PASSHE Institutions Merging

[complaint_hopeful]

Our numbers aren't any worse than most. There's a lot of "horse to water" relationships with college. Our schools were behind on fundraising and career services because for the first 100+ years that didn't matter. Average debt is higher because our schools enroll far more poor kids who have to borrow more. That lower third of incomes is much more price sensitive. A 3% tuition increase can lose them forever, so they're back to Brownsville working 30 hours at Dollar General.

Yep. And after thoroughly digesting this plan...my main criticisms are:

1) It doesn't lower tuition cost. It actually probably raises it. I get that they think kids can graduate quicker, etc...but that won't matter to recruits much. Cost is the main problem.

2) I think enrollment is going to tank really bad for fall. This plan projects modest increases and still doesn't break even for many years. Tank enrollment at the start and it will take way more years to break even. This Triad will be in financial peril for years and years.

3) I don't think kids will want to pay for housing and sit in a room and watch a teacher on the screen.

4) The unknowns. Name, accreditation, NCAA, etc. Big things.

That said...this will be approved. It was never about deciding whether to do this or not. It was about giving the public the chance at input that they could add to the plan...which they did.

So the Zoom commenter were overwhelmingly against this. I read through submitted comments, and it was less harsh. I'd say mainly employees are against it. Students either don't care generally, or don't know enough about it to make a decision.

[Fightingscot82]

I don't buy it's all money. I think it's the poor return on said money. We're offering way too many majors that result in debt and Starbucks careers. Many of their parents have said Starbucks degrees.

I don't think many 17/18 year-olds are thinking about loans.

Our numbers aren't any worse than most. There's a lot of "horse to water" relationships with college. Our schools were behind on fundraising and career services because for the first 100+ years that didn't matter. Average debt is higher because our schools enroll far more poor kids who have to borrow more. That lower third of incomes is much more price sensitive. A 3% tuition increase can lose them forever, so they're back to Brownsville working 30 hours at Dollar General.

[IUPbigINDIANS]

A lot of that can be filed under "why wasn't this being done already?" - and I get what they're saying but they don't have any data to suggest that any of these interventions (or even the completion time issue) are the "cost of degree attainment" issue. The primary reason students leave PASSHE is money - either they run out of ways to pay/continue or the game of finding money every semester makes them quit. Course availability should help with completion, especially when a student falls behind. Most often this is from changing a major and having to retake courses. When cost was much lower, students would take summer courses to make up lost ground but now just extend their stay.

The primary reason they aren't attending from the start is also money - the cost isn't low enough to convince them to buy in place of the state-related branches or the privates throwing around 50% off coupons.

Similarly to how the per-credit tuition model hurt the students most likely to finish on time, none of these interventions help these students much. They're already coming in with dual enrollment credits, more merit based aid, etc.

I don't buy it's all money. I think it's the poor return on said money. We're offering way too many majors that result in debt and Starbucks careers. Many of their parents have said Starbucks degrees.

I don't think many 17/18 year-olds are thinking about loans.

[IUPNation]

There's always NAIA. I'm sure they would love to have four "new" programs in PA. Partner with Wilberforce, Shawnee State, Carlow, Rio Grande, Point Park and Penn State-Schulykill and form a tight little 10 team conference in Ohio and PA.

[complaint_hopeful]

A lot of that can be filed under "why wasn't this being done already?" - and I get what they're saying but they don't have any data to suggest that any of these interventions (or even the completion time issue) are the "cost of degree attainment" issue. The primary reason students leave PASSHE is money - either they run out of ways to pay/continue or the game of finding money every semester makes them quit. Course availability should help with completion, especially when a student falls behind. Most often this is from changing a major and having to retake courses. When cost was much lower, students would take summer courses to make up lost ground but now just extend their stay.

The primary reason they aren't attending from the start is also money - the cost isn't low enough to convince them to buy in place of the state-related branches or the privates throwing around 50% off coupons.

