Obama's upcoming community college plan

[TianXiaXueXiao]

California residents are no longer "tuition-free" at community college. Our local CC in Northern CA is $46 per unit for residents. So for a semester it's between $552 - $690. And that does not include other student fees and or fees for parking/gas/books/labs. So they don't have to call it tuition, but it's not a $9 fee.

 

It's a bargain compared to the CA state schools (also no longer as cheap as they were for residents 10 years ago), or any other private/out-of-state school. But it's not free, and hasn't been since I moved here 18 years ago (and attended as both an out-of-state and in-state resident).

 

ETA: My point is that you can call it "fees" or you can call it "tuition"; either way, college is still not the bargain many of us were able to afford 10+ years ago. Even at a community college.

They haven't changed the law in CA. It is not tuition but fees. I realize that the cost has jumped greatly in the last decade. I took a class at College of the Redwoods a few years ago for $21 per unit. It's crazy how costly it's getting. I am just wondering how they will handle the terminology in CA with this initiative. What will they pay for since CA residents are not paying tuition? KWIM?

[foxbridgeacademy]

See, I don't think the parents income should have any baring on what a student qualifies for. When I was 18 I was an adult and had to pay my own way. I think that's how it should be. If a parent wants to be kind to their child and help out that's great. I think the whole system is wrong. Too wrong to go into right now, but I am 100% positive that more handouts is not the answer.

Of course the parents income shouldn't be considered, it would be great if they did that!  Of course since 90% of all 18 y.o. students don't have income they'd ALL qualify for student aid to ALL colleges which would be subsidized by the government through federal student aid, pell grants, state lottery...... six of one 1/2 dozen of the other, I'd be happy either way.

[foxbridgeacademy]

Considering we remove significantly more to fund a military industrial complex (not to mention a prison industrial complex) I can't see why a wailing and gnashing of teeth is justified over increasing educational opportunities for our young people.

 

Of course, we could help pay for this by cutting back the government pork fed to Haliburton and friends...probably have money left over for some new bridges and roads also.

 

:iagree:  :iagree:  :iagree:

[LucyStoner]

And so?

 

Who will be paying for it?

The federal budget is large. What we choose to spend that budget on says a lot about what we really value. I will be curious for information on the funding details of this once they become available. I believe that will be next month?

[EmseB]

I strongly disagree with everyone serving in the military. Crappy soldiers who don't want to be there take up a lot of my dh's time. It is a good deal for people who really want to be there. It's going to be a really bad deal if you wind up getting thrown out.

 

Yes, I was being facetious. :)  Perhaps just putting all of those who want free college to work on all those shovel-ready infrastructure projects would be the way to go?   (still kidding!)

 

Sorry, I'm feeling a bit punchy today.  Unbeknownst to me, last night DH told the oldest boy he could set his alarm for 6:00 a.m. to go look at Saturn with the binocs by himself, oldest boy woke up middle boy to go with him, they were both inside fighting before my normal wake up time and roused the toddler.  And it was too cloudy to see Saturn.  And said toddler, who has been in a toddler bed for a few weeks now, decided today was the day to realize he could just get up and walk out of his room during nap time, because, oh hey, there's nothing keeping him in bed anymore.

[umsami]

It would help if colleges could step away from their fanatical obsession with constantly improving their facilities and extracurricular programs and actually focus on academics.

 

:iagree:

 

Plus the dorms...they are insane.  I went to a good well-respected university.  I was in the Freshman dorm which was three people to a room, plus our own bathroom.  We had a walk-in closet, a main room, and a study area.  We put a bed in each.  There was a commons room on each floor.  

 

Just as I was leaving, the university started building luxury apartments/dorms.  These were more expensive, but were insanely outfitted.   Now, I hear everything is pretty much like that.  Almost all of the old doubles have been converted to singles, etc.  The university near where I lived added a lazy river for one of their dorms.   How ridiculous, IMHO.  College is not supposed to be a luxury-living experience.... nor have luxury living prices.

