HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Retired » Retired Forums » 2016 Postmortem (Forum) » what limits would you hav...

Sun Nov 29, 2015, 10:57 PM

 

what limits would you have on the free public university thing?

all countries which have free university impose limits.

many students can't even pass high school frankly.

what limits would you place on
- how long you can take to graduate
- who qualifies? is it entirely merit based? what about minority students?
- what degrees are allowed?
- are living expenses covered?
- do you cover professional and graduate degrees?
- do you have to maintain a minimum GPA during your studies?
- is there any lifetime limit to how much you can use?
- do you have to contribute back to society in any way after you graduate eg. higher taxes, public service, etc?



pipe dreams (ponies) just that until I see sensible debate on cost controls, limits, and policy objectives.

83 replies, 2529 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 83 replies Author Time Post
Reply what limits would you have on the free public university thing? (Original post)
hill2016 Nov 2015 OP
reformist2 Nov 2015 #1
hill2016 Nov 2015 #2
AgingAmerican Nov 2015 #50
Armstead Nov 2015 #69
Live and Learn Nov 2015 #6
Scootaloo Nov 2015 #53
Ron Green Nov 2015 #3
hill2016 Nov 2015 #4
kenfrequed Nov 2015 #9
Live and Learn Nov 2015 #28
kenfrequed Nov 2015 #81
Live and Learn Nov 2015 #82
Ron Green Nov 2015 #13
Scootaloo Nov 2015 #55
Ed Suspicious Nov 2015 #8
Live and Learn Nov 2015 #5
Crystalite Nov 2015 #12
hill2016 Nov 2015 #15
Live and Learn Nov 2015 #20
Crystalite Nov 2015 #36
Live and Learn Nov 2015 #19
Crystalite Nov 2015 #37
Live and Learn Nov 2015 #39
jeff47 Nov 2015 #31
jeff47 Nov 2015 #7
kenfrequed Nov 2015 #11
hill2016 Nov 2015 #16
Live and Learn Nov 2015 #21
jeff47 Nov 2015 #26
Eric J in MN Nov 2015 #10
hill2016 Nov 2015 #17
Live and Learn Nov 2015 #24
Eric J in MN Nov 2015 #27
AgingAmerican Nov 2015 #51
Warren Stupidity Nov 2015 #14
hill2016 Nov 2015 #18
Warren Stupidity Nov 2015 #22
Live and Learn Nov 2015 #25
hill2016 Nov 2015 #35
AgingAmerican Nov 2015 #52
mythology Nov 2015 #23
Eric J in MN Nov 2015 #30
AgingAmerican Nov 2015 #54
JI7 Nov 2015 #29
jeff47 Nov 2015 #32
JI7 Nov 2015 #40
jeff47 Nov 2015 #41
JI7 Nov 2015 #43
Kentonio Nov 2015 #59
jeff47 Nov 2015 #75
AgingAmerican Nov 2015 #79
jonno99 Nov 2015 #33
Eric J in MN Nov 2015 #34
Kalidurga Nov 2015 #38
tularetom Nov 2015 #42
reformist2 Nov 2015 #44
pinebox Nov 2015 #48
Gman Nov 2015 #45
litlbilly Nov 2015 #46
Recursion Nov 2015 #58
Warren Stupidity Nov 2015 #62
AgingAmerican Nov 2015 #80
pinebox Nov 2015 #47
Recursion Nov 2015 #57
Warren Stupidity Nov 2015 #63
Recursion Nov 2015 #65
Warren Stupidity Nov 2015 #67
Recursion Nov 2015 #68
pinebox Nov 2015 #73
DetlefK Nov 2015 #60
pinebox Nov 2015 #74
DetlefK Nov 2015 #77
pinebox Nov 2015 #78
LoveIsNow Nov 2015 #49
Recursion Nov 2015 #56
DetlefK Nov 2015 #61
lovemydog Nov 2015 #64
NCTraveler Nov 2015 #66
Armstead Nov 2015 #70
Vinca Nov 2015 #71
LWolf Nov 2015 #72
MineralMan Nov 2015 #76
taught_me_patience Nov 2015 #83

Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Sun Nov 29, 2015, 11:00 PM

1. Is that going to be Hillary's go-to message this year - limiting expectations?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to reformist2 (Reply #1)

Sun Nov 29, 2015, 11:01 PM

2. she's doesn't

 

promise ponies and rainbows which have no chance of being implemented or paid for.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Reply #2)

Mon Nov 30, 2015, 04:24 AM

50. Perhaps "Yes We Can't!" should be her defeatist supporters battle cry!

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Reply #2)

Mon Nov 30, 2015, 07:37 AM

69. Ponies and Rainbows eh? I'm curious where you'd have been....

 

when there were battles over launching Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, Minimum Wage and the "ponies and unicorns" of other eras.

Forcing business to pay at least a certain amount per hour? Ridiculous. How are they going to pay for that?

Taking money from workers so people have some guarantee income later in life? How awful. I'm not giving presents to some goddamn old fart, just because he or she didnlt have the foresight to save up money of their own! And I'll be goddamn if I'm going to pay for the Rockefeller's retirement.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to reformist2 (Reply #1)

Sun Nov 29, 2015, 11:06 PM

6. I believe so. It is the 'We Can't' campaign. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to reformist2 (Reply #1)

Mon Nov 30, 2015, 04:29 AM

53. Hillary Clinton's running a civil forfeiture campaign

 

"Yeah, you're gonna have to sell some stuff off, limit your expenses, and oh yeah, we're gonna garnish your pay by I dunno, three bucks an hour. sound good? Tough."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Sun Nov 29, 2015, 11:02 PM

3. Policies are things that get worked out.

Principles are things that some people fight for, and others crap on.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ron Green (Reply #3)

Sun Nov 29, 2015, 11:03 PM

4. and people

 

have to be realistic about what is achievable.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Reply #4)

Sun Nov 29, 2015, 11:10 PM

9. The problem is...

That when you are already compromising before you even get out of the primary gate it probably means that you are planning on doing so even more after you get the nod, and then a lot more after (and if) you get elected, and then even more before any legislation clears the finance committee.

Oh, and Hillary's plan doesn't actually create a dedicated revenue stream and relies primarily on tax credits.

Yeah, this isn't going to be much of a revolutionary new education policy because it is going to do as little as possible while stepping on the fewest possible toes. Her plan is more to win news cycles than it is to create change.


You start with the ideal and you run on the ideal and you fight for the ideal THEN you compromise when you have to.

My ideal would be free lifetime college education at public universities. I don't even think Bernie is thinking about going that far.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kenfrequed (Reply #9)

Sun Nov 29, 2015, 11:24 PM

28. And the jobs that she would require students to have. Where are they?

Is she going to provide them jobs during college? If she can do that, why not after college?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Live and Learn (Reply #28)

Mon Nov 30, 2015, 07:28 PM

81. Uhm...

You do realize the jobs of the 50's boom were partially generated by the brainpower built up by the World War II GI Bill. In fact part of the point of the GI bill was to ease the transition to a peacetime economy.

New jobs are almost always about technological and cultural advancement and growth.

Dear gods, we are supposed to be Democrats here.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kenfrequed (Reply #81)

Mon Nov 30, 2015, 07:37 PM

82. Uhm.. I was agreeing with you. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Reply #4)

Sun Nov 29, 2015, 11:13 PM

13. When I was a kid in the segregated South,

Black people voting was not seen as something that is achievable. It just wasn't "realistic."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Reply #4)

Mon Nov 30, 2015, 04:36 AM

55. But you don't counter-negotiate yourself before even coming to the table.

 

You do have an assessment of what you think is 'likely." And then when you sit down with the other party... you ask for more than that. You do aim over what you'd be willing to accept. And you actually make the effort to get those things above what you would settle for.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ron Green (Reply #3)

Sun Nov 29, 2015, 11:10 PM

8. Right on.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Sun Nov 29, 2015, 11:06 PM

5. I wouldn't expect living expenses to be paid because the schools should be plentiful

and close enough to commute to. Other than that, I wouldn't limit a thing. Keep learning for as long as you like!

