The Pennsylvania State System for Higher Education, commonly referred to as PASSHE, has again raised tuition for its 14 member universities. Tuition was increased for in-state students from $7,060 dollars to $7,238 dollars per year, a 2.5 percent hike. This tuition increase comes despite the fact that the state appropriation to PASSHE was increased by 2.5 percent by the Pennsylvania Legislature, the overall appropriation went from $433,389,000 to $444,200,000, an overall increase of over $10 million.

Despite the states sharp turn away from divesting in higher education and reversing the tides of the privatization process, the Board of Governors nonetheless hike the costs of obtaining a quality public higher education in the Commonwealth. Running a state system of higher education is expensive, and raising tuition is never popular and is often a necessary evil; however; in this case there are multiple factors that would lead one to oppose a tuition increase.

In the recent 10-year history of tuition, as stated on PASSHE’s own website, not once was there a tuition freeze. While raising tuition is often necessary, raising it every single year? Perhaps not. However, there are indeed other substantial and compelling arguments against raising tuition. The Pennsylvania State System has not increased but has actually declined in the amount of enrolled students, 109,088 in fall 2006, to 107,126 in fall 2015. If the state system had not shed a total of 1,962 students, it would have collected a total of over $14 million. Declining enrollment must be recognized, thus it is necessary to increase advertisement and outreach to secure a sufficient amount of students and reverse existing trends. The system, instead, raises the cost for its existing students. This is not a model for growth, but may, instead, continue and increase the decline in enrollment.

There is no easy to answer to the problems at hand. There is no single party at fault. This article and its author do not lay blame on the Board of Governors or on the Commonwealth. Difficult decisions have had to be made by many since resources are finite. This must include sacrifices on the parts of students; however, sacrifices must not be placed on students alone. Sacrifice must be shared. Austerity measures must be enacted. The purpose of a state system of higher education should be to educate the citizenry and be accessible based on academic ability, not based off of how much money an individual has.

Public higher education is not just a benefit to the citizen, it is a benefit to the state, worthy of investing financial resources in. The state needs individuals equipped with the abilities to educate and to govern in a variety of aspects. Additionally, they need individuals in quasi-public and private sectors which produce skills and resources need for the state including generating tax revenue to sustain the government. The continuously increasing cost of receiving a higher education is bound to have a practical impact, which could have the effect of barring individuals from reaching their full potential.