|
0 members (),
187
guests, and
13
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
S |
M |
T |
W |
T |
F |
S |
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
7
|
|
8
|
9
|
10
|
11
|
12
|
13
|
14
|
|
15
|
16
|
17
|
18
|
19
|
20
|
21
|
|
22
|
23
|
24
|
25
|
26
|
27
|
28
|
|
29
|
30
|
31
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2011
Posts: 2,007
Member
|
Member
Joined: Jul 2011
Posts: 2,007 |
Err...you're off-topic on both counts there. The thread is about tuition at US public universities, not public school expenditures or the health of low SES people who went to college. He's talking about people like my first college roommate who had already been arrested for a felony. He was not low SES, although he was a bit of a wackadoo. One of my first memories of college was him ripping off the window screen to climb into bed through his window. Both he and I had free tuition, so it seems relevant!
Last edited by JonLaw; 01/06/14 12:05 PM. Reason: Yes, I speeled a word wrong again.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 2,640 Likes: 2
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 2,640 Likes: 2 |
Our society encourages everyone to go to college, yet many aren't ready for college. We say that we're trying to help them find a better future, but we're really just yoking a lot of them to debt. This is wrong, and damages not just individuals, but the country as a whole. I agree, but "free tuition at US public universities" sends the message that everyone should go to college, just as free K-12 schooling sends the message that everyone should finish high school. As an alternative, giving 18-year-olds a grant of say $40,000 that could be used either for higher education *OR* to offset the first $40,000 of their social security and payroll taxes would not biased in favor of college over work.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2012
Posts: 761
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jul 2012
Posts: 761 |
Our society encourages everyone to go to college, yet many aren't ready for college. We say that we're trying to help them find a better future, but we're really just yoking a lot of them to debt. This is wrong, and damages not just individuals, but the country as a whole. I agree, but "free tuition at US public universities" sends the message that everyone should go to college, just as free K-12 schooling sends the message that everyone should finish high school. As an alternative, giving 18-year-olds a grant of say $40,000 that could be used either for higher education *OR* to offset the first $40,000 of their social security and payroll taxes would not biased in favor of college over work. They can't just be free. They need to be free for the best of the best. The rest can pay their way through private schools or find a job after high school and become "skilled labor" so those jobs that need skills wouldn't be all done overseas.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 3,299 Likes: 2
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 3,299 Likes: 2 |
I agree, but "free tuition at US public universities" sends the message that everyone should go to college.... On the contrary. Easy admissions and our educational establishment send that message. Minimum entry requirements (as noted by ColinsMum) send the message that only people who do well on the test should go to college. Ireland abolished fees some years ago in attempt to equalize the SES distribution in higher education. It didn't work out as planned. People who don't enjoy studying are unlikely to go to college if there are 1) reasonable options for employment and 2) there's no general message telling them the NEED TO GO TO COLLEGE!!!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 3,299 Likes: 2
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 3,299 Likes: 2 |
They can't just be free. They need to be free for the best of the best. The rest can pay their way through private schools or find a job after high school and become "skilled labor" so those jobs that need skills wouldn't be all done overseas. Who defines the best of the best? The SAT? Grades? Recommendation letters? All you get in a system like this is an arms race weighted toward stressed-out tiger cubs. No thank you. Anyone who qualifies for admission should be allowed to go to public universities for free provided they maintain minimum grades as set by the university.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2012
Posts: 761
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jul 2012
Posts: 761 |
They can't just be free. They need to be free for the best of the best. The rest can pay their way through private schools or find a job after high school and become "skilled labor" so those jobs that need skills wouldn't be all done overseas. Who defines the best of the best? The SAT? Grades? Recommendation letters? All you get in a system like this is an arms race weighted toward stressed-out tiger cubs. No thank you. Anyone who qualifies for admission should be allowed to go to public universities for free provided they maintain minimum grades as set by the university. I'm going back to liking the European system (might not be all of the countries but many of them) where you apply to school with a particular major in mind, you take entrance exams targeted towards that major, prove your knowledge in that field, and get admitted based on those test results. No SATs, ACTs, or other things like that. It's knowledge based. You study really hard in high school, especially in your senior year to do your best on those tests. Some universities have written and oral entrance exams. My nephew just started Law school at the best of the few public universities in the country. He had his eyes on the prize since early middle school and everything he did was with wanting to go to that particular school and program in mind. The system has it's flaws but I still like it a lot better than the college system in the US. High schools are free to everyone ... college is beyond what's necessary for many people in many occupations.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2012
Posts: 761
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jul 2012
Posts: 761 |
The problem is, for the free public university system to work, the whole high school system would have to be redesigned too. ... more trade / vocational schools, more selective college prep schools (public, not private costing you arm and leg).
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 3,299 Likes: 2
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 3,299 Likes: 2 |
I agree 100% with your previous two messages.
I have degrees from two European universities and one American one, and the European model is much fairer. IMO, the national curricula in the primary and secondary schools are a part of what makes it fairer. Americans don't like the idea of a national curriculum. But...
...oddly enough, this country has de facto national curricula in most subjects --- they're written by the big textbook manufacturers and the big testing testing companies (Pearson, the College Board and its AP exams, etc.). Yet people cling to the belief that there is "local control," presumably because their school board chooses Big EduCo Book A over Big EduCo Book B.
Oh dear.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2011
Posts: 2,007
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jul 2011
Posts: 2,007 |
I'm still not sure what the point of college is in the first place.
As far as I can tell, it was a waste of five years of my life and I took the place of someone who would have actually found it useful and had some interest in being there.
Although I did like the fact that it was free.
Last edited by JonLaw; 01/06/14 01:34 PM. Reason: I spleel wrong again.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2011
Posts: 2,007
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jul 2011
Posts: 2,007 |
...oddly enough, this country has de facto national curricula in most subjects --- they're written by the big textbook manufacturers and the big testing testing companies (Pearson, the College Board and its AP exams, etc.). Yet people cling to the belief that there is "local control," presumably because their school board chooses Big EduCo Book A over Big EduCo Book B. They do have local control. They can dump the current school board and make life miserable for the superintendent who promptly has a stroke.
|
|
|
|
|
