"No Child Left Behind" up for renewal soon

[Pangloss]

That's true for children, but once the student becomes an adult it makes sense to incur a certain degree of personal responsibility. Otherwise they'll just see it as a right, which is owed to them by society, which is not the case at all.

 

As you say, it's an investment for me to pay for education. It's also that way for the student.

[john5746]

Really? What states have that kind of policy?

 

My mistake. States are starting to offer this type of tuition help, it isn't common yet.

 

Georgia, South Carolina, Tennessee are doing it. Connecticut and Illinois? I think are looking at doing it. There are probably others.

[Severian]

User pay systems are by their very nature class based' date=' in my opinion, creating generations of people trapped in a poverty cycle.

[/quote']

 

That is not necessarily true. Imagine, for example, that the government would provide interest free loans to students which would pay for their education and living expenses up to some reasonable cap. Once the student has graduated and is earning greater than a set amount (e.g. $40k pa) they would then pay a 'graduate tax', which is a proportion of their income, in order to pay off the debt. Once the debt was paid off, then they have no further obligation.

 

Indeed, we already do something similar with our houses. Very few people can afford to buy a house outright, so we need to take out a mortgage to pay it off over time. The difference here is that you can only get a mortgage if you are earning, whereas anyone could get their 'educational loan'. Also, the educational loan I suggested was interest free, while a mortgage is not.

 

So in this system everyone can afford an education, and there is no risk since if they do not earn over the threshold they will never have to pay it back.

[GutZ]

In the UK the probabtion normally takes 2-3 years and you are definitely not untouchable afterwards.

 

Of course' date=' there will be bad teachers everywhere, but I don't think it is fair to tar all lecturers with the same brush.[/quote']

 

Oh of course not and I don't want to convey that all teachers are bad (since I hope to become one in the future), I have a wonderiful professor that does more then he should, but thats because he loves to teach, every school has them, I was lucky to get him.

 

There are alot of bad teachers in my school, even other teachers say so, thats how I got most of my information. I don't really care that much because I have a responsibility for my own success, but if they are there to do a job they should do it. they get paid more then secondary and below, and do less work, that doesn't seem nice. Especially since the lower levels often have the problems like what this thread is suggesting.

[Severian]

they get paid more then secondary and below' date=' and do less work

[/quote']

 

I would dispute both of these. My cousin is the same age as me exactly. After school he did a university degree to become a teacher, and then became a teacher on graduating. I did a degree in physics, followed by a PhD and 8 years of postdocs befoer getting a permenant lecturer job. He is still a teacher and now earns more than I do.

 

Also, there seems to be a false assumption that university lecturers only teach, so we have all summer off, light work loads etc. This isn't true - we also do research and admin, and are judged on our ability to bring money in through research grants. I think I work at least as hard as my better paid cousin.

[GutZ]

I would dispute both of these. My cousin is the same age as me exactly. After school he did a university degree to become a teacher' date=' and then became a teacher on graduating. I did a degree in physics, followed by a PhD and 8 years of postdocs befoer getting a permenant lecturer job. He is still a teacher and now earns more than I do.

 

Also, there seems to be a false assumption that university lecturers only teach, so we have all summer off, light work loads etc. This isn't true - we also do research and admin, and are judged on our ability to bring money in through research grants. I think I work at least as hard as my better paid cousin.[/quote']

 

I am not taking about physics professors lol. I should of clarified but I was still talking about my school (college). I am just trying to point out that in my area it's alot more advantagous to work for a college and some university's then to work for secondary or below.

 

(but for your own knowing my step-father who has a Phd in Philsophy was getting paid 80,000 - 100,000 near the end of his career before he became a minister, and my cousin who is an elementary teacher makes 35,000 - 45,000)

 

It's disrespectiful for the teachers that do work hard (From what I hear from my step-father) , and it leaves no motivation for others to teach anything other then college level+. I know an individual at my coop who had a teachers degree but has been working as a metal casting technologist for 10 years. That why I hope they put more effort, or atleast make it harder for college + levels so that people that do work hard stay.

 

Remember thats just here, I don't know about the US or UK.

 

You probably work for a great school where people are serious about education, and I don't mean any disrespect to those who work hard because I've always respected real teachers very highly, if any job in the world has some real significance its teaching.

