BUTLER TWP - An updated statewide plan for all higher educational institutions may not solve all the problems facing those institutions in Pennsylvania, but it certainly couldn't make them any worse.

That was the message delivered Tuesday morning during a special meeting of the Pennsylvania House Education Committee at Butler County Community College.

Representatives from four-year and two-year colleges, as well as financial organizations such as the Pennsylvania Higher Education Assistance Agency, were invited to speak to committee members.

Of those invited, only BC3 and the University of Pittsburgh sent representatives.

"Since I've been on the committee, I've heard about a statewide master plan," said state Rep. Jess Stairs, R-59th, who is committee chairman. "And that's one of the ideas of today's meeting."

The last state master plan was established in 1986 and has not been updated since. The plan is designed to give direction to educational institutions.

Robert Pack, vice provost for academic planning and resources management at the University of Pittsburgh, said the plan needs to have a greater clarification of the different missions and roles of each education sector.

Pack said Pennsylvania has five types of educational facilities: state-related universities, state system colleges and universities, community colleges, independent colleges and universities and for-profit institutions.

Because each has its own mission, one statewide uniform plan is not the best idea, Pack said. He supports a master plan for each of those five types.

"Without the sense of direction and, equally important, the resource base needed to achieve its responsibility, the individual institutions lack the clear roadmap for developing programs that will best enable them to fulfill their role," he said.

The biggest problem Pitt faces, Pack said, is the inequity in PHEAA funding for state schools.

"While PHEAA grants, because of their portability, enable students to discount substantially the tuition rates at private institutions, they do not provide such significant discounts for students at state-related and state-owned institutions," he said.

Park said if Pennsylvania adopted a funding policy for higher education that invested public money directly into public facilities instead of disbursing it broadly throughout all institutions, the results would be a more economically healthy public sector.

Park said there are other benefits to supporting state-related schools, such as retention of 18- to 24-year-olds in the state.

BC3 President Cynthia Azari said BC3's main problem, which is the same problem of all community colleges in the state, is inadequate funding.

Azari said enrollment at BC3 continues to rise, but the formula by which the state determines reimbursement for the colleges is not keeping up with that increased enrollment.

"Pennsylvania lags behind many of the top performing states in the number of 18- to 24-year-olds participating in post-secondary education - 39 percent compared to nearly 48 percent in the best performing states," Azari said.

Azari said the lack of a clear, state direction is causing the discrepancy.

Azari and Pack also were questioned by committee members, who were: Rep. John Pallone, D-54th; Rep. Fred McIhlattan, R-63rd; Lawrence Curry, D-154th; Rep. Pat Fleagle, R-90th; and Rep. Daryl Metcalfe, R-12th.

Stairs asked about the need for extra funding for research institutions such as Pitt.

Pack said most states have different cost structures for research schools, but Pennsylvania doesn't. One of the areas that suffers most because of this is faculty salaries, which tend to be higher for research schools.

Stairs asked Azari about

student transfer

agreements between community colleges and four-year institutions and how they may be improved.

"It would be helpful to have a statewide agreement between all community colleges and every state university, rather than by program to program like we currently do," Azari said. "Our current system can create confusion over which course credits will transfer depending on which school you plan to attend."

Pack agreed with Azari, saying a uniform system would make it easier for everyone.

Fleagle said he would support the idea of a master plan for each of the branches of education rather than one overall plan.

Metcalfe said he is tired of hearing pleas for more money without seeing why it is needed. He implied many of the schools raise tuition even after they've been given a reasonable increase in state funds. Metcalfe said he has to be accountable to the taxpayers as to where all their money is going.

Pack said the educational facilities are not the only ones Metcalfe should question about spending of taxpayer money.

"It's fair to say PHEAA spends a disproportionate amount of taxpayer money, and spends more of it on private colleges than state colleges," he said.

Pallone asked if community colleges track where their graduates end up - at four-year schools or in the work force - and use those figures to determine success.

Azari said about 60 percent of BC3 graduates go on to four-year schools, but because each student has different goals, that is not the only way to determine success.

"It depends on the students' goals," she said. "They determine what success is."

Pack said only 60 percent of Pitt's students graduate in four years, but that isn't because they're below average. Many of them are taking double majors or extra credits while they can, he said.

"So what you're both saying to me is you're producing a product that is clearly marketable," Pallone said.

Both Azari and Pack nodded in agreement.

Stairs said it is clear the master plan needs updating, but exactly what remains to be seen.

"There will be more hearings later that hopefully will involve PHEAA and SSHE (state system of higher education)," Stairs said.