Regents discuss program- and research-rankings data and strategic tradeoffs

Provost Croson and Vice President for Research and Innovation Trishank Priya briefed the committee on discipline-specific rankings, the differences between reputational and data‑driven measures, and multi-year movements in program placement.

Priya highlighted research‑expenditure–based measures and noted that the Twin Cities campus ranked 12th nationally on research expenditures; he reported total expenditures across all campuses for FY23 as "about $1,350,000,000."

The presentation reviewed programs that moved by five or more places in recent years and contrasted stable top programs with a "shrinking middle" where many programs fluctuate. Priya and Croson said changes in federal funding and competitive dynamics require strategic internal investments and preparation for solicitations.

Board members and student representatives questioned how much attention the university should place on different rankings. Regents asked whether pulling out of reputational surveys changes outcomes; Croson explained consequences vary by ranking. Several regents urged clearer costed strategies—identifying where investments could most effectively raise program standings or emphasize existing strengths.

President Rosalina Cunningham and other leaders described steps to boost national reputation, including systemwide nominations for national awards and hiring staff to coordinate honors and external recognition. The board discussed student concerns about publication costs and credit for student‑authored research; leaders said many journals have no author fees and libraries pursue bulk agreements with publishers to expand open‑access opportunities.

The discussion closed with agreement to factor rankings data into strategic planning and to explore targeted support for programs that can gain outsized benefit from modest investments.