Similarly to how the per-credit tuition model hurt the students most likely to finish on time, none of these interventions help these students much. They're already coming in with dual enrollment credits, more merit based aid, etc.

Yep. You don't need an Integration to do those things. As is the case with most of this. Schools could work together without this all. Schools could even share classes.

The finances in the West look pretty bleak. Even with the Integration and optimistic assumptions of cost savings/enrollment gains...it's going to be quite some years before it's sustainable. I was going to cite examples from the Integration Plan of this, but I don't have the energy right now.

[Fightingscot82]

As far as cost:
Page 201 (West)- For Revenue Assumptions -
1% enrollment growth and 1% tuition and fee increase. So they forecast increases.

But, in another part (Page 23 - West) -
'One of the primary goals of the integration is to make higher education more affordable. Specifically, one integration goal is to create degree pathways that reduce the total average cost of degree attainment by as much as 25%. This goal does not assume primarily a reduction in tuition, but incorporates opportunities such as reductions in time to degree attainment due to expanded course option availability, high school dual enrollments, and online enrollments, lower student fees, additional fundraising achievements, space utilization improvements, reduced operating expenditures, enhanced grant funding, more federal work study opportunities, working with community partners to reimburse student wages off campus and expanded use of open educational resources to reduce student costs for course materials.'

A lot of that can be filed under "why wasn't this being done already?" - and I get what they're saying but they don't have any data to suggest that any of these interventions (or even the completion time issue) are the "cost of degree attainment" issue. The primary reason students leave PASSHE is money - either they run out of ways to pay/continue or the game of finding money every semester makes them quit. Course availability should help with completion, especially when a student falls behind. Most often this is from changing a major and having to retake courses. When cost was much lower, students would take summer courses to make up lost ground but now just extend their stay.

The primary reason they aren't attending from the start is also money - the cost isn't low enough to convince them to buy in place of the state-related branches or the privates throwing around 50% off coupons.

Similarly to how the per-credit tuition model hurt the students most likely to finish on time, none of these interventions help these students much. They're already coming in with dual enrollment credits, more merit based aid, etc.

[complaint_hopeful]

A few thoughts:
- still no details on unanswered questions on academic accreditation
- still no details on what happens if NCAA puts kibosh on three athletic departments
- still no plan to reduce price (which they say is the clear driver of enrollment decline)
- a goal is to grow enrollment overall by 8%? without dropping price that ain't happening
- still talking about 25% cost savings by offering more sections of courses via integration partners without any data suggesting that is a primary barrier (its actually students running out of money)
- some of the integration will take YEARS. The goal to integrate the alumni databases is August 2026.

State System final university merger plan promises no campus closures but is silent on NCAA, accreditation | Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

[complaint_hopeful]

We talked about closing schools:

Cease operations at selected universities Requires legislative action and between $100 million to $287 million per university, for a total of $660 million to offset closing costs.

From Page 41 of West Plan.

[complaint_hopeful]

A few thoughts:
- still no details on unanswered questions on academic accreditation
- still no details on what happens if NCAA puts kibosh on three athletic departments
- still no plan to reduce price (which they say is the clear driver of enrollment decline)
- a goal is to grow enrollment overall by 8%? without dropping price that ain't happening
- still talking about 25% cost savings by offering more sections of courses via integration partners without any data suggesting that is a primary barrier (its actually students running out of money)
- some of the integration will take YEARS. The goal to integrate the alumni databases is August 2026.

As far as cost:
Page 201 (West)- For Revenue Assumptions -
1% enrollment growth and 1% tuition and fee increase. So they forecast increases.

But, in another part (Page 23 - West) -
'One of the primary goals of the integration is to make higher education more affordable. Specifically, one integration goal is to create degree pathways that reduce the total average cost of degree attainment by as much as 25%. This goal does not assume primarily a reduction in tuition, but incorporates opportunities such as reductions in time to degree attainment due to expanded course option availability, high school dual enrollments, and online enrollments, lower student fees, additional fundraising achievements, space utilization improvements, reduced operating expenditures, enhanced grant funding, more federal work study opportunities, working with community partners to reimburse student wages off campus and expanded use of open educational resources to reduce student costs for course materials.'