[clemota]

They haven't changed the law in CA. It is not tuition but fees. I realize that the cost has jumped greatly in the last decade. I took a class at College of the Redwoods a few years ago for $21 per unit. It's crazy how costly it's getting. I am just wondering how they will handle the terminology in CA with this initiative. What will they pay for since CA residents are not paying tuition? KWIM?

Maybe they'll change the wording regarding fees/tuition so that it still gets covered?  Something such as "tuition and/or enrollment fees" (since that's the $46 per unit is called at our local CC) would probably cover all the bases.

 

Is CA the only state that has resident "fees" in lieu of tuition?  Anyone?

[Elisabet1]

It seems Obama is all about spending more..more more...Heck..our government seems to just be run by a bunch of wealthy imbeciles who just want to spend money. Not to mention the excessive involvement of corporations and whatever other wealthy entities in our government.

[Mrs Mungo]

I think part of the disconnect seems to be between people who believe free community college is an *investment* versus those who see it as just *spending*.

[EmseB]

In my case, the disconnect comes when people don't seem to realize the economics of subsidizing tuition and what that does to prices and the industry being subsidized.

 

I absolutely view college as an investment, but I don't think that means federal spending needs to be involved. It also doesn't mean that I think the best way for the most people to have access comes via making it "free".

[LucyStoner]

Right now we provide most all of our college tuition as demand side subsidies- we give the students grants and or loans and that naturally bids up the tuition.

 

Funding the colleges (supply) rather than the students (demand) would hopefully help reverse that somewhat, especially when minimum achievement standards are expected.

 

You might disagree with my conclusions but I do understand the economic forces at play.

 

It is federal funding for education and other post war programs that largely built the middle class people want to preserve and expand.

[TianXiaXueXiao]

Maybe they'll change the wording regarding fees/tuition so that it still gets covered?  Something such as "tuition and/or enrollment fees" (since that's the $46 per unit is called at our local CC) would probably cover all the bases.

 

Is CA the only state that has resident "fees" in lieu of tuition?  Anyone?

 

According to Wikipedia, California is the only state with a tuition ban. Hopefully, they would amend the language to cover "fees" in CA community colleges. It would be pretty wrong to say, "California doesn't need to participate since they don't have tuition."

[DawnM]

It seems Obama is all about spending more..more more...Heck..our government seems to just be run by a bunch of wealthy imbeciles who just want to spend money. Not to mention the excessive involvement of corporations and whatever other wealthy entities in our government.

 

 

I think it would be best to stick to the topic instead of turning this into an Obama bashing political thread.  

[Mrs Mungo]

In my case, the disconnect comes when people don't seem to realize the economics of subsidizing tuition and what that does to prices and the industry being subsidized.

 

I absolutely view college as an investment, but I don't think that means federal spending needs to be involved. It also doesn't mean that I think the best way for the most people to have access comes via making it "free".

Someone in my family has been attending the university I attended since the late sixties. I can *see* a lot of what is pushing up the cost with my eyes when I go back!

 

I do agree with Lucy that financial aid contributes to the same problem, but with strong negative consequences for many students. It also has negative consequences for society. How many people can afford to be a teacher, if they can't pay their student loans and living expenses with a teacher's salary?

[jelbe5]

Unemployment is at it's lowest rate in years........ just over 5%, which means more people paying into the tax system than just a few years ago. Job growth is on the upswing, so that rate is likely to go down even more in the next year or two. Part of the plan, from what I can see so far, is that states will pay a portion of the cost, making it a partnership. That is a good thing.

Unemployment is higher here in the chronically bankrupt state of Illinois. We can't even properly fund special education in this state which is one of the main reasons we chose to homeschool. We are paying $121.00 per credit hour for my eldest to attend the local CC. I would love to see everyone who wants to go to college be able to do so without going into massive debt. However, from where I am, I just don't see this working if my state is supposed to help fund this. Perhaps there is a plan to seek funding from the private/corporate sector.

