PA Senate Education — 2026-10-20

Thank you. Today, we have an opportunity to challenge a long-standing assumption in higher education that the quality of a bachelor degree should be measured by the number of credit hours a student completes rather than by the knowledge skills and competency the student demonstrates This proposal is not about lowering academic standards or diminishing the value of a college degree. It's about modernizing higher education to better serve today's students, respond to the evolving needs of our workforce, and make a college education more affordable and more attainable. For years, legislators, employers, students, and families have challenged higher education to make college more affordable, more accessible, and more accountable for the value it delivers. These are not unreasonable demands. They are legitimate expectations. And higher education administrators have a responsibility to respond. But higher education leaders cannot be expected to transform higher education if the policies governing us do not provide us the flexibility to innovate. If we're truly committed to reducing the cost of a college degree, then we must be equally committed to examining the structures, practices, and longstanding requirements that contribute to that cost. I make this argument not as an outsider questioning the value of higher education, but as someone who has devoted more than 40 years of her professional life to it. As president of Carlo University and having served in small, medium, and large institutions, both public and private, I understand the complexities of operating a university. I understand what it takes to support faculty, sustain academic programs, maintain institutions' financial stability, and safeguard the integrity and quality of a college degree. But I also know that protecting the quality of higher education and preserving every tradition of higher education are not the same. We must have the courage to distinguish between what is essential to student learning and what we have simply become accustomed to requiring. One of the realities we must acknowledge is that not all universities are the same. We do not share identical missions. We do not serve identical students' populations. And we should not assume that every student must follow an identical pathway to earn a degree. At Carlo University, more than 45% of our students are the first in their families to graduate and attend college. And more than half of our undergraduate students are adults. Many are balancing their education with full-time employment, raising families, and having significant financial responsibilities for it. For these students, time is not abstract, and neither is cost. Every semester matters. Every credit matters. Every dollar matters. At many institutions, students must complete elective credits beyond the requirements of their major and their general education curriculum. These are often called free electives. But let me be clear. There is absolutely nothing free about them. Students pay tuition for those credits. They purchase textbooks, invest valuable times, and sometimes extend the time it takes to graduate. For a student struggling to afford college those additional requirements can represent thousands of dollars and precious time they simply cannot afford We must ask whether every elective credit should be a requirement for graduation or whether some of those credits exist primarily because we have built a 120-credit structure that must be filled. Some may view this proposal as a tact on the liberal arts. Nothing can be further from the truth. I believe deeply in the transformation power of a liberal arts education. That foundation is central to general education, and I would never want to diminish it. But protecting the liberal arts does not require protecting every credit hour requirement. I'm not asking you to mandate change. I'm asking you to permit it. Some colleagues fear this flexibility will create a two-tiered system of higher education. But we must acknowledge that inequity already exists. Students with financial resources can accelerate their education through summer courses and advanced placement credits. Meanwhile, students from under-resourced school districts, working adults, and first-generation students often face longer pathways, greater debt, and sometimes the heartbreaking reality of leaving college without a degree. We cannot defend the status quo in the name of equity while ignoring the inequities the status quo perpetuates. At least 12 other universities, states, have already provided this flexibility to university administrators. Pennsylvania cannot afford to ignore the changing landscape, particularly when over one million of our residents have earned college credit but never completed a degree. So my request is simple. Give Pennsylvania universities the flexibility to innovate, the responsibility to demonstrate quality, and the opportunity to deliver greater value. Give us the opportunity to reduce unnecessary costs without reducing academic quality. Give us the opportunity to prepare more Pennsylvania for the workforce our Commonwealth desperately needs. You've asked us to change. We are ready. Give us the flexibility to deliver that change. Thank you.

Absolutely. You know, I've talked to some of the corporations about this possibility. And what they tell me often is that they, too, believe that we can do this in less than 120 credit hours. because oftentimes, even with the 120 credit hours, when they get to the workforce, they find that they are still training, still educating. And so I think the time has come where we do a better job of making sure that our students are more prepared to do the work that those employers need us to do. And so I am confident that we can provide them with a student that is ready to take on the workforce.

So first let me say that, you know, how we design curriculum is our faculty are responsible for those designs. So I went to my faculty and I said to them, is it possible to create 90 credit hour degrees? And they gave me a list of programs that they believe we could reduce to a 90 credit hour degree. I want to remind you of something. So most majors are somewhere around 50, 60 credit hours. And then you have your general eds, which most of the liberal arts fall into the general eds. And then you have what is called the free electives. And so the reality is that the question is, can we educate the student with the major courses intact? Yes. With our general eds intact? Yes. Because that's where we are doing the critical thinking, the analysis, the communication skills. All of that's falling in that and should be intertwined in the major as well. And so I'm confident that with those two, we can do programs like pre-K. We can do programs like criminology, data analytics, health data analytics. Those are just a few of the programs that we know we can provide in less than 120 credit hours. If you think about it for a second, does it really take us the same amount of time to educate everybody for the same positions? And I say, no, it doesn't, because the time in the seat does not dictate the quality of the education.

So let's talk about that for a second. So every student is different. And every student's needs are not the same. So if I'm talking about a woman who's 40 years old, who has got children, who is trying to get her college degree because the employer needs that level of thinking, that level of critical analysis that a bachelor's degree would afford her. I'm not talking about getting rid of those really important courses. All courses are important. But I speaking to the fact that does this mother who been managing a family does she need some of the elective courses that we require 18 19 to take I just don think so And I know that we can provide a quality education Some of us try to use the college process, the four-year college process, as a maturation process. My 40-year-old student does not need a maturation process. She's mature. My 30-year-old does not need a maturation process. And quite frankly, some of our 18-year-olds don't need that either. If you think about it, we send an 18-year-old to war to protect our country. So every student is not the same. And that is why I don't believe that every degree should be 90 credit hours. I believe that we need the flexibility to determine which ones of them can we deliver the same quality of education that we're delivering with 120. The 120 credit hours, as you've read in my testimony, was really designed 100 years ago to give the Carnegie classification system an opportunity to pay faculty pensions across the board equally. It never had anything to do with the quality of the education. We've equated it to that today.

Well, I think that would be considered if it weren't going to be equal. But it should be equal. and I believe we can make the two experiences compatible depending on how we design them. Think about it for a while. You know, education, what we used to do 100 years ago, we have transformed. You know, faculty are no longer a sage on a stage. Faculty no longer just can stand up and give out information. They have to be able to help students dissect that and analyze that information in different ways. And now with the technologies that we have, we ought to be able to do this differently. So I don't think the answer is calling it something different when that in actuality is what it is.

