UT Tyler student chosen for UT System Board of Regents
Luke Schwartz, who is currently a graduate student at UT Tyler, was selected to represent students as the student regent for the University of Texas System Board of Regents. Schwartz received his bachelor's degree in nutrition from Texas A&M University and is currently pursuing a doctorate of medicine at UT Tyler.
Woman accused of stealing wig from corpse at Tyler funeral home
Abbott appointed several other student regents for public university boards across the state. A board of regents will govern the activities of each university in their system. In Texas, public university boards are appointed by the governor.
Students who were appointed as student regents by Gov. Abbott on Friday include:
Kohl Crawford from Texas Southern University
Jaquavous Doucette from Texas A&M University
Donavan Brown from Texas State
Eli Health from Texas Tech University
Alyssa Flores from Texas Woman's University
Adrian Caraves from Univeristy of Houston
Hayden Wochele University of North Texas
Abbott also selected Lisa Cantu of Texas A&M University to serve on the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board. The board strives to be an advocate for high education while promoting access to anyone looking to receive a college education.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Fast Company
a minute ago
- Fast Company
Is inspiration or influence more powerful? 20 leaders reflect
At their core, both inspiration and influence aim to move people—but how they do so, and what follows, can vary dramatically. For leaders, choosing between (or balancing) the two can shape not only how others respond, but also how trust, motivation and lasting impact are built. Some see inspiration as the deeper force, igniting internal purpose, while others view influence as the practical key to decision-making and action. Below, 20 members of Fast Company Executive Board share how they view the distinction between inspiration and influence, and which they believe carries more weight in effective leadership. 1. MOTIVATION DRIVES LASTING SUCCESS. Ninety percent of great leadership is about inspiring your team and helping them move in the right direction. I've learned that forcing people to go where they don't want to be rarely works. Real success comes from tapping into what motivates them. That's why I'll always choose inspiration over influence as my leadership approach. – Andy MacMillan, Alteryx 2. EMOTIONAL CONNECTION LEADS TO MEANINGFUL ACTION. Order of operations is important. In my organization, we influence people to take action on climate change. We start with inspiration, typically the beauty of nature and the joy of time skiing, biking, and hiking outside. That emotional spark influences action. The win isn't in how we move people. It's the progress we make on big challenges. – Erin Sprague, Protect Our Winters 3. INSPIRATION MOVES PEOPLE FORWARD WITH PURPOSE. I believe inspiring others is more meaningful than merely influencing them. Influence can shift behavior, but inspiration stirs the soul. It plants something lasting. Influence may win attention, but inspiration earns trust, action, and belief. The difference: Influence moves people. Inspiration moves them forward. One is power. The other is purpose. – Sudhir Gupta, FACTICERIE 4. INFLUENCE DRIVES SCALABLE OUTCOMES. Inspiration gets applause. Influence gets outcomes. One moves sentiment. The other moves decisions. At scale, leadership isn't only about lighting a spark. It's about aligning people to act with clarity and accountability. Inspiration matters, but without influence, it doesn't stick. Influence is what scales. – Mike Capone, Qlik 5. INFLUENCE AND INSPIRATION FUEL EACH OTHER. In my experience, it is not a question of one being more meaningful than the other. Instead, I see it as a symbiotic relationship, with one fueling the other. I believe true influence often starts with inspiration. People who feel moved by a vision and see a clear path to achieve it don't just follow—they help lead the way. And that drives action and results. – Jeffrey Whitford, MilliporeSigma 6. INSPIRATION SPARKS OTHERS TO GROW. For me, it's about inspiring others. Influence feels transactional—changing perceptions through action. Inspiration comes from authentic leadership that sparks others to grow on their own. Influence drives compliance; inspiration builds lasting commitment by helping people find their own path. – Barry Lowenthal, Inuvo, Inc. 7. TRUE INSPIRATION DRIVES LASTING COMMITMENT. Inspiring people is more meaningful—it lights a spark and taps intrinsic motivation. Influence can change behavior short-term, but inspiration drives lasting growth. They overlap, but true inspiration builds enduring commitment. – Stephanie Harris, PartnerCentric 8. INSPIRATION FUELS CREATIVITY AND COLLABORATION. Inspiring others is more meaningful because it fuels lasting engagement and creativity. While influence can guide actions, inspiration empowers people to contribute fully, embrace diverse ideas, and collaborate more effectively. It's the difference between directing a team and truly motivating one to grow, experiment, and innovate together. – Dominick Passanante Panasonic Connect 9. LEADING BY EXAMPLE CREATES GENUINE IMPACT. Leading by example is the most effective way to inspire others. When you demonstrate the behaviors and actions you expect from others, you create a powerful model for them to follow. This approach fosters genuine inspiration, which is more impactful than simply trying to convince someone, which can feel like a tactic. – Ruchir Nath, Dell Technologies 10. INSPIRATION GIVES TEAMS MORE FREEDOM. I prefer inspiring others, but I combine this with influencing when I sense that the team needs clearer direction setting. In my view, inspiring is a higher-leverage behavior than influencing, since it gives more freedom and responsibility to my team to choose problems to work on, and in turn, find the best solutions. – Max Azarov, Novakid Inc. 11. ADVOCATES EMERGE FROM INSPIRED TEAMS. Inspiring others is more meaningful long-term because it builds trust, fosters intrinsic motivation, and creates sustainable change. Inspiration allows individuals to operate with a sense of ownership, creativity, and resilience. There is a difference: inspiration fuels purpose, while influence drives action. And while they can overlap, inspiring others builds advocates, not just followers. – Justin Rende, Rhymetec 12. EFFECTIVE LEADERSHIP BALANCES BOTH IN CONTEXT. Great leaders know that both inspiration and influence matter, and they skillfully apply each based on the situation. Inspiration fuels culture and empowers people to do extraordinary