Higher Education in the USA Should Be Free
Providing a free secondary and higher education for people is the state task. It is very important not only to give a chance to the students to receive it free of charge but to receive an education of a high level in cities, towns - modern means of communication allow it. The higher education is a serious basis for the future of the society and a support for the country. For this reason, a higher education has to not only be completely provided by the state but also stand among the main priorities.
Free higher education is a basic of a high intellectual potential of the society and, therefore, a guarantee of a good future of America. An access to the educational resources has to be defined by the abilities of the students instead of the size of parents' purse. The implementation of the payment for education is the testimony of the social insolvency of the state. Against the poverty of the majority of the Americans, the charged education will lead to silliness of the population. Meanwhile, mass education is a necessary condition of the democracy and the developed civil society.
Annually, the state allocates 380 million dollars for the study, and the students pay only 60 million (Wellin). Money from the students will not affect significantly the quality of education in any way, as it is only 10-15% from the total amount (Wellin). So, it means the state is worth finding resources for free higher education. Then, students will understand that they are obliged to study that the diploma is not just a paper but the certificate showing the level of quality.
The state has to take care of that the society was healthy and competent, it is necessary to begin from far away and to improve education. Free higher education will increase the number of people successfully realized in life and, respectively, will reduce the number of the unemployed and even the drunkards. Education surely has to be free and public. Parents should pay neither for lessons nor for manuals.
It is necessary to aspire that each person had a good prospect to study from his/her birth. The person should study in the profession which reveals his/her abilities and talents. It is useful for the state to provide this way with a free education as the person could define the tendencies, choose the career as soon as possible. Certainly, if the person cannot define what profession to choose, starts being confused and changes faculties, that is the time when he/she should pay for the education. I think that such an idea corresponds to the principle of solidarity and a rational look. It will be initiated not only in the personality but also to the state. For me, this is a more harmonious development than the system of the bank credits for the students.
Unfortunately, nowadays, the role of the higher education is humiliated. On my strong belief, it is necessary not only to increase financing of the establishments of the higher education but also to do everything possible for increasing the status of the teacher.
Why do people need the higher education? They need it to get skills which allow them to get an interesting and highly paid work. For someone, the higher education is the way to rise in a new layer of the social status. For someone, the motive to get the higher education is simply ineradicable thirst for knowledge. For the minority, it is the opportunity to spend the time without any difficulties and strains, to hang out for some years and simply "to prolong the childhood" (Wellin). If you do not know what you want to be engaged in life, the father and mother still support you with money, here is a delay from crucial decisions for you.
Now there is an enormous disproportion between the requirements of economy and a labor market and a huge mass of lawyers, economists, PR managers with a low level of preparation as ballast. Besides, it is difficult to understand why "the taxpayers should pay for the education of those who go to work not for the state but for Abramovich and Deripasku".
The system, where 90% or even 95% of the students have a specific customer, the one who at first pays for the education and then provides the student with work, is necessary. There can be two such customers. The state should pay for those professions which are necessary to it: from officers, doctors, teachers to geologists and engineers-nuclear physicists. Then the young specialist has to fulfill the stipulated term in the place where he/she has been expected to work since he/she entered the Institute or the University. The second customer is business with the subsequent "distribution" of the graduate in these companies. Business is surely not only provide its students with a practice but also watch the quality of training throughout all the educational process as "it pays".
The relations between the student and his/her "customer" have to be contractual with the payment of an overall cost of training and penalties in case the young specialist "kicks up" and wishes to take "the free diploma". In the system of the order for the student, the issue with the grants is resolved itself. The state actually supports the young man and today's symbolical grants will not be able to be restricted any more. As for business, in general, it is clear: worthy grant is an advance payment of the future salary.
Purely free education is when the state pays for the student without any obligations. It has to be provided especially for those students who showed their talent for the future profession. Not poverty but a talent, endowments have to be the criterion for entering free higher educational institutions and receiving solid nominal grants.