[EmseB]

Right now we provide most all of our college tuition as demand side subsidies- we give the students grants and or loans and that naturally bids up the tuition.

 

Funding the colleges (supply) rather than the students (demand) would hopefully help reverse that somewhat, especially when minimum achievement standards are expected.

 

You might disagree with my conclusions but I do understand the economic forces at play.

 

It is federal funding for education and other post war programs that largely built the middle class people want to preserve and expand.

Yes, I agree we have different conclusions here, I was mainly responding to the assertion that I must not agree with "free" college because I don't see it as an investment. I very much do see it that way. That doesn't mean I see federal dollars as the most prudent way to invest in education. But THAT doesn't mean I'm against people being educated as others in the thread have asserted.

[Aelwydd]

Well, I can't speak for anyone else, but I would never make my child leave home at 18, nor would I charge him rent to live in his own home, so count me among the people who would be thrilled if my ds decides to live at home while he attends college -- community or otherwise.

Same here, Cat! On all counts.

[Aelwydd]

I think part of the disconnect seems to be between people who believe free community college is an *investment* versus those who see it as just *spending*.

Yeah, I think it's also similar to an interesting divergence between how wealthy people treat their young adults, versus how many working class and poor families do. Whereas the former are often noted for the way they bequeath homes, land, annuities, etc., and tend to find ways to foster their children's education and professional development well into adulthood, the latter are often proponents of pushing 18 year olds out the door and on their own, with minimal or zero support.

 

Very affluent families seem to see their children as investments, and future recipients of the family's wealth, instead of as expenses. It's a different mindset, and the values there are more focused on the corporate success of the group, versus an emphasis on going out and earning a living individually, to prove one's worth.

[elegantlion]

I wonder how it would affect dual-enrollment. My son is basically graduating a year early because we can't afford dual-enrollment (even at the discounted rate). However, because I'm a full time student who qualifies for aid, he will (hopefully) as well - enough to cover tuition. If we lived in a state with free DE, he'd be doing that instead. 

 

I have very mixed feelings about this, but it's the best of the decisions for us at this time. 

 

My point is that high school education is already varied across the states and not equal. Personally, I'd like to see some merging of high school and community college, maybe have those that are ready move to CC in their junior year, and those that aren't graduate on a regular schedule and either move to CC or a 4 year institution. The key would be to not water down classes.

 

The other issue with free tuition is that institutions could just increase fees if those aren't covered. Room and Board might be an issue as not everyone lives near a CC. 

 

something in education needs to change in this country - that conversation has been around for a while. Maybe a bite off more than you can chew scenario such as this will get something happening. Again, I'm cautiously optimistic, but it will probably look messy for a bit no matter how it rolls out. 

[Aelwydd]

Also, just want to add, I'm neither wealthy nor poor, but trying to identify which attitudes will more likely foster financial independence for my own family down the road. To that end, I would definitely support my ds living at home and taking cc classes if that was the best available option.

[Arcadia]

Just received another promo flyer from the local CC today.

 

Out of the courses offered;

 

Assoc Science Deg for Transfer - 5

Assoc Arts Deg for Transfer - 11

Assoc Degree - 30

Certificate - 61

 

Since this state has issued IOUs for tax returns, I'll wait for implementation proposals to see what happens.

[SKL]

If this happens and it has the effect of encouraging more students to choose CC when they would otherwise have gone straight to university, is this a good or bad thing?  Will it result in a more or less educated society?

[redsquirrel]

If this happens and it has the effect of encouraging more students to choose CC when they would otherwise have gone straight to university, is this a good or bad thing? Will it result in a more or less educated society?

That is a really good question. I think it could have a few different consequences. First I think it can mean a society that doesn't have young people starting life with 30,000 worth of debt.

 

Many might go to CC and drop out. Fine, but now they won't have that debt keeping them from being able to get an apt or a car loan. And they can go back when they are ready.

