Free College. How About We Do This:

[MineralMan]

We pay for your college tuition and basic room and board, wherever you go to school. In return, you agree to do social service work in your field at the national average entry-level pay for people in your profession - for the same number of years you spent in college. You go where your skills are needed, but aren't well-represented.

You got a BS in Chemistry? Then, maybe you'll work in a rural area doing soil testing to help farmers increase their yields for four years. You got a BA in Music? Well, you can teach band and choral classes in a school in a place that can't afford music education. Some other Humanities degree? Maybe you'll teach in a rural school. You spent 8 years getting an MD? Gosh, there are so many places that have a shortage of GP and Family Practice doctors. We'll send you there for eight years, pay you the average earnings a doctor gets in those early years.

Like that. This program won't be means tested, either. Even if your family could afford to send you to Harvard or Yale, you'll still qualify for the program, under the same rules. We'll pay for your tuition and basic room and board, too. Anyone can sign up. Heck, if everyone signs up for the program, we'll pay for all of you. We need your educated selves in places you might not think of going. You'll get tons of experience, and be free to choose your subsequent employment as soon as you've fulfilled that social service requirement.

[mahatmakanejeeves]

1. I've never had a problem with that notion. I'm sure there are details to be worked out.

Northeastern University uses a program like this to train its engineers, I think. A year in school, and a year in the field.

I'm probably wrong. Can anyone verify that?

[MineralMan]

3. I don't know about that program.

However, I've always thought we should subsidize higher education for anyone who is willing to devote equal time to service where it is needed. We pay for your school, but you have to repay us by working in your field at a job that needs doing, wherever it is.

You don't have to work for free, either. We'll pay you the going entry-level rate for whatever the job is. But, you don't get to choose the location. We'll do that, based on need.

Frankly, it's a hard thing to argue against, I think. It would also make educational opportunities available to people who might not otherwise be able to get that education. That's a primary goal. It would also bring people to places where most people don't think about going. It would be good for those doing the service and for those who need those services.

[Moostache]

54. This plan is what I WISH our candidates would be promoting...

It is not "free" college....it is "debt-free" education and community service.

The only change I would make is that I would require either military or civilian service for people qualified to attend and I would offer trade schools with a similar arrangement for rural areas and for people who may not need nor benefit from a liberal arts education in full.

Some people have no business or interest in schooling and we should be cognizant of the need to bring them into a meaningful position within a healthy society as much as those with higher education potential and proclivities.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

2. Great concept, but I see one problem:

"Free" college isn't free, of course; the government would be paying for it. Will the government also pay the salaries of the graduates sent off to do whatever they're sent to do, either through direct payments or by subsidies to whoever employs them? Wouldn't this effectively double the cost of free college, even though there would also be a social benefit?

[MineralMan]

4. Yeah, the thing is that there are many jobs that go unfilled out there.

Everyone wants to get out of college and go to work in a place they prefer. That's why so many law school graduates are starving in popular places to live. Frankly, we're already paying for people to work in those places, one way or another. Look at a field like dentistry. There are places that are crying for a dentist and are willing to pay a dentist, but that can't find anyone to fill such positions. Doctors, as well. Rural America is horribly underserved in those areas.

Meanwhile, the people who could be working in those areas are struggling to compete in popular places to live.

It all balances out, see...over time. A lot of people won't go for such an arrangement. They can pay their own way to school and then work wherever they want afterward. But, it will open up opportunities for education, as well as serving underserved areas.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

10. This is all quite true. If the job can be supported because there is demand for it,

the concept is a good one, but is there enough demand for all of the college graduates to find supportable jobs? For example, even in city schools, there are few music or art programs any more because the school districts don't want to pay for them. So if I graduate with a degree in music (which I actually did), would I be able to get a job in any school anywhere without my job being subsidized with additional government funding? If my degree is in theology can I get a job in a church that couldn't afford me without a government subsidy (and there's a can of worms for you)? Some degrees aren't good for much at all unless you continue to graduate school, so what are you going to do with a degree in theoretical physics, philosophy, political science or marine biology, since you wouldn't be able to get a "real" job in most of those fields without an advanced degree (and it would probably be in academia)? You might be able to teach at a high school, but you might suck at teaching. Not everyone is good at it. This wouldn't be serving either the high school students or the graduate very well.

