How would it diminish the opportunity while offering education to all. I do not understand what you are saying. In those countries who is being denied an education? Help me on this. Thanks.
We do not have to adopt their system of education, but we should make it possible for any student here who has the interest, motivation and intelligence to have a good education without putting either they or their families in deep debt.
I obtained state scholarships with the following provisos, either repay the state or work one year in education for each year of scholarship. Those scholarship were a very great help. My wife and I were very poor at that time.
According to the OECD Germany has the second highest income tax burden of all OECD’s 34 countries (
Belgium 55.5%, Germany 49.8%, Hungary and France (49.4%).
What about quality of education. Frieder Wolf (a political science professor at the University of Heidelberg) noted that while Germany lacks top-tiered schools what it offers is “reliable quality.” “With all due respect, American has the best colleges but it also has some of the worst…..where as in Germany basically most everybody who wants to go to an average college can go there and get a decent education.” (Marketplace article, March 31 by Kirk Carapezza and Mallory Noe-Payne, How German Higher Education Controls Costs).
So far the cost is an increased tax burden and a decrease high quality schools (but perhaps an elevation of lower quality schools).
So far, “free” = increased tax burden, loss of quality (perhaps a gain of “reliable quality”).
But you are saying make college free to everyone. Perhaps if our school system was structured so that we were not pushing everyone to college as there is absolutely no reason for many to attend (educational standards, career outlook, etc.). So let’s look at the German system.
In German schools, students attend together until the 4th grade (Grundschule). After this they are separated according to their academic ability (Hauptschule, Realschule, or Gymnasium). Hauptschule looks towards an apprenticeship program and vocational training. Realschule is leads to vocational schools. Gymnaisum prepares for university. Now students with high enough academics can switch from Realschule to Gymnasium. These are similar to tracks that we choose in high school, except they are chosen in elementary school and not by the students (except via exhibited potential/ability).
How do German citizens get to take advantage of this “free” education? Well, they apply. Whether or not they get in is simply based on the numerus clausus. For example, the University of Frankfort has a NC for it’s economics program of 1.9. About 2-3% achieve an abitur grade of 1, where as 12-30% fall between 1.0 and 1.9.
This means that 70% of students graduating with an Abitur (which are the only ones going to college) would not qualify to study economics at the University of Frankfort regardless of cost not being a factor. The average grade is 3 (which translates to a "B", or a 3.0 GPA) which would typically exclude one from college. Interestingly enough, barely half of those who graduate even qualify for college excluding these scores. The minority who do qualify can attend, for "free," in the program for which they qualified.
Here are how we stand in the US: Average GPA in the U.S. is 3.0 (2.9 male, 3.1 female). The average “standard” requirement for full time admission (per Peterson’s company) remains 3.0 for many universities, but many accept lower GPA’s, some even fully rather than probationary. Here are a few averages: Johns Hopkins – 3.68, Bucknell – 3.49, University of Pennsylvania – 3.86. But many others, and most community colleges, have a GPA requirement of 2.5 (below average).
34% of students at open enrolled colleges graduated within 6 years. At colleges where the acceptance rate was less than 25%, this number increased to an 89% graduation rate. (National Center for Education Statistics).
Most of our students, if living in Germany today, would not qualify for college even though it were "free". But they would have the burden of paying for others.
So, if you are saying that we need to increase our entrance requirements for college (we have systematically lowered these requirements where I live….the lottery scholarship was even called “racist” for requiring a 3.0 GPA so it was lowered to 2.0) then I absolutely agree. We should have in place some type of scholarship for our brightest who cannot afford college as this would be to our mutual benefit. But we should not pay for below average students to attend college simply because they “want to.”
In summary (skip to here if you don't want to read the entire post) the OP presents a lie that many will believe. But the Democrat party is like a bad parent. They offer illusions that will fulfill the childlike desires in order to gain obedience. But again, I am willing for the government to provide scholarships for those highly qualified but unable to attend college. I think that this is a good idea. But the qualifications need to be raised. And no one should be attending college out of high school on someone else's dime with a GPA of 2.5. That's just plain dumb.....pun intended.