It really isn't a pipe dream. We use to have free universities in CA. And community colleges were established as adult education lifelong learning centers originally. Many working people attended them to further their knowledge. Now they are too crowded with standard college curriculum (due to the universities being too full to accept even qualifying students) to cater to older adults.

They will contribute to society just by being educated.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Live and Learn (Reply #5)

Sun Nov 29, 2015, 11:12 PM

12. Exactly. Not sure what is so hard to understand about this.

 

University of California had tuition below $1,000/year when I was in high school, and state was just a few hundred, and community college was just a few bucks.

So we had this before, we should have it again.

Don't expect it under Hillary, however, because tuition and debt management are HUGE businesses for her friends.

I don't think advanced degrees will be "free", but they won't be what they are now, $35,000 for me to get a doctorate at a state college on top of my masters, which was cheaper, on top of my bachelors, which was free on a scholarship.

We used to honor the idea of a free education.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Crystalite (Reply #12)

Sun Nov 29, 2015, 11:16 PM

15. i asked what limits would you have?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Reply #15)

Sun Nov 29, 2015, 11:20 PM

20. And she answered. Did you actually read her post? nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Reply #15)

Sun Nov 29, 2015, 11:42 PM

36. Preference to undergrads, support for struggling students not available to stronger students

 

I don't see a need for many limits because people aren't going to take seats if they aren't there to learn.

Poor attendance would have consequences, I would maintain high academic standards, but admission would not be particularly selective.

Where someone has already earned a degree and there is greater demand for a course than usual, the undergrads would get preference.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Crystalite (Reply #12)

Sun Nov 29, 2015, 11:19 PM

19. You must be about my age. They were actually free before our time.

Reagan started the first tuition's for them. Obviously, it was quite a slippery slope since although ours were affordable for middle class families, today's rates are not.

My brother was the only one to take a loan out for an advanced degree and he was able to pay that back in just 2 years.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Live and Learn (Reply #19)

Sun Nov 29, 2015, 11:44 PM

37. Yup! I was high school class of 74...

 

I lollygagged with jobs and attempts at different junior colleges and then went in for a serious full-time five year degree back east.
On my own dime but with a full scholarship it was just books and fees.

These days, tuition is as much as annual salary at minimum wage, and more.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Crystalite (Reply #37)

Sun Nov 29, 2015, 11:47 PM

39. Oh, you are much older.

Class of 76 here.

It is really ridiculous today and today you need the degree. Back then, you could get pretty decent paying jobs without one. And jobs were plentiful.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Crystalite (Reply #12)

Sun Nov 29, 2015, 11:35 PM

31. Tuition history at UC Berkley

http://www.dailycal.org/2014/12/22/history-uc-tuition-since-1868/

UC Berkley was the first UC school. Zero tuition for in-state students from 1868 until 1975.

They started charging an administrative fee in 1921 - it covered the non-teaching expenses. It was $25 (~$300 in 2015 dollars).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Sun Nov 29, 2015, 11:10 PM

7. Before demanding some answers, how about bothering to learn some history?

We had free public university in many states in this country before the "Reagan revolution".

Before you claim it's a pipe dream, you're going to have to rewrite history.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jeff47 (Reply #7)

Sun Nov 29, 2015, 11:11 PM

11. Yes!

Plus a lot!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jeff47 (Reply #7)

Sun Nov 29, 2015, 11:16 PM

16. i asked what limits would you have?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Reply #16)

Sun Nov 29, 2015, 11:20 PM

21. Still demanding? nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Reply #16)

Sun Nov 29, 2015, 11:22 PM

26. What limits were there when we did have free public university education?

How 'bout we start there, since it worked for more than a century?

For example, University of California at Berkeley was zero tuition for in-state students from it's founding in 1868 until 1975. It was the first University of California established by the state.

But please, keep telling me that this is a pipe dream and utterly unworkable. It shows just how informed you are.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Sun Nov 29, 2015, 11:11 PM

10. Bernie Sanders' "College for All Act" puts in 2/3 federally for free tuition when

...states put in the other third.

