University of Texas names interim dean for College of Liberal Arts. Here's who will lead it
Sosa is a professor in the humanities at UT and the chair of the Philosophy Department. He will succeed Ann Huff Stevens, who former President Jay Hartzell blocked from pursuing a second term as dean last year because of differences in visions for the institution, Stevens said in an announcement to the school at the time.
The College of Liberal Arts is the largest of the university's 19 colleges and schools. It boasts nearly 800 faculty members, 10,000 students and more than 40 majors and 55 minors, including in fields that have come under scrutiny by conservative state lawmakers, such as women's gender and sexuality studies, LGBTQ studies and diverse studies.
Sosa has served as chair of the Philosophy Department since 2006, elevating the department to the top 10 in the nation, Vanden Bout said. He also oversaw the Plan II honors program, has published dozens of articles, edited several books, and is co-editor of the Oxford Studies in Philosophy of Language and editor-in-chief of the journal of Analytic Philosophy.
The university is continuing to search for a full-time replacement, Vanden Bout said. Sosa joins multiple UT leaders holding interim titles ― Vanden Bout, interim President Jim Davis and interim Vice President of Student Affairs Tom Dison ― after multiple high-profile administrative changes last year.
In his email, Vanden Bout thanked Stevens for her leadership and said Sosa's "strong record of leadership, along with a breadth of experience in teaching and mentoring" will lead him to success in the temporary role.
"Dr. Sosa's leadership experience and deep knowledge of our University will be invaluable as we continue to move forward with the search for a permanent Dean of the College of Liberal Arts," Vanden Bout said. "I look forward to working closely with him as Interim Dean during this transition."
This article originally appeared on Austin American-Statesman: UT names College of Liberal Arts interim dean amid search for new head
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Onion
17-06-2025
- The Onion
Mike Lee Stresses He Would Have Posted Same Thing If Own Family Savagely Murdered
WASHINGTON—After being confronted about social media posts that blamed the shootings of two Minnesota lawmakers on the far left, Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT) stressed Tuesday that he would have said the same thing if his own family had been savagely murdered. 'Democrats can say what they want about me, but I would have absolutely called the shooter a Marxist and made tasteless digs at Gov. Walz had my loved ones recently been killed in cold blood,' said Lee, adding that if his wife and and children had been shot multiple times, he wouldn't have hesitated to post photos of the incident and refer to it as a 'Nightmare on Walz Street.' 'To anyone offended by this, let me just say that had this happened to my family, I would have done everything in my power to mock them and use their deaths to advance my political agenda. Had I been shot, I would have used my last breaths to fan the flame and keep inciting violence. But that's just the kind of man I am.' Lee confirmed that had Elon Musk used his family's brutal murders to spread lies, he would have still posted a reply reading, 'Fact check: TRUE.'
Yahoo
10-06-2025
- Yahoo
If Tennessee chooses state law over NIL pledge, it risks being kicked out of SEC
This story was updated to add new information. A new Tennessee law triggered the power conferences of college sports into demanding member schools like the University of Tennessee and Vanderbilt to sign a loyalty pledge over new player pay rules or face possible expulsion. Knox News confirmed the existence of the loyalty document through a source with direct knowledge of the situation. The source requested anonymity because those correspondence are between the conferences and member schools. The document is being circulated by the ACC, Big 12, Big Ten and the SEC. It demands that member schools agree to follow new rules involving paying players despite state laws giving the freedom to circumvent the rules. And the pledge also requires schools to waive their right to sue the NCAA or conferences if they disagree with the implementation of those rules. The document has not been finalized. But potential consequences of not signing it include expulsion from the conference or participation in playing games against other power conference schools. The new Tennessee law applies to all four-year universities in the state, public and private. UT and Vanderbilt are in the SEC, one of four power conferences. A clause in the law permits Vanderbilt and private universities to opt out of the protections of the state law in order to cooperate with the NCAA or the College Sports Commission, a newly proposed entity overseen by the four power conferences. Additionally, it appears that UT is guiding the approach of the law because of how it's utilized lawmakers against the NCAA in the past. University of Memphis (American Athletic Conference), Middle Tennessee State (Conference USA) and other state universities are in mid-major conferences that likely won't require a pledge to follow the new college sports player pay rules. For better or worse, this makes Tennessee the epicenter of another earthquake in college sports. Expulsion from the SEC seems inconceivable for UT, a charter member since 1932. But whether it's a legitimate threat or a negotiating tactic remains to be seen. In a statement to Knox News, UT pledged to comply with the pending House settlement, which will create the new system for player pay, while acknowledging the need for the state law. 