info
Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
What Happened When England Offered ‘Free’ College
18 views
Skip to first unread message
a425couple
Oct 14, 2017, 12:28:36 PM10/14/17
to
What Happened When England Offered ‘Free’ College
Mary Clare Amselem / @MCAmselem / October 05, 2017 / comments
In England, "free college" policies resulted in the wealthiest
students receiving a disproportionate share of government
subsidies. (Photo: iStock Photos)
COMMENTARY BY
Portrait of Mary Clare Amselem
Mary Clare Amselem
@MCAmselem
Mary Clare Amselem is a policy analyst in education policy at The
Heritage Foundation.
Proponents of “free college” would have you believe that getting rid of
tuition fees is all it takes to create a high-quality, equitable, and
accessible higher education system.
But a recent study indicates that in England, removing tuition fees from
students achieved the exact opposite result. “Free” college in fact
created a system where the wealthy benefited, and the poor were left behind.
Starting in the 1960s, England removed tuition fees for its citizens who
were full-time students. As one might expect, this caused a massive
uptick in the number of students going into higher education.
After years of concerns about financial sustainability, England started
to slowly introduce tuition fees in the late 1990s.
Authors Richard Murphy, Judith Scott-Clayton, and Gillen Wyness studied
the impact that charging tuition had on student enrollment, equity in
college attainment among different income levels, and education quality.
The authors found that after tuition fees were introduced, the number of
low-income students enrolling in higher education actually doubled
between 1997 and 2015. This seems counterintuitive, considering that
low-income families would seem to struggle the most under the new
tuition-based system.
As with most government-run programs, the old tuition-free system in
England ended up hurting exactly the people it set out to help. With the
massive influx of students under the free system, the quality of the
system declined and struggled financially to keep up with demand.
In response, in 1994, the government capped the number of students that
could enroll in each university under state funding.
The result? The wealthiest students ended up receiving more of the free
college tuition subsidies, since they were typically the most qualified
and therefore most likely to succeed when competing for limited seats.
Just as we have seen with experiments with universal health care,
government control and financing leads to rationing. As England’s
experience demonstrates, removing market competition from higher
education did not help low-income students—instead, it restricted their
access even further.
The authors also found that the amount of funding an institution could
devote to each student increased once England introduced tuition fees,
as did student enrollment numbers.
The story of England’s experiment with “free college” should be a
cautionary tale for Americans. The concept has certainly gained some
traction in the United States already.
Politicians such as Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., propose offering four
years of “free” college tuition to all students at public universities,
and New York recently became the first state to offer a two- or
four-year degree to residents making $125,000 per year or less.
High student loan debt is a problem for many Americans. But the solution
is not to follow failed policies that transfer costs to other taxpayers
(most of whom do not hold bachelor’s degrees themselves) and to
disadvantage low-income students.
A better approach is to pursue policies that cut off the drivers of
tuition inflation.
Economic evidence suggests that unrestricted access to federal student
loans has led to an unprecedented rise in college tuition. Heavy-handed
government intervention in higher education does more harm than good.
England has demonstrated that when competition and market forces enter
the mix, more students gain access to a high-quality education.
American policymakers should take note of this policy shift across the
pond, and avoid the temptation of making the same mistakes inherent in
“free” college.
A Note for our Readers:
Trust in the mainstream media is at a historic low—and rightfully so
given the behavior of many journalists in Washington, D.C.
Ever since Donald Trump was elected president, it is painfully clear
that the mainstream media covers liberals glowingly and conservatives
critically.
Now journalists spread false, negative rumors about President Trump
before any evidence is even produced.
Americans need an alternative to the mainstream media. That’s why The
Daily Signal exists.
The Daily Signal’s mission is to give Americans the real, unvarnished
truth about what is happening in Washington and what must be done to
save our country.
Our dedicated team of more than 100 journalists and policy experts rely
on the financial support of patriots like you.
Your donation helps us fight for access to our nation’s leaders and
report the facts.
You deserve the truth about what’s going on in Washington.
Please make a gift to support The Daily Signal.
SUPPORT THE DAILY SIGNAL
http://dailysignal.com/2017/10/05/happened-england-offered-free-college/
Mary Clare Amselem / @MCAmselem / October 05, 2017 / comments
In England, "free college" policies resulted in the wealthiest
students receiving a disproportionate share of government
subsidies. (Photo: iStock Photos)
COMMENTARY BY
Portrait of Mary Clare Amselem
Mary Clare Amselem
@MCAmselem
Mary Clare Amselem is a policy analyst in education policy at The
Heritage Foundation.