States can maintain their current standards for admission and letting-students-stay while participating in the "College for All Act."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Eric J in MN (Reply #10)

Sun Nov 29, 2015, 11:17 PM

17. I asked what limits would you have?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Reply #17)

Sun Nov 29, 2015, 11:21 PM

24. Oh bother! nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Reply #17)

Sun Nov 29, 2015, 11:23 PM

27. I'd keep the current standards

...in which some people aren't admitted to the state colleges they apply to, and some people get in but flunk out.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Reply #17)

Mon Nov 30, 2015, 04:27 AM

51. Why would there have to be limits?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Sun Nov 29, 2015, 11:13 PM

14. Google broken?

 

The proposal is to eliminate tuition at public universities for undergraduate four year programs.

http://www.sanders.senate.gov/download/collegeforallsummary/?inline=file

This ought to be as controversial to democrats as free k-12 education.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Warren Stupidity (Reply #14)

Sun Nov 29, 2015, 11:17 PM

18. i asked what limits would you have?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Reply #18)

Sun Nov 29, 2015, 11:21 PM

22. You tossed up a bunch of uninformed arggle

 

bargle, pronounced your nonsense version of sanders proposal "ponies" and now demand answers to your irrelevant issues with your fantasy of what sanders proposed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Warren Stupidity (Reply #22)

Sun Nov 29, 2015, 11:22 PM

25. In a nutshell, yes. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Warren Stupidity (Reply #22)

Sun Nov 29, 2015, 11:39 PM

35. sorry

 

is it not fair to ask what limits are there on sanders proposal?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Reply #35)

Mon Nov 30, 2015, 04:28 AM

52. Why do you believe there must be 'limits'?

 

???

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Sun Nov 29, 2015, 11:21 PM

23. My problem with Sanders plan is the funding approach

 

of in a few years moving to give each state the same per student as I think it would damage better public universities and also incentivize states like Kansas who doesn't fund education to get worse at it rather than better.

But I would cover all accredited schools for all degrees, covering up to 5 years for all students in a degree program. I wouldn't cover graduate degrees or require a minimum GPA other than what is required to stay in school.

I don't think that people should be targeted to have to pay the money back as it should largely pay for itself in terms of higher incomes overall and higher disposable income due to no student loans over time.

I'm not certain how to address the increase in college tuition as there will still be an arms race at private schools that will have a downstream impact on public universities to provide better student living and amenities. Additionally a lot of the cost increases are due to technology needs such as wifi everywhere, software costs and other infrastructure. Yes there are more and more administrators and such for overhead which does need to be addressed, but not all of the costs are effectively invented costs.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mythology (Reply #23)

Sun Nov 29, 2015, 11:27 PM

30. The "College for All Act" doesn't say that there is the same funding per student.

States would get $2 from the federal gov't for each dollar of state spending on a tuition-free school. A state could have higher per-student spending at some schools while participating, just as they do now.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mythology (Reply #23)

Mon Nov 30, 2015, 04:32 AM

54. It only covers public colleges

 

It doesn't cover private schools. Those you would have to pay for yourself.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Sun Nov 29, 2015, 11:27 PM

29. there needs to be more equality in public school system first

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JI7 (Reply #29)

Sun Nov 29, 2015, 11:36 PM

32. We are capable of multitasking. (nt)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jeff47 (Reply #32)

Sun Nov 29, 2015, 11:47 PM

40. not really

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JI7 (Reply #40)

Sun Nov 29, 2015, 11:49 PM

41. Yes really.

And we're going to have to, because there's a hell of a lot of things that all need fixing.

You going to argue we can't fix our insane police departments until after we fix high schools?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jeff47 (Reply #41)

Mon Nov 30, 2015, 12:00 AM

43. no, i'm aruging that that free college will just mean those who are better off

will benefit at the expensive of those who have much less until the public system up to high school is improved and more equal.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JI7 (Reply #43)

Mon Nov 30, 2015, 05:01 AM

59. Why wait?

 

The process of fixing both can happen at the same time, and at least then you don't fail another generation of potential college grads in the process. Better to help as many as you can, rather than just wait until you can help them all.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JI7 (Reply #43)

Mon Nov 30, 2015, 11:41 AM

75. Why would it harm those who have much less?

If it's at the expense of those who have much less, then those who have much less are being harmed. What's the direct harm?

