Richard V. Reeves Free College

In “The Argument for Tuition-Free College,” Keith Ellison addresses the matter of free-tuition for colleges and universities in America. The high cost of tuition increasing inequality and the largest personal debt in the country, student loans, are the main two problems Ellison discussed. Claiming that minorities are less likely to succeed in the community is one of Ellison’s ways to support the issue. He promotes his argument with two solutions. In the first one he explains how to eliminate student loan debt. Ellison uses free primary and secondary schooling as an example to explain his second solution.

“"Free" is a word with a powerful appeal. And right now it 's being tossed around a lot, followed by another word: "college."” (Kamenetz).The debate surrounding free community college for all is becoming rather controversial. Since there has been no law set in place federally some states are taking aim. Washington has a scholarship program called “Washington Promise” that supports what this act is all for. As the world continues to flatten, it seems the only way to compete in the globalized economy is by higher education. Even though the funding is large, the first two years of community college should be free to all. The Washington Promise, a scholarship program in place to provide scholarships to high school seniors who graduate from a Washington high school, is a way to help students in the Yakima Valley attend college and graduate with an A.A degree which helps stress the importance of liberal arts, and help decrease what Thomas Freidman, the author of The World is Flat, calls the education gap at the bottom.

The hot topic amongst people entering college is student loan debt. With the average debt at tens of thousands of dollars, many people shy away from college, or at least do not get a full degree. As a result, many politicians have preached plans to make college free, and thus bring an end to student loan debt. However, those on the other end of the spectrum find themselves hindered in jumping aboard the free college mania, because, after all, nothing is free, everything comes at a price. And as they soon learned, what a price indeed. In fact, in order for the universities to pay staff and accommodate the student body without tuition being on the shoulders of the students, state taxes would have to be increased on the entire taxpaying population.

It’s an idea that pops up every now and then. Every year many young people work hard to pass their school-leaving exams and enter a college. However, for many of them acquiring good marks is not the only worry. Unlike the lucky minority from wealthy families, they must also think about the ways of getting money to pay for their education. For a half century, federal funding has flowed to students in the form of vouchers, and students have had the power to choose from an array of providers--public, private, and for-profit. Making education free can stretch from an array of getting rid of student debts/loans to decreasing the amount of unqualified jobs with the help of President Obama 's idea of making community colleges "free." The government claims that free education is impossible, as there is no possibility to subsidize the universities and colleges with the budget funds. Moreover, when education is fully supported financially by the state, colleges lose their independence and the spirit of democracy and freedom. .

Only four students went straight to the workforce, when a century ago, this was not the case. With students now consistently going straight to college after high school, state universities should be free to state residents since we have public high schools. In Kalamazoo, Michigan, students who attend high school in Kalamazoo starting in ninth grade, can have from sixty-five to one hundred percent of their tuition covered (Teicher). This is known as “The Promise.” The Promise guarantees any student from Kalamazoo a scholarship that pays either a majority or all of their tuition (Teicher). This scholarship can be used for any state school, fifteen private schools, and other state schools around the United States that are less than the highest tuition in Michigan (Teicher). Since The Promise’s first wave of scholarships, there has been definite improvements in college attendance. For black students, there has been a three percent rise in college attendance and overall forty-eight percent of scholarship recipients graduate college (Teicher). While this has shown an impact, there certainly are other factors that lead to the fifty-two percent that do not graduate, such as not being taught time management, academic skills, or how to take advantage of their sources (Teicher). Despite this fallback, “The Promise” has definitely started an era of higher college graduation rates and those who lack financial support a method of

Dreams are not cheap. I have dreamed of having a college degree for twenty years, one of the hurdles that I struggled with overcoming was the shear rising cost of higher education. In the articles, The Problem with Obama’s “Free Community College” Proposal and Obama’s Dream of Free Community College is Headed to Congress, high dropout rates and low percentages of students earning a bachelor’s degree are touched upon. While reducing the cost of college or providing free community college may not be enough to raise the dropout rate, we need to look at the other non-quantifiable costs of getting an education. If we want to enable American’s to earn that dream, we need to address the whole needs of the student and not just throw money at them.

Andrew Kelly’s article “The Problem Is That Free College Isn’t Free” originally appeared in the New York Times, and due to the large audience that normally views this website and newspaper each day, there’s no doubt that he had an influence on those who read his article, particularly those in his intended audience of taxpayers and students. The author uses

The recent presidential election brought about a new round of discussion concerning the possibility of free state college tuition. Since Barack Obama first mentioned the idea in 2015, conflicts of interest have arisen surrounding the debate. Many people think that free state college education would enable more Americans to receive and then use an education at a higher level than in years past. Other argue that there will be many disadvantages to free state college education that would far outweigh the benefits. Providing free state college education to all American citizens would not only lend to the enormous debt of our nation, but would offer assistance to families without real need of financial assistance, and would contribute to the laziness and lack of motivation of the future generation of United States Citizens.

