What would happen if college was free for all students?

[Sunkist]

It makes good sense to have an educated population. Which is why we have legislated schooling to the age of 16 in the UK. Higher education - college - is optional. Personally, I don't think time spent learning is ever wasted.

In modern times, I['m not sure the old model of physically attending a college - with all the expense that incurs - and lectures and such make as much sense, but then college is often the first time young adults spend time away from their families, which is good for socialization.

I do worry that colleges have lost a little focus on being centers of learning though. This may not be a legitimate concern, but there appears to be an awful lot of non-academic stuff going on, and I'm not sure that's always a good thing.

I do NOT think that there has to be a direct correlation between a college degree and a specific career path. Education within itself is valuable. People need to learn all kinds of skills, from how to research, study, document ideas, communicate in various forms, etc. There are paths where career paths are clearly mapped, such as in the medical field, and research fields in the sciences, but it doesn't have to be direct.

The burden of debt is a madness though. The whole loan and repayment system needs to overhauled.

Finally, we need to accept as oldsters that we don't really have the vision for the future in the same way younger folk do. Technology has been busy reshaping every aspect of our lives, and I know for myself - despite a career in technology - that I'm already behind the 8-ball on what's coming, and what will be relevant.

Agree on all the points you made ^ .

 

[Rider77]

Many states allowed lotteries on the precept of supporting tuition based higher education. There are negatives to that concept. When implemented college attendance numbers soar, that demands significant infrastructure investment and more staffing and to some extent artificial staff costs. Those unintended consequences directly impact tax revenue requirements. Then start considering the impact of the primary source lottery revenue, largely from the pockets of the poor. So did we win in the end? My reasoning says no, but there are many who say my thinking is all wrong. Maybe so, but that's my reasoning.

 

[RambleTamble]

When implemented college attendance numbers soar, that demands significant infrastructure investment and more staffing and to some extent artificial staff costs. Those unintended consequences directly impact tax revenue requirements.

The result is a more highly educated populace, which means companies that need educated people will be more likely to start up or move there, which will result in more jobs. The infrastructure investment will also mean more jobs and improved life for the residents, as well as increased tourism to the state. Educated people earn far more on average than non-educated, which means they pay more in taxes. That increased tax revenue, if not offset by more tax cuts for the rich, can pay for infrastructure improvements and can also be used to lower tuition rates for students, which means more potential students can afford college and university...

It's pretty much a "win-win" for everybody, including the poor who spend the largest percentage of their income on lottery tickets since affordable college and an abundance of jobs provide them with a way out of poverty.

 

[Rider77]

The result is a more highly educated populace, which means companies that need educated people will be more likely to start up or move there, which will result in more jobs. The infrastructure investment will also mean more jobs and improved life for the residents, as well as increased tourism to the state. Educated people earn far more on average than non-educated, which means they pay more in taxes. That increased tax revenue, if not offset by more tax cuts for the rich, can pay for infrastructure improvements and can also be used to lower tuition rates for students, which means more potential students can afford college and university...

It's pretty much a "win-win" for everybody, including the poor who spend the largest percentage of their income on lottery tickets since affordable college and an abundance of jobs provide them with a way out of poverty.

I know that is the argument put forward, but it has quite a bit of pipe dream in it as well. I guess no method is going to work perfectly. It does seem that there is a gradual recognition that learned skills in trades and service vocations is getting more attention. If the higher education institutions were more focused on skills that truly get applied that utopian concept might show more results. Fact is some of the majors that graduates pursue just don't have real market value.

Look at the number of students who graduate or even fail to graduate with mountainous debt. Is it realistic to say value received is near dollars owed? I frankly feel we are kidding ourselves if we subscribe to that concept.

 

[January]

I think everyone with the ability to do so should have access to higher education - so university/college entry shouldn't be limited to children of parents who can afford to pay.

In Australia we have the HECS system whereby part of the cost is paid back by the college attendee in extra tax when you earn over a certain amount.

I think this is a fair system.

 

[RambleTamble]

Look at the number of students who graduate or even fail to graduate with mountainous debt.

That's the problem we're trying to solve here. College and universities are too expensive.

People should be able to get an education if they want to and blue collar workers should be able to get training if they want to. The more skilled and educated the populace, the better off our country will be.

 

[VaughanJB]

I know that is the argument put forward, but it has quite a bit of pipe dream in it as well. I guess no method is going to work perfectly. It does seem that there is a gradual recognition that learned skills in trades and service vocations is getting more attention. If the higher education institutions were more focused on skills that truly get applied that utopian concept might show more results. Fact is some of the majors that graduates pursue just don't have real market value.

Look at the number of students who graduate or even fail to graduate with mountainous debt. Is it realistic to say value received is near dollars owed? I frankly feel we are kidding ourselves if we subscribe to that concept.

I don't think it's a pipe dream, I think it's reality. Our nations benefit all the time from educated individuals. I think we ought to make sure we're talking about the same thing. Most college education is what might be described as book learning. This is useful, it had bred generations of individuals who have had jobs, had families, and so on. Then there is a whole other approach, it's still education, but it's more hands-on and practical. I'm talking bricklayers, carpenters, plumbers, mechanics, machine workers, and so on. These are people who learn, but learn in a different way.

I'd agree with you that there might be a problem in younger education. That is, until the age of 16. There wasn't much education in terms of the trades, it was all focused on book learning. Also, those trades tend to rely on hands on working, often known as apprenticeships, and sadly they've become hard to come by. We had a scheme in the UK, back in the 1980's, where the government would pay kids to go work on the trades and learn, usually on a fixed term basis. The employer paid virtually nothing for the help. It might have worked out if only people truly had good intentions. Sadly, companies would take the cheap labor, have them for the allotted time, and then fire them in order to bring in more cheap labor.

As I stated earlier, there doesn't have to be a direct correlation between the subject studied, and a specific job. Every student who graduates ought to be able to read, write, do math, communicate, and so on. AND - learn more. That's the essence of it.

The debt thing is a problem, but it's heinous nature of the system that preys upon young people.

 

[Rider77]

Every student who graduates ought to be able to read, write, do math, communicate, and so on.

They ought to be able to. Our education system is pushing them out the door without the basics being mastered. Ask one to count your change without the use of a machine, ask them to write a simple sentence in cursive, balance a checkbook, or read a paragraph and then tell you what it meant. I had a Purdue accounting graduate on my staff, (for a while) who had no idea what depreciation or the depreciation reserve meant on the balance sheet, but she graduated with honors in accounting.

 

[January]

ask them to write a simple sentence in cursive, balance a checkbook,

yes they should have reading and writing, maths, communications skills

No need to be able to write in cursive though - since that is not a neccesary skill in today's world

and no need to know how to use check books - since they are a dying ( if not already dead) thing to most people today