[complaint_hopeful]

That's basically the full gamut of what goes on now lol. When my parents attended Edinboro in the early 70s, there were growing pains and they didn't have enough professors to teach enough sections. Adjunct & part-time weren't a thing back then. So they had CCTV set up in some rooms and students would watch the lecture live from another room on campus. Kind of a 'back to the future' plan. Its not ideal - those rooms would have to be monitored somehow, right?

In grad school, I took an in person class at Edinboro in a video conference classroom with a group I believe in Clearfield (maybe at the Lock Haven facility). They had the (advanced for the time) setup that when you spoke, you pushed a button on the table and the cameras found your seat to broadcast your face to the virtual group. It was alright but a) we were all working adults and b) there was no way for the professor to spend individual time with students attending remotely. Those folks all seemed to know each other too (I believe they were all teachers from the same district). The dynamic wasn't great and I felt my professor spent a lot of time regulating the technology.

Well a lot of students that pay to live on-site are used to having their professor physically in the classroom they are in. I think not having that is going to be a shock to some. It's basically like a distance ed class viewing party.

[boatcapt]

A few thoughts:
- still no details on unanswered questions on academic accreditation
- still no details on what happens if NCAA puts kibosh on three athletic departments
- still no plan to reduce price (which they say is the clear driver of enrollment decline)
- a goal is to grow enrollment overall by 8%? without dropping price that ain't happening
- still talking about 25% cost savings by offering more sections of courses via integration partners without any data suggesting that is a primary barrier (its actually students running out of money)
- some of the integration will take YEARS. The goal to integrate the alumni databases is August 2026.

There's always NAIA. I'm sure they would love to have four "new" programs in PA. Partner with Wilberforce, Shawnee State, Carlow, Rio Grande, Point Park and Penn State-Schulykill and form a tight little 10 team conference in Ohio and PA.

[Fightingscot82]

1. You meet in a physical classroom with other students to participate together in online lectures and activities taught by a professor who is either online or live on another campus

That's basically the full gamut of what goes on now lol. When my parents attended Edinboro in the early 70s, there were growing pains and they didn't have enough professors to teach enough sections. Adjunct & part-time weren't a thing back then. So they had CCTV set up in some rooms and students would watch the lecture live from another room on campus. Kind of a 'back to the future' plan. Its not ideal - those rooms would have to be monitored somehow, right?

In grad school, I took an in person class at Edinboro in a video conference classroom with a group I believe in Clearfield (maybe at the Lock Haven facility). They had the (advanced for the time) setup that when you spoke, you pushed a button on the table and the cameras found your seat to broadcast your face to the virtual group. It was alright but a) we were all working adults and b) there was no way for the professor to spend individual time with students attending remotely. Those folks all seemed to know each other too (I believe they were all teachers from the same district). The dynamic wasn't great and I felt my professor spent a lot of time regulating the technology.

[complaint_hopeful]

1. You meet in a physical classroom with other students to participate together in online lectures and activities taught by a professor who is either online or live on another campus

[Fightingscot82]

A few thoughts:
- still no details on unanswered questions on academic accreditation
- still no details on what happens if NCAA puts kibosh on three athletic departments
- still no plan to reduce price (which they say is the clear driver of enrollment decline)
- a goal is to grow enrollment overall by 8%? without dropping price that ain't happening
- still talking about 25% cost savings by offering more sections of courses via integration partners without any data suggesting that is a primary barrier (its actually students running out of money)
- some of the integration will take YEARS. The goal to integrate the alumni databases is August 2026.

[complaint_hopeful]

PASSHE has updated the implementation plans:

University Integrations | PA State System of Higher Education (passhe.edu)