News

Despite the highest tuition increases at Pennsylvania's public universities in decades, a financial analyst says residents should grumble more about how much of the tab the state expects them to pay for their education.

"The range in tuition is more important than the yearly increases," said Kent Halstead, director of Research Associates of Washington, a consulting firm that analyzes the economics and finances of higher education.

He made his comment before the University of Pittsburgh voted Monday to raise tuition 14 percent this fall for Pennsylvania residents and 10 percent for out-of-state students. Last week, Penn State University raised tuition by 13.5 percent, and the State System of Higher Education hiked tuition at its 14 universities by 9 percent and added a $100 technology fee.

Pitt's increase was the highest in 24 years; Penn State's, 20 years; and the State System's, 11 years.

Across the nation, the average split has the student paying 40 percent and the state paying 60 percent.

"In Pennsylvania, it's almost just the opposite," Halstead said. "The student pays 59 percent, and the state pays 41 percent. That's what ought to be broadcast high and low. Pennsylvania is third-highest in terms of the student's share of paying for their higher education."

Only Vermont and New Hampshire impose a higher burden on students and families. In Vermont, students pick up 93.7 percent of the tab; in New Hampshire, 83.8 percent, Halstead said.

In contrast, residents pay only 20 percent of the cost at public universities in North Carolina and 24 percent in New Mexico.

In Pennsylvania, Halstead said, "The student and the parent should say, 'Why are we reflecting an extremely conservative approach to funding this public service?'"

Nationally, Halstead said, the cost of goods and services bought by universities has increased about 4 percent a year. He presumes schools are raising tuition another 3 percent for quality.

"Each institution ought to be able to explain to the student what the components of the percent increase in tuition are," Halstead said. "It doesn't add up."

Other analysts were not surprised by the tuition hikes at Pitt, Penn State and the state-owned universities.

"Certainly, this is very typical of what's going on in public higher education," said Gordon Winston, an economics professor at the Williams Project on the Economics of Higher Education at Williams College in Williamstown, Mass. "As states cut back on their support of education, tuition is going up and quality is going down. But it's got to happen because there isn't the money there."

The Legislature cut Pitt and Penn State's funding by 3.7 percent and the State System by 3 percent.

"I'm sure these places could tighten up and be run more efficiently, but not as much as we'd like to think," Winston said. "I don't think there's any price gouging."

Besides the state cutback, Pitt Chancellor Mark A. Nordenberg attributed the hike to a 3.5 percent increase in compensation for faculty and staff, heightened security and increased maintenance costs as more buildings come on line.

Penn State spokesman Bill Mahon said the university is still reeling from state cutbacks two years in a row. The Legislature reduced Penn State's appropriations by $10 million last year and $12.2 million this year.

In addition, the university increased salaries by $21.2 million, extended health benefits to graduate students at a cost of $4 million and spent an additional $8.8 million on its 1,000 buildings.

Besides compensating for the loss of $14.2 million in state funds, the State System is spending $15.2 million on a new computer system that will link all 14 campuses.

• Most Read
• Most E-mailed
• Latest News