Regarding the Collegian's editorial yesterday ("Dickinson, PSU need to agree about future of dual campus school" Wed., Dec. 1), I believe that you identified the core issue of this debate. You state that "Dickinson produces practical lawyers ... not everyone wants to be a big-time city lawyer." The crux of the debate is essentially the difference in the vision and mission of Penn State and Dickinson; the two schools are totally different in this respect. The decision regarding the future of the Dickinson-Penn State relationship is not altruistic. Dickinson is a lower tier law school. Unless Penn State is successful in raising its profile, an affiliation with Dickinson will dilute the name of Penn State and hence the value of a Penn State degree. This impacts both current students and alumni. For the large investment involved, Penn State should do whatever will absolutely maximize the impact of that investment in furthering the university's mission and its reputation. If Dickinson somehow fits into that model, great! If not, we should be prepared to part amicably.