If Elected Officials Cared about PASSHE Students, What Would be Different? - Part 6

The Purpose by Law of the PASSHE System of Fourteen Universities

Based on official news releases over four years, PASSHE leaders can’t or won’t bring themselves to commit publicly to PASSHE’s statutory purpose¹ according to Act 188:  “Its purpose shall be to provide high quality education at the lowest possible cost to the students.” (Emphasis added.)
 
Recall from Merriam-Webster that “When used in law, the word ‘shall’ describes what is mandatory.”
 
Quoted PASSHE leaders, as we saw last time, will occasionally make a passing reference to “quality education” while almost never citing “high quality education” as a critical part of PASSHE’s purpose.
 

PASSHE versus Act 188 on the Subject of Cost

 
Even more revealing is the fact that PASSHE leaders rarely if ever utter these other words from PASSHE’s statutory purpose: “…at the lowest possible cost to the students.”
 
Instead, as we saw last week, PASSHE leaders take the following pathetic stabs at what Act 188 requires:

·         “…affordable education to our students.”

·         “…the most affordable cost possible.”

·         “…the most affordable cost available.”

Recall that these three statements have been included in official PASSHE news releases covering the last four fiscal years (2012 to 2015).  One can only assume, therefore, that these words, attributed to Guido Pichini, Chair of the PASSHE Board of Governors, reflect PASSHE’s official policy position on “cost.”

 
Recall that PASSHE’s new (2014) Strategic Plan “2020: Rising to the Challenge,” also makes no mention of PASSHE’s Act 188 statutory purpose: “To provide high quality education at the lowest possible cost to the students!”
 
Rather, PASSHE’s new strategic plan reveals that—despite Act 188—the PASSHE Board of Governors is taking a totally different path; one that ignores the PASSHE students and pursues the following Vision:
 
“The Pennsylvania State System of Higher Education seeks to be among the nation’s leading systems of public universities recognized for (1) excellence, relevance, and value in education; and (2) responsiveness to regional, state, and national needs through its programs, service, scholarship, and research.”
 
Note that there is no public commitment neither to “high quality education,” nor to any intention of providing that education at “the lowest possible cost to the students.”
 

The Cost to Whom?

 
To speak clearly about the “cost” of something, one must specify the entity that will pay that cost.
 
For example, the cost to a manufacturer of producing a certain car is one figure.  The cost to the person purchasing that car is a quite different, and larger, figure.  In order for the manufacturer to earn a profit and therefore remain solvent, the cost to the purchaser must be larger than the cost of production.    
 
Note then that both entities, the car manufacturer and the car purchaser, are both naturally concerned about their respective costs, but would also be wise to be concerned about the cost to the other entity.
 
The car manufacturer that can keep costs low—while maintaining car quality—will also be able to keep the cost to the purchaser low, while still being able to make a profit and remain in business.    
 
In the PASSHE system of 14 universities, the cost to PASSHE of producing a college graduate with a particular degree is a certain figure.  The cost in tuition and fees to the purchaser of that college degree should, on the average, be the same figure.  That’s because most educational institutions function on a “non-profit” basis, meaning that the cost of production and the average cost of purchase are equal.
 
Note that even in the world of non-profit higher education, which includes not only private colleges and universities but also PASSHE—which Act 188 created as a “public corporation”—both the producer and purchaser of the education in question will be concerned about their individual and respective costs. 
 
The producer of a college education (PASSHE in this example) must be concerned about both the quality of the education provided and their actual cost in providing it.  The purchaser of a PASSHE education must also be concerned about the quality of what they receive, as well as their cost in receiving it.
 
So even in a non-profit higher education setting, where the costs to the producer and purchaser are equal, for purposes of clarity one still must answer “The Cost to Whom?” question.
 

Act 188 Speaks Clearly on the Subject of Cost

Act 188 is a model of clarity on the subject of “The Cost to Whom?”  Act 188 mandates that PASSHE’s statutory purpose is: “To provide high quality education at the lowest possible cost to the students.”

PASSHE Speaks Obscurely on the Subject of Cost

PASSHE news releases with quotes from Board of Governors’ Chair Guido Pichini on “cost,” don’t differentiate between the cost to PASSHE as opposed to the cost to PASSHE students.  That leaves one to wonder “To whom is the cost of education—according to PASSHE—supposed to be affordable?”
 
Since neither PASSHE’s leader nor PASSHE’s Strategic Plan is willing to quote Act 188 on that subject—which unambiguously specifies the lowest possible cost to the students—one can only conclude that the PASSHE Board of Governors is committed to keeping affordable the cost of education to PASSHE, but not to individual PASSHE students!
 

“Obscurity is the Refuge of Incompetence”

                                                                                                                 Robert Heinlein³
 
When the Chair of the Board of Governors of PASSHE, a large ($1.5 billion) public organization, engages in obscure public statements about cost for four years in a row, that is a concern.  When those obscure public statements about cost are at odds with the clear language of Act 188, the law that created and ostensibly guides the operations of PASSHE, that is a major concern.
 
But when the statement of “Vision” in PASSHE’s official Strategic Plan contradicts the clear language in Act 188 as to PASSHEs statutory purpose, that moves beyond concerns to a potentially public scandal.
 
To be continued.
 
¹ https://www.keepandshare.com/doc/6772880/act188-pdf-405k.
² https://www.keepandshare.com/doc/7490741/strategic-plan-2020-rising-to-the-challenge-10-14-pdf-2-1-meg.
³ “Obscurity is the Refuge of Incompetence” may be a modern day version of an old Russian Proverb: “You can’t write in the chimney with charcoal.”