A Cost-Effective Solution

Now that I have explored both sides of the debate on free-tuition, I am ready to give my opinion on what I think is best for our nation. Both sides have many appealing aspects. Everybody would love to graduate college and say they didn’t have to pay a dime towards tuition. However, there are many trade-offs to the general public, including enormous tax increases and potential for decreases in the overall quality of education that is being offered. To determine the right way to implement a solution for this civic issue, it is necessary to get down to the foundation of what problem this type of policy is trying to address. It seems the two main purposes of free tuition are: (1) to recruit top-tier talented minds from home and abroad to fill specialized careers that is or could be facing a shortage of workers and (2) to empower American students who are discouraged from continuing their education due to the high sticker price of attending college. With this in mind, I have come to the conclusion that something must be done, although universal free tuition is not the answer.

There are two solutions that I think would work well in addressing the concerns that are coming from both sides. First, I think there needs to be economic incentive to enter fields that teach the skills for careers paths that are supposed to have shortages of workers. For example, geriatric care has been identified as a field that will have significant labor shortages in the coming years as the Baby Boomer generation ages. One way the government can ensure that there will be enough professionals providing care to the aging population is to subsidize students’s education bills after graduating with a degree that would properly train them for a career in geriatrics. This framework could be applied generally to many different fields. Additionally, the subsidized tuition would be a great incentive for students who are interested in the field, but don’t think they can afford the cost of attending school. It also could incentivize bright students from other countries to study, and hopefully make a career, in the United States.

The second solution I am proposing already exists to a certain extent. Federal student aid is not currently providing enough to meet financial need. At Penn State, I am likely to graduate with more debt than if I were graduating from an Ivy League school. This is hard to imagine when the sticker price at Penn State is nearly half that of most of the ivy schools. However, one thing that Ivy schools do differently then public schools is meet 100% of financial need. Since these schools have a more realistic interpretation then the government of how much of my education I can pay for, it can be less expensive for most Americans to go to the Ivy schools. If the government actually made an effort to meet students’ individual financial needs, students would be able to graduate with less debt. This would certainly cause an increase in taxes, but it would not cause nearly as drastic of an increase as universal free tuition. For that reason, I believe this is a viable compromise between the two sides of the debate on free tuition.

Although free tuition is unfeasible, there are various other initiatives that can achieve the same goals, and require far fewer tax dollars. I am excited to see how this civic issue will affect legislative agenda in the near future as well as the Presidential race in 2020.

The Cost of Free Tuition

Although my previous post may have been a compelling argument for why college should be free, I want to include the counter on why it should not be free. While free college sounds great, there is not a real clear answer on how it could be feasible in the United States.

The first thing that always comes to my mind when I think about free tuition is the fact that it would not actually be free. Professors, many of whom make very handsome salaries, are not going to suddenly become volunteers. Operating expenses involved with keeping universities and colleges running are not going to simply disappear. Somebody would have to pick up the bill for the millions of students who would utilize tuition-free college. That is when the tax burden would be realized by the working citizens of the United States. There are already so many issues surrounding tax increases. Offering free tuition to anyone and everyone would just make tax-rates skyrocket. This is why most people who support the policy are those who are in their teens and early twenties. Many older working people who already deal with high taxes want nothing to do with a policy that would cause even more financial stress. Meanwhile, publicly-funded budgets would most likely be restricted to try to limit the financial burden bestowed on the taxpayers.  This would cause a decrease in the quality of education and resources provided to the students.

Another big doubt that I have come across is that free tuition might not benefit the right people. A majority of the people attending college come from middle class or upper class families. In no way does that mean that those families don’t struggle to pay the six figure cost of attending college. However, what positive impact would free tuition have on families that pay the bills with ease? The universality of the policy is troubling because not everyone necessarily needs to have their tuition subsidized. One idealistic viewpoint is that free tuition would incentivize lower income students to continue their educations. I think that would be an amazing outcome, but to achieve that I do not think that free tuition needs to be universal since that is such a targeted outcome. Additionally, significant increases in lower class enrollment rate might not become the outcome. The sticker price of college is not the only thing holding poor students from continuing their education. For many, there is a need to immediately enter the work-force in order to help provide for their families.

Personally, my biggest concern related to tuition-free college is the devaluation of the education itself. If free tuition were successful in increasing the amount of students attending in a sustainable manner, there would suddenly be a lot more people with undergraduate degrees. In one of my favorite movies as a child, the main antagonist proclaims, “when everyone’s super, no one will be!” The same principle can be applied to free tuition. It used to mean something to be a college graduate. Now, people already talk about how most people need to go to graduate school to get a good job. If more people were to attend and graduate from college as a result of free tuition, this devaluation would be further exacerbated. On the other hand, free tuition could also have the opposite effect in which people would not value their education as much because of the limited monetary risk associated with attending school. In this hypothetical outcome, the dropout rate would hike significantly upward.