So the reason why I thought that we should consider the 90 credit hours as the other side, the bookend of the 120. But you should also know that some degrees take more than 120, right? And so the reason why I thought it important for us to examine this is because other states are already doing it. We're going to have to compete with those other states. I also believe that if there's fear in our own state about the flexibility, it's because of the competition, right? Otherwise you wouldn care what I do right but you concerned about the competition of what going to happen if you allow me to have a 90 hour degree and they don Is it going to push the students into our direction I'm concerned about that with all the other states that are already doing it. This is coming. It's a matter of when are we going to get to the race. It is on its way. We can be behind or we can be with it. But it's on its way here. Because every single day you hear about another state who is providing the flexibility.

So I don't believe that we are offering any bachelor's degrees that should be associate degrees. The examination, the full examination of the major course of study is important because that is the person we are sending out. into the field. That student who's majoring in biology needs, if they want to go to medical school, they need to be fully prepared to go to medical school. And that means they need every credit hour that we can give them that will really set them on a trajectory to ensure that they become the man or woman they want to become. So I don't believe that even today that we are providing bachelor's degrees in places where it should be an associate degree. But what I do believe is that we are not always being very sensitive about what we're requiring students to take in the free elective area. For example, you know, aerobics. That was one of my pet peeves. I'm not against aerobics. I think aerobics is great. But you can take it at the Y for $150. And I'm charging you tuition for it. I think we have to think about that. We can't continue to say that's okay, right? And I'm not against aerobics. There are reasons why students should have to take aerobics, right, for their major field. But I use that as an example. Women in movies, right? I'm not against those courses. I think those courses have a place. But I also think for that student who's paying every dime for those courses, we have a responsibility. And it is time for us to look at it. And the only reason why we have some of those courses is to fulfill the state's requirement to have 120 credit hours.

We do.

For example, we have just created a relationship with our police department where we are giving them credit for completing the police academy.

I am Heather Perfetti, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Commission, a student-centered, global, voluntary, non-governmental institutional accreditor. The United States Secretary of Education recognizes us to serve as gatekeeper to Title IV so that institutions may participate in federal student aid programs. one within the regulatory triad alongside the United States Department of Education and state licensing authorities, including the Pennsylvania Department of Education. Each partner has a distinct role, with ours being one that is mission-driven for quality assurance. but we all hold the shared responsibility to protect students and hold institutions accountable. As an institutional accreditor, we do not tell colleges and universities that every degree must follow one particular model. Unlike other accreditors, we do not prescribe a minimum number of credit hours for a credential level. This means that we do not have standards, policies, or procedures that require every baccalaureate degree to consist of 120 credit hours. If any jurisdiction permits an institution to offer a reduced credit hour credential, we evaluate it through the institution's regular accreditation cycle. We evaluate academic offerings for rigor, curricular coherence, alignment with higher education expectations, and the achievement of student learning outcomes, all while allowing institutions appropriate discretion in how programs are designed and delivered. We would not permit an institution to offer a degree in a way that conflicts with applicable state law, and we would not stand in the way of a program that complies with state law and meets our expectations through our standards, policies, and procedures. In addition, our commission does not have a separate approval process for these programs. The only exception would be some category of what we call substantive change under federal law that requires accreditor approval. But the reduced credit hour baccalaureate degree does not, in and of itself, require approval by our commission. We appreciate that this is now a national discussion. Models exist across the country that can be informative. Our position is simply that for institutions in Pennsylvania accredited by our commission, we do not offer barriers to reduced credit hour credentials. However, we know and appreciate the concerns that you have heard and will hear about this model, and we encourage you to work through those concerns to remain student-centered. For example, it will be important to understand how employers, graduate schools, professional programs, or other institutions will recognize the credential. None of us want to further challenges associated with transfer for students. We certainly do not want any new credit program to negatively impact professional licensure or accreditation by programmatic or specialized accreditors. And we all have to consider the costs and applicability of state and federal student aid programs in the context of any new educational models. Perhaps none of these are reasons to unilaterally dismiss innovation, but they do justify exactly what you are doing, spending time on as many student-focused considerations as possible, so that those concerns are resolved in a way that do not complicate a student's future. Because I mentioned the regulatory triad, we are seeing the consideration of emerging trends directly embedded into the regulations of our state and federal partners. If the currently proposed federal regulations are an indicator of what we should expect, we know that our work as an accreditor and that of our institutions may be required to account for innovative models of education that reduce costs. emerging trends that differently structure credentials can perhaps help meet the demands of that new regulatory framework to summarize our commission is not prescriptive and we will be deferential to state law restrictions or expanding freedoms on reduced credit hour baccalaureate degrees It was certainly important for us to lend to this discussion with the Commonwealth as we see the work that we do as critical partners to you and your constituents. Because accreditation is often blamed as serving as a barrier to initiatives such as these, we wanted to share our position in the hope that it could be helpful. Thank you for the opportunity to share our perspective and for the ways that your state is conducting research to ensure that students remain at the center of this discussion, along with important partners at our institutions and within the workforce. It's my privilege to have been here with you this morning, and I welcome your questions.

So our standards require that all institutions have a process for evaluation and assessment. And through that, they are looking at data that is critical to that understanding, but also incorporating the kinds of expectations you would expect with institutions with current programs. And so we see this as no different an expectation for institutions to be considerate of how successful are those programs, how well are they meeting the outcomes that they intended with those programs. So through accreditation, which is grounded in institutional improvement, institutions are in a constant state of evolution at looking at their programming and improving upon it.

We do have standards for accreditation. So in some ways we are setting expectations for institutions, but we are absolutely deferential to state law and we are also deferential to federal law. So we have to be mindful of those and how institutions come to us with proposals, initiatives or the work that they're doing and we make sure it complies with that.

My understanding is that the state does not permit a credential with less than 120 credit hours.

We are not specific to naming conventions for any academic programs or any academic credentials. And I think this is a very similar conversation to when we saw micro-credentials become very popular among various states. What are they called and how are they transcripted? And I think that is an important conversation we are seeing in other states where the 90 credit hour baccalaureate degree is being called something different that tends to convey it is less than a 120 credit hour baccalaureate degree So states should be incredibly mindful and institutions should also be mindful of how to transcript those requirements because it is sending certainly a message to other institutions at the time of transfer or to employers. and helping those individuals understand what these different credential levels are is really critical.

