Universal Public Higher Education

Oh yeah, and it should be free.

Public Higher Education Should Be Universal and Free - NYTimes.com

 

But if education was free, how would we keep the riff raff out?

 

You're right Ted, they'd have to let you in too. #there goes the neighborhood

 

The problem I have is the formalism. We need a new path in this country that switches from various stages in life (elementary, post-secondary, etc) to one that switches to life long-learning. The Gates Foundation wants to head in that direction--the problem is that it can''t escape the corporatist shell that haunts American life. They want to drive profits rather than drive human fulfillment and cultural growth.

So the issue is "what is a 'higher' education?" that the root value that needs to be explored.

 

I like this train of thought.

 

DI as a collective entity is fairly paradoxical or what contradictory with itself. It goes to the end of the world to find cheap and affordable education. Books/papers are a being written by its members on how to scour the bottom to get an almost free degree. However, the notion of free public education seems to be greeted with a huff and puff.. The basics underlying notion is that there a segment of society that should not have access to free universal post secondary education because they would not treat it with respect or some nonsense like that. The other o main argument against free universal post secondary education is not my taxes, like if anyone has any control how his or her taxes is spend. One of the good things about for-profits, if there is ever free universal education the for-profits and the so call not-for-profits will be there to take our money.

 

Aside from the TOS there is no "itself." Hell, we even let in Levicoff and he doesn't even like distance learning.:kiss:

 

I went to a free public school. Folks, this is not a new concept; public colleges are free in many countries; wealthy and otherwise. Frankly, coupled with fair entrance exams, it is a compelling idea.

 

Steve, I think you may be wrong on this one. True,DI may not be monolithic because there are diverse views, however, I don’t that may be enough to say there is not a DI collective “it”. I think someone with a good understanding of group dynamics can quite easily tell us how much similar we are than dissimilar.

 

OK, I'll tentatively buy in. How would you describe the DI "it?"

 

I'm all for it. I think that Obama has the right approach, starting by working on free CC. California has had almost free CC for a long time, and it makes a great place for the people who are determined to pick themselves up by their bootstraps to do it. That said, there are also plenty of people there who are not ready to go to college (and therefore fail or get Cs), but are there because they don't know what else to do. We need to find a way to either get those kids into a vocational track where they can succeed or otherwise keep them out of the universities until they are ready to commit to their education. Tuition does that now, we would need a different mechanism.

I'd also like to see the scam that is textbooks cleaned up. Sure, the publishers and authors need to be paid, but a lot of the stuff going on today are simply school supported scams.

 

I am not trying to prove DI is group. That may take 200 pages. However here are few things that are not that debatable.
DI is a community of people of similar interest. Also, there is a sense of community. Members are everyday here responding to other members.
DI has group norms hence you're a black sheep if you are outside those norms
DI has leaders and followers. There is an hierarchy.There are people with roles.
There is a sense of belonging. There are members with thousands of posts. Thousands of congratulations to members

There are sometimes diverging views however there is also groupthink
DI has objectives, maybe even an agenda, TOS, and sometimes thought police but not lately.

I think it will be more difficult to argue that DI is just any regular crowd of people, than a collective of people with similar interest and objectives. All of the postings on DI may be the world greatest source of information on distance education, and diploma mills.

 

OK, you did it, I'm sold. And it didn't take 200 pages.:fing02:

 

If you are not kidding, then it is my first sale in many years. Anyway, back on topic with universal free education. Psychologists may say DI is struggling with cognitive dissonance. DIers go the extreme distance to find hidden cheap education, and almost free education. However, many of the big thinkers on DI have an aversion to free public education.

 

I don't have a problem with free, public higher education if that is something Americans are willing to pay for, but I don't see why anyone who doesn't should struggle with cognitive dissonance. Other than the fact that some of the popular schools on here are public schools (most will end up paying non-resident rates anyway), seeking out the cheapest ways to complete a degree is working the free market system. Just because you go out and search for the best deals on televisions doesn't mean that you should believe that the government should provide free televisions to everyone. Using free market economics, if most people took their business to the cheapest colleges, then it would force the more expensive colleges to lower their tuition and fees if they want to stay open. Some people want to spend the extra money to have the luxury of a Cadillac. Some people just want a Kia to get them from Point A to Point B, but that doesn't mean that they want the government to buy them cars. Also, taking advantage of alternative credit-earning options and discounts offered by private organizations is not the same as wanting taxpayers to be forced to pay for your education.

 

I think this is a good point. Some people might not object to their tax dollars being used for free education but some inevitably will. This happens all the time when towns try to build new K-12 schools. Some people like the idea (maybe on principle, maybe because they think their kids will benefit) and they don't mind so much if their taxes go up a bit. Other will object, for a bunch of easy to imagine reasons like "I don't have kids" or "I can't afford the increase"