PASSHE Institutions Merging

[Fightingscot82]

There are two ways to address the financial situation - increase revenue and decrease cost. You are speaking to the cost issue which has all kinds of built-in roadblocks. The ways to increase revenues are to increase enrollment or increase the state appropriation. The state appropriation is not likely to be increased (in any meaningful way), given Pennsylvanians' apparent disdain for funding public education ( I am embarrassed by what my native state has become).

By tinkering with tuition, there are also two parts to it. One is the hope that not increasing tuition will bring in more students. However, the PA demographics negate that possibility. The other is that by keeping tuition the same (lowering it in real dollars) the schools will be better able to retain the students they have. That is where the PASSHE is at right now. Retaining, not growing.

In the case of IUP. lowering tuition by 20% provides the hope that it will increase enrollment, not necessarily that it will increase revenues. IUP seriously needs to improve enrollment.

And in reality, its not truly lowering tuition as much as it is abandoning a very short-sighted policy that clearly did not result in the desired outcomes. FWIW, every PASSHE school that has tried per-credit tuition has abandoned the model.

[iupgroundhog]

Back to the tuition freeze. This is good for students...to a point. Its bad for schools especially if the state doesn't come through with more money. Most employees are on union contracts that are structured like teacher salary scales for those familiar. Those employees get two raises a year - the new salary scale on a specific date then also a bump up a "step" on the salary schedule. This is outside of any promotions of sorts like assistant professor to associate professor. The total raise is modest - usually around 3% total - but that's regardless of the campus financial situation - enrollment or state appropriation (these two ~90% of revenue) - that's automatic raises for a lot of employees before other increases in benefits, utilities, and inflation. So one PASSHE school was planning for a $4 million deficit this year is now looking at an $8 million deficit with all the predicted cost increases without a big state appropriation increase.

There are two ways to address the financial situation - increase revenue and decrease cost. You are speaking to the cost issue which has all kinds of built-in roadblocks. The ways to increase revenues are to increase enrollment or increase the state appropriation. The state appropriation is not likely to be increased (in any meaningful way), given Pennsylvanians' apparent disdain for funding public education ( I am embarrassed by what my native state has become).

By tinkering with tuition, there are also two parts to it. One is the hope that not increasing tuition will bring in more students. However, the PA demographics negate that possibility. The other is that by keeping tuition the same (lowering it in real dollars) the schools will be better able to retain the students they have. That is where the PASSHE is at right now. Retaining, not growing.

In the case of IUP. lowering tuition by 20% provides the hope that it will increase enrollment, not necessarily that it will increase revenues. IUP seriously needs to improve enrollment.

[Fightingscot82]

Back to the tuition freeze. This is good for students...to a point. Its bad for schools especially if the state doesn't come through with more money. Most employees are on union contracts that are structured like teacher salary scales for those familiar. Those employees get two raises a year - the new salary scale on a specific date then also a bump up a "step" on the salary schedule. This is outside of any promotions of sorts like assistant professor to associate professor. The total raise is modest - usually around 3% total - but that's regardless of the campus financial situation - enrollment or state appropriation (these two ~90% of revenue) - that's automatic raises for a lot of employees before other increases in benefits, utilities, and inflation. So one PASSHE school was planning for a $4 million deficit this year is now looking at an $8 million deficit with all the predicted cost increases without a big state appropriation increase.

[iupgroundhog]

Again, it's speculative but I think just because "they" are looking to grow athletics does not mean the new reality will allow them to do that.

The bailout of Mansfield is probably a last-ditch effort. What you are going to see, I think, in the future is less autonomy for the individual schools It's been slow in coming, Moving forward, the direction is with more of a system-level approach. The triads are the beginning of that and there is now going to be a triad-level approach plus a system-wide approach. Just because administrators at Edinboro or any of the others want to try to show revenue increases prompted by expanded athletics does not mean it's going to be implemented. Not to mention, the Title IX implications that face the schools' athletic programs. most notably at Clarion and Edinboro, which sets the tone for athletics expansion.

[iupgroundhog]

I can tell you that they're looking to grow athletics. This integration forced them to do what D3 schools have done for years - consider the net tuition revenue against program expenses. Its almost always positive.

But you're right - traditional aged students want a vibrant college experience: https://www.insidehighered.com/admis...ensive-college

Again, it's speculative but I think just because "they" are looking to grow athletics does not mean the new reality will allow them to do that.

[Fightingscot82]

Sure, that's an important factor - or, it has become an important factor. But what CALUPA69's argument seems to say to me is that it's the reason for these programs to exist at all the triad schools except for Bloom and Cal. I don't think that's true. The main reasons the programs exist are historical and necessary just to create a full college campus experience. In essence, even the "revenue" sports are extracurricular activities. There is a lot of significance placed on involvement in these activities while balancing academics and other college life things (see the D2 creed). It's a part of traditional college life in the U.S.