Unless you're going to continue to insist multitasking is impossible, which again runs into the problem above: how do you prioritize primary/secondary school reform over other things that are literally killing people? If we can't multitask, don't we have to solve those first?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JI7 (Reply #43)

Mon Nov 30, 2015, 01:04 PM

79. This is bologna

 

I didn't make it out of the 7th grade, yet I am a college graduate. Pssssst! G.E.D.!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Sun Nov 29, 2015, 11:36 PM

33. I don't think some expectation of "giving back" is unreasonable:

- community service (Peace Corps?)
- military service (active or reservist)
- volunteer fire or police
- mentoring, teaching, etc. etc...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Sun Nov 29, 2015, 11:37 PM

34. Regarding living expenses

The "College for All Act" says a participating college needs to eliminate tuition and "required fees."

Therefore, whether the dorms would be free depends on whether a participating college requires students to live in the dorms.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Sun Nov 29, 2015, 11:45 PM

38. I like ponies

what limits would you place on
- how long you can take to graduate

Same time frame as pell grants and loans

- who qualifies? is it entirely merit based? what about minority students?
Everyone, even the children of the rich.

- what degrees are allowed?

I don't care if someone wants a degree from film school. Yes, the study of film not making them just watching them and learning the history of film.

- are living expenses covered?

Yes
- do you cover professional and graduate degrees?

No
- do you have to maintain a minimum GPA during your studies?

Yes
- is there any lifetime limit to how much you can use?

Don't care.

- do you have to contribute back to society in any way after you graduate eg. higher taxes, public service, etc?

Yes, you will be paying higher taxes, because generally people with college degrees end up with better paying jobs.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Sun Nov 29, 2015, 11:53 PM

42. I attended the University of California from 1963 until I graduated in 1966

There was no tuition, although there were some minor fees. I received a modest sum each month from the VA and I worked part time. My wife also worked part time after our daughter was old enough to go to day care.

The only condition placed on my free tuition and my GI bill benefits was that I continued to be a student, in other words, if I flunked out, I no longer qualified. There were no cost controls or limits other than those defined by the program.

That was not pipe dreams, it was an investment the state of CA made in its future by assuring that its residents would be able to cope with life.

You seem to have the opinion that university students are a bunch of spongers looking for "free stuff" from the government.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Mon Nov 30, 2015, 12:11 AM

44. Actually, we need to expand upon Bernie's plan... we need to forgive $1 trillion in student loans!


And refund a generation of students who overpaid for college due to what could be described as price-gouging.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to reformist2 (Reply #44)

Mon Nov 30, 2015, 02:24 AM

48. AMEN!

 

You know, if Hillary REALLY wants to attract people to her campaign, she should start talking about THIS right the hell now.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Mon Nov 30, 2015, 12:41 AM

45. Legitimate question that needs to be asked

It doesn't have to be too specific. But more than a blanket assertion of free tuition.

Must meet admission standards.
Minimum GPA. (I think 2.5. Min now is in general 2).
Strict attendance standards

In other words, be good enough to get in (Minority quotas would still apply), make good enough grades to stay in and be there when you're supposed to be.

Big issues arise from inequality in school funding at the lower levels and quality of education which impacts being good enough to get in and stay in with grades.

Regardless, the issue would be fought much harder than the ACA was fought. And stands no realistic chance of happening in the next 10 years, and likely much longer.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Mon Nov 30, 2015, 02:06 AM

46. Enough with the stupid snark already. We get it, you support the 1%.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to litlbilly (Reply #46)

Mon Nov 30, 2015, 04:45 AM

58. About 70% of American high school graduates (or roughly 50% of the age cohort) go to college

The comparable percentage in Germany is 30%.