 

Some will graduate and be done with higher ed. Again, they will be debt free and able to get on with their lives. Some will go on to a 4 year university and have only 2 years of debt when they are done.

 

I went to a state school and I knew so many kids who would have been better off in a 2 year school. They couldn't cut it once they got past the 200 level of classes. Many dropped out. I feel like a lot of them didn't even know why they were there. Maybe if a taxpayer subsidized CC were available they would have been happier about trying that first. It would have saved them a lot of unnecessary debt.

 

Students who drop out are also likely to default, and that has repercussions beyond the student. It makes getting a mortgage difficult etc. It will have effect on their kids if their parents can't get a car loan etc.

 

As for better educated, I think in the end it will. If by a "better educated society" you mean more people availing themselves of higher education. I think that some will try college that had not considered it. Some will return to school to complete their education. Some who have degrees will return for training in new fields. I think all of those things are positive.

 

If you mean by "better educated society" that will people who attend a 2 year college instead of a 4 year be less educated, I think it is difficult to know. First of all. I think so much of education is what the student brings to the table. Is it better if a student completes a 2 year degree at a CC or quits halfway through a 4 year at a university? Will there be some who intended to go on to a 4 year degree after getting a 2 year degree who do not? Yes. But will there be some who hardly hoped to make it through 2 years who finish and are confident enough to go on to a 4 year degree and beyond.

 

I do think this stands to give us a more flexible workforce, where people can return to school for a 2 year degree to gain entrance to a new field. I have about 10 friends who have gone to CC to be nurses. They have all been over the age of 35. One used to be a lawyer. I think that sort of thing is only going to become more common. I think there will be lots of people with several years of college going back to CC because they have to change fields.

 

But I will be shocked, gobsmacked even, if this proposal has legs. I just can't see this having any chance of getting through congress.

[flyingiguana]

I am also concerned that as we subsidize higher education more and more, all it does is get more and more expensive.  It's already way too expensive.  I'd rather look into ways to reduce and maybe redirect the money we already spend on higher education.  This could make a real education (as opposed to remedial adult high school) accessible to more serious students.

 

It's expensive because teaching isn't cheap. 

 

In the past a lot of the state run schools got a lot of state funding, so tuition appeared lower or free to the consumer.  So one could get a college education without a huge amount of debt so long as one chose a "cheap" state funded college.  That's no longer possible.

 

There may be some cost savings that could be realized by delaying building a gym or firing some of the bloat of administrators, but, by and large, the biggest expense of higher education is the teachers.  You can only cut so much there.  Large universities have saved big on payroll by hiring a lot of cheap TAs.  Smaller colleges are now doing the same thing by hiring a lot of cheap adjuncts.  But there's a limit to how far you can take this.

 

That state funding has been drying up in recent decades as more govts have come to see education as a useless freebie for citizens rather than an investment in the future economic growth of the state.

[The Girls' Mom]

Reading through this thread has been interesting to say the least.

 

Not all Community Colleges offer a sub par education. The one where I am currently enrolled, along with my oldest dd, works very hard to offer university parallel courses. In fact, many CC in our state work with a Pathways program that ensures equivalent and transferable courses with many Universities throughout our state. Also, while most everyone with a diploma or GED can get in, they do require testing and placement. You'd better believe that if you aren't up to par, you will be taking remedial classes until you CAN take college level courses. They also have a ton of programs that prepare you to enter the workforce at the end of your two years, which is kind of the point of this whole thing anyway.

 

As far as it hurting four year Universities, I just don't think it will. The students that have a desire to attend a university will likely go there regardless. I know in our family, in spite of the fact that my kids DO get two free years of CC, I have one student that will likely head straight to a four year. Why? They don't really offer any transfer or degree programs at the CC level that would transfer without having a lot of credits that would not count towards her major. Plus, she just wants the experience of going to a four year school. The two that will be going to CC would have chosen CC regardless of the TN Promise bill, simply because they aren't interested in a four year school.

[amy g.]