We are generally partners with our institutions in initiatives and innovative approaches they may be considering, and we connect them with others to evaluate how others are doing it and what is best for them as an institution. I think our primary goal is with our standard that is focused on ethics and integrity, that we would expect transparency in whatever way the naming conventions land. Because I think we're already starting to hear very different opinions on that.

I think much of the research up to this point has shown that field-by-field analysis is really critical. And I know the president that testified before me was talking about that as well. And it is critical for reasons of graduate study, but it is also critical to understand licensure, not just in Pennsylvania, but in other jurisdictions where your students may end up. Some licensing examinations refer to 120 credit hour baccalaureate degrees. And I know that the programmatic accreditors are also aligned with some of those expectations. So just as a reminder, we are an institutional accreditor, but there are also programmatic accreditors that set more prescriptive criteria, which makes this field-by-field analysis really important. Some fields will lend more easily to a 90-credit-hour baccalaureate degree than when compared to the 120-credit-hours.

baccalaureate degree. I prefer to call them differently structured. I know reduced credit, 90 credit is the nomenclature that is currently in the national discussion, but these are differently structured baccalaureate degrees. And I think there are models from other institutions and other kinds of programs to help institutions understand where there has been success and where there is not that deep regret that they maybe eliminated something that could end up being useful to a student's future. And that's why that field-by-field analysis is really important. And we're hearing about institutions that are reconsidering the way that their baccalaureate degree is structured so that they can serve public safety needs in a community. And similar to what you've already heard, removing electives while retaining the core essence of the baccalaureate degree has been an approach of many institutions. But it will be an institution by institution determination, often driven also by their mission. and what their goals around each of their students are set out to accomplish.

Dacey is an academic term.

And thank you for being here today. Very, very helpful and insightful information. So here's a question. We're talking about other states who have allowed for, what did you call it, a differently structured baccalaureate degree, right? I like that. It's very positive. But leaving open the possibility that it could be a very positive outcome. So my question is, are there any states that have been doing this long enough that they have a perspective that has led them to roll it back to the traditional 120 baccalaureate degree?

Okay, thank you. Okay. Thank you, Senator Cominus. Senator Anthony Williams?

So we have the benefit of accrediting institutions in the international environment, and many of them have been years ahead of us with a three-year baccalaureate credential as the model. And so we have seen institutions structure it in that way and be able to demonstrate success with our standards as well. So I was always taught to ask the question and the answer too, so thank you for that. And the reality is this.

So I think the president who appeared before me talked a little bit about that. What I will say is our standards require institutions to look at the very issues that you're raising. And they report to us not only the data around it, but also report to us around the financial aspect relating to their students, including scholarships that they may offer as well as other financial aid. But they're doing analyses around students stopping out and trying to understand why students are doing that, with many being proactive at trying to get those students out and deliver the kinds of services that those students specifically need.

I think the differently structured baccalaureate degrees require interaction and understanding of the perspective of the workforce. And again, that's part of the field by field analyses. It's really critical to understand what employers expect and to have the credential mindful and delivering around those expectations. But again, if it's tied to certification and licensure, those are the more difficult programs to attempt to restructure. And again being mindful of programmatic accreditors which are often reflective of what the field mandates or what the certification mandates So you absolutely right to be raising that question and it is something that we would want to see from an institution that opted for a differently structured degree. How are they able to demonstrate that it is going to be of good service to constituents, students, the community, as well as the workforce?

I do.

Chair Culver, Chair Williams, and members of the Senate Education Committee, thank you for the opportunity to share Penn State's perspective on the reduced credit bachelor's degree. My name is Lance Kennedy Phillips, and I serve as Penn State's interim senior vice provost for student success. In this role, I am leading the development of our new office of student success, which is focused on bringing greater coordination to how we support students throughout their educational journey. Our goals are straightforward. improve retention and graduation rates, help more students complete their degrees on time, reduce barriers to degree attainment, and ensure that students are prepared for meaningful careers, lifelong learning, and civic engagement. I believe these priorities are closely aligned with the issues before the committee today. Affordability, time to degree, educational quality, and workforce preparation. As Pennsylvania's land-grant university, Penn State shares the General Assembly's commitment to expanding educational opportunity and preparing students to contribute to the Commonwealth economy and communities. We recognize that the traditional structure of higher education does not always meet the needs of every student. Rising costs, changing workforce demands, and the need for greater flexibility requires us to think differently about how we deliver a high-quality education. Reduced credit bachelor's degrees represent one potential approach. And Penn State supports providing institutions with this flexibility to explore innovative degree pathways where appropriate. However, as we consider these opportunities, I would emphasize four important considerations. First academic quality and disciplinary differences must remain central to these discussions Degree requirements vary significantly across academic disciplines Programs in engineering nursing education and other professional fields often have accreditation standards, licensing requirements, and substantial clinical and laboratory or field-based experiences that are essential to preparing them for success. In these cases, reducing credits may not be practical without affecting the competency students need to succeed. At the same time, other disciplines may offer opportunities to rethink how academic requirements are structured while maintaining the quality and rigor of the degree. Second, reducing credits does not automatically reduce the cost or time required to earn a degree. The actual benefits to students depend on how programs are designed, how courses are structured, and whether students can access courses and experiences they need to graduate on time. For example, a student may be able to complete a traditional bachelor's degree in three years through accelerated scheduling, summer enrollment, or credits earned before entering college without reducing the overall number of credits required. We should consider multiple approaches to improving affordability and timely completion. Third, we must preserve opportunities for experiential learning and workforce preparation. Internships, cooperative education, undergraduate research, and other hands-on experiences like the FFA students that the chairwoman spoke of are important parts of preparing students for success beyond college. These experiences help students develop critical thinking, communication, problem solving, and collaborative skills that employers want. As we consider alternative degree pathways, we should ensure that students continue to have meaningful opportunities to apply what they learn in a real-world setting. Fourth, we must protect the long-term value of the bachelor's degree. Students pursue higher education not only to secure their first job, but also to build careers, pursue advanced education, and adapt to a changing economy. Any new degree model should provide confidence that graduates will be competitive in the workforce and eligible for graduate and professional education. That is why engagement with employers, accrediting organizations, faculty, graduate institutions will be essential in determining where these models can be successful. At Penn State, we are examining a range of strategies to improve student success, affordability, and time to degree. Through our new Office of Student Success, we are placing particular emphasis on helping more students graduate on time, strengthening their academic advising and support, and expanding access to educational and career development opportunities. We believe reduced credit degrees should be part of the broader conversation, But innovation should not be limited to a single degree structure. Ultimately, the question is not simply how many credits a bachelor's degree requires. It is whether graduates possess the knowledge, skills, and experiences necessary to succeed in today's workforce and tomorrow's economy. Penn State appreciates the committee's thoughtful consideration of these issues. We look forward to working collaboratively with the General Assembly, employers, and our higher education partners to identify approaches that expand opportunity, improve affordability, preserve academic quality, and most importantly, help our students succeed. Thank you for the opportunity to share our perspective and I look forward to the questions Thank you Dr Kennedy Phillips We are now going to transition to Dr Brenda Allen She is virtual Dr Allen are you ready