If we want it to be free, we're going to end up really restricting who goes. That's also going to require that employers stop requiring bachelors degrees for jobs that simply don't need them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Recursion (Reply #58)

Mon Nov 30, 2015, 07:18 AM

62. Germany is low compared to other OECD states. But that number is rising

 

Based on current patterns, in 2012 an estimated 53% of young people in Germany are expected to
enter academically oriented tertiary programmes (tertiary-type A) in their lifetime, up from 30% in
2000 and closer to the OECD average of 58% (compared with 48% in 2000) (Table C3.2a). In addition,
some 22% of young people are expected to enter shorter, more vocationally-oriented tertiary
programmes (tertiary-type B) during their lifetime, up from 15% in 2000 and exceeding the OECD
average of 18% (up from 16% in 2000) (Table C3.3).

Despite these increases in entry rates, tertiary graduation rates are still below the OECD average. An
estimated 31% of young people in Germany are expected to graduate from academically oriented
tertiary programmes in their lifetime, up from 18% in 2000 (a 13 percentage-point increase compared
to the 10 percentage-point increase of the OECD average, from 28% in 2000 to 38% in 2012).
Meanwhile, 15% of young people are expected to graduate from vocationally oriented tertiary
Germany Country Note Education at a Glance 2014: OECD Indicators
OECD 5
programmes, up from 11% in 2000 and above both of the OECD averages of 10% in 2012 and 9% in
2000 (see Chart A3.2 below) (Table A3.2a).
http://www.oecd.org/edu/Germany-EAG2014-Country-Note.pdf

My guess is your 70% number includes 2year programs. Actually I don't know where that number comes from. The current population -55.60 of the population 25 and older have "some college" - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Education_in_the_United_States#Higher_education So I think your numbes are PFA.

Do you think the current system that burdens lower income young people with huge debt is "working"?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Recursion (Reply #58)

Mon Nov 30, 2015, 01:08 PM

80. What Germany calls 'trade schools'

 

We call 'college'

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Mon Nov 30, 2015, 02:23 AM

47. Talk to me Goose, my son is German and is in University.

 

What would you like to know?

He has it better than most American students and he has it better than single kid who has had to take out student loans. He'll never ever know what it's like to be a pawn in a game that involves his education because his college is 100% free. Just like his health care. He'll never face what millions of American's do and you know what? I'm damn glad he won't!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pinebox (Reply #47)

Mon Nov 30, 2015, 04:42 AM

57. About half as many Germans go to college as Americans per capita

It's definitely a good way to do it, but we should be honest about it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Recursion (Reply #57)

Mon Nov 30, 2015, 07:18 AM

63. your numbers appear to be dubious.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Warren Stupidity (Reply #63)

Mon Nov 30, 2015, 07:31 AM

65. No, they don't (nt)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Recursion (Reply #65)

Mon Nov 30, 2015, 07:32 AM

67. Yeah they are.

 

And I provided links up thread. Go for it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Warren Stupidity (Reply #67)

Mon Nov 30, 2015, 07:34 AM

68. So did I. You're wrong

See how easy that is?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Recursion (Reply #57)

Mon Nov 30, 2015, 11:18 AM

73. Do you know WHY that is though?

 

The answer is one you may not expect. Trade schools. That is why. Many Germans opt for going to trade schools where they are offered a job basically right away as soon as they finish. The EDU system there is completely different than here and here, we basically don't have trade schools. They're huge there. You can read more about it here http://www.bloomberg.com/bw/articles/2013-04-29/what-germany-can-teach-the-u-dot-s-dot-about-vocational-education

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pinebox (Reply #47)

Mon Nov 30, 2015, 05:09 AM

60. Well, not perfectly free. About $100-200 per semester.

But those are administrative fees. They aren't legally regarded as tuition fees.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to pinebox (Reply #74)

Mon Nov 30, 2015, 12:05 PM

77. Well, I studied in Germany.

There's a fee for administrative costs per semester, about 100-200. That varies by university. (Though you can get a huge chunk of that back with the price-cuts the student-ID gives you, e.g. for public transportation.)

