Skip to Navigation
University of Pittsburgh
Print This Page Print this pages

September 12, 1996

THE CHANCELLOR'S COLUMN

Just over 30 years ago — on Aug. 23, 1966 — Governor William Scranton signed the bill making Pitt a state-related university. That, of course, was one of the defining moments in our institutional history. In the short term, the creation of that relationship enabled the University to deal with a looming financial crisis. And, over the course of the past three decades, we have continued to benefit from our partnership with the Commonwealth.

Pennsylvania and its citizens also have benefited greatly from the decision to "take Pitt public." The middle 1960s saw the first big wave of "baby boomers" hit college age. That group was more higher-education-oriented than its predecessors had been. Almost every state faced great pressure to expand existing opportunities for affordable college and university experiences. Pennsylvania was able to meet a significant part of that demand, without the need to build campuses and programs from scratch, through the relationships it forged with Pitt and other established universities.

Over time, Pennsylvania got even more out of its end of this bargain. Let me convey some quick sense of our three decades of institutional contributions.

— In the last 30 years, the University of Pittsburgh has conferred over 180,000 degrees, most of them to Pennsylvania residents and more than 40 percent of them at the master's level or above, providing the specialized training so often essential for success in today's more competitive economy. — In the last 30 years, the University has earned international recognition for world-class quality in disciplines as diverse as philosophy and transplantation surgery; was accepted for membership in the prestigious Association of American Universities; became one of the top 20 institutions in the country, in terms of the federal research dollars that it attracts; and now annually "imports" into this region close to one-quarter of a billion dollars in sponsored project support. –In the last 30 years, the University has launched a broad range of initiatives dealing with such important social problems as illiteracy, drug and alcohol abuse, computer networking, support for battered women, and legal aid for the elderly; and has sponsored a significant number of clinical outreach programs designed to meet important health care needs.

–And in the last 30 years, the University has emerged as a dominant economic force; by itself standing as the largest employer in this city; becoming, when combined with the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, the largest employer in the six-county Pittsburgh region; supporting economic development through such initiatives as our Manufacturing Assistance, Biotechnology and Bioengineering Centers; and looming, in the minds of many, as the linch-pin for regional economic revitalization through such efforts as the Pittsburgh Tissue Engineering Initiative.

Much of what we have accomplished would not have been possible without support from the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. Indeed, much of our progress has been the direct product of that 30-year-old public partnership. Unfortunately, however, the financial side of our relationship with the Commonwealth has been steadily moving in the wrong direction. Over the years, comparative levels of support for higher education in this state have dramatically declined. In 1975, for example, the Commonwealth appropriation amounted to 34 percent of our University's total budget. By 1995, the Commonwealth appropriation had shrunk to 18 percent of our budget. And within the public institutions of the Association of American Universities, the group with which Pitt most directly competes, the state appropriation amounts to 36 percent of the typical university's budget. Obviously, then, Pennsylvania's public universities operate at a distinct competitive disadvantage. Among other things, this also means that, in the emerging regional economic competition, Pennsylvania itself operates at a distinct disadvantage. It is disheartening, but perhaps instructive, to note that this Commonwealth ranks near the bottom of the 50 states both in terms of per capita funding of higher education and in terms of new job creation. Governmental leaders do face difficult choices in increasingly challenging times. However, it is critical to the general good that they not forget tomorrow's needs when making tough decisions today. That support for higher education is among the most important investments any society can make in its future is a message that is consistently delivered by University leaders in Harrisburg. It is a message that also can be advanced by each of us, even here "at home," on an almost daily basis.

Each of us can underscore that message by taking full advantage of opportunities to effectively and enthusiastically proclaim and explain the social value of what we do. Each of us can minimize the likelihood of effective attacks upon our mission by recognizing and responding appropriately to the ever-increasing demands for accountability that are being directed to institutions of all types, including universities. And, perhaps most important, each of us can advance our shared cause by serving as an individual model of what is good about American higher education.

Robert Alberts closes his bicentennial history of our University by stating that the story of Pitt "is essentially a success story, a happy chronicle of a sound and worthwhile accomplishment." Everyone committed to advancing the University can take a cue from our historian. The vast majority of the population, those who have not read to page 445 of the Alberts book, must be educated in other ways to the fact that there is much to celebrate at Pitt. Achieving wider recognition of that truth is an important part of building the foundation for a vibrant institutional future.

Mark A. Nordenberg

Filed under: Feature,Volume 29 Issue 2

Leave a Reply