As you said, my name is Brenda Allen, and I serve as president of Lincoln University, and I remind you that we are the first degree-granted historically black college in the nation. On behalf of our students, faculty, staff, alumni, and board of trustees, thank you for inviting Lincoln University to contribute to this important conversation. Lincoln University appreciates the committee's willingness to engage institutions across the Commonwealth as you consider policy changes that may shape the future of higher education. Like many institutions across Pennsylvania, Lincoln University recognizes the financial challenges facing today's students and families. We support efforts to reduce barriers to higher education, increase degree completion, and create meaningful pathways to economic mobility. These are priorities we share with the General Assembly and with our higher education partners throughout Pennsylvania. At the same time, we believe any modification to bachelor degree requirements should be approached thoughtfully and with careful consideration of educational quality and student success. After extensive discussions among faculty, academic leaders, student success professionals, and administrators, Lincoln University has concluded that a broadly applied 90-credit bachelor's degree would not align with our traditional undergraduate educational model. Our bachelor's degree program currently requires 128 credit hours, and I should mention here that credit hours do not necessarily reflect number of courses. It reflects, though, our deliberate commitment to academic rigor and a comprehensive liberal arts education. Those credits represent much more than classroom instruction. They support the development of critical thinking, communication skills, leadership capacity, ethical reasoning, civic responsibility, and global awareness. They also provide opportunities for internships, undergraduate research, experiential learning, leadership development, and other high-impact educational experiences that prepare students for graduate study, professional careers, and lifelong success. Our faculty expressed concern that reducing degree requirements by nearly one-third could limit these experiences and potentially diminish the transformational educational environment that has long distinguished a Lincoln University education. Particular concern was expressed regarding first-generation students, Pell-eligible students, and those who benefit from the mentoring, support services, and developmental opportunities embedded within a traditional undergraduate experience. However, our review also identified potential opportunities for carefully targeted implementation. Lincoln University School of Adult and Continuing Education serves adult learners, degree completers, military-affiliated students, and working professionals. For these populations, a modified degree pathway may offer additional flexibility and help address workforce needs while maintaining rigorous academic standards and meaningful learning outcomes. Should the Commonwealth move forward with this legislation, Lincoln University respectfully recommends several safeguards. First, participation should remain entirely voluntary, allowing each of institution to determine whether such programs align with this mission and student population. Second, faculty governance must remain central to the curriculum decisions, academic standards, and learning outcomes. Third, students must receive clear information regarding transferability, graduate and professional school, admissions requirements, licensure implications, and financial aid considerations. And finally, any modified degree program should remain subject to accreditation requirements and demonstrate educational quality equivalent to the traditional pathways. In closing, Lincoln University does not support broad implementation of a 90 credit hour bachelor's degree within our traditional undergraduate programs. However, we recognize that carefully designed, mission-appropriate application may provide value for adult learners, degree completers, and workforce populations when accompanied by strong institutional safeguards and student protections. We appreciate the Commonwealth's thoughtful consideration of these issues, and thank you for seeking input from institutions across Pennsylvania. Lincoln University stands ready to work with members of the General Assembly, higher education leaders, and accrediting bodies to advance solutions to improve access and affordability while preserving the rigor, integrity, and transformational value of a baccalaureate degree. Thank you for this time and consideration, and I will welcome any questions.

Thank you, Chair Culver, and thank you to the members of the committee. University of Pittsburgh shares this committee's commitment to access and affordability. We support both reducing costs for students and families and producing more graduates within the Commonwealth. I serve as Pitt's provost and senior vice chancellor. I've spent my entire career at Pitt. I'm an engineering educator, and like my colleague, I consider myself a champion of student success. A bachelor's degree in its current form sends a signal. It's read the same way by students, employers, graduate programs, and licensing boards. There's a shared understanding of what it means. At Pitt, we have strong evidence that we're delivering on that understanding. Our most recent outcomes were well over 96%, and it's been above 94% for at least five years running. That's based on knowledge of 80% to 85% of each of our graduating classes, so for the vast majority of our students, we know their next step and we know it's successful. You'll hear from employers in a little bit today, and I expect that we'll agree on one point. They do not need graduates who arrive fully trained. What they need is a graduate that's ready to contribute and ready to learn productively. Currently, our graduates arrive trainable. An employer can bring them up to speed quickly, and they stay nimble enough to be trained again five and even 15 years later as their industries changed. That nimbleness is a trait that I would not want to lose. It comes from breadth, applied learning, internship, and coursework beyond the major. So the open question for the shorter degree is not whether it prepares for a graduate for the first job. It's whether it can be designed to build the capacity to adapt to the fourth one. This is worth considering before widespread implementation and it should be explicitly assessed if we adopt this I want to be precise about accreditation We heard a bit about that from our institutional accreditor middle states Of course they do not require 120 credits but programmatic accreditors often do. ABET in engineering, CCNE in nursing, and the Department of Education here in the Commonwealth for teacher certification. They specify coursework and clinical hours, and state law would not change them. In those fields, a shorter degree could put a program at odds with its accreditor. A word, too, on where college savings tends to be found. Two of the biggest drivers of costs are credit portability and student financial aid. Students leave or take longer than they anticipated because of inflexibility, finances, or competing obligations. A lower credit threshold does not directly address any of that. Pitt's already working on both of those goals. Brand new this fall through our regional campus tuition pledge, eligible Pennsylvania residents at all four of our regional campuses can earn a degree at zero tuition. We're improving transfer pathways for community college students, and our college and high school program reaches roughly 7,500 students a year to give them a boost as they begin their college journey. Let me close with one recommendation that wraps a lot of this together. Whatever this committee decides about credit hours, the tradeoffs have to be communicated clearly. A student weighing a reduced credit program should understand the total cost, the time to completion, how the credits might transfer, how graduate students, I'm sorry, how graduate schools will treat it, and any effect on licensure and understand all of that before they enroll. As we've heard a couple of times today, the name also matters just as much. Other states have created a distinct degree type, leaving the BA and the BS explicitly at 120 credits. Middle states does not prescribe naming, as we've heard, so in Pennsylvania that choice would fall to the Commonwealth. I'd urge that the committee take it up in legislation rather than leave it to institutions. Pitt's firmly committed to lowering costs and producing more graduates for the Commonwealth's workforce and examining multiple paths to achieving those goals. We would welcome the chance to work with the committee and your staff on naming, disclosure, regulations, and assessment. Thank you again for the opportunity to be with you today and talk about this important matter.