Germany had tuition-fees for a very short time. They were capped at 500 per semester and even that was considered too much (and the universities had no plan what to do with the money and what they are allowed to do with the money, as it was solely to be invested for the betterment of the education).
The left-leaning-states got rid of the tuition-fees almost immediately and the right-leaning states followed a few years later.



At my old university there was a "penalty-fee" per semester if you study too long, because being a student has tangible financial benefits (taxes, health-insurance...) in Germany.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DetlefK (Reply #77)

Mon Nov 30, 2015, 12:09 PM

78. I lived there as non military, x wife is German

 

and my kiddo attends school there. The point is though, nobody is swimming in student loan debt and the system there is far superior.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Mon Nov 30, 2015, 04:06 AM

49. Okay, best answers.

- how long you can take to graduate?


I would say you can attempt 150 credit hours for a 120 hour degree before you have to pay. Perhaps even a little more. Students should have some wiggle room to fail a few classes if they have trouble adjusting to college, and wiggle room to experiment with classes outside their major. I also think that if a student does poorly their first time in college, they should have a second chance after going into the workforce for five years or so.

- who qualifies? is it entirely merit based? what about minority students?
- do you have to maintain a minimum GPA during your studies?


I will answer these together. I think NCLB has shown the dangers of the federal government micromanaging education. The institutions will decide whom to admit (and most will continue to give preferential treatment to minorities), and what constitutes satisfactory academic progress, as they do today. If they set their standards too low, they will obviously lose accreditation. I think anyone making satisfactory academic progress should not pay tuition. If they are put on probation, they should have to either pay until their GPA gets back up or go get a job try again after the waiting period I described above.

- is there any lifetime limit to how much you can use?


This is tricky. One one hand, I don't begrudge anyone exploring new fields. On the other, we can't have people stay in college forever, or there wouldn't be taxpayers to pay for it. I would say, perhaps you get one five-year "try-again" waiting period, and if after two tries, you can't finish a 4 year degree in 5 years (or a two year degree in two and a haf), we shouldn't waste our money on you. I would also be amenable to some sort of "midlife crisis" exception that lets you get a second bachelor's degree after, say, 15 years in the workforce, or if your industry goes down the tubes.

- what degrees are allowed?


Any two or four year college degrees or trade programs. As well intentioned as we might be in saying only "practical" degrees, this might have unintended consequences down the road. We might produce so many STEM majors that they begin to outnumber the jobs. Also, people are most productive doing things they care about; the government shouldn't micromanage this either.

- are living expenses covered?


There should be an allowance for books and living expenses based on full or half-time status. A few thousand a year for full-time students, that states can add to if they have a high cost of living.

- do you cover professional and graduate degrees?


I'm not opposed to covering higher degrees, but let's start with Bachelor's degrees, and see where that gets us.

- do you have to contribute back to society in any way after you graduate eg. higher taxes, public service, etc?


All taxpayers will pay more to fund this. However, everyone will have the right to a tuition-fee degree or trade certification if they can get into a program. Those with outstanding student loans should have them forgiven, as a one-time expense, since they will be paying taxes for future generations. Older workers will benefit by not having to pay for their children or grandchildren's education. Those who already have degrees and don't have children may kvetch because they don't personally see a benefit, but education benefits society as a whole. The majority of people will benefit in since way, so I believe enough people will come around to put tuition-free college in place.

I sincerely hope you wanted to have a real debate, and not just belittle the idea. I look forward to any counterpoints and follow-up questions you may offer.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Mon Nov 30, 2015, 04:41 AM

56. It's an important question. Fewer Europeans go to college than Americans

That's the downside of it being free or much cheaper: they are much more strict about who can go.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Mon Nov 30, 2015, 06:13 AM

61. Just an example how Germany does it:

- How long to graduate?
In Germany, you don't start studying and eventually decide on a major one day. You start out with a fixed major. You know many semesters in advance, which mandatory courses you will have to take. For example if you study physics, there is a plan, when you are supposed(!) to take which physics-lectures. (It's not entirely rigid.) Plus you have to take additional lectures in math, chemistry, engineering, but you can choose to some degree which ones exactly you take and when.
You have a fixed number of semesters to reach your degree. During this time, tuition is free. (The schedule is tight but feasible.) You may take more semesters, but additional semesters on top of that are no longer free.