Proponents of “free college” would have you believe that getting rid of
tuition fees is all it takes to create a high-quality, equitable, and
accessible higher education system.
But a recent study indicates that in England, removing tuition fees from
students achieved the exact opposite result. “Free” college in fact
created a system where the wealthy benefited, and the poor were left behind.
Starting in the 1960s, England removed tuition fees for its citizens who
were full-time students. As one might expect, this caused a massive
uptick in the number of students going into higher education.
After years of concerns about financial sustainability, England started
to slowly introduce tuition fees in the late 1990s.
Authors Richard Murphy, Judith Scott-Clayton, and Gillen Wyness studied
the impact that charging tuition had on student enrollment, equity in
college attainment among different income levels, and education quality.
The authors found that after tuition fees were introduced, the number of
low-income students enrolling in higher education actually doubled
between 1997 and 2015. This seems counterintuitive, considering that
low-income families would seem to struggle the most under the new
tuition-based system.
As with most government-run programs, the old tuition-free system in
England ended up hurting exactly the people it set out to help. With the
massive influx of students under the free system, the quality of the
system declined and struggled financially to keep up with demand.
In response, in 1994, the government capped the number of students that
could enroll in each university under state funding.
The result? The wealthiest students ended up receiving more of the free
college tuition subsidies, since they were typically the most qualified
and therefore most likely to succeed when competing for limited seats.
Just as we have seen with experiments with universal health care,
government control and financing leads to rationing. As England’s
experience demonstrates, removing market competition from higher
education did not help low-income students—instead, it restricted their
access even further.
The authors also found that the amount of funding an institution could
devote to each student increased once England introduced tuition fees,
as did student enrollment numbers.
The story of England’s experiment with “free college” should be a
cautionary tale for Americans. The concept has certainly gained some
traction in the United States already.
Politicians such as Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., propose offering four
years of “free” college tuition to all students at public universities,
and New York recently became the first state to offer a two- or
four-year degree to residents making $125,000 per year or less.
High student loan debt is a problem for many Americans. But the solution
is not to follow failed policies that transfer costs to other taxpayers
(most of whom do not hold bachelor’s degrees themselves) and to
disadvantage low-income students.
A better approach is to pursue policies that cut off the drivers of
tuition inflation.
Economic evidence suggests that unrestricted access to federal student
loans has led to an unprecedented rise in college tuition. Heavy-handed
government intervention in higher education does more harm than good.
England has demonstrated that when competition and market forces enter
the mix, more students gain access to a high-quality education.
American policymakers should take note of this policy shift across the
pond, and avoid the temptation of making the same mistakes inherent in
“free” college.
A Note for our Readers:
Trust in the mainstream media is at a historic low—and rightfully so
given the behavior of many journalists in Washington, D.C.
Ever since Donald Trump was elected president, it is painfully clear
that the mainstream media covers liberals glowingly and conservatives
critically.
Now journalists spread false, negative rumors about President Trump
before any evidence is even produced.
Americans need an alternative to the mainstream media. That’s why The
Daily Signal exists.
The Daily Signal’s mission is to give Americans the real, unvarnished
truth about what is happening in Washington and what must be done to
save our country.
Our dedicated team of more than 100 journalists and policy experts rely
on the financial support of patriots like you.
Your donation helps us fight for access to our nation’s leaders and
report the facts.
You deserve the truth about what’s going on in Washington.
Please make a gift to support The Daily Signal.
SUPPORT THE DAILY SIGNAL
http://dailysignal.com/2017/10/05/happened-england-offered-free-college/
Topaz
Oct 15, 2017, 6:45:16 AM10/15/17
to
On Sat, 14 Oct 2017 09:28:19 -0700, a425couple
<a425c...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>What Happened When England Offered ‘Free’ College
Free College is a great idea but only those who do great in high
<a425c...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>What Happened When England Offered ‘Free’ College
school should be allowed in college. And those who don't do good in
high school should be kept out of college no matter how rich they are.
www.tomatobubble.com www.ihr.org http://nationalvanguard.org
http://national-socialist-worldview.blogspot.com radioaryan.com
a425couple
Oct 15, 2017, 9:35:54 AM10/15/17
to
On 10/15/2017 3:45 AM, Topaz wrote:
> On Sat, 14 Oct 2017 09:28:19 -0700, a425couple
> <a425c...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>> What Happened When England Offered ‘Free’ College
>
> Free College is a great idea but only those who do great in high
> school should be allowed in college. And those who don't do good in
> high school should be kept out of college no matter how rich they are.