 

I am really not here to complain (even though it sounds alot like it). I want to see education as one of the more important aspects of life and to be taken seriously (specifically in my geo location). I will stop here because I could go on forever without find my point, and I am probably off topic, but hopeful you get what I am trying to say.

[Pangloss]

That is not necessarily true. Imagine' date=' for example, that the government would provide interest free loans to students which would pay for their education and living expenses up to some reasonable cap. Once the student has graduated and is earning greater than a set amount (e.g. $40k pa) they would then pay a 'graduate tax', which is a proportion of their income, in order to pay off the debt. Once the debt was paid off, then they have no further obligation.

[/quote']

 

That's an interesting suggestion.

 

One of the problems we're seeing over here right now is that interest rates are climbing again, which is pushing up the cost of student loans. It seems to me that tying student loans, which are an infrastructure-investment issue, to interest rates, is probably a bad thing. Just a couple of years ago I got all my loans at 2.something percent, but new students entering the system now are looking at more than twice that number.

 

It would be nice if the cost of a student's education were based entirely on, well, the actual cost of the student's education at the chosen school. Have the government pay the interest to the lending institution entirely, at some fixed rate over prime. It's easily worth it.

 

It really irks me that Congress has found one and only one cut to make to the entire budget this year, and that was in the area of student loans. What does that say about our interest in the future of the country?

[Phi for All]

It really irks me that Congress has found one and only one cut to make to the entire budget this year, and that was in the area of student loans. What does that say about our interest in the future of the country?

I'll predict that one of the next big markets is going to be education, in the form of loans and job placement afterwards. You'll start an account with a private firm to go to college, then agree to a curriculum that certain corporate sponsors have arranged with the school. Upon graduation you'll sign on to work for a period of time with a corporation who will take on your student loan debt as part of your compensation package. If you work out and they like you, they can throw in more incentives to stay after your obligation is done. If not, they can sell your contract to another company.

 

I think this is why Congress is going to back away from funding loan programs, and why higher education will only go to those who can afford it or are willing to sell a bit of themselves to corporations that are tired of revolving-door personnel with incorrect skill sets. I can't figure out another reason why a country like the US places so little interest in educating it's citizens.

[Pangloss]

That's an interesting speculation, Phi. It does make a lot of sense that we could see that sort of thing fairly soon. Another indicator that we might be headed in that direction might be seen in the rise in private scholarship funds.

 

There are down sides, of course. It's like tying healthcare and retirement savings to employment -- it makes a lot of sense from a logistical viewpoint, but it raises other issues which can be fairly serious. I'm sure you've seen the statstics on how many people cash out of their 401(k)s when they leave a company, for example. Sure we can put regulations like COBRA, which deals with the issue of terminated employees facing gaps in healthcare coverage that can lead to massive premium increases, out there to help fill the gaps, but the more gaps you fill the less enforcement and more money you have to spend (actually COBRA would be a bad example of that, since it costs nothing, but I'm sure you see my concern here). In your example we might need to have some regulations specifying what happens if an employee is fired or quits, but still carries an outstanding student loan.

 

But yeah that's a good point about skill sets and it's not hard to see the advantage there for both company and employee.

[Skye]

That is not necessarily true. Imagine, for example, that the government would provide interest free loans to students which would pay for their education and living expenses up to some reasonable cap. Once the student has graduated and is earning greater than a set amount (e.g. $40k pa) they would then pay a 'graduate tax', which is a proportion of their income, in order to pay off the debt. Once the debt was paid off, then they have no further obligation.

We have a scheme like that that applies to tuition. It's not interest free but at 2.8% interest, which is roughly the inflation rate these days. Most people receive a government scholarship for much of the tuition costs, but some people pay all the tuition themselves. Once you are earning 30-odd grand you start paying money back as a progressive tax.

[Phi for All]

That's an interesting speculation, Phi. It does make a lot of sense that we could see that sort of thing fairly soon. Another indicator that we might be headed in that direction might be seen in the rise in private scholarship funds.

It's not a bad system but I dislike the idea of lobbying against other forms of education funding in order to bring it about. I think students would suffer all the way around, especially those who aren't college bound. I don't think businesses who hire lesser skilled personnel would be interested in paying for technical training in the same way.