In theory, free tuition would be a great policy. It has even gotten a lot of young people interested in the political process, which is great. However, when you apply the policy to the realities that exist in our society, it is hard to think that such a progressive move could feasibly be implemented any time soon.

Deliberation Reflection – “The Cost of College: Who Pays the Bill?”

For my required deliberation attendance, I attended “The Cost of College: Who Pays the Bill?” Originally, I attended just because a friend of mine in the group asked me to attend. At the time, I did not know what the topic was, but agreed to attend. Ironically enough, the topic was the same as that of my Civic Issues Blog. Because I have been doing research into the topic, I had a lot of background knowledge and therefore a lot to offer to the deliberation.

At the beginning, I was sort of distracted by the summary. The deliberation guide showed what the average cost of public tuition was in 1986 and what it should be now if it grew solely based on inflation, versus what it actually is. I italicized “public tuition” because the numbers they presented, respectively, were approximately $10,000, $22,000, and $59,000. This threw me off because the guide was not talking about only tuition, but also fees and room and board. Additionally the guide was referring to private universities/colleges as opposed to public ones. This sort of distracted me while they were on the topic, but I did not want to throw off the deliberation simply because they had a bad source. Also, I did not know at the time if I was simply misinterpreting the guide, but now I am certain I was not. However, the deliberation continued to run smoothly.

The first approach was called “Status Quo” and was a discussion about the current system in the United States. It was the most moderate of the three models. It acknowledged that the high price of attending college is an issue as it may discourage some students from attending. The deliberators also brought up the point that most students do not have to pay the entire sticker price.

The second approach was bound to be a part of the deliberation – the idea that college should be universal for all. This garnered a lot of discussion, likely because Bernie Sanders popularized it during his bid for President. Since a large cohort of Sanders’s supporters were college students, I thought many people would strongly agree with this approach. To my surprise, many people did not seem to think that a nation-wide reform would be successful. That is when I added to the conversation by telling people about the Tennessee Promise (free tuition at 2-year colleges in Tennessee). The general consensus was that programs like this that are put together by the states would help the federal government make a better plan for enacting an effective policy in the future.

The third approach suggested that the United States base its policy around the European model. This tends to attract smart students from around the globe and students of course the benefit of graduating college debt-free. However the debt comes at the expense of the citizens who are paying the taxes. Additionally, the free tuition in European countries has negatively affected the education system itself. Also, getting into colleges has become increasingly more selective.

Overall, this deliberation gave me new insight into the discussion on college tuition.  Although I am doing a blog on the topic, I obviously do not know everything there is to know on the issue so I am glad I was able to attend this event as it gave me some new ideas to consider in my ensuing blog posts. Finally, I enjoyed deliberating as there are not many opportunities in which you can speak your mind without fear that others will discredit your thoughts and think less of you. It was a truly thought-provoking experience.

It’s my Money and I Need it Now – why college should be tuition-free

If you have ever been to Costco, you know that Americans enjoy getting things (i.e. samples) without having to pay for them. Recently, the debate for free tuition has picked up more national attention than ever. In the immediate past, it was individual states that took measures to subsidize the cost of attending college. Now, there is a national movement for policies to be put in place that would allow all Americans to attend college without having to deal with the financial burdens of tuition. Supporters want free tuition for various reasons, but perhaps most importantly, because they believe that people have the right to an education even if they cannot afford one without taking out loans.

To understand why people support free tuition, we must also consider who specifically supports free tuition. According to a poll conducted by Princeton Survey Research Associates in July 2016, a majority of Americans do in fact support free tuition. Additionally, 79% of millennials support this policy change. Granted, these are the people that would be the most affected by the proposed change. There is however a generational decrease in the amount of support for free tuition. Many young people are discouraged from seeking out higher education because they know the unmanageable burden it could bring on their family. This likely prevents many students from unlocking their full potential. Once students know they aren’t going to college they often give up on themselves (in an academic sense). Through this lens, it appears that the intimidating cost of attending college only perpetuates the poverty cycle while enabling the rich and middle class to grow their wealth.

Supporters site many examples, both within the states and abroad, at which our policy-makers should look for inspiration. Currently, the Tennessee Promise is a program in Tennessee that allows for high school graduates to attend community or technical college tuition-free. It began with the graduating class of 2015 as an initiative to increase the percentage of Tennesseans with a college degree. The first year the program was in place, Tennessee saw a significant increase in freshmen enrolled in the state’s colleges or universities that partook in the program. Officials in Tennessee believe that this will help address the loss of skilled workers as the baby boomer generation retires.