I disagree with the above opinion.
> On Sat, 14 Oct 2017 09:28:19 -0700, a425couple
> <a425c...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>> What Happened When England Offered ‘Free’ College
>
> Free College is a great idea but only those who do great in high
> school should be allowed in college. And those who don't do good in
> high school should be kept out of college no matter how rich they are.
Desire, drive, and determination are much more important
predictors of future performance than either high school
grades or standardized tests.
I suggest you buy and read:
Successful Intelligence: How Practical and Creative Intelligence
Determine Success in Life Paperback – September 1, 1997
by Robert Sternberg (Author)
4.0 out of 5 stars 25 customer reviews
Hardcover
41 Used from $2.49
Paperback
32 Used from $1.70 (so, delivered to your door for just $5.60)
https://www.amazon.com/Successful-Intelligence-Practical-Creative-Determine/dp/0452279062
For example, the youngest of my 4 children would have been,
by high school grades and tests, rated weakest.
All 4 got their Bachelors degrees, but she got her Masters first.
from
http://www.robertjsternberg.com/successful-intelligence/
"My theories on intelligence can be divided in two parts: the theory of
successful intelligence and the theory of practical intelligence (common
sense).
Augmented Theory of Successful Intelligence
The traditional view of intelligence is that it comprises a single
general ability (g), under which are hierarchically arranged
successively more specific levels of abilities, such as fluid ability
(the ability to think flexibly and in novel ways) and crystallized
ability (cumulative knowledge).
The augmented theory of successful intelligence, in contrast, suggests
that intelligence is more complex than this. Successful intelligence is
defined as one’s ability to set and accomplish personally meaningful
goals in one’s life, given one’s cultural context. A successfully
intelligent person accomplishes these goals by figuring out his or her
strengths and weaknesses, and then by capitalizing on the strengths and
correcting or compensating for the weaknesses. Strengths and weaknesses
are in terms of four kinds of skills: creative, analytical, practical,
and wisdom-based. In particular, the individual needs to be creative in
order to generate novel and useful ideas; analytical to ascertain that
the ideas he/she has (and that others have) are good ones; practical in
order to apply those ideas and convince others of their value; and wise
in order to ensure that implementation of the ideas will help ensure a
common good through the mediation of positive ethical principles.
Although intelligence is viewed as of various kinds, the mental
processes involved in creative, analytical, practical, and wise thinking
are the same. Metacompomponents, or higher order executive processes,
plan, monitor, and evaluate courses of thinking and action. Examples of
metacomponents are recognizing the existence of a problem, defining the
nature of the problem, and mentally representing information about the
problem. Performance components implement the instructions of the
metacomponents. Examples of performance components are inferring
relations and applying relations. And knowledge-acquisition components
learn how to solve problems in the first place. Examples of
knowledge-acquisition components are selective encoding (deciding what
information currently available in a problem is relevant for one’s
purposes) and selective comparison (deciding what prior information
stored in memory is relevant for one’s purposes).
My colleagues and I have tested the theory of successful intelligence,
in its various phases, using a variety of converging operations,
including reaction-time analysis, cultural analysis, factor analysis,
correlational analysis, predictive analysis, and instructional analysis,
among other methods. The results have been, for the most part, highly
supportive of the theory.
Practical Intelligence (Common Sense)
Practical intelligence, or common sense, according to a theory I
developed with Richard Wagner, is based in large part upon tacit
knowledge, or what one needs to know to succeed in a particular
environment that is not explicitly stated and often that is not even
verbalized. What are the characteristics of tacit knowledge, a concept
first proposed by Michael Polanyi?
First, tacit knowledge generally is acquired on one's own with little
support from other people or resources. It usually is acquired, for
example, without the support of formal training or direct instruction.
When knowledge acquisition is supported, certain processes underlying
that acquisition are facilitated. These processes include selective
encoding (sorting relevant from irrelevant information in the
environment), selective combination (integrating information into a
meaningful interpretation of the situation), and selective comparison
(relating new information to existing knowledge). When these processes
are not well supported, as often is the case in learning from everyday
experiences, the likelihood increases that some individuals will fail to
acquire the knowledge. Additionally, because its acquisition usually is
not supported, tacit knowledge tends to remain unspoken,
underemphasized, and poorly conveyed relative to its importance for
practical success.
