The demand is meant as a polemic against the increase of tuition fees. These fees appear to them as the price for a commodity named education or training. For them, “economic thinking” would enter a sphere where it has no business being – the sphere of university education. Education cannot be given a price and has nothing to do with “economic uses.” In addition, a high price for education would constitute another hurdle which must be overcome before “working class and minority students” can study.
This criticism of tuition fees is annoying: on the one hand, it is unclear what the protesters actually have to complain about in the commodity character of goods and services if they find fault with it in education. Do they want to say that the exchange of commodities for money is okay if it takes place where it belongs, in the economy? Do they want to endorse the opinion that money plays a useful role for supplying people with goods? One learns, namely in school, that exchange without money would be incredibly complicated; that money fulfills an “allocation function” and, as the universal means of exchange, allows access to the whole diverse world of commodities. So it says in the social studies books which prepare kids for the rules of life: a private lack of money only happens when daddy has not saved enough.
On the other hand, however, do the students infer from the increase of tuition fees what needs to be criticized in money and commodities? Namely, that with any price a hurdle has been established before one can satisfy this or that need with a good – whether this good is called a meal or an education. And they know that among their competitors for student enrollment there are those who lack the money to overcome this hurdle to university studies; that they – together with their kin – can't first save up enough because they don't earn enough and because they also cannot choose their earnings opportunities themselves; which incidentally makes them a whole...
...Should University Education Be Free of Charge?
Education is a way to understand the real world better and whether this educationshould be provided to university students freely or not is one of the most debated topics over the last decades. It is a topical issue, which is discussed all over the world. Nowadays, people need education in order to survive in this fast-growing civilization. Everyone understands the value of education and on that account the competition to get into the most approved universities is very fierce. University educationshould not be free of charge, but these fees should not be as astronomically high as they are in so many countries. The situation is different in America, in Great Britain and Slovakia and it can be effective to compare these 3 distinct countries.
There are many universities in the world, both state and private ones, which offer a variety of study fields. Let us imagine that all of these universities were free of charge. This way everyone would apply for them and after successfully finishing their studies, they would start to seek for a job. The source of the problem would be that there would be too many graduates to begin with. There would be a lot of teachers, architects, lawyers etc., who would not find a place to work. It would lead to a rise of...
...education is damaging to both society and the individual. Free tertiary education is both desirable and affordable. It would result in a much better society.
Getting a university, polytechnic or apprenticeship qualification means that society, as a whole, is more educated. We all benefit. Everyone benefits from having plumbers who understand the entire pipe system thingy, scientists who understand the problem and can effectively deal with it (whether it is bio-security, nuclear reactions, or finding a cure for AIDS), accountants who can book-keep properly or teachers who can actually teach your children. This is beneficial for everyone. No one benefits from poorly done jobs, it is annoying and costly. Having a highly trained workforce means that no one needs to worry about quality, we become more efficient as a whole.
By giving free tertiary education, the government would provide a level playing field for everyone. Many would argue that the loan scheme achieves this. It does not. People from poorer backgrounds are less likely to burden themselves with debt as, relative to what they have lived their lives of, it is higher. They are frightened away from taking on too much debt (comparative to their parent’s income). They thus do not get a tertiary education. The student loan scheme works to keep poorer people out of university, not to get them into it.
Reducing the cost of tertiary...
...Economics for Business
Should higher education be free to students?
University education has become a major hot topic recently as governments have struggled to find the funds for universities. Therefore, there have been many debates raised of what the best way to fund university education is and whether it should be free or not. Firstly, we will start by going over why tuition fees were actually introduced. The idea began in the labour party manifesto in 1997 when Education was known to be the biggest priority as Tony Blair called for ‘Education, Education and Education’. Tuition fees were all paid by the governments before and many more grants were given out. However, throughout the years the government had lost the money and had no income to be able to pay for university education so therefore top-up-fees started. This was a way in which universities can charge fees for whatever price they wish. When labour came to power in 1997, there were no fees but there were only means-tested maintenance grants. But after one year grants were no longer available and a means-tested fee regime of £1,000 a year was introduced. In 2004 the higher education bill brought in top-up fees of up to £3,000. The tuition fee limit has remained at about £3,000 up to now and there are current plans and proposals to...
