Consultant to continue analysis of cost, value and affordability at Penn State

[PA_JOE]

FWIW: Since tuition level is a per student charge as a comparison shouldn’t you be showing the appropriation on a per student basis (I.e. number of students across all the campuses) instead of aggregate appropriation $ received. You’d see that PSU ranking change pretty dramatically. Penn used to get more per dog for their veterinary school under Tommy Corbutt than PSU was getting per student.

FWIW: These are the most recent appropriations for the Big Ten "Publics"

 

[LafayetteBear]

Ya’ think?
The only time the legilslature should be concerned about the OOS Tuition - is when Barron and the rest of his c^ck-sucking band of miscreants go out and “recruit” low-level OOS azzh^les (who’s parents are willing to write the check).....

I suspect that you will be disappointed if you go searching for a big cache of "low-level OOS azzh*les" in any PSU class. The out of state tuition is certainly welcome by PSU (that is the case for every state's public universities), and PSU likely has little difficulty identifying out of state students with competitive grades and SAT scores. My sons had high school grades and test scores that put them near the top of their freshmen class at PSU.

There is NO public university that does not have a sizable number of out of state students. But you are correct in noting that a fundamental purpose of a state university is educating that states' residents, so the proper mix of in state and out of state students is certainly a fit subject for debate.

The UC Board of Regents recently approved a system wide out-of-state student enrollment cap. Beginning in fall 2018, all UC campuses will be capped at enrolling 18 percent nonresidents — unless a campus’s 2017-18 student-body composition of out-of-state students exceeds 18 percent. At those campuses, including Cal, nonresident enrollment will be capped at the level of nonresident enrollment for 2017-18. Cal's entering freshman class for 2017-2018 has 14,205 total students, of which 4,490 (or 32.3%) are out of state students. The disparity between 32.3% and 18% is quite wide, so I suspect that there will be continued pressure on Cal to reduce the number of out of state students.

According to data obtained from the following PSU link, the 2017-2018 freshman class at University Park included a total of 9,210 students, 42.0% of whom were out of state. That is a surprisingly high percentage, and I imagine political pressure will cause it to be whittled down over time.

https://admissions.psu.edu/apply/statistics/

 

[LafayetteBear]

Congratulations on having wonderful kids.

 

[PA_JOE]

Completely disagree, it’s very relevant if you’re trying to measure efficiencies of the total enterprise.

Actually, on a “per student” basis would be meaningless.....
There is some meaning to a “per IN STATE student basis”......

(Do you think I haven’t done that? )

 

[LafayetteBear]

Uh....... does the PA Assembly allocate funds to PSU (or PItt or Clarion or Lock Haven) to subsidize tuition for kids from Indiana (or Ne Jersey or Georgia)?

Clearly not, hence an out of state tuition that (at roughly $36,000 per year) is twice the in state tuition (roughly $18,000 per year). I have no idea whether the actual cost of providing a PSU education is, on a per student basis, less or more than $36,000 per year, but I wanna believe that the people running the University have studied that issue and concluded it is at least a little bit less.

 

[Art]

Clearly not, hence an out of state tuition that (at roughly $36,000 per year) is twice the in state tuition (roughly $18,000 per year). I have no idea whether the actual cost of providing a PSU education is, on a per student basis, less or more than $36,000 per year, but I wanna believe that the people running the University have studied that issue and concluded it is at least a little bit less.

Cost of educating a student? Not a clue. Feeding and housing them? Down to the penny. But to educate? They don't have a clue.. That's not peculiar to PSU.

 

[LafayetteBear]

I thought that was a rhetorical question..... (it was in response to PSU JOE)...... but perhaps I STILL assume too much.

LOL

I don't think my response to your question suggests it was not rhetorical in nature. Do you?

 

[PA_JOE]

Let it go, he only likes rhetorical questions because his own answer is the only one that matters.

I don't think my response to your question suggests it was not rhetorical in nature. Do you?

 

[tboyer]

If anything positive can come of this, they might find that University Park and a few branch campuses are subsidizing over a dozen other branch campuses that lose money. They might recommend an ideal model of two of three branch campuses instead of nearly two dozen. I hope someone finally takes a look at that.

Yes, maybe half of the branch campuses lose money. PSU would be better off consolidating them, but that is politically a nonstarter.

Likewise, redirecting money from construction to reducing tuition is a non-starter because donors want their names on new buildings. Almost nobody wants to donate for programming, and if they do they want it to be new programming. It's virtually impossible to raise money for ongoing operations because donors feel like their money just disappears. I do think the university could address this by allowing donors to tattoo their names on students. That would help raise money for scholarships I'm sure.

Otherwise, programmatic cost cutting -- just about anything you would do would cost Penn State in academic prestige -- and prestige is the coin of the realm.

 

[Art]

Yes, maybe half of the branch campuses lose money. PSU would be better off consolidating them, but that is politically a nonstarter.

Likewise, redirecting money from construction to reducing tuition is a non-starter because donors want their names on new buildings. Almost nobody wants to donate for programming, and if they do they want it to be new programming. It's virtually impossible to raise money for ongoing operations because donors feel like their money just disappears. I do think the university could address this by allowing donors to tattoo their names on students. That would help raise money for scholarships I'm sure.

Otherwise, programmatic cost cutting -- just about anything you would do would cost Penn State in academic prestige -- and prestige is the coin of the realm.

It doesn't take anything nearly as dramatic. Donors can endow scholarships and chairs that carry their name in perpetuity. Even better than a building which can be torn down and replaced by a the name of a donor who gives more money.

 

[Fizz1]

If anything positive can come of this, they might find that University Park and a few branch campuses are subsidizing over a dozen other branch campuses that lose money. They might recommend an ideal model of two of three branch campuses instead of nearly two dozen. I hope someone finally takes a look at that.

Even closing one branch campus that is a significant drain on resources deserves a look. Closing too many would compromise PSU's mission of access. The current direction has been to be sustain all, even if there are consequences. I doubt leadership will have the political courage to pursue this.