'The University of Tennessee has committed to following the House settlement if it is approved,' UT said in a statement. "That commitment has not changed. We appreciate the Tennessee General Assembly's forethought in passing NIL legislation that provides future protections for student-athletes and institutions beyond the House settlement." Vanderbilt and the SEC did not immediately respond to a Knox News request for comment. Threatening a loyalty pledge is a bold move by the NCAA and power conferences and, most certainly, in response to the new Tennessee law, which was signed by Gov. Bill Lee on May 1 and surfaced about two weeks later. The law protects Tennessee universities from anticipated antitrust lawsuits by athletes and NIL collectives unhappy with the player-pay rules coming to college sports. The new college sports system will include a salary cap of direct school-to-player pay, roster limits, revenue sharing that challenges Title IX principles of publicly funded institutions and a clearinghouse that vets NIL contracts. It could help stabilize college sports, but lawsuits challenging those rules are expected. If athletes, boosters or collectives sue, the new state law allows Tennessee universities to opt out of those college sports rules and shift liability toward the NCAA and conferences. It also prevents the NCAA from penalizing schools that circumvent those rules for purposes of following the law. Only a federal law, a valid court order or antitrust exemption for college athletics can supersede Tennessee's new law. That escape hatch for Tennessee schools sounded alarms across the college sports landscape. TENNESSEE DILEMMA: Why Vols winning too much could be a problem in player-pay era Opinions about Tennessee's approach vary around college sports. About a dozen states have enacted similar laws in the everchanging arms race of paying college athletes with few restrictions. But Tennessee's law is believed to be the strongest and most evasive to NCAA rules and the conditions of the pending House settlement. The timing of Tennessee's new law is also problematic. A new college sports system for paying athletes could begin as early as July 1, pending the multi-billion-dollar House settlement, which resolves three federal antitrust lawsuits against the NCAA and four power conferences (ACC, Big Ten, Big 12, SEC). That settlement could come any day now. There's growing skepticism that it will solve the legal and structural problems in college sports, although some are cautiously optimistic that it'll at least achieve some progress. Opponents of the new state law believe Tennessee is nixing an effective agreement days before it's signed by a federal judge. But proponents of the state law believe Tennessee is being proactive by keeping its legal options in anticipation of a system it believes will fail. The most straightforward take of the situation is that Tennessee is protecting its own interests ahead of the SEC or college sports. Whether that's a wise move or heavy handed is debatable, but it certainly got the attention of college sports leaders. Tennessee schools intend to comply with the system prescribed in the House settlement, but that plan remains hazy. UT, specifically, wants legal cover if the new rules violate antitrust law. Here are examples of what UT fears if it's not given liability protection by the state law. A new clearinghouse will determine if NIL deals are legitimate and of fair market value. Legally, that appears to be a difficult standard to define. If an athlete or collective sues because an NIL deal is declined, UT wants the flexibility to approve the contract independent of NCAA rules or at least opt out of the system to avoid a lawsuit. Lawsuits on numerous antitrust grounds are anticipated after the House settlement is approved. The NCAA, power conferences and schools could be sued. There's no indication whether those suits would be successful. But UT doesn't want to be among the defendants, and the state law says Tennessee schools don't have to follow anticompetitive NCAA rules. If damages are awarded in antitrust lawsuits, the state law says that Tennessee schools can't be held responsible for paying them. Instead, the NCAA would be liable. UT wants to avoid punishment from the NCAA if it opts out of rules that it finds to violate antitrust laws. If that occurs, the state law protects UT from NCAA sanctions. Notably, UT football is already on probation until July 13, 2028, as a result of the Jeremy Pruitt recruiting scandal. Some college sports stakeholders believe Tennessee isn't being a team player. But UT has reasons to distance itself from the NCAA in future lawsuits, and it has a good track record against the governing body. They faced off in federal court in 2024 after the state of Tennessee, on behalf of UT, sued the NCAA to loosen its stringent rules over NIL benefits. UT won that battle. On Jan. 31, 2025, the NCAA and a coalition of states led by Tennessee reached a settlement that protects student-athletes' NIL rights during the recruiting process and prohibits the NCAA from bringing back its NIL recruiting ban. And in 2023, Tennessee Attorney General Jonathan Skrmetti threatened to sue the NCAA if it gave the UT football team a postseason ban in the Pruitt recruiting scandal. UT also won that battle, as the NCAA relented from issuing a postseason ban. The bad blood between UT and the NCAA can't be ignored as a backdrop to this state law. And don't be surprised if Skrmetti or Tennessee lawmakers get involved again if this situation escalates. Adam Sparks is the Tennessee football beat reporter. Email X, formerly known as Twitter@AdamSparks. Support strong local journalism by subscribing at Get the latest news and insight on SEC football by subscribing to the SEC Unfiltered newsletter, delivered straight to your inbox. This article originally appeared on Knoxville News Sentinel: If Tennessee chooses state law over NIL pledge, it risks SEC expulsion
Yahoo
10-06-2025
- Yahoo
After Dream Act reversal, undocumented students in Texas face tuition uncertainty