Just playing devil's advocate here.

[MineralMan]

14. You know, I don't have answers to all of your questions.

We're already subsidizing all sorts of things, and that would continue or even increase, I imagine. See, I think that music education in elementary and secondary schools is important, and worthy of being subsidized. As a semi-professional musician, I benefited from that in my schools. While it didn't become my profession, that education enriched my life and worked to my benefit. So, I think there should be music programs in all schools. It's as important as sports, certainly.

There's no shortage of ministers, nor churches. I don't see that as an issue, frankly.

As for the graduate level stuff, I can't answer, really. I haven't thought enough about it. I probably won't either. I'm not going to be making a formal proposal for something like this. So, I'm not going to attempt to work out all the details.

One of the options, though, I see for graduate student is that they be better compensated for teaching undergraduates than they are now. When I was in a Masters program in English, I taught Freshman Comp classes as an unpaid lecturer as part of the program. Perhaps such people should be compensated in some way, like waiving tuition and fees for their work. There's one thing. Maybe grad students doing research should be paid for that research work in the same way. I don't know. But, there are answers. They just have to be worked out.

[Voltaire2]

5. Other modern developed countries

just extend universal public education through college. They don’t impose service or debt obligations. Why is this a problem to do here?

[MineralMan]

7. Have we done it here? Have you seen any movement in that direction?

Frankly, I haven't seen any sign that "free college" is anything more than a campaign slogan.

Perhaps we need a different way of carrying such a thing out. Maybe we need to try something instead of simply wishing for what will not occur.

Most countries that have free higher education also have high testing standards for those who receive such an education. Not everyone qualifies for that free higher education.

It's more complicated than just saying we should provide free higher education to those who want it. Meanwhile, many who would do very well in college or at a university never have even a small chance of getting that education here. Our standard of sending everyone off to college is misplaced, in many cases. Many people would do far better in a skilled profession that doesn't even require a college education. But, we want to send everyone to college.

It's not so simple.

[Voltaire2]

13. We have several excellent candidates proposing

universal public college plans. Not yours though. Also, as you are likely aware, we used to have a patchwork of state systems: land grant universities, state systems like California’s and New York’s, and federal aid programs that were moving the country in that direction. Then we got all reaganized. 40 years later we are so dazed and confused that some of us think it’s just not possible to have a system that works for everyone, that somehow we can’t do anything significant to change directions.

It’s sad so many have bought into the myth.

[MineralMan]

15. Yes. I am a beneficiary of those old subsidized systems.

I understand them. The Republicans got rid of them. It is that simple.

However, there are far more colleges now than there were then. Everyone has to go to college now, it seems. I think that's an error in judgment. I truly do.

[Voltaire2]

56. So you got yours but 'those kids' should just be happy flipping burgers?

"Everyone has to go to college now, it seems. I think that's an error in judgment. I truly do."

1. 'everyone' is about 35% of the college age population that gets a degree.
2. almost 90% of that population graduated high school.
3. You've somehow decided that most of those high school graduates are unfit for college.

How the fork did you make that decision?


Perhaps, just maybe, we ought to let people decide for themselves what education they need?

the numbers: https://www.statista.com/statistics/184260/educational-attainment-in-the-us/

[MineralMan]

58. Uh, no. I'm trying to find a way to let them attend college without

going into massive debt. Did you even read my OP?

Yes, only about 35% gets a degree. But, to hear politicians talk, everyone needs to go to college. That's not me saying that, obviously. I don't think that's the case.

And yes, almost all of that 35% graduated from high school. That's not surprising.

Your third conclusion makes no sense at all.

Many high school graduates cannot find any economically feasible path to a college degree at all, regardless of their abilities. That is shameful. My idea would make a post-secondary education possible for anyone who can handle it. No worries about paying for it. Just an obligation to spend some time using that education where it is most needed. Once that commitment is complete, the now-experienced graduate can seek any job in the field, anywhere.