As Bernie Sanders claimed along his campaign trail, America once had various colleges that offered free tuition. According to writer Lawrence Wittner “in 1862, to provide educational opportunities for the ‘sons of toil,’ the U.S. Congress passed the Morrill Act, establishing land-grant public colleges and universities on a tuition-free basis. For roughly a century thereafter, many American public colleges and universities either charged no tuition or a nominal fee for attendance. The State University of New York (SUNY) system – the largest in the nation – remained tuition-free until 1963. The University of California system, established in 1868, had free tuition until the 1980s.” Many nay-sayers fear that if we get rid of tuition, it will come at the expense of quality educators. However, California remains one of the least expensive states to attend college, in terms of tuition, despite their many amazing state programs. (Seriously! why couldn’t I grow up in California and go to Berkeley for $4,000 less per year than Penn State!?)  Many people see these examples as proof that free college tuition is possible in the United States.

If that is not proof enough, proponents of free tuition also site programs in Germany, Norway, etcetera as proof that free tuition has sustainable benefits for any developed country. These programs help bring in a diverse, skilled work force. It also encourages economic mobility within the country.

Whether you believe that free tuition is practical or not, most people can agree that youths are the future of this nation. Next blog post, the debate will continue on whether or not free tuition is the best way to make that future a bright one.

Here are links to various sources that were utilized in this blog:

https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2015/11/24/promise-program-sharply-lifts-tennessee-college-freshman-enrollment

http://education.stateuniversity.com/pages/2152/Land-Grant-Colleges-Universities.html

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-08-01/majority-of-americans-want-college-to-be-free

 

Will free tuition come to fruition?

As a college student, it is hard to escape the question, “should college be tuition-free?” In fact, there are some people who would not even consider that a question because they are so certain that students should or should not have to pay college tuition. It is important to note the use of the word tuition. Many people have different definitions of free. Some believe that students should neither have to pay tuition nor room & board. However, for the purposes of this blog, I will assess the punctuality of simply making college tuition-free. Throughout this blog, if I ever write “free college,” or something of that nature I am simply short-handing “tuition-free college.”

One year ago, self-declared socialist Bernie Sanders was getting serious consideration in the race for the Democratic Presidential nomination. One of his main policy objectives? –Government-funded college tuition. Not surprisingly, he had huge support from the newly enfranchised college-aged population of voters. Hillary Clinton went on to win the Democratic nomination. However, in this article in the Wall Street Journal, you can see that one demographic in which Sanders really outpolled Clinton was with voters aged 18-29 years old. In other words, the group of people that were preparing for, experiencing, or recovering from the financial burdens of college were strongly supporting Sanders. The fact that the debate on tuition was so important to this election gives it a kairotic relevance that I am excited to explore.

While there are differing opinions on this issue, most people can agree that the youth are this nation’s future. Most supporters of free college tuition use this as enough justification to merit government action. Some of the arguments for government-funded free tuition include:

  • Federally-funded financial aid is currently giving too little money to too few people
  • Instead of focusing on working, students would be able to focus on their educations and obtaining their degrees quicker
  • The amount of people on current entitlement programs could decrease

Meanwhile a few of the main arguments against free tuition are:

  • It would be too significant a commitment for the limited amount of government funds available
  • Many people in America who can afford the cost of tuition will be more likely to take advantage of the funding
  • The quality of educators would go down because universities would be mandated to cut costs (say bye to professors with six-figure incomes)
  • Free tuition could make some people lose their incentive to do well/graduate

Some alternatives offered by those who are opposed suggest that the government should pin-point who is really in need. In a sense, the government already does this, but expansion of these programs could be beneficial.

In addition to the black and white, for and against arguments, I believe there is a grey area in the middle. Free tuition would be a very arduous task and would include an exorbitant amount of government funding. As a college student, I would love to not have to worry about how I fund my education. However, a free education for anyone and everyone is not practical. Our government has the option to engage in a more pragmatic initiative; there should be subsidies available for students who graduate with degrees which apply to a certain field that is lacking depth, such as geriatric care where there are a lot of patients and not a lot of specialists. How could this work? The best way would probably be for the government to award a grant to students upon receipt of the pre-determined degrees. This would contribute to filling the shortage of professionals in occupations that have deficient work-forces. In my opinion, this is a great compromise. One of the main reasons some foreign countries offer free tuition is because of the need for skilled workers. The targeted degree approach is a practical way to offer students free tuition because it can effectively fill industries that are lacking the proper employment. Additionally, it would avoid various problems such as lack of funds and lack of effort on the part of the students.

In my ensuing blog posts, I will go into more detail on the different sides of my civic issue. By the end of my blogging, I hope to come to an informed decision on whether or not free tuition, or something in-between, is the best thing for our country.