Here dual enrollment is free to all high school students who qualify. There is also a program for high-achieving freshmen which pays all books, all tuition, all fees, a stipend and a semester abroad. So in effect, anyone who is motivated can already go to CC for free here.

 

It has been a HUGE blessing for my oldest who did not want to go to college, but has done so well she wants to go to graduate school when the times comes.

 

As Apryl said, her classes are very good. In fact when my sister-in-law, who is now teaching at Cornell read some of my daughters papers she said,"I wish my students were turning in this level of work. I with my GRADUATE students were turning in this level of work!"

 

So, if every family could enjoy the benefits mine has from CC. I'd be happy to pay for it, no matter what the sacrifice. It could truly change a generation's entire future.

 

Here is what concerns me, though. My daughters professors and classmates have been outstanding in the honors college. In the regular classes it is a different story.

 

She has seen students cussing out professors, texting in class and then CRYING when asked to put their phones away, not doing any homework all semester then demanding extra credit in order to get an A, and of course sleeping in class everyday.

 

My fear is that when everyone goes to community college for free, no one will be getting the wonderful stepping stone to a 4 year degree and a brighter future.

 

I fear CC will become even further dumbed down and become grades 13 and 14.

 

I really don't know what the answers are. I don't see how even the best professors can teach students who are so indifferent to education.

 

Also I'm sure I would feel very different if I lived in an area where it wasn't already possible to go to CC for free.

[JFSinIL]

Aren't CCs really crowded? I hope expansion is part of the plan or more students will be on the waiting list.

 

My nephew in Moreno Valley, CA got "in line" to attend the local CC...and had to wait a couple semesters to be allowed to register for classes.  The school was too crowded to let students start without a big delay.  I can't imagine how much more crowded it would get if more folks could afford to attend.  They'd flat out have to create more cc's and hire more teachers.

 

Or - maybe do some cc classes at night in area high schools????

 

Where I live the cc is a a five minute drive away, no wait, and it is a decent school.  My youngest will start there, odds are, before transferring to a four-year.  I do not want her taking on student loans the first two years since she is NOT a STEM person. 

 

Oh, we do NOT have dual enrollment here, except if a kid wants to take an automotive or nursing course not offered in local high school. 

[foxbridgeacademy]

It is detrimental to the 16s here who are being forced to go to college for senior year of high school. CCs do not offer the level of challenging coursework they need in math, science, economics or English.It keeps them down, just like their high schools have done. If they do attempt a transfer into Engineering, Business, or something difficult, it will be 3 additional years, not 2. So, cost savings is one year of tuition at a cost of having to remediate some coursework when they do arrive at the 4 yr. And the transportation cost to commute will be huge....no bussing to CC here, its all pov unless the student lives within 2 miles in which case there is a city bus or a cab co.

 

I think it is a positive for those who need a certificate program for getting a job, and such a program wasnt available in their high school. We have seen local districts drop out of these programs bc they do not have the cash flow, and there is no option for the parent to fund their child....so the kids rot in study hall, taking the 2 reqd senior year classes, then begin a CC program when financial aid is available.

We are wasting a lot of student time because of funding issues due to medical needs being routed thru the school district. The reg ed kids here are being starved. I wish the pols would address this.

 

The CC in my state, there's really only 1 with 30 plus campuses, has over 30 core classes that transfer to all of the state funded Universities (we also have a Jr. College that offers the same transfer deal).  So if you take Bio, Calculus, Econ, History, Geology, Psych (etc...) it counts as if you took it at the University (This includes many 200 and even a few 300 level classes). You get credit and GPA transfers.  In fact many of the Professors at the CC are also the same Profs. at the local Universities.  So here it would be a huge deal if the CC were free, making it easier to transfer to the 4 year. So at least here the CC is not just for " those who need a certificate program for getting a job, and such ".  It's a real educational choice.

 

 Especially for people like me whose financial need isn't enough in the eyes of FASFA but there is no way we could pay on what we earn, especially since we'd have 2 kids in at the same time.