But, you've decided what you think I'm talking about. Sadly, you got it wrong.

[Voltaire2]

66. that you don't think 'they' should attend.

Your words: " Everyone has to go to college now, it seems. I think that's an error in judgment. I truly do."
Did you even read them?

Which politicians are stating that everyone should go to college?

It is almost 90% who graduated high school. That is up from less than 50% in 1965.

"Just an obligation to spend some time..." - so if you are poor you get indentured servitude. Everyone else gets to just have a normal life after they graduate. Hows about we stop punishing people for being poor?

[NurseJackie]

6. Your description reminded me of this...

[MineralMan]

8. I never watched that, but I know the concept.

Yes, sort of.

[NurseJackie]

12. More info...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northern_Exposure#Premise

Premise

New York City native Joel Fleischman is a fish out of water adjusting to Alaska. A recently graduated physician, Fleischman is sent to practice in Anchorage for several years to repay the state of Alaska for underwriting his medical education. However, much to his chagrin, he is assigned to the much smaller, remote, fictional town of Cicely, which is in need of a general practitioner.

[MineralMan]

16. Yes. I understood the plot line. It's interesting, and does relate

directly to what I'm talking about.

[beastie boy]

9. One problem, though:

What if you drop out after 3 1/2 years of college?
What if you transfer to a private school?
What if your GPA at the time of graduation is 2.0? Who would want to employ you then?

I firmly believe there must be some element of merit in free college education. Some mechanism that translates academic achievement into tuition, housing and other benefits. Otherwise it would be too tempting to abuse the system.

[MineralMan]

11. Let's see:

If you drop out, you still owe the service, but it might be somewhat different than if you had completed your studies.

In my plan private or public schools are treated equally. It wouldn't matter.

A lot of people graduate with a 2.0 GPA. They can, and do, still work for a living. They'd still be responsible for the service requirement. No doubt something can be found for them, as well.

College or University is hard. So is life. I don't see how this would change that.

[beastie boy]

17. This can become very complex and expensive very quickly.

Obviously, people who don't graduate or graduate at the bottom of their class can't expect be as employable or earn as much as the rest of the class. Who determines their salary after they leave college? If they get paid as much as their higher achieving counterparts, the insentive of doing well in school disappears. If, on the other hand, they get paid less, whatever the formula for their post-college earnings might be, the money that went into their education may far outpace their potential for earning post-college.

And then there is the question of enforcement. How do you make students stay at the jobs that were designated for them by the system? And if private universities offer terms that are equal ot public universities, how can they possibly survive financially?

Many other variations on the theme exist. Just a couple of examples: What if someone goes to college at the age of 57 and stays in college until they are 62, at which time they qualify for Social Security?What if people go to college just to get room and board and they don't intend to put any effort into the academics?

Too many questions that need answers before even the first step in this direction can be taken.

[MineralMan]

19. Stuff is complicated, isn't it?

Every plan will be equally complicated. It doesn't matter what the plan is, people will have questions about it and will pose those questions, many of which will be hard to answer.

The devil is always in the details.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

21. Exactly, and this is why I'm skeptical about the free college plans.

We have some candidates sounding like Oprah giving away cars: "And YOU get a free college education! And YOU get a free college education! And YOU get a free college education!" But there are lots of details and lots of devils. I taught at a state university as an adjunct faculty instructor for quite awhile (until they cut my program a few years ago). The tuition was relatively low and the admission requirements weren't especially stringent: High school class rank in the upper 50th percentile, and/or ACT, PSAT or SAT composite score at or above the national median, and/or GPA of 3.0 or higher. In other words, an average-ish student would probably get in. Even so, there were a few students who couldn't write a coherent English sentence. There were some who were disturbed or mentally ill (I recall one who was downright scary). College requires more than money, in other words.