Good morning, Chairman Culver and members of the committee. Thank you for your invitation to talk with you today. My name is Jody Levine Lofgraven. I'm the Vice Provost for Academic Programs and Institutional Effectiveness at Temple University. As you saw in my testimony, I'm arriving with a lot of questions and perhaps more questions than answers, but with gratitude for the opportunity to participate in this conversation with my colleagues and to raise important questions regarding the proposal to allow Pennsylvania institutions of higher education to offer a 90-credit bachelor's degree pathway. Since our founding, Temple has always prided itself on access to excellence. That has been our guiding mission. With that in mind, we are always willing to participate in conversations around helping students earn degrees faster, reduce the cost of college degree, and enable students to enter the workforce sooner, particularly in high-demand fields. We also recognize, more so today than ever, that families and our students want options and flexibility when thinking about college. As others have mentioned today we are not the first state to be considering this We have started watching the states that have passed this legislation allowing or requiring 90 bachelor degree pathways and how they are implementing these programs. States and institutions are taking different approaches, and we will want to understand the benefits and drawbacks of each of those options. It is important to learn from our peer institutions and how the faculty at those campuses are offering 90 credit degrees as high-quality programs that are preparing their students for work or further study. How did they successfully ensure that such pathways are not a less than or degree light? What we call this has already been discussed across the morning. I am intentionally not using the term reduced, as to me, it implies less than, but rather thinking about this option as an alternative model or a path to a bachelor's degree. I agree that language matters, and what we call this pathway will be important. In the available literature, and as others have said before me this morning, it has been noted that this pathway may not work for all subject areas or disciplines. It is important that we think about the 90-credit degree as a degree type and not a prototype for all degrees or disciplines. Earlier a question was asked about how will we know if this is working. I think the set of questions that I proposed in my testimony will be the important questions that we will have to explore. How did institutions who have 90 credit degrees preserve the most important aspects of their degree programs? How did faculty at these institutions determine for which discipline a 90 credit pathway could be effective? Who are these programs serving, and are they serving new audiences of students who might have not pursued or completed a post-secondary credential otherwise? How does the 90-credit pathway impact student debt or borrowing? How did institutions balance academic quality and integrity of a degree with the need to prepare students to enter fields with critical workforce demand? How do students move between 90 and 120-credit degree programs, if at all? And another important question, several of us have already alluded to our strong commitment to student success, is will 90 credit degrees lead to gains in retention and graduation rates? Are we seeing in other states that data supports that hypothesis? Student success is a critical pillar in Temple's strategic plan, and we, like our peers, share the goal of improving student outcomes. We already have initiatives at Temple such as Fly-In 4 and financial literacy programs that are aimed at promoting on-time graduation, ensuring students can complete a 120-credit bachelor's degree in four years and not more. But we also have the responsibility to explore ways we can do more. It is important that we provide our faculty with the opportunity to conceptualize 90-credit degrees as new and comprehensive academic programs, intentionally and thoughtfully designed. We've talked about how we would reduce our current bachelor's programs. Perhaps we need to think about as building the 90-credit from the ground up. How will we build these new programs? At Temple, I oversee the assessment of student learning and institutional effectiveness program that Dr. Perfetti referenced in her testimony. My area is assessment. When I think of academic programs, I do not think about credit hours or seat time or numbers of semesters. I focus on learning outcomes. What should a student know and be able to do when they graduate with a degree in X The conversation around 90 credit degrees allows us to think about outcomes from a slightly different lens What does the curriculum to gain these skills and knowledge look like, and can that be accomplished in a less traditional time frame? We very much at Temple want to participate in exploring with our academic programs the answers to these questions. We are an urban public research university. Access and affordability are at the center of our mission. We remain open to learning more and considering alternative pathways that allow students to access higher education, reduce the cost of their degree, and enter the workforce well prepared and ready to succeed. Thank you.

I guess I'll step up. That's probably a pretty good guideline, but at the University of Pittsburgh in particular, are in major credits vary quite broadly. So in some cases, 42 would be accurate. In other cases, it would be a little bit high. And in alternatives, it would be a little bit on the short side. What isn't encompassed in what you quoted, though, are the foundational math, science, and other preparatory classes that might be required in the major.

Okay. I would add that there are some programs where students have a common foundational core. So, for example, for our Bachelor of Business Administration programs, all students, whether they're going to be pursuing an accounting major or a finance major or a marketing major, take a common core of business basics or business foundational courses and human resources and accounting and marketing. For many students, that foundational core is important. because they may come in not knowing do they want finance or accounting, do they want marketing or human resources. So in some instances, you can have general education, you might have a college core or a foundational set of courses on top of a major, and then as an earlier colleague said, there is usually elective space, which many students use to pursue minors or certificates or perhaps even a double major.

I'll jump in and say, I think that's more program specific too. So it depends on the requirements for the program of how many hours are accepting. Usually a backup degree from the international institutions accepted as a baccalaureate degree and not necessary as a number of credit hours. So it depends on the program, but I will say the majority of those are accepted as baccalaureate degrees. Okay. All right. Thank you. Chairwoman Williams.

My first question, I have two, probably two questions. I'd like to direct to Dr. Allen. Dr. Allen, you mentioned in your testimony the importance of faculty governance and institutional responsibility. And my question is, if Pennsylvania authorizes greater flexibility in bachelor's degree requirements, how important is it that participation remain voluntary and that faculty and institutions retain the responsibility for determining curriculum, learning outcomes, and academic standards? Well, thank you for the question, Senator Kameda.

Very good. Thank you. Dr. Allen. And my next question is for Dr. McCarthy. Okay.

Thank you, Senator, for the opportunity to clarify. What I was arguing for in that latter segment was that, you know, other states that have enacted this kind of flexibility have actually carved out a distinct degree type and left the Bachelor of Science and Bachelor of Arts at 120 credits. Because Middle States, the institutional accreditor for many of the institutions here in the Commonwealth, does not prescribe the naming of the degrees, as we heard from President Perfetti, I would urge that any legislation that's created would clarify what the naming convention would be.