 

 

 If it doesn't go through in the next couple years I think we'll move back to TN, it's where DH wants to retire anyway and we really liked the mountains. 

[SKL]

How about making the first 1 or 2 years of state university free instead, or in addition?

[Lady Florida.]

How about making the first 1 or 2 years of state university free instead, or in addition?

 

I'd agree with in addition. One could either choose 2 years at a CC (and go for an A.A., A.S. or technical certificate), or the first 2 years at a state university.

[G5052]

I need to do errands, but this was a big issue of discussion at my community college faculty meeting this week.

 

Several key points:

 

This has been proposed before at both the state and federal level.  And it didn't happen in most cases, although a few states have free or reduced tuition with some restrictions.  The President has mentioned this off and on since he took office.  It is not a new idea to him.

 

The community colleges do not currently have the facilities and staff to handle this.  It is about far more than tuition.  Tuition only covers a portion of the costs.  Even if the tuition is paid by the federal government, there will be a cap on what the community colleges can offer.  The finances of this is going to be a huge headache for the community colleges.  There are a lot of questions about who is going to administer this.

 

Currently most community colleges in my state have a graduation rate of only 20-25% within five years of enrollment.  With this program, that rate is expected to go down because having to pay for the class or sign loan paperwork does prevent some folks who aren't serious about it from signing up.  Of course some will also sign up who might not have done it before who will go on and finish.

 

Community colleges are the target because the tuition is less than a 4-year.

 

[Slartibartfast]

I am in favor of helping people pay for  college as long as it is not those for profit schools.

 

 

[DawnM]

I'd agree with in addition. One could either choose 2 years at a CC (and go for an A.A., A.S. or technical certificate), or the first 2 years at a state university.

 

 

I think the problem is the cost factor.  CCs are significantly cheaper in most areas.  

[QueenCat]

Unemployment is higher here in the chronically bankrupt state of Illinois. We can't even properly fund special education in this state which is one of the main reasons we chose to homeschool. We are paying $121.00 per credit hour for my eldest to attend the local CC. I would love to see everyone who wants to go to college be able to do so without going into massive debt. However, from where I am, I just don't see this working if my state is supposed to help fund this. Perhaps there is a plan to seek funding from the private/corporate sector.

 

I meant nationally. I realize that there are pockets that are doing worse and pockets doing better. It's that way pretty much all the time, not just in recent years.

[regentrude]

Currently most community colleges in my state have a graduation rate of only 20-25% within five years of enrollment.  With this program, that rate is expected to go down because having to pay for the class or sign loan paperwork does prevent some folks who aren't serious about it from signing up.  Of course some will also sign up who might not have done it before who will go on and finish.

 

That could be helped if, instead of making CC free up front, students were reimbursed for tuition (forgive their loans or something) if they successfully graduated from the program. This way, only students who are seriously making the effort benefit from the initiative.

 

 

Back home, students can obtain interest free government loans to help with cost of living (we do not have tuition), and they get rewarded for finishing earlier than the regular duration of study and for finishing top of the class by having parts of their loans forgiven. Such an idea could be translated.

[NoPlaceLikeHome]

WAS attainable. It's physically impossible to work enough hours to pay for college today unless you stretch it to a 6-8 year gig or supplement with loans. Also, some degrees demand much more of the student, so available hours become an issue.

 

I get it. DH and I put ourselves through school with no parental help. That's just not an option for our daughter. It's so much more expensive in just one generation.

Plus, many jobs nowadays do not give set schedules and only give schedule for next week or so making it impossible to hold a second job or to go to school :glare:  These are the sorts of jobs that many college students would hold let alone people trying to support families. Walmart and many others are big offenders when it comes to only offering unpredictable jobs.

[G5052]

That could be helped if, instead of making CC free up front, students were reimbursed for tuition (forgive their loans or something) if they successfully graduated from the program. This way, only students who are seriously making the effort benefit from the initiative.