So, under the You get a free college education! concept, will there be admission standards or will everybody be admitted? Will there be remedial programs for students who need them? What happens to dropouts or flunk-outs? Will academic standards be affected? Will there be any effort to make the operation of a college or university less costly (my observation was that there were an awful lot of administrators, functionaries and levels of bureaucracy that might not be needed)? Will football coaches still be paid twice as much as university presidents?

Much to think about. Apparently simple solutions are rarely simple when we try to execute them.

[MineralMan]

27. As am I. Which prompted me to post this.

The instant I did, of course, people started looking for flaws in it. I'd like to see the same standard applied to all such "Free anything" proposals.

When I attended a state college, beginning in 1963, the standard was something like the top 15-20% in high school were automatically admitted to some state college, although not necessarily the one of your choice.

I went to a state school, instead of a private university, because there was no way my parents could afford to send me to Cal Tech, where I was also accepted. I was in the 99th percentile of my class, and nationwide. But, I went to a state college to study engineering, instead. It didn't matter, really.

In any case, i ended up with a Masters in English some 8 years later, after dropping out and enlisting in the USAF. Still, my entire time was in a subsidized system. Soon after that, though, that went away, thanks to Ronald Reagan and his cohort.

There are no simple answers, although there are many simple ideas. Mine is one of those, but one that has at least some flesh on its bones. I'm not going to continue to flesh it out, though. It's just an example of a different kind of plan.

There is much that is wrong with our system of higher education, just as there is with our healthcare system. Neither will be fixed by simply attaching the word "free" or "public" to them. More thought will be required. Much more thought.

Clearly, the current education and healthcare systems are untenable. They're also not equitable. The brightest kid at some inner city school will not get the degree he or she deserves, while the barely adequate kid in a wealthy suburb will eke his or her way through college. That's a stupid way to handle things, it seems to me.

So, something new needs to be done. I'm not sure going back to the 1960s system is the answer, either. That was a male-dominated system. There was not a single young woman in my engineering major. Not one. They were all over in the Education Department or the Humanities. That was systematic.

We will not solve any of those problems by listening to slogans from political candidates. They're no better than what I jotted down here on DU. More thought and planning is needed. We should not elect a President on the basis of any slogan or idea, frankly. Instead, we should look at the challenges that we face immediately and the general way of looking at things from each candidate.

Slogans, in themselves, do not accomplish anything. Directions and serious plans do, and a political campaign is not where those things happen. We need to look at the general intent of our candidates and choose based on that, after thinking long and hard about the slogans being tossed around.

[George II]

18. THAT is the way to do it. Kind of like the GI Bill and some military benefits. We should do that..

...with this idea of student loan forgiveness. EARN that forgiveness, it shouldn't be a gift.

[MineralMan]

20. Well, at least it makes some sense. It's not like just saying:

"Free college for everyone!" I hate when people say things like that, and then just stop and don't bother to get into the details. It sounds good, so that's all that matters, it seems.

I finished my education on the GI Bill. That and another $100 a month let me attend school without working part-time. I lived poorly, but that was OK. I was a young guy. Hell, I still live poorly, by some measures.

[aidbo]

24. Free 4 year college for everyone is not complicated and doesn't need extra explanation.

It is paid for by the taxes that people make on their earnings.
Just like we understand (or at least we should understand) as a nation that paying for roads and infrastructure is a common good that benefits everyone and so everyone’s taxes go toward paying for them. And people that are wealthy generally benefit even more than most from those common goods so the wealthy pay more in taxes because of that. This is simple stuff that anyone can understand.

[aidbo]

22. Hmm state directed use of Human Resources, huh? Sounds like communism.

And this program would de facto be means tested because the folks that can afford to pay their own way will not have to be directed to live somewhere they might not want to.

[MineralMan]

29. Does it? OK.

It's funny. You're happy to tear into my little exercise and start pointing out issues. Now, do the same for the candidate you champion. Fair's fair. I'm not running for anything. I'm just musing on DU.

This thread is turning out just as I expected. Think about that for a while.

[ehrnst]

23. Needs to be means tested. We need some income to pay for it.

The wealthy need to give back into the system that they benefitted from.

