3 Things to Know
Ohio’s new funding system pays public universities based on whether students pass classes and earn diplomas. Colleges used to be funded based on student headcounts.
Central State, Wright State and Youngstown State have all upped admissions standards — in part due to the state’s funding system.
Central State’s funding dropped 1.1 percent this fiscal year. Meanwhile, Wright State’s appropriations jumped 3.4 percent.
Central State University welcomed its freshman class to campus last week. It’s a group school officials say may be the most academically prepared in the college’s recent history.
That’s not an accident. The historically black university upped its admissions criteria this year and hopes having more “college ready” students — and fewer unprepared students — will translate into more money.
Ohio’s new funding system puts a premium on colleges that produce graduates. The state last year moved to a model that pays universities based on whether students pass classes and earn diplomas, a departure from a system that distributed funds based on student headcounts.
The changes are troubling to some higher education and student advocates who say they could undercut Ohio’s most disadvantaged students.
“It undermines the idea that if you work hard (in college) you can succeed,” said John McNay, a professor of history at the University of Cincinnati Blue Ash College. “I was not a great high school student, but the University of Montana let me in, and it changed everything.”
Increased admissions standards are not what the state intended, said John Carey, chancellor of the Ohio Department of Higher Education. He said the goal is to get universities to help students graduate — not keep them out. Carey said he has not heard of examples of universities increasing standards due to funding criteria, however, this newspaper found that colleges are raising the bar because of the new model.
A handful of university officials say schools get paid only if students pass classes, thus creating an incentive to turn away students in the lowest academic standing.
“If you have a student enter your institutions that cannot complete classes, because of performance funding, that affects your funding,” said Stephanie Krah, Central State’s vice president for student affairs and enrollment management.
CSU’s state funding dropped 1.1 percent this year, one of only two Ohio universities that saw a cut from the state legislature.
Wright State University officials say funding was a small factor in their decision to up admissions requirements.
Jim Tressel, president of Youngstown State University, said state funding directly affected his school’s decision to increase standards. In fact, YSU officials say without higher standards the university would have lost funding from the state this year.
“I think it’s the right thing to do, and now our incoming class is at a higher level,” Tressel said. “It rewards freshmen who worked hard and prepared for college.”
Cost big concern
Researchers at Columbia University released a study in November that looked into how funding models were changing institutions behavior in three states, including Ohio.
“Ohio was interesting because it had the highest number of universities going through significant changes as a result of the funding change,” said Kevin Dougherty, a researcher at Columbia. “Among other things we heard about were institutions moving financial aid from needy students to merit students.”
That concerns some high school officials, because many students struggle with college costs.
“The biggest concern for my students is price,” said David Asadorian, a counselor at Stivers School for the Arts. “A lot of the time they will get into a school but come back and enroll at Sinclair, due to cost.”
In 2012, Gov. John Kasich tapped then-Ohio State University President Gordon Gee to lead a commission tasked with overhauling Ohio’s university funding system. That system, Gee says, will push universities to focus on graduation.
“If you are awarded by seats at the beginning of the year, and no penalty for not walking over the stage, then you will fill seats and not minds,” Gee said.
Some experts say universities often take the easiest route to increasing funding, even if it’s not what the state intended.
“One of the easiest things to do is squeeze admissions,” said Nicholas Hillman, a higher education policy professor at the University of Wisconsin.
Gee doubts universities will become more exclusive as a result of the funding model.
“I think it’s way too early, I think those are anecdotal,” Gee said. “If people are raising admission standards, there is nothing good of that.”
Suburb recruitment
To find more college-ready students, schools such as Central State and Wright State are expanding recruitment. For example, CSU plans to ramp up its efforts at suburban high schools in the Dayton region.
“We are telling our recruiters to expand to the variety of schools they go to,” CSU’s Krah said. “If you’re in Dayton, maybe not go to just Dayton Public, also go to Beavercreek and Centerville.”
Those students could help attract more state dollars, but some officials worry recruiting changes could leave behind some students. Krah says CSU plans continue its current levels of recruitment at schools it has historically visited.
In past years, Youngstown State’s five-county core region has accounted for about 85 percent of its enrollment. However, due to a combination of Ohio’s funding model and population declines, YSU is looking to cities such as Buffalo and Pittsburgh.
Despite the new strategy, YSU associate vice president for enrollment Gary Swegan says serving students in the Youngstown region remains the school’s mission.