My ears perked up when Dr. Kennedy Phillips used the term experiential learning. The scouts that I worked with in Germany years ago called that Lern by Duink. At Temple, your dental dean, I'm a big fan, Dean Ismail with the new two-year dental school in Tamaqua, With the clinic, I guess refers to it as service learning, that when these dental students in their third year and their fourth year are doing root canals or are actually saving people's lives by, you know, filling cavities. I had no idea it was that important until I started working with him. They're learning, but they're also providing a service. And I guess my question is, if we're going from 120 credits to 90, you know, what gets cut? Is it likely that internship programs get cut? I think one of you had said, you know, what gets cut and who decides really matters. And I'm just concerned that this could be a possible area for the chopping block.

Thank you, Senator Argel. Senator Anthony Williams followed by Senator Carney. Thank you, Madam Chair.

Yeah, if I could clarify my testimony, actually. Outcomes rate, I find it difficult to follow myself, honestly. Outcomes rate is the modern way of saying placement rate. So when I referred to 96% or higher and 94% over the last five years at Pitt, that was what we would traditionally call the placement rate back in the day when I was originally introduced to that. It's called an outcomes rate now because it combines both job placement as well as continuing education going to a graduate or professional school after you graduate. So you do have – so – So those were not graduation rates that I quoted. Those are equivalent to placement rates.

So the question for me is, you actually are saying all your institutions can tell me he enters or she enters as a freshman, graduates as a senior, and we know where they are upon graduation relative to employment or relative to entrepreneur or graduate rates. That's what you're telling me. There's a national standard. It's called NACE, the National Association of Colleges and Employers, that has a standard methodology for tracking outcomes rates, and that's what I believe all three of our institutions use. So we can get that. I can make that request to find out what that number is relative to your graduating.

It does not. There's still 120 credit hours. Got it.

At Penn State, you can go to weearn.psu.edu, and you can track our student outcomes as far as real wage data. We're part of what's called the post-secondary education outcomes. So we use U.S. Census data to actually track our students at one year, five years, and ten years out. We also partner with the PA Department of Labor and Industry to look at Pennsylvania graduates from Penn State and look at their real wage data one year, five years, and ten years out. So we do have that data available for you. May I also note about the cost of a degree. You asked if a student who completes a bachelor's degree, a 120-credit degree, in three years can leave with yet less debt.

Those do, in fact, do that. But that's the complement. Community college, in effect, two years there. I get that. this is about the four-year institution, and that's what we're talking about with the number of requirements that I go to Penn State, I go to Temple, I go to whatever school I choose to go to, and I choose to go there for four years. What within that body are we able to figure out that we can negotiate upon? We may not come to a resolution today, but I do think the pressure of the economy and the reality of rising costs don't intersect effectively with students deciding to go to college. And I just happen to represent an area where, you know, significant population of students start year one and drop out by year two or three simply because of cost. And so they never make the employment numbers that we're talking about. They never reach their full potential, and they're good students. So that's the space in which we're occupying. So thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you, Senator Williams. Senator Carney? Thank you, Madam Chair. Complicated, interesting stuff, huh? It's... Very often, I've discovered in Harrisburg that we spend a lot of time talking about metrics and trying to understand metrics. And that's kind of at the core, I think, of what we're talking about. Bachelor's degrees are... really when you look at them, they're already not equal. They're already inequities built into them. Just the fact that you can get a FSC average, you can get a bachelor degree, the same person gets an A average. So that's a built into the system in terms of how we make all these things happen. we're trying to understand or get our arms around whether or not 90 hours has the same value as 120 hours whether it's academic or whether it's in future job placement and everything else. And I struggle with that. I struggle with, you know, hours is a funny thing. I'm an architect, and I think most of your schools have architecture programs. I'm not sure if Dr. Allen does. But I spent a hell of a lot more hours in, you know, getting through an architecture degree than my peers in college kind of thing. And, you know, certainly I remember as a young student, like pretty much ignoring my core courses because I was concentrating on my architecture stuff. And then getting to graduate school and placing out of a bunch of the technical requirements and like my joy of being able to take philosophy courses in grad school, you know, was something that really tried to get back at something I missed. So I struggle with where the line is or where the lines can be or how you try to figure out what's worth what in terms of numbers of – how you determine those hours. And I get the whole idea. A lot of it has to do with the individual and everything else, but that's a hard way to do policy around how an individual is growing and what they learn and everything else specifically. We look for ways to put people in different kinds of boxes so that we can tick them off and kind of move forward. I think this is going to be a very interesting conversation over time, moving forward, trying to figure out. And it's going to come down to a lot of those ideas about what is the actual value. I mean, there's a lot of people who think, well, maybe a bachelor's degree doesn't have the kind of value that it used to have in terms of the job market when you have like the largest companies in the world run by people who never even made it through college, you know, kind of those types of things. And I wonder, too, about I know that certainly in architecture, the degree is one thing, but where you've worked is probably more critical in terms of as you're trying to advance or move up and work at different kinds of firms and go through various things. I know we always had a saying in school that the C students worked for the B students and the A students taught. But that was architecture in kind of a nutshell. So I don't know that I have a question per se as much as just, you know, I've been listening to all the testimony today and find it really thought-provoking and trying to figure out exactly how it is. And I don't know that we can ever get our arms around the sort of inequities that are sort of built into the process already in terms of students and this. And I don't know that we can ever get out of our own way here in Harrisburg to not put things in boxes and try to understand metrics moving forward. So, thank you for indulging me. Thank you, Senator Carney. Thank you, Dr. Kennedy Phillips, Dr. Allen, Dr. McCarthy, and Dr. Lofgraven. I'm not saying it right yet, am I? Lofgraven. Oh, thank you. So you taught me something today. It was going to come out. Thank you for your time. I am sure we will be getting in touch with all of you as we go through this process. So thank you. Thank you, Raj. On our fourth panel today we have Aaron Riggleman Director of Governmental Affairs for the Pennsylvania Chamber of Business and Industry Warren Hudock President of Hudock and Company Wendy Coleman President of the Pennsylvania Chapter of American Federation of Teachers And Kara Laskowski, Vice President of the Association of Pennsylvania State College and University Facilities. I know why we use the acronym. So when you're ready, I'll swear you in. Are we missing one? Yeah, she's on her way. Yeah, I thought so. I can come over here. And your name flag is on the side table there. Oh, you have it. Okay, great. Okay, all right. Do you swear or affirm that the testimony you are about to give is true to the best of your knowledge, information, and belief? If so, please say, I do. Please be seated. When you're ready, Erin, please begin.

