Sr. VP argues for state funding

But Whittington did not focus her arguments only on the University, which is scheduled to lose $18.2 million, almost half its state aid, next year. Whittington spoke on behalf of all 14 private schools that receive money from the state government at the hearing, which was set up for state legislators to consider restructuring how Pennsylvania funds higher education. Whittington was joined on a panel by representatives from four other schools, each of which fall into different funding categories than the University. The University is classified as a non-state-related school. Gov. Robert Casey proposed earlier this month cutting funding for all of these schools roughly in half. Whittington also appeared at the hearing in an indirect attempt to restore or at least maintain the University's own funding. But she did not directly defend state funding of the University during her testimony. Even though House Education Committee Chairperson Ronald Cowell (D-Allegheny) said earlier this month the legislature would have to review the University's "special treatment" in higher education funding, none of the legislators suggested this yesterday. Committee members instead discussed ways to make institutions accountable to the state, to increase the number of students at the state's schools and to standardize how the state funds schools. Whittington told the committees there are several misconceptions about the increasing costs of colleges and universities, saying schools have to spend increasing amounts of money on non-classroom services. She said tasks like keeping up with technology, helping students who are unprepared for college-level academics, maintaining financial-aid as federal support decreases, and keeping pace with increasing governmental regulations all take money away from traditional educational goals. Whittington said after the session she was pleased with the joint hearing. "It was clearly constructive day," Whittington said. "No one came in with their own agenda." In his closing remarks, House Appropriations Committee Chairperson Dwight Evans called the day productive, although he said he disputes claims that the system is satisfactory. "Some things in this state -- some things in Harrisburg -- need to change," Evans said. "We're beginning to lay a foundation to change how we do business." The hearing was structured so committee members could hear an overview of how other states handle higher education funding. In addition to the panel, two out-of-state education experts and Drexel University President Richard Brelin gave presentations. During the morning session of the seven-hour hearing, Kent Caruthers, an educational consultant, outlined national trends and nationwide problems in funding higher education. Caruthers said the biggest trend in funding higher education is performance-analysis funding, in which states set up criteria to judge schools' success. Brenda Albright, Deputy Executive Director of the Tennessee Higher Education Commission, presented her state's performance-analysis program, where colleges and universities can receive up to five percent over their appropriation if they meet certain minimum acedemic standards. Albright also presented how Tennessee approached higher education funding. This program includes a state endowment for funding professorships and a "centers of excellence" program to fund a a select number of high-quality programs. The legislators suggested using the Tennessee plan as a model for Pennsylvania, but panelists said the Tennessee plan could have several possible problems. In a subtle attack on the state's proposed cuts, Whittington suggested to the committee such a system needed "predictability of funding."

Please note All comments are eligible for publication in The Daily Pennsylvanian.