Why savvy students might start to opt out of university
This article from the UK's The Guardian reflects on many of the same issues we have talked about in class, but from the British perspective. The students there are facing many of the same questions about higher education as American students, including weighing the costs (explicit and implicit of a degree) vs. the potential benefits.
Also, as most colleges/universities are state-funded in the UK, students pay a standard fee. Approximately 2 years ago, this fee went from 3,000 L to 9,000 L per year. This increase has corresponded with a dip in the number of applications to universities.
The writer makes the point that many students may be able to take on apprenticeships to learn the skills of their future career rather than go to college. I like that this writer acknowledges that the stigma about those who do not go to college exists. I also think she is right in pointing out that this stigma may eventually disappear if college becomes less and less of the norm.
I think we tend to forget that students across the globe face similar issues to us when it comes to higher education. Rising fees, debt, and uncertain job prospects are factors that extend far beyond our own borders.
The writer closes with: "In 10 years, the question young people may face in job interviews may not be: 'Why didn't you go to university?' but: 'Why did you think it was worth it'. That might not be such a bad thing."
I'm not sure if she's right about it not being such a bad thing, but I do think she makes a point that perhaps this will actually increase the worth of a college education and force individuals to evaluate their own goals and motivations for spending years of their life earning a degree.
Monday, January 13, 2014
How The Government Could Make Public College Free For All Students - ThinkProgress.org
How The Government Could Make Public College Free For All Students
The article from this liberal website outlines its ideas about how the government could use the same amount of money it already spends in order to fully subsidize a public college education for every student in the US.
The article claims that the government spends $69 billion attempting to make college affordable, while the cost of public tuition in 2012 was $62.6 billion (for all students across the country). They claim that the government could divert all of this money into subsidizing public higher education in order to provide a free degree.
But the math seems fuzzy to me.
First, this would only cover tuition, not room and board.
Second, that $69 billion includes tax cuts, which can't necessarily be turned into cash to pay for people's tuition.
Third, institutions partially rely on out-of-state students who pay a greater amount in tuition. How would a purely-government-subsidized program handle this? Where does the state fit in?
Four, what happens to students attempting to go to private institutions? Would their federal aid be completely lost as the funds are redirected towards public tuition?
Five, how would this affect the quality of education students receive?
Also, wouldn't it create a massive conflict of interest when every single public college or university in the United States is being completely paid by the U.S. government? This seems as if it could be a major power grab by the federal government.
A commenter makes a good point that many colleges/universities may feel obligated to grant students their degrees, even if they have not done the work, like what supposedly happens in many high schools. In addition, if schools are graded on their performance in areas such as graduation rates as the article suggests (in order to "incentivize" schools to improve and compete with private colleges), this handing out of degrees could also increase.
I support attempting to make college affordable for those who work hard and are committed (note, I did not say everyone). However, I question if this free-public-education-for-all idea is a good one. Or even feasible for that matter.
What are your thoughts?
The article from this liberal website outlines its ideas about how the government could use the same amount of money it already spends in order to fully subsidize a public college education for every student in the US.
The article claims that the government spends $69 billion attempting to make college affordable, while the cost of public tuition in 2012 was $62.6 billion (for all students across the country). They claim that the government could divert all of this money into subsidizing public higher education in order to provide a free degree.
But the math seems fuzzy to me.
First, this would only cover tuition, not room and board.
Second, that $69 billion includes tax cuts, which can't necessarily be turned into cash to pay for people's tuition.
Third, institutions partially rely on out-of-state students who pay a greater amount in tuition. How would a purely-government-subsidized program handle this? Where does the state fit in?
Four, what happens to students attempting to go to private institutions? Would their federal aid be completely lost as the funds are redirected towards public tuition?
Five, how would this affect the quality of education students receive?
Also, wouldn't it create a massive conflict of interest when every single public college or university in the United States is being completely paid by the U.S. government? This seems as if it could be a major power grab by the federal government.
A commenter makes a good point that many colleges/universities may feel obligated to grant students their degrees, even if they have not done the work, like what supposedly happens in many high schools. In addition, if schools are graded on their performance in areas such as graduation rates as the article suggests (in order to "incentivize" schools to improve and compete with private colleges), this handing out of degrees could also increase.
I support attempting to make college affordable for those who work hard and are committed (note, I did not say everyone). However, I question if this free-public-education-for-all idea is a good one. Or even feasible for that matter.
What are your thoughts?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)