[aidbo]

25. Means testing is just a way to weaken it and make it easier to do away with.

[ehrnst]

32. No, it'll make the 1% pay something into that they can.

And here I thought that was the goal....

[oldsoftie]

37. Bull.

If done correctly, means testing can provide funding for a much longer time without hurting anyone in need. Means testing has been in place for decades for financial aid for school, medical assistance, vocational, etc, and it hasnt stopped funding.

[aidbo]

48. Bull to you.

Means testing has been in place for school and vocational assistance and medical payment assistance.

And consequently we have record debt on education that is strangling the economy, and medical related bankruptcies are still very common.

But I'm sure you're ok!

[oldsoftie]

50. NOT giving money to rich people hasnt caused any of those problems.

You know that, but you still push the fantasy that the same rich people can pay for everything for everyone else.

[MineralMan]

30. What? You want this to be paid for somehow?

When did that start?

[guillaumeb]

26. An excellent foundation.

Education is a social and personal investment.

This should also apply to trade and vocational education as well.

[MineralMan]

33. Trade and vocational education should be funded by the industries

that benefit from it. That's how it used to be done. Think about it.

[guillaumeb]

35. That is true for some trades.

Mainly in the construction and machine shop industries via their apprenticeship programs. But some of these programs were effectively closed to minorities.

[MineralMan]

40. The discrimination was a separate problem and not directly caused by the program.

For skilled labor jobs, on the job training is the traditional method for creating new skilled workers. Companies, however, are no longer so interested in such training systems. They demand pre-trained employees. And now, they're starving for them.

Traditionally, apprenticeship programs were run by labor unions. I was in an electrical workers apprentice program for a short time, but dropped out of it to pursue a different career.

[guillaumeb]

44. Very true.

And today, many companies prefer to outsource skilled labor and import finished sub-assemblies.

And in construction, many non-union contractors prefer to hire undocumented workers to hold down labor costs.

These companies are externalizing their costs to the taxpayers.

[brush]

28. Good stuff.

[oldsoftie]

31. Here in GA, we have a similar program already in place for teachers.

My friends daughter got her teaching degree paid for by agreeing to teach for a certain number of years at a school designated as "Title Nine" (i may have that name wrong). Its basically a school where scores are below normal and more than average number of poor students.

[MineralMan]

36. Yes. There have been systems like this here and there.

There used to be a system that paid for medical school for qualified students who agreed to work as physicians for the National Health Service for a term of years. I think that has been discontinued, though.

The GI Bill is a reversed sort of similar system, in which people do their service first and then are subsidized in their education later.

But, there is no uniformity to such systems, and that is what would be needed on a national scale.

[oldsoftie]

39. I agree. And i'd bet even a lot of republicans would support it if its written properly.

I mean, GA isnt exactly a liberal state itself, so i think it shows that it CAN be done.
But as you know, there are a lot of people who want 100% of whatever they think is the "right" answer & will settle for nothing less. Which means you get nothing in the end.

[MineralMan]

42. Yes. Insisting on perfection means the other guy wins.

When will we learn that lesson.

[tulipsandroses]

34. HRSA Loan forgiveness programs are based on this concept. I relocated to get

to work for a facility that is HRSA qualified to get loan forgiveness. There is no guarantee you get loan forgiveness - since there is limited funding for the program. They have many applicants. But that is concept of the program, work for underserved areas, apply for the program, if approved, you get loan forgiveness for a certain amount for a certain time. It would be nice if that is given as a grant up front in school instead of asking students to take out loans and then apply for loan forgiveness.

HRSA has grants as well as loan forgiveness, but again, these programs have limited funding - Since opioid addiction is a big thing - there are grants for people who want to work in addiction medicine. From what I am hearing Loan forgiveness preference is being given to those working in addiction.

I work in healthcare and similar programs exist for teachers. I don't know what programs already exist for other professions. I do think it is possible to expand these programs - and instead of asking people to take on debt, and then tell them to ask for loan forgiveness afterwards, provide grants to pay for education if they are willing to work in under-served areas.