Aside from changes in admissions and recruitment, this newspaper found that some universities are increasing merit aid to help retain students. In 2010-11, WSU awarded $15.9 million to 3,586 students; in 2014-15, those figures grew to $20.6 million and 4,624 students.
“Of course this helps with performance-based funding,” said WSU vice president for enrollment management Mary Ellen Ashley. “Though our work on retention and focus on student success far exceed the implementation of this funding model.”
Compared to financial-based aid, higher education researchers say, merit aid is more likely to go to students who are likely to graduate. This newspaper did not find examples of universities moving financial aid money to merit-based aid.
Better options?
Some school officials say turning away unprepared students benefits both the institution and the students.
All of the 518 freshmen at Central State this fall had to meet a higher grade-point average and placement score requirement than previous classes. The university upped its GPA requirement from 2.0 to 2.2, and its minimum ACT score from a 15 to 16. Those moves, the university estimates, decreased its class size by around 3 percent.
CSU officials say the students denied were unlikely to graduate, and not being accepted might work in their favor. In fact, according to U.S. Department of Education data, 63 percent of borrowers who default on their student loans are students who do not graduate.
“If they drop out, guess what stays with them? The debt,” said Daarel Burnette, vice president for administration and chief financial officer at CSU. “And they do not achieve the benefits of a degree, and end up with a lower-paying job.”
Youngstown State’s class size fell by 300 students after it implemented its new requirements in 2014. Prior to the new standards, the university ran an analysis finding that only about 2 percent of those 300 students would likely graduate.
“I think accepting students with a 2 percent (chance of graduating) is not very responsible,” said YSU’s Swegan.
He said those students may be better off attending a community college — a move that would save them money. That’s exactly what Wright State — which has raised its admission standards — tells denied students.
Nearly 300 students were denied from WSU’s 2015 applications and those students were referred to local community colleges. After completing a certain number of credits students in good standing can transfer to Wright State.
Gee said an uptick in admission standards isn’t always a bad thing.
“When I came to OSU in 1990, we were open admission,” he said. “We raised standards and now are one of the highest performing schools in the country.”
At-risk students
Columbia’s Dougherty says the students hurt the most by these changes are low-income or at-risk students. That’s something the state addressed with its formula.
“No formula is perfect. In theory it’s designed to accommodate for that,” said Jack Hershey, president of the Ohio Association of Community Colleges.
To accommodate for at-risk students, the state gives more money for minority, low-income and older students. But schools only get those dollars if students pass classes.
“You don’t want to give Miami University an advantage, and Shawnee a disadvantaged,” Hershey said. “If both Miami and Shawnee have a student that graduates from English 101, then Shawnee would get more money.”
Hershey said the accommodation makes things more fair for schools like CSU and Shanwnee State, which have lower graduation rates. For instance, CSU’s six-year graduation rate is 22 percent, compared to 83 percent at Ohio State.
Ohio institutions with higher graduation rates said the system isn’t something they are very concerned about — a different tune from what universities like CSU and YSU said.
“It’s not something we are spending much time thinking about,” said Ohio State President Dr. Michael Drake.
However, Miami University President David Hodge did voice one concern. He said placing regional campuses in the same funding formula with universities — instead of with community colleges — can create issues.
State dollars
Ohio plans to spend $2.5 billion on higher education in the current fiscal year, which began in July. That’s more than the state will spend on prisons, and behind only budget appropriations for Medicaid and K-12 education.
While the state increased higher education spending slightly in 2015, per-student appropriations are down. An analysis by the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities finds that Ohio’s inflation-adjusted, per-student spending dropped 22 percent from 2008 to 2014.
University leaders say that increases the importance of new dollars.
In fiscal year 2016, YSU funding jumped 7 percent to $41.7 million. But without its admissions increase, the school says funding would have dropped.
“Everybody is chasing the same finite carrot. (Higher admission requirements) protected our share of state funding,” said Neal McNally, vice president for finance at YSU.
While some universities have increased standards and made recruitment changes, officials say it’s unclear if that will continue.
Universities “over time might modestly increase (standards), requiring an ACT, moving up the scale,” said Bruce Johnson, president of Ohio’s Inter-University Council.
Johnson doubts the funding formula will be a contentious issue in the coming years.
“I think it’s probably the best system in the country,” he said. “It’s not perfect — it does not adequately fund higher education. But it saves students money.”
The top concern voiced by higher education researchers is that over time funding systems may force universities to change who they serve. That’s not something Tressel wants to see.
“The one thing we cannot change is our mission,” he said. “I meet successful alumni all the time that say going to Youngstown State changed their lives.”
About the Author