Choose an area:

« back to columns
« back to spring 2000 columns

SSHE needs to learn how to use its allowance

Sometimes it's not easy to be a kid.

As a child in my elementary school years, my parents gave me a rather modest allowance to be used for daily expenses. In order to recieve that allowance, I generally needed to say where the money would go.

This certainly isn't an easy task for an 8 year-old child, and it certainly wouldn't be an easy task for the entire State System of Higher Education (SSHE). But that's exactly the method I think should be used.

Just as I had to justify my spending before my parents would ever give me an increase in my allowance, SSHE should also have to be more specific as to where money will go before they can raise tuition.

Why would I need an increase in my allowance? Because movies are more expensive, CDs are becoming more expensive everyday and it costs a little more each day to eat out.

Similarly, why would the state system need an increase in their allowance? Because computers are more expensive, faculty are better skilled and tougher to keep, and state system enrollment is once again increasing.

The everything-I-need-to-know-I-learned-in-kindergarten philosophy holds true here. It's just this sort of simple logic that I think can help things in the state system. Adults, likewise, have to do this sort of justification every time they want a raise at work. And, they have to itemize their purchases every year when tax time comes around and they want every tax break in the book. It's certainly not a new concept.

While there hasn't been any official announcement from SSHE as to whether or not there will be a tuition increase, signs are pointing that way. More and more, professors are demanding more money for their skills, equipment is getting more advanced but also more expensive and facilities are always in need of repair.

Last year, SSHE's Board of Governors raised tuition $150, or 3.2 percent, according to SSHE. Board Chairman F. Eugene Dixon Jr. said that with this increase, "our universities will be able to provide even better services to our students."

While I'm not disputing that improvements have been made throughout the state system, I don't really have a lot of facts to back that up. Why? I haven't been given any.

Sure, things happen day to day in the system that may be a reflection of the 3.2 percent increase in tuition from 1998, but might these things not have happened without this increase?

With another possible increase waiting in the wings, lawmakers have been quick to make the last jump for their soapboxes to calm the voters' mind.

Statistics will be thrown out as to how little Pennsylvania has increased tuition over the last three, five and 10 years as compared to other states. And, $150 in the grand scheme of the cost for college is minuscule. After a one-year freeze in tuition the year before it seems to be even less.

Too often we get caught up in politicians and their rhetoric, saying how they have successfully kept the state system from raising tuition. But honestly, who cares? Isn't it more important that the students get a quality education even if we do end up having to pay a little more?

Throughout the entire state system, there has been a 36-student increase in enrollment over the 1998-1999 figures.

Bloomsburg will be seeing an additional increase of 88 students for next year, according to BU President Dr. Jessica Kozloff in her April 13 Letter to the Editor in The Voice.

With this increase in enrollment just at our university alone, it only stands to reason that we need additional funds to keep the high quality of education that Board Chairman Dixon is so passionate about.

In the fall of 1999, there were 95,088 students enrolled in state system schools, according to SSHE. Multiply enrollment by the $150 increase, and the state system gets what executives call a "revenue enhancement" of $14,263,200.

Now, to be perfectly clear, I have no problem whatsoever with the $150 tuition increase for the 1999-2000 academic year. I don't feel like I pay too much money for a college education as a student of a state system university. In fact, I often feel like I'm paying too little to go to school.

Many of my friends from high school went to private schools, and are paying over $20,000 per year. Because private schools don't generally get state funding, their rates will obviously be higher. But, generally, for their money, students are getting a pretty good education with good facilities and sufficient faculty to teach them.

And I'd be glad to pay another $50 to $150 again in a tuition increase for next year. But let me qualify that. I'd be glad to pay the tuition increase if, and only if, I could see where my money would be spent. If I'm going to pay an additional $150, it only stands to reason that I'd like to see $150 of improvement for myself.

I don't have a clue where the more than $14 million was spent from the tuition increase for this year. I know I didn't get an itemized list of what school got new computers from the increase or how many more professors were hired because of the "revenue enhancement." I have no idea how much money has been used to increase salaries. I just don't know where the money has been spent and I don't think it's from lack of trying to find out.

The fact is people want to know where their money is being spent. Generally speaking, the American people don't have a problem with their taxes being increased as long as they can see a benefit to the increase. That's all I'm asking for here with the state system. I don't need a list down to the penny. What I do need is some objectives as to where this money will go.

Will it go to upgrading classrooms to the latest technology? Will it increase professors' salaries or help to hire new staff? Will administration get a boost in salary from this tuition increase? These are questions that I should have the answers to. These are the essential pieces of any proposal.

As taxpayers, we assume the role of the parents with the state system. We have the right to protest the tuition increase if we feel the money isn't being used effectively. After all, even if we can't ground the state system, at least we can cut back their allowance.