It is also not an easy thing to pick up and move away from family and friends for several years, but when you are doing something you love, you find it worthwhile. I do believe we can make it happen and many are already making that sacrifice, hoping for loan forgiveness.

[MineralMan]

38. Without guarantees, such systems are not likely to work as well as they should.

As you say, funding is the issue. If there is funding, you might get loan forgiveness. That's not how to do such things. People need assurances before making commitments.

[tulipsandroses]

43. Oh, I completely, I agree. The HRSA loan forgiveness programs don't work well for many

even for those of us in healthcare. I have known nurses and other providers that jump from employer to employer over the years hoping for loan forgiveness and get denied. See even if you work in an underserved area, you can still get denied based on who knows what. The facility has to meet certain qualifications, so much red tape. So even if you move to the middle of the desert. You have to be working for an approved facility. Doesn't matter that the people in desert have no other providers.

[flor-de-jasmim]

41. What about married students?

[MineralMan]

55. What about them?

Same deal.

[Mike Nelson]

45. We should stop...

... I stress, STOP calling it "free college" and start calling it an expansion of public education, because that's what it is and is isn't free. The candidates should say a strengthening of public education will help everyone, because it will. Tell voters we are the best and the brightest and are going to stay that way!

[oldsoftie]

51. But "free" sells better. It makes people think they dont really have to pay for it

[MichMan]

46. I have asked this question several times with no answer

How would free college be implemented when colleges have wildly varying tuition costs?

For example, there are 3 colleges in Michigan in close geographical proximity.

Washtenaw Community College (tuition $4k per year)

Eastern Michigan University (tuition $10k per year)

University of Michigan (tuition $14k per year)

University of Michigan is a top tier prestigious college with nationally famous athletics.

1) Since the student pays zero tuition at all three, why wouldn't everyone want to attend the schools with the highest name recognition and reputation?

2) Since the students no longer care about the costs anymore, why wouldn't Eastern Michigan raise the tuition costs to match Univ of Michigan?

3) What controls are there that would control colleges from raising tuition to pay for large increases in administrative salaries, or expensive building projects etc.?

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

47. Maybe a solution could be to offer a stipend or a refund of a flat amount per semester

or even per credit. The stipend would be a percentage of the school's actual tuition, say 75%, which would still keep some of the student's skin in the game but they'd be able to graduate without crushing debt. This might keep colleges from raising their tuitions to match the more expensive schools. I think one of the biggest problems with college tuition is what they spend on their vast workforces of administrators, building projects and athletic programs.

[oldsoftie]

53. Ahh, now you'll be accused of spreading RW talking points!

But you're right.

[yellowdogintexas]

49. the Univ of KY medical school had a similar program

med school fees were at least 50% waived if you agreed to practice for a certain number of years in an underserved community in KY. The community had to be sure there was a place for the doctor to work and live.

I had a friend who did this.

[AlexSFCA]

52. terrible idea that originated from USSR

[crazytown]

57. Communistic I tell you,

and maybe godless too.

[MineralMan]

61. LOL!

As a godless atheist, I have to ask, "And what's wrong with that?"

[crazytown]

62. Mr. I suspect you to be ...

(fill in ubiquitous 1950s put down)

[MineralMan]

63. Are you now, or have you ever been...

[crazytown]

64. I plead the 2nd.

Put 'em up. Why are you asking me?

[crazytown]

65. Are you now, or have you ever been...

a Republican? No Sir, I have not. I)

[andym]

59. A good idea, but many degrees wouldn't have associated jobs

so the kids would have to do something outside their fields. Would the government have to then cover their salaries? What about those who wish to go to graduate school, medical or law school? Would they have to wait? Would that qualify?

Btw, the NIH has just such a program for PhDs in biomedical research. Afterwards, the graduates must work in academic research for several years or pay back the money.

[MineralMan]

60. There's always teaching for majors like the humanities.

As for graduate school, I haven't thought that through yet, and probably won't. My idea has virtually no chance of being adopted, so I'm not going to spend a huge amount of time thinking about it, really. I'm in no position to propose such a thing, anyhow.