 

 

Back home, students can obtain interest free government loans to help with cost of living (we do not have tuition), and they get rewarded for finishing earlier than the regular duration of study and for finishing top of the class by having parts of their loans forgiven. Such an idea could be translated.

 

Yes, this would be much better. .

 

When I was in university research, my employer reinbursed me for my graduate school credits if I got an "A" or "B" and if it was job-related.  One of the community colleges I work for still offers that benefit within certain parameters even for adjuncts, and the other offers it for full time faculty. It's a little different if you have "skin in the game."

 

Students with Pell Grants and loans have certain repayment requirements if they drop or fail classes.  I would assume that this program would have something like that.

 

One college where  I work notifies me which students have aid because I have to report twice a semester if they attending and/or if they are in danger of failing.  The goal at that community college is to turn them around before they're obligated in a way that they may not want.  The other one (much larger BTW) just lets them fall.  Always sad though.  Students are sometimes overly optimistic, and of course many of them have complex job and family situations that make school tough.

[G5052]

Plus, many jobs nowadays do not give set schedules and only give schedule for next week or so making it impossible to hold a second job or to go to school :glare:  These are the sorts of jobs that many college students would hold let alone people trying to support families. Walmart and many others are big offenders when it comes to only offering unpredictable jobs.

 

I don't know the specifics, but it definitely seems like the on-campus opportunities have really dropped as well.  When I was in school there were student employees all over the place.  They served the meals in the cafeteria, cleaned the dorms and classrooms, set up and cleaned the science labs, graded papers, etc. etc.  I worked as a resident assistant, graded, and took on odd jobs and paid my own way to double STEM degrees.  I was busy, but my employers worked with me and the hours fit my schooling.

 

I always listen when I hear students talk about good employers for students because indeed there are some bad ones out there.

[maize]

The news mentioned that on average CC grads make $20,0000 more a year than HS grads. If it is free to everyone now, like HS, I wonder what is to keep a CC diploma from eventually being viewed the same as we view a HS diploma today? There have already been discussions on how Bachelors degrees are losing their value and that many need to get a Masters now. I don't see how this wouldn't accelerate this.

Free to the student doesn't make something low quality or worthless, there are countries where secondary education is both free and highly valued.

 

We do have quality problems in our education system, I just don't think they are driven by whether government or individuals shoulder the cost.

 

Personally I would like to see more vocational training and apprenticeships in high school.

[momofkhm]

I can't possibly read through the whole thread - 3 pages as I'm typing.

 

For us, if it went through, for us, we would make next child, youngest, go to CC for 2 years and then transfer to a 4yr place.  BUT i think a LOT of people would do that and so 4yr uni-s would get even that much more expensive.  In the end would we save any money?

 

That's if it goes through.  I see the real question - how would it get paid for?  What are the check boxes for "willing to work for it"?  Does everyone qualify for free?  And if everyone does, and everyone goes and it's free, the isn't it going to end up just like high school where the degree doesn't matter and so it just pushes even harder for the higher degree?  When I was in school, physical therapy was a bachelor's start.  We have friends at church that for their daughter, it was a master's to start.  Now they have to have PhD to really get a job.  Is everything going to be that way?

[PeacefulChaos]

I don't really have any strong opinions about it.

 

On one hand, I'm like, hey, free CC tuition is a good idea.  It is something that I could potentially take advantage of (if I ever found something I wanted to study, that is).  It is something my children could potentially take advantage of - though I never had any intention of paying for their college (unless our financial situation improved drastically), I would of course be glad for them to get that break.  

 

On the other hand, I do also think about things like 'where will this money come from?' and 'will this just be extending a sub par education?'  I'm not saying CC is subpar - I'm all for it.  But I'm wondering what others have mentioned - is it just going to become the next hs diploma?  Will the educational 'requirements' in the world at large just become even higher as a result?  

I wouldn't go so far as to say these are 'worrisome' ideas - they are just thoughts.  I just wonder.  But if it goes through, it does, and I can't say I'd be sad about it.