things, while influence focuses on alignment and decision-making. It's not necessarily either-or but depends on the goals and context, focusing on driving business outcomes. – Jani Hirvonen, Google 13. BELIEF SPARKS MEANINGFUL CHANGE. In my opinion, inspiration is more meaningful because it's rooted in belief, not persuasion. It sparks ownership and purpose. Influence can shape decisions, but inspiration helps others move forward with conviction. Being able to positively inspire someone is a privilege—and one of the most fulfilling aspects of leadership. – Eddy Azad, Parsec Automation Corp. 14. INTERNAL MOTIVATION DRIVES INNOVATION. Inspiration creates lasting change by motivating people from within. Influence can be temporary, so when you can get people to choose to act rather than being persuaded, you're building authentic commitment. I've seen teams transform when connecting emotionally to our mission of creating meaningful experiences. That internal motivation drives innovation far beyond what external influence achieves. – Jaime Bettencourt, Mood Media 15. TRUE LEADERSHIP ENABLES FREE THOUGHT. The direct answer to this question is inspiring and enabling. Inspiring people, to me, enables free thought and critical thinking. Influencing people, to me, is my imposition of my thought process on others. I look to have an open forum of thought which allows for understanding and learning, not an influencing approach allowing for just my thoughts. – Richard McWhorter, SRM Private Wealth 16. INFLUENCE BUILDS COMPLIANCE; INSPIRATION BUILDS MOMENTUM. Inspiration sparks that intrinsic action where people move because they actually have the desire to do so. Influencing shapes behavior, often without belief. One builds momentum, the other compliance. Both matter, but inspiration ultimately scales better. Especially with agentic AI, we need systems and people that opt in with intention and don't just follow by default. – Unnat Bak, Revscale™ 17. MEANINGFUL INFLUENCE CAN POSITIVELY SHIFT SOMEONE'S PROFESSIONAL PATH. Mentorship is very important to me, so I would lean toward influencing because it implies helping someone change direction. It's important to me to encourage and positively shift people's professional paths through workforce development, training, and mentoring, shifting their trajectory positively through meaningful influence. – Larry Brinker Jr., BRINKER 18. INSPIRATION CONNECTS PEOPLE TO THEIR INNER COMPASS. Inspiring someone drives a deeper, more impactful, and sustained impact. It awakens an inner knowing or compass that is more enduring. (Influence pushes from outside or external reference points.) True leadership happens when people connect to their own wisdom, not your agenda. Answers aren't in more external strategies, but often in accessing what's available and beneath the noise. – Dr. Camille Preston, AIM Leadership, LLC 19. INSPIRATION FOSTERS A CULTURE OF AUTHENTIC ENGAGEMENT. Inspiration elevates people—it makes them feel seen, capable, and connected to something bigger than themselves. When people are inspired, they own the outcome. They don't just follow; they lead, grow, and pass that spark on to others. It fosters a culture of authentic engagement, which is vital in modern, decentralized, and hybrid workplaces. – Britton Bloch, Navy Federal Credit Union 20. DURING PERIODS OF CHANGE, PEOPLE NEED INSPIRATION TO COME ON THE JOURNEY. Inspiring others is more meaningful, especially during periods of great change or disruption, when people need to be inspired to come along on the journey. Influence gets things done, but inspiration taps into hope and purpose. It's the difference between moving someone and truly motivating them. Influence is practical; inspiration is higher order. Great leaders know when and how to do both. – Dan Priest, PwC
Forbes
a minute ago
- Forbes
‘Let's Be Blunt—This Is Bad': MSNBC Host On Trump's ‘Really Dangerous' Smithsonian Order
In the first months of his second term, President Trump has targeted what universities can teach, and now he wants to influence how the Smithsonian tells visitors about moments in American history. The Trump Administration sent a letter to The Smithsonian Institution on Tuesday ordering a "comprehensive internal review" of exhibits at the Smithsonian and its collection of museums, education centers, and the National Zoo. 'This initiative aims to ensure alignment with the President's directive to celebrate American exceptionalism,' the letter says, informing the Smithsonian that the president wants to 'remove divisive or partisan narratives, and restore confidence in our shared cultural institutions.' The letter gives the Smithsonian 120 days to replace "divisive or ideologically driven language with unifying, historically accurate, and constructive descriptions." On MSNBC's Morning Joe Wednesday, co-host Jonathan Lemire said the Trump effort to control the Smithsonian's exhibits raises disturbing questions about the accuracy of how the nation's history--bad and good--is told. "I mean, let's be blunt: This is really bad and really, really dangerous," Lemire said. "A nation needs to know its history. It has to be honest about its history to learn from it, to honor it, and also to then grow and improve for the present and future. There's no way that rewriting a history to fit one president's vision is good for a nation's health or good for a nation's democracy." 'A sweeping revisiting of American history' Earlier this month, the Smithsonian's National Museum of American History removed references in an exhibit to Trump becoming the first American president to be impeached twice. The reference was later restored, but edited. The Smithsonian said in a statement Tuesday that its work 'is grounded in a deep commitment to scholarly excellence, rigorous research, and the accurate, factual presentation of history. We are reviewing the letter with this commitment in mind and will continue to collaborate constructively with the White House, Congress, and our governing Board of Regents.' 'Now it seems that's just the first step to a sweeping revisiting of American history,' Lemire said. Museum content 'should not be reviewed, revised, or edited for political gain' "Museums cannot change content to suit a political whim or agenda," said Lisa Strong, a professor of art history at Georgetown University, in an interview with NPR. "The best way for museums to maintain the high public trust they already enjoy is by remaining independent. Museums are staffed by experts in their fields who interpret the collection to help educate the public about art, history, science and culture. Their content should not be reviewed, revised, or edited for political gain."