Okay. Thank you. We are going to transition to Mr. Hudak. Am I saying that right? Yes. Thank you. Chair Culver, Chair Williams, and members of the committee. Is my call? Thank you. I'm

Thank you for your testimony. We're going to shift to Ms. Coleman. Thank you.

Thank you, Ms. Coleman. Ms. Laskowski?

Thank you. I appreciate all your time today. I think I have more comment than question, maybe a few questions. So, Mr. Riggleman, when you talked about, and you've all talked about this, critical thinking, problem solving, communication, I don't know that there's a bigger champion than the two of us on those two things. but it makes me gasp when I hear they're getting it at college. We all know that window is three to five years old. The chamber has been the biggest champion on early learning, as I have, I think, and as you have. It creates a bigger conversation to me. Are we not sending them with any of those skills? Because that is a bigger conversation. You know, we have Act 339 in place now where the schools are exposing children from K through 12 to internships, externships, apprenticeships during the school years so that when they come to you, they have a better idea of what they want to do. So I think a bigger conversation on our part might be warranted that that's not happening. So I guess, Mr. Hudock, and I don't want to put you on the spot, but I feel like I am. What can we do better? I'm not going to say the universities. as chair of education, what is the single most thing we can do to better prepare students for the workforce?

It helps in the rural areas for sure. Where there's not large employers, we have to figure out a better way to involve local employees. And look, you mentioned it. I just met with a ninth-grade teacher last week. Her peers are complaining that they're getting students that have a fifth-grade maturity. They said, I don't know how to deal with that. I'm not trained for that. We have colleges who say the first semester, first-to-two semester is remedial work. And then we get the employee after they graduate and they ready for the workforce All along the way we are failing Failure failure failure We can do better This is a great conversation Get away from checkboxes. Get away from numbers of credit. How are we doing? What are the outcomes? How are we measuring it? And who are we measuring? Size does matter, no matter what anybody might say. Okay, thank you. And I do appreciate in some of your testimony, even though I knew inviting you here, this would not be a popular topic with you. You gave me suggestions that if we continue to go down this road, what should we consider and how can we make it better? I really appreciate that. This is, we are still at the beginning of this. We are in no way doing this this session, obviously. But my fear is if it's something we don't have conversation about and we don't work collaboratively on, I don't want us to be left behind as a commonwealth. That's most important to me. and leaving our students behind when we do that. Our students must be first and focus-centered in this conversation. Nothing else should matter but putting out a student that can give you what you need in the workforce and that our workforce is strong because if we're putting out students that aren't prepared, we're affecting their own ability to earn, we're affecting the health of our community and the ultimate welfare of the economy of our society. So thank you all. Chairman Williams? Thank you, Senator Culver. I think I also just have thoughts, not really a question. Maybe it'll come to me as I'm talking. But I'm sitting and reflecting on this panel and the previous panel together. And I will say that Mr. Hudak and Mr. Riggleman, your comments on needing those critical thinking and communication skills is not the first time I've heard it. It will not be the last time I've heard it about business owners needing those skills. but like reflecting back to what you know Dr. McCarthy said about preparing students and there there is a trajectory and like I've noticed both in my own personal life that the skills and things that I learned later on in my college degree are things that I'm still using now as Dr. McCarthy talked about preparing you for your fourth job not your first like that that's that's me I've also seen it in the interns that come into my office. If they come into my office earlier in their undergraduate education versus later in their undergraduate education, or we've had some interns that are graduate students and the difference in their ability to, to adapt and to think it's not that they can't think critically. It's just, it takes you time to build up that base of knowledge that allows you to think outside the box. If you don't have that base, you can't do that later on. Dr. Christina Clark from LaRoche University submitted written testimony, and she also recently had an op-ed. And a quote from it is, employers are demanding more sophisticated human skills like ethical reasoning, problem framing, and sound judgment, even for entry-level positions. Those capabilities have traditionally been expected from middle managers, not new hires. I think as we're changing, like our education has to keep up with that. So that's something that I think we have to be thoughtful of as we're approaching this. And the other thing that, you know, President Coleman and Vice President Lukowski brought up is this, you know, kind of centering the elephant in the room, which is affordability. And when, you know, Pennsylvania goes from 49th in the country in higher ed to 50th in one report, is 46th in another ranking. You know one report says only one in three public four colleges are affordable for low students Pennsylvania is one of those We can give students less and call it affordability So like as a first generation student who pieced my liberal arts education together with merit scholarships and work study and need-based aid, including Pell Grants, like, and someone who's still paying about a thousand dollars a month in student loan payments, Like, we also have to think about, is this solving our bigger problem for all of our students? So I just, those are questions that both the previous panel and this panel, I think, are having me think about. So thank you. Thank you, Chairwoman Williams. Senator Argel? I'm a strong supporter of our community colleges and dual enrollment classes for high school students. I think if we're looking for affordability, quality, I think that is key. Ms. Coleman, I just want to focus on one key point. It's how exactly does a possible three-year degree hurt our community colleges? Couldn't students just take the two-year program and then transfer into the, let's not call it a bachelor's degree program? I'm concerned about, I don't understand that point. Well, I think they could. I think it's the possibility of the competition between the two. And I think that if you create a system of competition, then it remains to be seen which one will suffer. But I think that one of the two will certainly have a major shift in the students who choose to go to one establishment over the other. And given the demographics of Pennsylvania with the declining number of traditional students, okay, I get it. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Senator Urgo. Thank you to the panel for your time today and your testimony. So our final panel, thank you for your patience. We have Dr. Jonathan Green, president of Susquehanna University, Representative ACUP. I have to divulge, Susquehanna University is in my district, so I'm a little partial to it. And we have Christopher Fiorentino, Chancellor of the State System of Higher Education. And full disclosure, I serve on that board as well. So thank you both for being here. Could you please raise your right hands? Do you swear or affirm that the testimony you are about to give is true to the best of your knowledge, information, and belief? If so, please say, I do. Thank you. Thank you, Dr. Green. When you get settled, feel free to start. Thank you all.

Thank you, Dr. Green. Excuse me. Chancellor Florentino. Thank you.

I know it's getting long, but I still have a few comments, questions. Dr. Green, I am still alarmed that students are coming to you unprepared. I think at one point we said that some of them are coming with a ninth grade reading level and that remediation is required. I think that's work on our part that still needs to be done. Um, I'm also just one clarification from you. You commented, and I hope I got this right. Uh, if the three-year, um, degree would come in, it could lead to a 25% reduction. And was that an income or students? Or is it equal? If students are spending three quarters of the time on campus, then they're spending one quarter less. So just in terms of income for the university, um, income for the university, the surrounding community. So that shouldn't be the thing that drives it. But since I had heard others raising that as a question, our concerns are really about how our students are prepared to be successful after graduation.