(INTRO) During the recent Presidential Address in January, Barack Obama introduced a groundbreaking new idea; free community college. Upon approval, the proposal would provide all students in the United States who maintain a 2.5 GPA, go to school at least part-time, and make steady progress toward degree completion with free education (Community College Week, par. 16). As the world powers continue to improve education systems, the United States is undoubtedly falling more and more behind, and many believe that this program would be a good beginning to closing the educational gap with other nations. There is no debate that free college would change the educational “game” by allowing millions of students to access free college annually; however, many politicians doubt that the available resources (especially economically) are adequate to cover such a plan. (THESIS) America’s College Promise is merely a proposal designed to spark the conversation over higher education structure; the program is frankly impractical, as the detail and necessary

age. In Kalamazoo, Michigan, students who attend high school in Kalamazoo starting in ninth grade, can have from sixty-five to one hundred percent of their tuition covered (Teicher). This is known as “The Promise.” This scholarship can be used for any state school, fifteen private schools, and other state schools around the United States that are less than the highest tuition in Michigan (Teicher). Since The Promise’s first wave of scholarships, there has been definite improvements in college attendance. For one, African-American students, had a three percent rise in college attendance (Teicher). This gives hope for minorities as well as role models that match aspiring students’ background. These role models are important for students to demonstrate that all students, regardless of their background, can go to college. Second, forty-eight percent of scholarship recipients graduate college (Teicher). This demonstrates that scholarship recipients have benefit from these scholarships. While this has shown an impact, there certainly are other factors that lead to the fifty-two percent that do not graduate, such

Dr. Monica Herk, vice president of education research at the Committee for Economic Development, claims “Making community college free will reduce costs for families but increase them, probably significantly, for taxpayers.” It is no doubt that a free community college program in the Yakima Valley would be expensive. For students with a full course load of 15 quarter credits, tuition at YVC costs over $4,000 per student per year (“Yakima Valley College Tuition”). This cost can be overcome, however, as Tennessee’s community college tuition rates for a comparable course load also costs around $4,000 per student per year (“Tennessee Promise”). In 2016, The Oregonian journalist Andrew Theen reported that each year, because of federal funding through programs like the Pell Grant, Tennessee Promise (Tennessee’s free community college program) only incurs “an estimated cost to the state of $938 per head.” So, even though Tennessee’s community colleges cost $4,000 per student per year, the state only pays around 23.5 percent of the total tuition price. Assuming that each year, 2,000 students earn a 3.0 GPA or better at YVC and the cost per student per year of the program is about $938, the program would cost around $1.8 million per year. To pay for the program, I offer two solutions. Foundation President Glenn Rasmussen asserts that The Yakima Valley College Foundation (YVC

Its proponents differentiate tuition-free college and debt-free college by noting that the debt-free college proposal would allow a federal grant that would cover the cost is unmet by university funds and family support. It wouldn’t eliminate the full cost of college, but rather the possibility of having to go into debt and risking other essential aspects of financial health. With this proposal, public college education becomes transformed into a low-risk investment that only involves the money that is used in order to cover the cost. Other than completely eliminating the possibility of student debt, another merit would be that the student dropout rates would be drastically lowered. Borrowers drop out of college at twice the rate of the regular dropout rate (Beginning Post Secondary Students, 2011). Because students will not require an unsustainable lifestyle in order to fund their education, they will have much more time to allocate into working on their degrees. As private debtors are mostly cut out of the structure of affordable higher education, the systematically regressive lending system can be abolished. The aspect of paying for college will no longer deter students from attending. Making college not free, but affordable for every student in the country would stop the advance of socioeconomic inequality in that much more low-income students would be able to

The words “free college tuition” spark interest in any college student with accumulating debt. In fact, this topic is so incredibly supported that Bernie Sanders implemented it as a core interest in his 2016 campaign. Once Hillary Clinton became the Democratic nominee, she decided to take it on herself with an extensive plan that guaranteed students free tuition. Unsurprisingly, free tuition resonates extremely well within the student demographic. To forty million Americans, free tuition eliminates the largest problem for students: debt (Hess, 2017). However, free college tuition generates the inverse of what these low-income and middle-income students believe. In fact, free college cripples them from multiple perspectives; students will end up spending more financially, will be less likely to graduate with a degree, and will be subjected to more inequality and less exposure.

To determine the cost of making all public higher education free in America, we first need to look at how much we are currently spending. In 2008–9, there were 6.4 million full-time-equivalent undergraduate students enrolled in public universities and 4.3 million enrolled in community colleges.1 The following year, the average cost of tuition, room, and board for undergraduates at public four-year institutions was $14,870; at two-year public colleges, it was $7,629.2 If we multiply the number of students in each segment of public higher education by the average total cost, we discover that the cost of making all public universities free would have been $95 billion in 2009–10, with an annual cost of $33

In the heart of twenty-first century America, state-level higher-education reforms magnify the socioeconomic inequalities of educational attainment, wealth and poverty and exacerbate the opportunity gap between rich and poor. Particularly, the Michigan Education Trust (MET), a policy that allows state residents to invest in college savings accounts for student recipients, amplifies the ongoing tragedy of exorbitant higher education costs that prevent financially disadvantaged students and families from saving for college. Although the MET has already made college possible for thousands of Michigan students, its target demographic has few sellable assets and, thus, less incentive to invest in it. Lacking physical assets such as homes and cars,