AUSTIN (Nexstar) — Nearly a week has passed since the Texas Dream Act was struck down, and schools still do not have clear answers about changes to undocumented student tuition rates. Undocumented students lost the ability to receive in-state tuition Wednesday after the Trump administration sued Texas, accusing it of violating federal law. The administration said the Dream Act, which passed the Texas legislature with bipartisan support in 2001, was in violation of a 1996 federal law. Because Texas agreed, the suit was settled within hours, and it is unclear if the decision will be appealed. For some undocumented students, the difference between in-state and out-of-state tuition at Texas public universities may be the difference between receiving a college education or not being able to afford one. Edilsa Lopez is a recipient of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program and attended the University of Texas at Austin for her undergraduate degree. She said that because noncitizens are not eligible for federal aid, the Dream Act was essential for her ability to afford college. State of Texas: Abbott approves billions for schools, but is it enough? 'Having in-state tuition for us was such a blessing, because we didn't have to pay three times the in-state tuition rate,' Lopez said. 'Even then, we had a situation that was still very difficult for us, just because of the limited amount of financial aid available to us, undocumented students.' The out-of-state tuition rate ranges from double to nearly quadruple that of in-state tuition, depending on the school. Out-of-state students at UT and Texas A&M University pay the highest amounts, over $40,000 per year. Lopez was brought to the United States from Guatemala at age 12, fleeing poverty and homelessness. Even after arriving in the U.S., she said, she experienced homelessness after her mother had to leave the U.S., leaving Lopez to care for herself and her sister. Lopez said going to college was transformative for her life, as she now works for a Fortune 500 company as an accountant. 'I was brought here [at a] very young age … and so education for me was very important, and I only had one thing in mind, which is to graduate from college,' Lopez said. 'And so it was difficult in itself, but having in-state tuition and then graduating from college changed my life completely. I am now a professional financial accountant.' While in high school, Lopez said she didn't know about college, but her educators urged her to pursue it. She ended up in the top 10% of her class, making her eligible for automatic admission to most public universities in the state. Now, Lopez worries for the undocumented students following in her footsteps. She said that even before the Dream Act was reversed, she at times struggled to pay for her education. 'At the very end, I wasn't able to get all the money that I needed to graduate from college, and I almost dropped out,' Lopez said. 'But it was thanks to my high school teachers who really supported me, and they always believed in my potential, that they sort of helped me and did a fundraiser for me.' State Rep. Roman Romero, D-Fort Worth, shares Lopez's concerns about the future for undocumented students — especially those who are currently in the middle of their college education. Romero, who chairs the Mexican American Legislative Caucus in the Texas House, worries that Texas may lose good students to other states if they can no longer afford a college education in Texas. 'How would we not continue to support those that we have invested, likely over $100,000 into that child, if they were with us through K through 12,' Romero said. 'It's a lot of money to invest and then see them walk away and go to a different state. So we don't want this talent to leave.' State Sen. Carol Alvarado, D-Houston, pointed out the economic impact that allowing undocumented students to pay in-state tuition generates for Texas. She said in 2021 alone, 20,000 undocumented students paid about $80 million in tuition to state universities. 'I think … we're going to take a financial hit from this, because these are students that may choose not to go to school,' Alvarado said. One temporary solution, proposed by State Rep. Donna Howard, D-Austin, is for the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board to give undocumented students a temporary designation that allows them to receive in-state tuition until the legislature can address the matter in its next session. Romero said he agrees with Howard. In a statement, THECB Spokesperson Mike Eddleman said the agency does not have an update to share, but is looking into the matter. 'Currently, we are evaluating the scope of the ruling and are actively working to ensure that any THECB rules, policies, and programs comply with the law,' Eddleman said. In the meantime, universities in Texas have to decide how to proceed with billing students for the fall semester. So far, most do not have updates to share. University of Texas Rio Grande Valley spokesperson Melissa Vasquez said, in a statement, that the university understands the decision may affect students' existing financial plans. 'As UTRGV continues its review of the impact of the consent judgment, students who may be affected will be notified directly,' Vasquez said. A spokesperson for Midwestern State University said that MSU is currently reviewing the impact of the decision. A spokesperson for UT Austin said it did not have updates to share. The Texas A&M University System will hold a meeting Friday to discuss the change, according to a spokesperson from West Texas A&M University. Other public universities around the state did not respond to requests for comment. The sudden nature of the decision not only complicates the path forward for universities and students, but it also raises eyebrows at the prospect of collusion between the federal government and the state. Alvarado was frustrated by the timing of the decision, right after the legislative session concluded. 'It's kind of like a boyfriend that cheated on you,' Alvarado said. 'Everybody was recognizing the importance of keeping the in-state tuition for these students, and then as soon as we turn our backs and go home, then they circumvented the legislative process.' Romero called the whole process 'shady,' but said the path forward has to involve more than talking about the issue. 'We're at a time when President Trump is really using every single lawyer at his disposal … to go around and circumvent the priorities of the state of Texas,' Romero said. 'Am I upset? Yes, but we can't just stay upset. We have to do something about it.' Undocumented students will be faced with the reality of being charged significantly more for higher education, and possibly not being able to afford it, if lawmakers or THECB are unable to find a solution before the fall semester. For Lopez, who said she learned English specifically so that she would be able to get an education, that would have made a difference in her life trajectory. 'I mean, the only thing we want in this country is literally opportunity for an education,' Lopez said. 'We want to be able to contribute back to the state we have lived here our entire lives.' Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