New York Times
2 minutes ago
- New York Times
Climate Change, Regulation and Health
To the Editor: In 'How Trump E.P.A. Is Giving Up Role of U.S. Protector' (front page, Aug. 4), about the recent E.P.A. reversal of its previous finding that climate change is endangering the American people, David Gelles and Maxine Joselow note the longstanding debate over the proper role of government in regulating dangers. Adam Smith, they remind us, argued that 'governments should play a limited role.' But a limited role in what? Smith contrasted the benefits of the emerging system of capitalism with the mercantilist system that it was soon to replace, but even he recognized that governments sometimes had to get involved. Regulations were warranted, he wrote in 'The Wealth of Nations,' when the 'natural liberty of a few individuals, which might endanger the security of the whole society, are, and ought to be, restrained by the laws of all governments; of the most free, as well as of the most despotical.' Smith was referring specifically to banking regulation, but his argument was not sui generis. He compared banking regulation to the requirements for firewalls, which had been mandated in London under the Fires Prevention Act of 1774, just two years before Smith wrote his classic work. Worsened wildfires are, of course, one of the many costly consequences of man-made climate change. Today, the liberty of fossil fuel companies is endangering the security of us all. Adam Smith would have seen the need to regulate them. Naomi OreskesCambridge, writer is a professor of the history of science and an affiliated professor of earth and planetary sciences at Harvard. She is also an author, with Erik M. Conway, of 'The Big Myth: How American Business Taught Us to Loathe Government and Love the Free Market.' To the Editor: Re 'E.P.A. to Retract Bedrock Finding on Climate Crisis' (front page, July 30): The Trump administration's proposal to repeal the endangerment finding is a threat to people's health across the country. The endangerment finding affirms, based on overwhelming scientific evidence, that emissions of greenhouse gases contribute to climate change while worsening air pollution and harming health. With this proposal, the E.P.A. is essentially turning its back on decades of scientific consensus and putting polluters ahead of the health of children, seniors and communities. As the American Lung Association hears frequently from nurses, physicians and patients experiencing them firsthand, climate change has profound effects on respiratory health, including heightened risks of asthma attacks, worsening symptoms of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and premature death. Make no mistake: This decision will immediately affect the health of every American, especially those who are most vulnerable to air pollution, including children, older adults and pregnant women. We urge the E.P.A. not to move forward with this harmful action and to instead prioritize the health and well-being of all communities. Laura Kate BenderFairfax, writer is the vice president for nationwide advocacy and public policy at the American Lung Association. Hiding Unfavorable Jobs Data To the Editor: Re 'Trump Pick for Agency on Job Data Stirs Alarm' (Business, Aug. 13), about the selection of E.J. Antoni, chief economist at the Heritage Foundation: I was struck by this quote from Preston Caldwell, an economist, in the article: 'First impressions here, this guy has an extreme degree of partisan motivation, which affects how he interprets the facts. But I do not think he's fundamentally dishonest.' If President Trump and his appointments have shown anything, it is their blind loyalty and willingness to, if not lie outright, at least fudge at every opportunity. One of Mr. Antoni's first comments was that maybe these employment figures do not have to be published every month. If the figures were favorable, they would be published by this administration every day. Only unfavorable stats would go unpublished. Is hiding the facts a lie or a fudge? Does it matter as long as we no longer trust the government at all? Stephen T. SchreiberPrinceton, N.J. To the Editor: President Trump has named a new head for the Bureau of Labor Statistics. I imagine the job application had a single question: How much is two plus two? The winning answer: Whatever you want it to be, Mr. President. Robert S. CarrollStaten Island
