Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

PASSHE Institutions Merging

Collapse

Support The Site!

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • complaint_hopeful
    replied
    Originally posted by Horror Child View Post

    You've posted this several times. Can you provide the reference so all of us can get angry?
    From the current Appropriations request linked to in previous post:

    At this funding level, Pennsylvania ranks 48
    th of 50 states in terms of educational appropriation per student Full Time Equivalent (FTE), representing a decline from FY 2018, where Pennsylvania was ranked 47th (Figure 19). Additional data from the State
    Higher Education Executive Officers Association (SHEEO) lists Pennsylvania as ranked 47th in net tuition per FTE, spending $3,719 per student less than the 50-state average.

    Leave a comment:


  • complaint_hopeful
    replied
    Originally posted by Horror Child View Post

    So what you meant to say was "PASSHE released a tweet" and not the "state released a report".
    Here's the newest PASSHE Appropriations request. In it, they have this:

    Economic impact
    According to a study conducted by Baker Tilly Virchow
    Krause, LLP in 2015, State System universities contributed $4.4 billion in economic impact to Pennsylvania, representing $10.61 for every one dollar of public funds expended on the State System that year.

    https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sour...=1617841364181

    Leave a comment:


  • complaint_hopeful
    replied
    Originally posted by Horror Child View Post

    You've posted this several times. Can you provide the reference so all of us can get angry?
    Sure. Here's a reference. It's out there a bunch:

    Enrollment across PASSHE’s 14 universities declined 20 percent over the past decade, Greenstein said, while state funding levels for the system rank 47th nationwide. Pennsylvania’s student debt is also the second highest in the nation, Greenstein added, despite the agency’s priority of keeping tuition affordable.

    https://www.thecentersquare.com/penn...1cfd5e8fb.html

    Here's another...and note in this article it shows how bad most Penn State campuses are losing enrollment too:

    That plunged 52 percent to $4,552 per student in 2018. Pennsylvania now ranks near the bottom in most measures of support for higher education — 47th, for example, in the percent of tax revenues allocated to higher education.

    https://www.inquirer.com/business/st...-20191127.html

    Leave a comment:


  • IUPNation
    replied
    Originally posted by Horror Child View Post

    You've posted this several times. Can you provide the reference so all of us can get angry?
    Does this suit your needs?

    https://www.abc27.com/news/local/har...er%20education.

    Leave a comment:


  • Horror Child
    replied
    Originally posted by complaint_hopeful View Post

    To me, that's where this discussion starts and ends. IF the state kept increasing the allocations equivalent to inflation...PASSHE would be thriving. We're 47th in funding! IF you put any of the 46 school systems above us at their 2000 funding numbers, I'd guess A LOT would struggle.

    That said, no matter what statistics on ROI PASSHE puts out...I doubt the funding increases enough to help. The Integrations are what is proposed and that's the path I think they'll be pushed down to try to save this. I'd be curious how the ROI was calculated too. Like was it so high because the state contribution as a percentage is so low? Ie where if the state paid more, ROI decreased?
    You've posted this several times. Can you provide the reference so all of us can get angry?

    Leave a comment:


  • Horror Child
    replied
    Originally posted by Fightingscot82 View Post

    I assumed the statistics being pushed by PASSHE this week were newer than 2015. If there is a new report, I'm working on finding it.
    So what you meant to say was "PASSHE released a tweet" and not the "state released a report".

    Leave a comment:


  • IUPNation
    replied
    Originally posted by IUPbigINDIANS View Post

    It's doomed. IUP and SRU will use this to their advantage to grow in the West. Perhaps not publicly but certainly in recruiting they will use it as a put-down. Who wants a glorified branch campus? How much smaller can these schools actually get and still keep the lights on?

    This all sounds like drawing up a Hail Mary play ... sort of a last-ditch prayer.
    Maybe that's the point...slowly kill three schools.

    Again...Harrisburg is going about this the wrong way. The problem isn't the system itself. The problem is that the Harrisburg is being ****ty towards funding education thanks to rural Qpublicans who don't want educated people because they wind up voting Democrat...and this State System vs State Related. Why are you funding schools that you don't own? The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania does not own The Centre County Community College, The Oakland Remedial Academy and Temple. The reform has to be the way Harrisburg funds the schools they own and then find way to save costs. Either the State Related become State Owned Schools or cut the cord. They have 8.0 billion dollars in endowment between the three of them (most of it not Temple's). Who can justify the 400 million a year The Centre County Community College receives from Harrisburg when they have almost 4 billion sitting in their endowment?

