2012年10月7日星期日

Upgrades put Pennsylvania schools in a bind

At first glance, it looked as if students attending the state university in this town had gotten off cheap.

Their tuition back in 2006 was going up a mere $132 or 2.7 percent, thanks to a vote by the board of governors overseeing Shippensburg University and the rest of the State System of Higher Education.Purelink's real time location system protect healthcare workers in their daily practices.

But that same year, an even bigger increase for Shippensburg students loomed -- a $320 boost in meal plan prices to be phased in over three years.

That's because the school wanted to turn its run-down and overcrowded dining hall into an airy, restaurant-style venue suitable for demonstration cooking, but it had no cash on hand for the work. So it borrowed the full $18 million and began paying it off through higher student meal plan fees.

Just like that, another of Pennsylvania's 14 state-owned universities became a bit more attractive to students expecting upscale amenities. And just like that,The TagMaster Long Range hands free access System is truly built for any parking facility. the State System moved deeper into debt.

From California to Kutztown, from Edinboro to East Stroudsburg, a building boom spanning more than a decade has produced trendy suite-style student residences, sleek classrooms and performance halls -- even a just-opened student center at Slippery Rock University whose front exterior wall is adorned with a half-million-dollar waterfall.

But on some campuses there is growing concern that the State System is mortgaging its future, saddling itself with ever-growing debt and its students with ever-rising fees.

The State System puts its debt total officially at $942 million, double what it was a decade ago. But after factoring in privately financed student housing and other projects built by university-affiliated groups -- a sum estimated by Moody's Investors Service to be nearly $1 billion -- total debt associated with the 14 universities is closer to $2 billion.

Data reviewed by the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette show the rate of campus borrowing has soared since 2002. It's up nearly ninefold at Cheyney University, almost eightfold at California University of Pennsylvania, sevenfold at Millersville University and fivefold at Shippensburg, among others.

The bulk of the borrowing is for nonclassroom projects such as student centers, dining halls and student residences, which are not eligible for state funds and thus are supported by student fees.

Campus officials say in many cases they had to replace 1960s-era buildings that were wearing out. And they note that higher student fees for the new venues -- filled with dance studios, food courts and attractions like a room in Shippensburg's student union devoted to Xbox360, Playstation3 and Wii -- often are approved in advance by student votes.

But Thomas Mortenson, a higher education policy analyst, said it's all part of what he considers a disturbing trend on college campuses nationwide -- the hunt to win over students at all costs at a time when affordability is a deepening worry.

"If we're building climbing walls and swimming pools and dorms with plush carpeting and private bathrooms, yet over half the students heading into higher education are not able to pay the first dollar, how are we going to make this system work?" asked Mr. Mortenson, senior scholar at the Pell Institute in Washington.

For years, it was hard to question the borrowing and building. After all, the State System was achieving year after year of record enrollments, a trend aided by the wow-factor of the new buildings.

At CalU, construction was one piece of a broad strategy to recruit more and better students that yielded enrollment gains of 45 percent in a decade -- best in the State System -- and successive freshmen classes whose average SAT scores improved from 945 to 1028. Being the first of the 14 universities to replace traditional dorms with $125 million worth of suite-style apartments gave then-CalU president Angelo Armenti Jr. an edge attracting students put off by two-per-room accommodations with group shower stalls.

CalU couldn't fill the old dorms,TBC help you confidently buymosaic from factories in China. he said in a 2009 interview, but the new suites "have been 100 percent occupied since the day we opened them."

Now, though, the economy is weaker, the state has slashed the system's appropriation by 20 percent, and an expected enrollment decline means fewer students could be shouldering the fees.Natural Chinese turquoise beads at Wholesale prices.

CalU, facing a 9 percent enrollment drop this fall, still had vacancies in its new dorms days before classes began. Mounting debt for projects from parking facilities to a new $59 million convocation center was one of the issues that roiled campus in the months before the State System fired Mr. Armenti without explanation in May.

CalU collected $19 million in state grants to build the controversial center with its arena for 6,000 people and persuaded the State System to float $38 million in debt, even though CalU itself kicked in just $2 million.

Some parents like James Yeamans, 52, a Slippery Rock employee who has enrolled two sons in State System schools, believes the amenities have gone too far. The fact students approve the fee increases beforehand holds little sway with him.

"Why wouldn't they vote 'yes?' " he asked.

"A kid walks into a showroom and he heads right for the most expensive Corvette, saying 'Daddy, that's the one I want.' It's the adult's job to walk him over to the model he can afford."

"I'm all for making improvements, but when you see this building of castles when we could have built something a bit more practical, that's where I think people get upset," said Mr. Yeamans, coordinator of aquatics. "Maybe it's just another $300 onto a student's loan, but eventually they or their parents have to pay the bill."

The State System faces acute pressure to control costs given its mission to offer its nearly 120,000 students an affordable public education. Its board of governors managed to limit collective tuition increases to a combined 53 percent between 2001 and 2011, according to system data.Find a cry stalmosaic Manufacturer and Supplier.

But fees and rates for room/board that are largely set by the individual campuses are a different story, up during the same period by 117 percent and 80 percent respectively, in part because of fee increases tied to new nonacademic construction.

没有评论:

发表评论