Join In On The Action "Register Here" To View The Forums

Already a Member Login Here

Board index Forum Index
User avatar
Administrator
 
Posts: 6927
Joined: 26 Jun 2000, 1:13 pm

Post 21 Aug 2018, 9:36 am

rickyp wrote:bbauska
Perhaps this is not a government solvable issue
.

Denmark? Germany? Any other OECD nation?
These countries have largely solved the problem.
Is it impossible to learn from them bbauska?


Not impossible to learn from them. Just saying that I think it in NOT the governments responsibility to pay for college education. A way to make it more affordable is to lower the cost of education, No?

You see, I am trying to provide you with an alternative viewpoint which you are blind to even the possibility of.
User avatar
Statesman
 
Posts: 11019
Joined: 15 Aug 2000, 8:59 am

Post 21 Aug 2018, 10:54 am

bbauska
You see, I am trying to provide you with an alternative viewpoint which you are blind to even the possibility of


No your not. This isn't a "viewpoint".
You said
"Perhaps this is not a government solvable issue"

Since other governments around the world do solve (or at least mitigate) the issue - this statement is demonstrably false. Therefore your premise is a non-starter.

You then said
I know that the Universities can reduce the costs...

Fine... Since cost is the underlining problem..
Do they do this magically? What about the current situation concerning University education will reduce costs? Why would Universities be motivated to do so?
If they are running as not for profit now - essentially breaking even - then what has to change?
User avatar
Administrator
 
Posts: 6927
Joined: 26 Jun 2000, 1:13 pm

Post 21 Aug 2018, 11:19 am

If you expect a government to operate at a bigger loss (paying for education), then an alternative viewpoint (which indeed is mine), is that the collegiate educational system is capable of operating at a loss as well.

That would require charging less to students, No?

Expect staff/educators to paid less. Expect services to be cut such as sports activities, meals. Expect students to pay more.

Sound like an alternative viewpoint to me.
User avatar
Statesman
 
Posts: 11019
Joined: 15 Aug 2000, 8:59 am

Post 22 Aug 2018, 8:59 am

bbauska
Expect students to pay more
.
And yet in the systems being compared, students pay less. Some nothing...
So why should I expect that?

https://trends.collegeboard.org/sites/d ... cing_0.pdf

page 12 of the linked report shows how much tuition and fees have increased since 1987. Its now over $34,000 for a private non-profit university.

It seems like another case where there is actually a need for regulation, as the market system in place is busy pricing education out of the reach of too many people. And the problem with that, is that the talented people in the lower and middle classes won't be able to access a better education. And the people who can actually afford the education will include a lot of less talented people will make up the classes.

In other words, US universities will return to the situation before the GI Bill, when they were something of a closed shop rather than a meritocracy. (Incidentally also a period when there was a lack of social mobility) .
User avatar
Administrator
 
Posts: 6927
Joined: 26 Jun 2000, 1:13 pm

Post 22 Aug 2018, 10:34 am

Are you saying that the entrance requirements for education be based upon the best, regardless of race, religion, creed, social strata, and income?

I am fine with that.
User avatar
Statesman
 
Posts: 11019
Joined: 15 Aug 2000, 8:59 am

Post 23 Aug 2018, 6:44 am

bbauska
Are you saying that the entrance requirements for education be based upon the best, regardless of race, religion, creed, social strata, and income?

I am fine with that


velkommen til danmark
User avatar
Administrator
 
Posts: 6927
Joined: 26 Jun 2000, 1:13 pm

Post 23 Aug 2018, 7:22 am

rickyp wrote:bbauska
Are you saying that the entrance requirements for education be based upon the best, regardless of race, religion, creed, social strata, and income?

I am fine with that


velkommen til danmark


Danke! Da gehren!

You asked for people to be based on merit, and now you don't answer a question...
Are you saying that the entrance requirements for education be based upon the best, regardless of race, religion, creed, social strata, and income?
User avatar
Adjutant
 
Posts: 3108
Joined: 17 May 2013, 3:32 pm

Post 23 Aug 2018, 8:28 am

Wouldn't want that 16:1 ratio for top quartile vs bottom quartile at selective colleges to go down any, right Brad?
User avatar
Administrator
 
Posts: 6927
Joined: 26 Jun 2000, 1:13 pm

Post 23 Aug 2018, 9:23 am

freeman3 wrote:Wouldn't want that 16:1 ratio for top quartile vs bottom quartile at selective colleges to go down any, right Brad?


Would you like to answer my question, Freeman? Should it be merit admissions, Affirmative Action based, or no restrictions?

To answer your question, I am fine with people making their own way. I am a University grad, and I came from poverty conditions as a child. I am not special or better than anyone else. I don't give a rip about who goes to college. I just think it should not be a government supported program.
User avatar
Adjutant
 
Posts: 3108
Joined: 17 May 2013, 3:32 pm

Post 23 Aug 2018, 10:05 am

I was merely pointing out that a cookie-cutter approach to deciding who gets into college is not only not fair but does not even maximize the talent we have. GPA and test scores are not everything. In real-life, you don't get to sit in a library and study for hour and hour after so you get a perfect GPA. Those "fair" requirements don't measure creativity, drive and determination, social intelligence, artistic ability. Our universities should not be just there for educating a certain type of educational over-achiever, many of whom who have had all of the advantages in life. A university should have the freedom to select a broad-section of students with different types of talents and abilities. Some consideration should be given to poverty and overcoming educational barriers, as well (which could include barriers based on a history of discrimination/segregation). (I took a look at UCLA's ethnic breakdown and I thought with the ban on affirmative action it would not be very diverse but in my mind they are doing a good job.)

As for government supported programs I certainly think the government should finance higher education to a certain extent. Students whose parents have higher income already have an advantage in getting a college degree and getting high-paying jobs. Having the government get out of helping students with loans and financial assistance would make that disparity even worse.
User avatar
Statesman
 
Posts: 11019
Joined: 15 Aug 2000, 8:59 am

Post 23 Aug 2018, 1:03 pm

bbauska
You asked for people to be based on merit, and now you don't answer a question...
Are you saying that the entrance requirements for education be based upon the best, regardless of race, religion, creed, social strata, and income?


I guess the short answer is a system should be merit based, but merit may be defined differently..
I'll link here to an interesting study on the Danish system. The authors were testing this notion:
In most countries, no matter the type of welfare regime, there continues to be a
political consensus on the importance of striving for equality of access to education.
The chief and most important challenge in this endeavor has been posed by the fact
that the further up in the educational hierarchy we move the more socially exclusive
access becomes.

In this paper we investigate access to university institutions in Denmark
– an interesting case, comparatively, because there are no tuition fees in higher
education and because students are automatically granted relatively generous
government subsidies for the stipulated time of the higher education programs (in
3
2011: 740 Euros per month for the duration of the program studied, with the
possibility of one additional grant year). As is the case in most other countries, the
number of students attending university education in Denmark has multiplied tenfold
over the last 60 years (from approx. 13,000 to 120,000 in 2011), and the number of
university study places available per 20-year-old has more than doubled since 1979.

Today it is expected that 54% of all young people in Denmark will complete a higher
education degree course (compared to an OECD average of about 40%) (OECD,
2010, p. 58). Five per cent will graduate from business academies (short cycle
programs), 25% from university colleges (medium cycle programs primarily for
teachers, nurses, child care or social workers) and 24% from university institutions
(long cycle courses with a range of traditional and professional programs). It is
against this background that we ask: What does such a massive increase in study
places mean for the social distribution of students in the various fields of study and
university institutions? Do certain fields of study and institutions remain exclusively
for those class fractions endowed with the resources needed to enter into these
programs?


http://vbn.aau.dk/files/71338299/Final_ ... _11_12.pdf

Their findings are that, even in a system that removes most of the obstacles to attaining higher education; socialization as a child leads to "streaming". Simply put; a child from a blue collar family will be drawn to work in blue collar occupations. ...
So, in the US, where poverty is greater than in a nation like Denmark, and where cultural groups by race and language also exist more greatly than less diverse nations and more diverse nations (Canada), you're going to expect that social "streaming" will lead some to endeavors that aren't university. So even if you removed all financial obstacles to secondary education, even then University wouldn't reflect the demographic make up of the US.
But overall people will find the social class and occupation that best meets their needs and for which they are best qualified.
User avatar
Administrator
 
Posts: 6927
Joined: 26 Jun 2000, 1:13 pm

Post 23 Aug 2018, 4:05 pm

Since merits can be based upon different "definitions"; can anyone education center be allowed to apply their definitions as they see fit?

Basically, you want standards to be merit based, but with everyone able to apply standards as they see fit. I am fine with that, but there better not be ANY griping when the standards do not go your way.

If you want a college where only adults of children who are in below the poverty level are accepted, then great! I just do not see the fairness in making society pay for that.

If you want a college where only adults of children in the 1 percentile are accepted, then great! I just do not see the fairness in making society pay for that.

I am all for a charity providing education benefits for those that they wish to help. I am done watching the government pick winner and losers. Everyone should have the same benefits.

Give everyone 100K or nobody. Give everybody $1000/mo. for food. Give everyone $1000 for housing. Do it for everyone on nobody. Honestly, I don't care which.

If you give everybody everything, it is unsustainable. That would be fun to watch.
User avatar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 4823
Joined: 08 Jun 2000, 10:26 am

Post 24 Aug 2018, 5:56 am

Ricky:
It seems like another case where there is actually a need for regulation, as the market system in place is busy pricing education out of the reach of too many people.


Currently University education is regulated in the US. That's a reason why education pricing is so expensive.

https://hechingerreport.org/the-150-mil ... -colleges/
User avatar
Adjutant
 
Posts: 3108
Joined: 17 May 2013, 3:32 pm

Post 24 Aug 2018, 8:56 am

That link you posted RJ indicated that most of the costs colleges incur relating to comply with regulations have to do with complying with research requirements and are not directly related to educating students.
I'm quite sure colleges had regulations prior to 1980 as well before tuition costs exploded. Colleges charge more...because they can. I don't think it's a bad idea that if the government is providing financial assistance to either collleges directly (or indirectly through assistance to students) that they have something to say about these ever increasing tuition costs.
User avatar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 4823
Joined: 08 Jun 2000, 10:26 am

Post 24 Aug 2018, 2:06 pm

The real danger is how governments, sometimes unwittingly, structure markets. Standardizing financial aid formulas have enabled universities to determine the wealth and income of all of their customers and price their product accordingly in cahoots with other universities and colleges who use the same formulas. Yet it is not considered price fixing. Student loan markets which are structured and backstopped by the government enable universities to charge more than they could otherwise if a prudent lender was considering payback potential.. Sometimes that expensive degree in sociology is not quite worth $300,000. If it's the individual's money, so be it. But if it a loan made possible by the government because of loan guarantees or otherwise, US regulation has created the problem that you are now asking US regulation to solve.

I realize that higher education is a complicated market; but let's at least acknowledge that it is not the free market that has created this mess. Government has had a large and clumsy thumb on the scales.