    Jesus Christ the revenue the Nits bring in for foosball alone could cover Cheyney's operating costs for a year.

    Why is there no common sense about this. Stop ****ing protecting state related schools that don't need help and put the ones you own in a better position to educate students who can't or don't want to go in hock for a college education.


    Leave a comment:


  • complaint_hopeful
    replied
    Originally posted by IUPbigINDIANS View Post

    It's doomed. IUP and SRU will use this to their advantage to grow in the West. Perhaps not publicly but certainly in recruiting they will use it as a put-down. Who wants a glorified branch campus? How much smaller can these schools actually get and still keep the lights on?

    This all sounds like drawing up a Hail Mary play ... sort of a last-ditch prayer.
    I think the new brand is the biggest dooming factor. Consumers want to buy products they know from companies they trust. The whole disband passhe thing hurt that trust. And a new school has no brand.

    I don't know that creating a new school but keeping old names will work. I think they're trying to please everyone, but it will be confusing.

    Plus, there will be growing pains I'm sure. Ie Things won't be seamless for years. Hundreds of people are working on these in silos...that tends to lead to fragmentation.

    Leave a comment:


  • complaint_hopeful
    replied
    Originally posted by IUPbigINDIANS View Post

    It's doomed. IUP and SRU will use this to their advantage to grow in the West. Perhaps not publicly but certainly in recruiting they will use it as a put-down. Who wants a glorified branch campus? How much smaller can these schools actually get and still keep the lights on?

    This all sounds like drawing up a Hail Mary play ... sort of a last-ditch prayer.
    It's hard to say. I think the Triads want to get their price down too. Until the details are presented, it's so hard to say.

    Leave a comment:


  • complaint_hopeful
    replied
    Agree on hard truths but I think it's job loss. People working really hard on this will be gone. The budget distribution of 1 budget will hurt too...atleast some schools in this. Mainly the biggest school.

    I don't think the plan is to shrink. I think the plan is to grow. Like they think the Triad in the West will become an online powerhouse and grow that way.

    Now, will that actually play out is the question? I'm sure when SNHU wanted to grow that it didn't look possible too.

    As far as Academics...there will be some classes offered in person on all 3 campuses. It's kind of a mix. Others may be offered at 1 and you do it online.

    It's funny because of the pandemic every school has some 'hybrid classes that you can do in person or from home.
    Last edited by complaint_hopeful; 04-07-2021, 05:36 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • IUPbigINDIANS
    replied
    Originally posted by iupgroundhog View Post
    I think there are some harsh truths that Greenstein can't reveal publicly. The biggest harsh truth that he can't be forthcoming about is that 5 out of 6 of the integrated schools (except Bloomsburg) are going to be smaller than they are (and keep in mind they don't have sufficient enrollment at present).

    How will it work. Here's what I think. Recently, I saw something pertaining to the western triad that said 75% of current students are enrolled in a program that exists in all 3 schools. Look, with few exceptions, they evolved to be all the same.

    So, if they designate a "home" campus for a program the program is going to gravitate to that campus. If you are not at the home campus does it make any sense to end up taking a majority of your major courses online? In the PASSHE world I don't think it does. In my mind, by natural selection these duplicate programs are going to die off and be eliminated. And because duplication is inefficient, I think that's inevitable. In both triads, enrollment will continue to decline. That's just a continuation of current trends. Why would it be otherwise?

    In addition, nobody knows what the impact of the ambiguity of forming the schools into triads will be on applications/enrollment. I think the impact will be negative and contribute to further enrollment declines. Why would it increase? Why would it even stay the same?

    I think it's clear that the schools will contract under the triad arrangement. Greenstein can't tell you that. And he's not going to.

    Also paramount is the NCAA determination whether to maintain separate athletics programs. Without that, identity retention is a pipe dream.
    It's doomed. IUP and SRU will use this to their advantage to grow in the West. Perhaps not publicly but certainly in recruiting they will use it as a put-down. Who wants a glorified branch campus? How much smaller can these schools actually get and still keep the lights on?

    This all sounds like drawing up a Hail Mary play ... sort of a last-ditch prayer.

    Leave a comment:


  • iupgroundhog
    replied
    I think there are some harsh truths that Greenstein can't reveal publicly. The biggest harsh truth that he can't be forthcoming about is that 5 out of 6 of the integrated schools (except Bloomsburg) are going to be smaller than they are (and keep in mind they don't have sufficient enrollment at present).

    How will it work. Here's what I think. Recently, I saw something pertaining to the western triad that said 75% of current students are enrolled in a program that exists in all 3 schools. Look, with few exceptions, they evolved to be all the same.