...“Educationshould be free”
Education illuminates the people, Education illuminates the society and Education illuminates the whole world. This sentence can well signify the importance of education in one’s life as well as the society. It plays the pivotal role in one’s life and it is the only way that can provide with good life, career and secured future. As such, every nation of the world has given the priority to provide education to their citizens who help them in the development of their country and to get educated and cultured society, human resource, and advancement in technology and development of arts, literature, music & society. Overall, it could only be obtained if the citizens and the society are well-educated.
We can see that there are many countries that have higher percentage of (up to100 %) literacy rate and are very rich, developed and peaceful, while, on the contrary, it’s quite opposite to many poorer nations which have low literacy rate.
So, there are many advantages of this policy “educationshould be free”. With this high significance of education, many of the countries in the world have policies to give freeeducation to their respective citizens. The first one is tha
The first one is that, each citizen in the country would get equal opportunity to...
...Should all education be free?
All educationshould be free to all people and paid for by the government. This statement has caused great controversy over the past decades.
On the one hand, it should be free since there are poor who are smart, intelligent and capable, yet the state provides no education for them. How would you feel knowing that your life is never going to get better because you don’t have the opportunity? Another argument is economic development. Finishing school and pursuing a career will allow you to get a higher standard of living hence economic development.
The last argument for freeeducation is economic growth. If everyone gets a well paid job, they will contribute to society by becoming taxpayers. The state will be capable of improving the country.
On the other hand, It shouldn't be free as tax would need to increase to provide freeeducation and not many are pleased with this idea. However, if tax doesn’t increase, we will get a mediocre education. This is seen in Peru where there aren’t even enough schools and universities.
In addition, if everyone gets educated, no one would want to take the low paid jobs. An example is Spain. An ex- CEO prefers not to work rather than to work as a taxi driver.
In conclusion i do...
INSTRUCTIONS: Fill out the following outline
Free post-secondary education
THESIS STATEMENT with MAP - full sentence(s) (1 or 2):
Post-secondary educationshould be free. It is important for the student to have equal opportunities that are not dictated by wealth. It is also beneficial for the college as it allows more applicants for expansion and offers gifted students who would not normally affordeducation. Expanding the public sector.
TOPIC SENTENCE 1 - full sentence:
Post secondary educationshould be free
BODY PARAGRAPH 1- point form:
Primary Support 1: Potential students can reach their full ability regardless of wealth.
Secondary Support: Contribute to society and economy more effectively
Primary Support 2: Can end up in a cycle of debt
Secondary Support: By the time they get a high earning job their interest will have built up and it’s at a time when they will be aiming to make larger purchase e.g. house or a car.
Primary Support 3: Fewer worries
Secondary Support: More studies and better grades
Concluding Statement 1 - full sentence OR point form:
With the freeeducation students can reach their full ability, be debt free and do their studies better
TOPIC SENTENCE 2 - full sentence:
It is beneficial for the higher...
...EducationShould Be Free
The school is the last expenditure upon which a country should be willing to economize.
Franklin D. Roosevelt
Personally I believe, that educationshould be free. Every country should be interested in a well educated youth. That is because the young are our next generation and our future. Compulsory education is free, but higher education is really expensive. In Belarus 36% students are provided state-subsidized education. Other 64% pay about one thousand dollars yearly. 56
Average salary in our country makes up 400 dollars per month. Minimum consumer budget for a working woman of middle age makes up 230 dollars and for a student – 200 dollars. It means that higher education for a child from a single parent family is merely unachievable. 47
For the reason the tuition fees are raised once in a team, talented and diligent but of modest means students cannot pay after another raise and quit studies. It results in unrealized ambitions, melancholia and may lead to crime if such student cannot find job because he/she does not have a diploma. 52
However, tuition fees conduce to reduction of number of students who are not really serious...
...Should High School Education in China Be Free?
Should High School Education in China Be Free?
Ancient philosopher Confucius, who was considered the first professional teacher in China, opened an old-style private school in his hometown. The school enrolled more 3,000 students, and those students just paid a symbolic tuition fee as some crops and meat. The old-style private school has been followed for more than 2000 years. Therefore, the simplest and best way to disseminate knowledge is freeeducation. China had a nine years’ compulsory education but it is not advance with the times now. China should extend years for the compulsory education that freeeducation to senior high school students. With high school freeeducation, students will have equal opportunities to be educated, focus on learning and improving, and improve the standard of living. Let’s look at those benefits of high school freeeducation.
Provide equal opportunities
Freeeducation of senior high school can also provide equal opportunities as the normal kid to the poor. In the past time, only wealthy people had chance to receive education, but some poor people could not. Now, everyone has right to get knowledge....