Now, where I see his point and probably agree with him is when you look into the near future. These extracurriculars (not just sports) are going to be slashed and/or eliminated at triad schools. The constituents for each one will have to fight to keep it alive and most will lose.

I can tell you that they're looking to grow athletics. This integration forced them to do what D3 schools have done for years - consider the net tuition revenue against program expenses. Its almost always positive.

But you're right - traditional aged students want a vibrant college experience: https://www.insidehighered.com/admis...ensive-college

[iupgroundhog]

Let's not kid ourselves. All programs are enrollment boosters.

Sure, that's an important factor - or, it has become an important factor. But what CALUPA69's argument seems to say to me is that it's the reason for these programs to exist at all the triad schools except for Bloom and Cal. I don't think that's true. The main reasons the programs exist are historical and necessary just to create a full college campus experience. In essence, even the "revenue" sports are extracurricular activities. There is a lot of significance placed on involvement in these activities while balancing academics and other college life things (see the D2 creed). It's a part of traditional college life in the U.S.

Now, where I see his point and probably agree with him is when you look into the near future. These extracurriculars (not just sports) are going to be slashed and/or eliminated at triad schools. The constituents for each one will have to fight to keep it alive and most will lose.

[Fightingscot82]

The idea that Penn State branch campuses would have D1 football teams is foolish at best. In fact, some Penn State branch campuses DO have basketball teams, that play in D II. Imagine that...

Some play D3: Abiington, Altoona, Berks, Erie, and Harrisburg. Everyone else plays USCAA (community colleges).

[iupgroundhog]

Interesting. Thanks for sharing - that conflicts with what folks at PSU told me when I worked there. Then again, those same folks believed Paterno walked on water.

The extent that people continue to throw around this kind of wild, unsubstantiated (and unverifiable) innuendo and speculative rumor about what Joe Paterno did and didn't do does kind of keep his memory at sort of a messianic level. It's not the Joe Pa fans who perpetuate it. It's the people who remain fixated on his legacy (or deriding it).

[WarriorVoice]

So I guess this clears the way for any state school with multiple locations to start duplicate athletic programs. Heck, guess it would be OK for Penn State to start football programs at any of it's satelite campuses as a means of increasing enrollment...Let's see, I can play DII football at Edinboro OR D1 at Penn State Behrend. Hummmmm...Which one should I choose?? Maybe Penn State Beaver could use a shot in the enrolement arm? No problem, start a football team and watch enrollment jump!

The idea that Penn State branch campuses would have D1 football teams is foolish at best. In fact, some Penn State branch campuses DO have basketball teams, that play in D II. Imagine that...

[Fightingscot82]

https://www.pennlive.com/midstate/20...onsidered.html

Interesting. Thanks for sharing - that conflicts with what folks at PSU told me when I worked there. Then again, those same folks believed Paterno walked on water.

[Matt Burglund]

Penn State Behrend is D3. The only Penn State outlet store that's explored football was Altoona when it was thriving in the 90s (no longer so) but that was aborted, oddly because Paterno balked at the proposal that included hiring Jerry Sandusky has head coach.

https://www.pennlive.com/midstate/20...onsidered.html

[Fightingscot82]

So I guess this clears the way for any state school with multiple locations to start duplicate athletic programs. Heck, guess it would be OK for Penn State to start football programs at any of it's satelite campuses as a means of increasing enrollment...Let's see, I can play DII football at Edinboro OR D1 at Penn State Behrend. Hummmmm...Which one should I choose?? Maybe Penn State Beaver could use a shot in the enrolement arm? No problem, start a football team and watch enrollment jump!

Penn State Behrend is D3. The only Penn State outlet store that's explored football was Altoona when it was thriving in the 90s (no longer so) but that was aborted, oddly because Paterno balked at the proposal that included hiring Jerry Sandusky has head coach.

[Fightingscot82]

Both SB and VB are played by all 18 PSAC schools while WR (8) and FH (11) not so much. Doesn't make them less important to the participants or their schools but I was pointing out that the 6 sports most widely played were not really viable in 4 of the 6 branches of the merged institutions. IMO, were it not for NCAA minimum requirements, there really isn't a reason other than schedule filling and enrollment/tuition boosting for these schools to participate in those six sports. Purely personal observation.

Let's not kid ourselves. All programs are enrollment boosters.

[CALUPA69]

It's not. I disagree that all these sports at all these schools are "schedule fillers" and enrollment boosters. I think the long tradition of the student-athlete is alive and well at all of these schools. It's more about participation than what you are saying.

Well since they clearly aren't playing to win championships, participation and enrollment boosting seem to go hand and hand because I'm fairly certain playing on the 2-27 SB team isn't really that fulfilling. Although the trips to NC, SC and a week in FLA is definitely sweet.