You can abort your major any time. (There are rules how to pause it without aborting it, e.g. if you get pregnant.)

But if you start a second, different major, that will no longer be free. (Sometimes you can transfer lecture-credits from one major to the other.)

- Living expenses covered?
The meals at the canteen cost way less than in restaurants of comparable quality. ~$4 for a basic two-course-meal.
And the university very often has a deal with the public transportation-department: For example, you can ride the bus for free on work-days.

- Minimum GPA?
In Germany, there are certain thresholds you have to pass in the earlier semesters. You must have completed certain exams the latest at semester X. (Very generous time-frame, but not infinite.) If you fail to do that, you are automatically barred from continuing to study that major. Nation-wide. IIRC there are no such thresholds in the later semesters.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Mon Nov 30, 2015, 07:24 AM

64. I would exclude the Trumps

but keep the Kardashians.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Mon Nov 30, 2015, 07:32 AM

66. The ponies and ice cream promises...

 

Are nothing more than campaigning. Good discussion to draw out nuance. They really seem to like the works free. Though they think deception by way of the word free is a good way to get LIV's, you might want to remove it from your op.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NCTraveler (Reply #66)

Mon Nov 30, 2015, 07:42 AM

70. Better to aim for ponies and unicorns that Hogs and Wolves /nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Mon Nov 30, 2015, 07:56 AM

71. Pipe dreams and ponies? Heaven forbid we have an educated populace.

If other countries can do this, it's silly to think the United States shouldn't even try . . . especially given the fact the majority of our citizens couldn't name three members of the Supreme Court for a million dollar prize.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Mon Nov 30, 2015, 07:57 AM

72. what limits would you place on

-how long you can take to graduate : none.
- who qualifies? is it entirely merit based? what about minority students? Anyone who meets entry requirements...gpa or some other way to show college readiness. Minorities included.
- what degrees are allowed: none
- are living expenses covered? No, not as long as there is a facility local to the student's home base.
- do you cover professional and graduate degrees? Yes.
- do you have to maintain a minimum GPA during your studies? Yes.
- is there any lifetime limit to how much you can use? No.
- do you have to contribute back to society in any way after you graduate eg. higher taxes, public service, etc? No.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Mon Nov 30, 2015, 11:42 AM

76. When I went to a state college in California in the 1960s,

There was no tuition at all. It used the quarter system, rather than semesters. There were administrative fees due each quarter, about $100 when I started and, after a 4 year hiatus, about $200 when I came back. That was the entire subsidy from the state. No tuition. Living costs were extra, with dorm living and board costing about $600 per quarter when I first went there in 1963. After I came back, I lived on the local economy, sharing a run-down house with three others.

Books were expensive then, too, proportionally to their cost today. I bought used textbooks, sometimes even an edition or two old. It didn't matter. Texts for all classes were also available to be checked out of the college's library for the quarter. Supplies of those, however, were limited and it was first come, first served.

Bottom line, the costs for that college, which became a university during my hiatus were doable for my parents, the first time, and via the GI Bill and about $100 more per month when I returned. You had to live very frugally, but it was doable without taking loans. That system worked OK. My father was an auto mechanic and my mom was a school secretary. It was a tight squeeze, but doable. I also worked full-time during the summers, which also helped. It was a good school, but was not a prestigious school. I never got any questions, though, from any employers about going to that school instead of Cal Tech or Stanford, both of which accepted me, but were not affordable.

Public colleges and university needn't be fully subsidized to make it possible for people to attend without crippling student debt. The elimination of tuitions would be enough, I think. Lots of savings are possible for the rest of the costs.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Mon Nov 30, 2015, 08:40 PM

83. For most on DU, the limit is actually having to pay taxes on it

 

Apparently free college should be paid for by someone else.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread