Perspective on issues facing state colleges

In the Senate’s recent appropriation hearing about funding Pennsylvania’s State System of Higher Education, PASSHE Chancellor Dan Greenstein sought to drive home the fact that our state schools are in serious financial trouble. So much so, that if nothing changes, his recommendation would be to disband the system.

The key point being: If nothing changes.

But some of my colleagues and those in academia were quick to panic, seemingly understanding the chancellor’s frank comments as a plan to shut down our state schools. It has caused unnecessary uproar considering that PASSHE’s financial woes aren’t new. This was evident to the Legislature last year when we passed Act 50, which authorized needed reforms and independent reviews of the system (already completed).

For six years I’ve served on PASSHE’s Board of Governors, a 20-member panel responsible for planning, development and operation of the system. I’ve invested time and energy into my role because I believe quality, affordable education can bring about meaningful change, both to the students served and to our commonwealth.

The last few years have been difficult for public and private higher education, even prior to the pandemic. It’s a buyer’s market, and students have their pick of schools. PASSHE’s main sell for years was its affordability — but the economy has negated that. It is difficult to strike a balance, keeping education affordable while attracting and retaining topnotch professors and staff.

Keep in mind that a few years ago, our 14 PASSHE schools’ state support was slashed by hundreds of millions of dollars annually. Although some of those cuts were restored, the system is operating at the same appropriation level it did in 2000. And, primarily due to demographic changes, our systemwide enrollment has dropped to about 95,000 from a peak of 119,000 in 2010.

Our state schools are an integral economic asset to our state, especially for workforce development; their continued health is vital to the economic success of Pennsylvania.

PASSHE is in the process of redesigning itself with three priorities in mind: ensuring student success; leveraging university strengths; and transforming the governance/leadership structure. The plan is in its third and final phase. We need to let this process finish and review its recommendations. The intention was never to close schools but to better position them to survive.

To achieve this, we must consider alternatives that may differ somewhat from our current model. That’s exactly what the system’s plan to integrate six of our more vulnerable PASSHE schools — three in the west and three in the northern part of Pennsylvania — will accomplish. Integration combines governance and leadership functions and offers students expanded academic opportunities; in essence, two accredited institutions with six distinct campuses, each with their own unique identity. The synergy the integration creates will hopefully allow university faculty to continue to innovate and educate, students to learn and ensure schools remain viable and vibrant parts of their communities.

For sure, there is more to be done and more that can be done. For example, our state schools could forge stronger relationships with community colleges to create a pipeline of students and find ways to provide educational opportunities for retraining and upskilling our existing workforce. It’s also imperative that we empanel a Higher Education Funding Commission to review and make recommendations to the governor and the General Assembly on funding public higher education.

I wish the chancellor’s remarks had instead inspired my colleagues into finding ways to support and further invest in our state system. If we can’t get beyond the outrage, our students, particularly those of lower income and color, will suffer the most.

Higher education is supposed to be a great equalizer. This is not the time to abandon that goal.

State Sen. Judy Schwank, a Ruscombmanor Township Democrat, represents parts of Berks County.

Schwank