of America’s diverse institutions of higher education, specifically Minority-Serving Institutions (MSIs) and Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs),” added Senator Warnock, in his letter.
As the proud product of an HBCU, Senator Warnock is deeply committed to doing all he can to ensure these often-overlooked institutions thrive. To date, Senator Warnock has secured more than $267 million for Georgia HBCUs and has helped spearhead bipartisan calls for robust funding for HBCUs. In March, Senator Warnock addressed HBCU faculty and staff and led the group in prayer at the 7th Annual HBCU Fly-In and outlined his priorities for these important institutions. He has worked to strengthen 1890 land grant institutions and minority serving institutions and pushed hard to secure robust funding for 1890 Land-Grant colleges and universities as part of fiscal year 2024 budget.
The full text of the letter can be found here and below:
Dear Mr. Gunja,
I understand that the American Council on Education is currently redeveloping its methodology for the 2024 Carnegie Classification of Institutions of Higher Education. As this process continues, I urge you to update this methodology in a manner that reflects the importance of economic and social mobility in higher education and recognizes the groundbreaking research contributions of America’s diverse institutions of higher education, specifically Minority-Serving Institutions (MSIs) and Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs).
The Carnegie Classification of Institutions of Higher Education’s “very high research activity” and “high research activity” (R1/R2) designations are viewed as an indication that an institution of higher education is at the forefront of academic research and innovation. Institutions use this status to attract graduate students and faculty, garner funding to improve their facilities and equipment, enhance their research grant applications, and raise the reputation of their research. While the R1 designation is not meant to classify the best or worst research institutions, many use the classification this way. Moreover, these rankings, which are meant to help institutions identify their peers, have had the unintended consequence of pitting them against each other. There are many incredible research institutions, especially MSIs and HBCUs, that do tremendous research, but are not recognized by the current methodology, which accounts for research dollars spent and the number of research faculty, but not necessarily research quality or utility.
In the 2021 classification, 133 doctoral universities achieved high research activity, or R2, status and 146 doctoral universities achieved very high research activity, or R1, status. None of the R1 institutions are HBCUs. There are 11 HBCUs that are R2s, including Howard University, Clark Atlanta University, and Jackson State University.
In light of this disparity, I wish to share three concerns with you. First, I am concerned that the existing methodology, which requires creating an index of numerous metrics, is overly complex. The process to create such an index is not easily replicable, making it difficult for institutions to understand how to improve their standings. Without greater clarity, universities can struggle to strategically plan their research agenda, ultimately affecting the quality of their research and the education they provide to students. I encourage you to simplify the classification system and transparently share the process with institutions, so have more clarity regarding how to improve.
Second, I am concerned that the current set of metrics fails to account for several factors critical to evaluating an institution’s research. For example, the current methodology rewards and requires institutions to engage in comprehensive research in the humanities, social sciences, and STEM. Many agricultural, mechanical, and technical institutions, like Florida Agricultural & Mechanical University and North Carolina Agricultural & Technical State University, conduct pivotal research, but their specialization means that they do not rank highly in non-STEM expenditures and degree conferrals. The current methodology penalizes these institutions for a lack of education and research that may fall outside of their founding purpose and could drive institutions to change how they allocate resources to their students and faculty in pursuit of a higher classification. I encourage you to update the methodology to recognize the crucial research that takes place at specialized institutions and allow them to continue serving their populations in line with their missions.
Finally, I am concerned that the way the classification ranks institutions and uses these metrics to determine the cutoff point for R1 status can unintentionally pit institutions against each other. While many HBCUs and MSIs prioritize research and innovation, many see their primary mission as educating the student body and preparing them for future success. The classification system is meant to group similar institutions, not pit them against each other to achieve a higher research status or inject tension into how institutions pursue their academic missions. If institutions continue to see the classification as a competition they must win, there is a chance that this will adversely affect their strategic planning and undermine their ability to freely advance institutional missions.
As the American Council on Education continues to develop its methodology ahead of the 2025 classification list, I encourage you to consider these concerns and must-needed reforms to the current methodology and create a classification system that acknowledges the holistic contributions of diverse institutions of higher education, particularly HBCUs and MSIs. I look forward to your response and to keeping this conversation open as you redevelop a new methodology for the Carnegie Classification of Institutions of Higher Education.
###