    So, if they designate a "home" campus for a program the program is going to gravitate to that campus. If you are not at the home campus does it make any sense to end up taking a majority of your major courses online? In the PASSHE world I don't think it does. In my mind, by natural selection these duplicate programs are going to die off and be eliminated. And because duplication is inefficient, I think that's inevitable. In both triads, enrollment will continue to decline. That's just a continuation of current trends. Why would it be otherwise?

    In addition, nobody knows what the impact of the ambiguity of forming the schools into triads will be on applications/enrollment. I think the impact will be negative and contribute to further enrollment declines. Why would it increase? Why would it even stay the same?

    I think it's clear that the schools will contract under the triad arrangement. Greenstein can't tell you that. And he's not going to.

    Also paramount is the NCAA determination whether to maintain separate athletics programs. Without that, identity retention is a pipe dream.

    Leave a comment:


  • complaint_hopeful
    replied
    Originally posted by Fightingscot82 View Post

    I believe they've been distracted by fighting faculty cuts at places like IUP. I do believe they're bankrolling one of the online accounts fighting integrations. They've also got the Kutztown professor's Raging Chicken site.
    Indeed. They do seem to be fighting cuts. This whole process is interesting. There does seem to be opposition to the Integrations...but, it's really hard for groups to get too specific on the fight because hardly any concrete details of the Integrations have been released! It's mainly high level ideas and talk of how great things will be.

    And then, like this thing hasn't been even presented and approved by the board and the 60 day comment period before the other vote...and they have consultants working on names and I'm sure there are other things happening for the Integration. What if it gets rejected? They're out all that money they paid for that work. Kind of like they know it will be approved no matter what opposition comes out.

    The whole fighting cuts by saying - 'This is a person and they deserve to make money is interesting. Losing their job hurts their family.' Not how corporate America operates. Not how managers and staff (many of which are in Unions) have been treated. Some of these schools have been furloughing mangers and staff for almost a decade. Faculty were kind of untouchable at some of these schools. So I don't know. I think people have to come to grips with the fact that the schools are doing bad financially and people are going to lose jobs...but that's better than shutting down a school totally.

    I'm still waiting to see actual details on the Integration before I make up my mind.

    That said, I have heard some pretty crazy goals like increase enrollment by a quite sizeable number over 5 or so years, etc. for atleast one of the triads. I hope that happens. I'm just skeptical that schools that have been losing enrollment for 7-8-9 years consistently will pool together and drastically gain in size. Especially with a new entity created that has no brand reputation and the long term viability of it is shaky at best. Like the Triads could fail. It's possible. They could also wildly succeed. It's unknow. If you are a 17 year old kid, do you want to be the one that goes there and risks that?

    And if say the triad does gain a considerable amount of students, I think atleast some percent will be pulled from other PASSHE schools. Especially if the Triad tries to lower the cost of education.

    I'm eagerly awaiting the projections on this kind of stuff (Enrollment projections/Financial Savings projections/etc)...and it's largely from the consultants and I want to see the data that led them to those projections. Or I want to see if they just pulled wildly optimistic numbers from a hat with nothing really backing it up.

    Leave a comment:


  • complaint_hopeful
    replied
    Originally posted by Fightingscot82 View Post
    Thanks for sharing that. I do believe the "PA Publics" advocacy group (I believe they are the Lock Haven community group) is right for criticizing the chancellor for cherry-picking 2010 for statistics. I was unaware that system enrollment is presently at a similar level as 2000. The kicker is that state appropriation is down over $200MM in real dollars since 2000.
    To me, that's where this discussion starts and ends. IF the state kept increasing the allocations equivalent to inflation...PASSHE would be thriving. We're 47th in funding! IF you put any of the 46 school systems above us at their 2000 funding numbers, I'd guess A LOT would struggle.

    That said, no matter what statistics on ROI PASSHE puts out...I doubt the funding increases enough to help. The Integrations are what is proposed and that's the path I think they'll be pushed down to try to save this. I'd be curious how the ROI was calculated too. Like was it so high because the state contribution as a percentage is so low? Ie where if the state paid more, ROI decreased?

    Leave a comment:


  • Fightingscot82
    replied
    Thanks for sharing that. I do believe the "PA Publics" advocacy group (I believe they are the Lock Haven community group) is right for criticizing the chancellor for cherry-picking 2010 for statistics. I was unaware that system enrollment is presently at a similar level as 2000. The kicker is that state appropriation is down over $200MM in real dollars since 2000.

    Leave a comment:

Ad3

Collapse
Working...
X