So, Dr. Fiorentino, yeah, we know we don't have enough students to fill that workforce, and that's part of the issue. and when we're talking to students some students just going to college don't have the bandwidth or you know don't want to pay for courses that they feel and their estimation is not required for them to be successful in their employment I hear some larger employers considering starting their own university or their own college and I've asked the question how long would that be and they said probably three years is what we're thinking we could do it in. And, I mean, there's a plethora of questions that come up with that, so I won't take us down that rabbit hole at this point. But community colleges have been a big consideration to us as we've been going through this process. And I was glad to hear that you mentioned it. And one thing I learned today specifically is we need to build the program, not subtract from the program that already exists. That was a great point, I think, that a lot of you made today. And I just want to end by thanking both of you for being here, for having an open mind. I hope you all learned something today, as I have. But I'm going to turn it over to Chairwoman Williams. Thank you. Thank you both for your testimony. Chancellor, you included in your written testimony that neither federal regulations nor middle states require a bachelor's degree to have 120 credit hours. but respectfully your omission of Pennsylvania's own requirement of 120 credits is glaring. In 2022, the state system filed a petition with the State Board of Ed to waive the state regulation that requires a minimum of 120 credits. In that petition, PASHE petitioned that the regulations must be waived before the state system could establish a reduced credit bachelor's degree. As you know, PASHE withdrew that petition before the State Board of Education took any action. We've heard from middle states today that they agree that those regulations would have to be changed in order for a reduced credit program to be accredited. Is PASHE testifying that they do not require a change in regulation or law to offer a bachelor's with less than 120 credits? Since that time in 2022, it has been brought to our attention that Act 188 is structured in such a way that it would enable us to offer a 90 credit degree.

Okay. I'm going to like a little more information about that because in the petition, we... from PASHE in 2022. It talks about the PA code that requires the specific number of credits, and it says, and I quote on page three, thus the General Assembly made the state system independent of the Department of Education, but continued the state system's obligation to comply with regulations issued by the State Board of Education unless otherwise stated. So, can you tell me where it's otherwise stated? Well, again, that was the understanding

And subsequent to that, we learned or we've been informed that... You've been informed by who?

It's been reviewed by legal counsel because when it was brought to my attention

And their opinion is that within Act 188, there is language that would enable us to do this. Okay, I'm going to need that language because it looks like that you have the same attorney as you did in 2022. So I'm trying to understand what change and why the Board of Governors thinks that unilateral action is allowed. And, you know, especially with middle states testifying that they will not accredit without change in regulation, I am concerned about what that might do if PASCHI takes unilateral action. And I'd also – go ahead.

And you said Act 188?

Okay, I'd love to take this conversation offline to learn more about that interpretation And then I'd also like to know if that interpretation extends to other regulations. Are there other state regulations that act that PASCHI believes now with this new interpretation that it can unilaterally not follow those regulations with just simply board action and not going to the State Board of Ed?

Okay, but I would like that answer. If the interpretation on something else changed, I would like to see if it changed on anything else.

Thank you. Senator Argel. This has been probably one of the most valuable public hearings I've attended in a long time. So thank you, Madam Chairman. Very, very interesting. And I'm glad we're having the conversation. I'm glad we're looking at it. But as so many others have indicated, I would encourage us to move very, very cautiously. because if we would take the wrong road, I think we could be doing many of our students a disservice. Just a note, Dr. Green, I have had a very good intern from your institution serve in my office for several years, and I'm glad he was there every year and we did not cut one year from his education. And he is currently president of our Student Government Association Yeah he a good guy Good guy Thanks all Senator Carney Just a quick at the end here. Thank you both for being here. One of the things that I've – one of the reasons I think community colleges have been so successful is because they've been sort of nimble enough in being able to do non-degree programs that, you know, that associate's degrees or certificates that met a certain criteria for education moving forward. A lot of the discussions around CUNY colleges have been around lifetime learning, about students who come back, you know, every few years when they need something else kind of thing in order to kind of move forward. And I understand that at the heart of this is the sort of sacredness of the degree, the bachelor's degree, is, you know, the sheepskin might, you know, it means, it has to mean something in order for higher education to really maintain its brand, I guess, maybe is the best way to see it. But so I'm happy to continue these conversations. I'm glad we're going to continue to think about this. I have a feeling that a 90-hour thing shouldn't be called a bachelor's degree maybe. And certainly we know. I mean, before I mentioned, you know, that sometimes your last job is more important than your college degree. Kind of moving forward in the business world. So I struggle with that a lot. And, you know, I've been on the faculty at Drexel for 20 years. I taught at Penn before that. So I've sort of been inside, you know, and seen kind of how the things work. And you know it a stamp on an uneven process that winds up with a degree that worth something so that the C student who has the same degree as an A student has the same credential moving forward That to me is, it adds to the conversation to me. It adds to the, you know, trying to figure out exactly what the kind of worth of things are and who's it worth to and how do we kind of come back. And as always, I seem to come back to metrics in terms of what we're trying to do here in the Commonwealth. So not really a question, but again, thank you for being here. Chancellor, it's always great to see you. And we go back to his Westchester days. And thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Senator Carney. Chairman Williams, Chairwoman Williams. I just want to say thank you to everyone who testified. I think we had a good conversation. I look forward to more. So thank you all very much. I want to thank our testifiers, all the testifiers today. It turned out pretty much as I thought. Now I just want to get you around a big round table and let's solve all the problems that arose today. We know we have a lot of work to do. I think Chairwoman Williams and I are committed to doing that. But it's only going to happen if the experts in the fields communicate with us, articulate to us what was working, what is not working, and what we can do to improve this system for you. It is always student-centered. I'm not going to speak on her behalf, but for us. and I think that's what's important and students are speaking to us students are changing the students that are enrolling today are not the students that enrolled when you went to school or when we went to school and I encourage all of us to keep an open mind as we go through this process the thing that would I guess distress me the most is if we get five years down the road we don't have a good conversation about this and then we are in trouble because students are exporting from our commonwealth instead of importing. I know this is still a new concept, and I knew it would be met with mixed emotions on this one and mixed interpretations of what it can and can't do. And I just appreciate everybody's open and honesty, and let's continue this conversation. So thank you.