Second, tacit knowledge is procedural in nature. It is knowledge about
how to act in particular situations or classes of situations. But as is
the case with much procedural knowledge, people may find it difficult to
articulate the knowledge that guides their action. In particular, tacit
knowledge is a subset of procedural knowledge that is drawn from
personal experience and that guides action without being easily
articulated. In other words, we consider all tacit knowledge to be
procedural, but not all procedural knowledge is tacit.
Third, tacit knowledge often is expressed in the form of complex,
multi-condition rules (production systems) for how to pursue particular
goals in particular situations (e.g., rules about how to judge people
accurately for a variety of purposes and under a variety of
circumstances). These complex rules can be represented in the form of
condition-action pairings.
Fourth and finally, a characteristic feature of tacit knowledge is that
it has practical value to the individual. Knowledge that is
experience-based and action-oriented will likely be more instrumental to
achieving one’s goals than will be knowledge that is based on someone
else’s experience or that does not specify action. For example, leaders
may be instructed on what leadership approach (e.g., authoritative vs.
participative) is supposed to be most appropriate in a given situation,
but they may learn from their own experiences that some other approach
is more effective in that situation.
Topaz
Oct 16, 2017, 5:13:54 PM10/16/17
to
On Sun, 15 Oct 2017 06:35:08 -0700, a425couple
<a425c...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> Free College is a great idea but only those who do great in high
>> school should be allowed in college. And those who don't do good in
>> high school should be kept out of college no matter how rich they are.
>
>I disagree with the above opinion.
>Desire, drive, and determination are much more important
>predictors of future performance than either high school
>grades or standardized tests.
Desire, drive and determination are the main things for doing well
<a425c...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> Free College is a great idea but only those who do great in high
>> school should be allowed in college. And those who don't do good in
>> high school should be kept out of college no matter how rich they are.
>
>I disagree with the above opinion.
>Desire, drive, and determination are much more important
>predictors of future performance than either high school
>grades or standardized tests.
in high school. This is the time to show it. Being intelligent is
important too. If they have all of that they should get free college.
great in high school.
a425couple
Oct 19, 2017, 10:56:00 AM10/19/17
to
On 10/16/2017 2:13 PM, Topaz wrote:
> On Sun, 15 Oct 2017 06:35:08 -0700, a425couple
> <a425c...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>> Free College is a great idea but only those who do great in high
>>> school should be allowed in college. And those who don't do good in
>>> high school should be kept out of college no matter how rich they are.
>>
>> I disagree with the above opinion.
>> Desire, drive, and determination are much more important
>> predictors of future performance than either high school
>> grades or standardized tests.
>
> Desire, drive and determination are the main things for doing well
> in high school. This is the time to show it. Being intelligent is
> important too. If they have all of that they should get free college. ---
> On Sun, 15 Oct 2017 06:35:08 -0700, a425couple
> <a425c...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>> Free College is a great idea but only those who do great in high
>>> school should be allowed in college. And those who don't do good in
>>> high school should be kept out of college no matter how rich they are.
>>
>> I disagree with the above opinion.
>> Desire, drive, and determination are much more important
>> predictors of future performance than either high school
>> grades or standardized tests.
>
> Desire, drive and determination are the main things for doing well
> in high school. This is the time to show it. Being intelligent is
> The way they can prove they have successful intelligence if by doing
> great in high school.
a youth has not demonstrated maturity before they have
turned age 18, that you are forever going to limit
their potential.
That would cause all of society to lose a great deal.
And it would aggravate social unrest.
MajorOz
Oct 25, 2017, 12:42:55 PM10/25/17
to
On Sunday, October 15, 2017 at 8:35:54 AM UTC-5, a425couple wrote:
>
> http://www.robertjsternberg.com/successful-intelligence/
>
> "My theories on intelligence can be divided in two parts: the theory of
> successful intelligence and the theory of practical intelligence (common
> sense).
[ snip the silliness ]
>
> http://www.robertjsternberg.com/successful-intelligence/
>
> "My theories on intelligence can be divided in two parts: the theory of
> successful intelligence and the theory of practical intelligence (common
> sense).
When you can MEASURE these alleged characteristics...you might have a case.
Until then, it belongs in the bucket with crystal power and other new age crap.
0 new messages