 

I like it better than the healthcare ideas that came across.  Though, granted, the healthcare in and of itself I don't necessarily have a problem with - the being penalized for not having insurance is what I have a problem with. ;)  :D

[Lady Florida.]

I think the problem is the cost factor.  CCs are significantly cheaper in most areas.  

 

Ah, true. I wasn't thinking about that. There might be a way to make something work, but I'm happy with the start of the program only including CC's. 

[Serenade]

That could be helped if, instead of making CC free up front, students were reimbursed for tuition (forgive their loans or something) if they successfully graduated from the program. This way, only students who are seriously making the effort benefit from the initiative.

 

 

 

 

This is a great idea!

[TranquilMind]

Yeah, I think it's also similar to an interesting divergence between how wealthy people treat their young adults, versus how many working class and poor families do. Whereas the former are often noted for the way they bequeath homes, land, annuities, etc., and tend to find ways to foster their children's education and professional development well into adulthood, the latter are often proponents of pushing 18 year olds out the door and on their own, with minimal or zero support.

 

Very affluent families seem to see their children as investments, and future recipients of the family's wealth, instead of as expenses. It's a different mindset, and the values there are more focused on the corporate success of the group, versus an emphasis on going out and earning a living individually, to prove one's worth.

Very affluent families have more than their share of kids with drug or alcohol problems, or trouble with the law.  All that cash and no obligations is not always a good thing. 

[TranquilMind]

Lower cost access to higher education is exactly what we need to help the middle class breathe a little easier and sleep at night without panicking about how they will pay for Juniors' education next term.

Sure....unless they are hit somewhere else to pay for it. 

[TranquilMind]

Perhaps that is Obama's plan, to require military service for anyone who wants to go to college for "free"? 

 

The G.I. Bill is a good deal for many people!  Not to mention the additional job skills from being in the military.

 

Now I'm beginning to see the light. :)

Since he didn't serve, I think it will be more of a Peace Corps kind of requirement. 

[TechWife]

That could be helped if, instead of making CC free up front, students were reimbursed for tuition (forgive their loans or something) if they successfully graduated from the program. This way, only students who are seriously making the effort benefit from the initiative.

 

This wouldn't help people who don't qualify for student loans, yet don't have the cash on hand to pay for CC. 

 

What if students had to sign acknowledging that if they didn't make a minimum GPA they would automatically have a loan at the end of the semester that will reimburse the CC for the semester?

[LucyStoner]

And so?

 

Who will be paying for it?

Sure....unless they are hit somewhere else to pay for it.

Is there some reason you responded to my same post twice on different days but skipped over my first reply?

 

I think that the federal budget is large enough for us to allocate resources to programs which help families in meaningful ways without increasing taxes. This is a relatively small proposal compared to so many other line items in the the federal budget. As I said before, funding details for this proposal will be released next month. I will be curious to read them but I make no assumptions that it will be a zero sum situation for families.

[Luanne]

:iagree:

 

Plus the dorms...they are insane.  I went to a good well-respected university.  I was in the Freshman dorm which was three people to a room, plus our own bathroom.  We had a walk-in closet, a main room, and a study area.  We put a bed in each.  There was a commons room on each floor.  

 

Just as I was leaving, the university started building luxury apartments/dorms.  These were more expensive, but were insanely outfitted.   Now, I hear everything is pretty much like that.  Almost all of the old doubles have been converted to singles, etc.  The university near where I lived added a lazy river for one of their dorms.   How ridiculous, IMHO.  College is not supposed to be a luxury-living experience.... nor have luxury living prices.

 

I thought this was about community colleges.  The community colleges here don't have dorms or any kind of place to stay at the school.

[Luanne]

Would you say that anyone who is against any one particular plan for "free" college is against another person getting an education?

 

I was going off the person who claims that getting an education is a privilege and not a right.  To me that is saying that if you or your parents can't afford to send you to college (even community college), you don't deserve to go.