Penn State clashes with its land-grant mission as it mulls branch campus closures

As the discussion continues over Penn State’s recommendation to shutter seven branch campuses, much of the debate has turned to whether the closures would allow Penn State to continue to fulfill its mission as a land-grant university.

But what exactly is a land-grant university?

In 1863, Penn State was designated to receive the benefits of the Morrill Act and gifted land from the federal government to build a university focused on agriculture and “mechanical arts.” It was to provide an accessible education to state residents at a reasonable cost for a working family.

Experts say closing Penn State’s branch campuses, known formally as Commonwealth Campuses, may not technically violate the land-grant mission. Yet critics contend that by closing seven of the 19 campuses, Penn State would not be upholding the spirit and purpose of the mission.

The university administration has recommended closing the New Kensington, Fayette, DuBois, Mont Alto, Shenango, Wilkes-Barre and York campuses, a decision largely driven by finances, demographic shifts and enrollment declines.

The board of trustees will hold a remote meeting Thursday night to review the plan.

“Penn State is fully committed to the university’s mission of serving Pennsylvania residents and the important role of its Commonwealth Campuses in achieving that mission,” reads a response from Penn State’s FAQ section on potential campus closures.

“Many campuses are poised for future success with the right evolution and strategic investments. These campuses have a definitive path forward, and Penn State is committed to providing the resources necessary for them to flourish long into the future.”

Jay Paterno, a Penn State trustee, sees the proposal as a “retreat of sorts” from Penn State’s land-grant mission. He’d like to see the university look for ways to innovate — which he said it has done before.

College athletics, Paterno said, change every day, and Penn State responded by investing money into Beaver Stadium and launching a capital campaign.

That option wasn’t considered when it came to Commonwealth Campuses, he said.

Paterno also pointed to the 1990s, when Penn State was one of the first major universities that went “all-in” on online education and now has more than 13,000 students attending its World Campus.

“If you look at a history of Penn State, we have been leaders and innovators of higher education,” Paterno said.

Commonwealth Campuses are educational and economic drivers in the communities they serve, Paterno said, noting Mont Alto’s forestry programming and DuBois’ wildlife resource management courses.

“These are lifelines where people can get unique programs and local programs they can afford,” he said.

As New Kensington professor Andrea Adolph sees it, Penn State’s very existence is due to the Morrill Act. She believes the development of the branch campuses was considered an extension of the land-grant mission.

“After World War II, people like President Eric Walker saw the need for Pennsylvania citizens to have access to the university in their own communities,” Adolph said. “In fact, each year at each campus, a student is selected for an award in Walker’s name that is considered the highest student achievement at a campus.”

Residents from the “industrial classes” should be taken care of through the promise of the Morrill Act, Adolph said. The majority of students at the branch campuses are state residents, and she said they serve more low-income, first-generation students compared to the University Park main campus in State College.

Removing the campuses in areas like New Kensington and Fayette is a de facto removal of their land-grant opportunity, she said.

“The land-grant mission doesn’t mean that we only have to provide an education to students if no one else does,” Adolph said. “It means we are obligated to serve those whose lives can most be improved by a Penn State education.”

State government officials don’t appear to have taken a stance either way when it comes to Penn State’s proposal.

The Department of Agriculture won’t comment on Penn State deliberations, spokeswoman Shannon Powers said.

A spokesman for Gov. Josh Shapiro directed a TribLive request for comment to a statement from the Department of Education, which noted the state established a new $60 million investment to be distributed among Penn State, Pitt and Temple University.

“The Shapiro Administration respects the autonomy of our commonwealth’s higher education institutions to make their own financial decisions, and we will continue to engage with Penn State, members of the General Assembly, and — most importantly — students and parents as the university releases more information,” the statement said.

Over time, the mission of land-grant institutions like Penn State was conceptualized to include extension services in agriculture and mechanics, but there was no mission or plan to develop branch campuses, said Julie Wollman, a professor at the University of Pennsylvania’s Graduate School of Education.

Though some branch campuses have become an economic driver in rural areas, they’re also in areas that have seen steep population decline, Wollman said.

She pointed out that Wisconsin recently eliminated some of its branch campuses.

“The argument that having these campuses is part of the original mission isn’t accurate, but they may be viewed by some as a sort of extension of that mission,” Wollman said. “Nevertheless, if there is not sufficient enrollment to sustain such a mission, then keeping open more institutions than can be supported does not achieve the mission and results in an education that is less valuable than that which students might get at other nearby institutions that are more viable.”

Although the broad impact of campus closures will be limited because of their low enrollment and number of employees, the effect will be profound for students, employees and area businesses that depend on campus activity.

Paterno hopes his fellow trustees think hard on their decision and what’s best for Penn State. He personally wants more time to determine ways to move the Commonwealth Campus structure forward.

“When you’re closing things, it’s never a good look,” he said. “As a member of this board, I would like us to have a legacy years from now that (we) found a way to innovate during these times, to advance instead of retreat.”

One way to be innovative, Wollman said, would be for Penn State to partner with nearby state system universities or University of Pittsburgh branch campuses to transfer pathways for students and new jobs for some employees, though that might not always be possible.

“Looking for nearby institutions to partner with may achieve the goal of the Morrill Act — access to education at an affordable cost,” she said.

Wollman doesn’t believe closures will damage Penn State’s reputation.

“The branch campus closures are a necessary and courageous move to do what’s right for the university as a whole, while thoughtfully trying to reduce any negative impact,” she said. “Penn State is a very strong brand, and I expect it will remain so.”