Scholarship

[ydoaPs]

In the military, we were given an option to opt in to the G.I. Bill(pre-9/11 version for purposes here) which would pay for an undergraduate degree. This is the reason a great many of my peers joined the military. Regardless, the overwhelming majority of military members did not in fact use it. By opting into the program, you agreed to pay a $100USD each month for your first 12 months in service. This is the same principle behind how insurance and taxes work and stay low-more people pay than use the service(yes, you pay for interstates in CA even if you live in NY).

 

Now, what if we had something similar for every US citizen(I've also previously suggested extending the Thrift Savings Plan to all citizens rather than just government employees)? I'm not saying that the government foots the bill for an entire undergrad degree, but merely a large scholarship. The difference between this and the GI Bill(apart from the amount payed by the government) is that, since the money comes from taxes, you will eventually have paid for your entire 'scholarship' yourself. It amounts to an extremely low interest loan. Allowing the plan to be optional would also allow this service to be paid for only by people using the service. The plan would cause a temporary increase in the deficit, but would eventually pay for itself and start chipping away at the deficit.

 

What effect would this have on the future of American politics? Would having college being more accessible make a more educated voting population?

[Pangloss]

Well the Pell Grant could be expanded, but I believe President Obama's current budget proposal calls for reducing it, which is unfortunate, because it's pretty clear the GOP won't be much help here at the moment either.

 

Perhaps a 0%, or even 1-2%, loan initiative, with 100% coverage, might be realistic in the current budgetary environment. Current federally-guaranteed student loans are already exempt from repayment until six months after graduation (or dropping out), so that's fine, but they don't always cover the entire amount of college, including books, which leaves students picking up the pieces with high-interesting, immediate-repayment loans. (I can't tell you how many students I've watched skip a quarter because they couldn't make their payments. That didn't happen five years ago.)

 

The nice thing about low-interest loans is that the only long-term impact on the budget is from defaults, which currently are something like 7%. So we get back 93% of our money, with a small amount of interest that may make up for the defaults, and we enable students to go to school who otherwise could not. Everybody wins.

 

This basic reasoning is what produced the existing student loan programs, both federal and private-federally-guaranteed, but over the years the goal has been kinda forgotten amidst various political and economic issues. President Obama attempted to reinitialize the issue about a year ago when he pledged to move all lending into the federal budget, which promised to eliminate corruption but introduced a risk of funding loss due to budgetary cutbacks. I was opposed to that change (still am), but I'm even more concerned about the larger problem of inadequate funding and high interest rates that have crept into the picture without a lot of public notice.

 

Whatever the method, IMO a renewal of national public interest in the subject is desperately needed.

[ydoaPs]

Well the Pell Grant could be expanded, but I believe President Obama's current budget proposal calls for reducing it, which is unfortunate, because it's pretty clear the GOP won't be much help here at the moment either.

 

Perhaps a 0%, or even 1-2%, loan initiative, with 100% coverage, might be realistic in the current budgetary environment.

I didn't even think of that. If we call the plan the 'new' Pell Grant(I guess it wouldn't really be a grant anymore, though), the effect on the deficit would be lessened which would allow for higher coverage(maybe even 100%).

 

My thoughts are currently something like the following: Any citizen is eligible. Upon acceptance to a public university, the prospective student can opt for the 'new' Pell 'Grant' and choose the percentage of coverage and the added tax amount(which is similar to merely determining the length of the loan). Upon repayment of the loan(and small interest), the tax is ended for that person.

[Marat]

Many European countries already have something like the idea being proposed, since everyone goes to university for free and receives a salary from the government to cover expenses while a student, but all of these costs are covered by general taxation. After the student graduates and gets a job, the student pays for the educational costs incurred by accepting a higher tax rate than there would be without free university studies and stipends for all.

 

Since having more well-educated people in a society benefits the entire society, even those who never go to university, university education should be funded by the government out of general taxation like any other social good such as highways, primary and secondary schools, police, fire department, and the military. The spin-off benefits from having a more educated population are so many and so varied, and penetrate every aspect of society in one way or the other, that there is no way to trace who benefits how much from what, so there is no logic to assigning the costs to one individual rather than another.

[Genecks]

Answer: I think there would be hyper-inflation of tuition costs.

 

Tuition costs are already effected by the G.I. bill.

 

I think the modern system is ok, works to make sure students do their best and are funded as such, but I think it would be great if the Pell Grant was unlocked for people at age 20 with two years of college/uni work and above a 3.5 GPA.

 

If that had happened for me, I would be done by now. There needs to be a system that pays people for hard work and responsibility.

 

Expansion of the Pell Grant is the better bet. Obama made the Pell Grant more accessible the past year or so. I know this, because I'm getting the full Pell Grant (I'm 24, btw).

 

I have an EFC of 0, which is because I'm an independent and very broke (in debt). I write that I have $0 in my bank and person when filling out the FAFSA.

 

I'm also getting the SMART grant. As I read, something is being cut in the summer of 2011. I can't quite recall at the moment. These grants sure change a lot.

 

As I'm but 13 credits away from a B.S. (I have 117 credit hours, atm), I'm hoping to obtain federal work study (the government gives you a check to work while being a student) in the case that I somehow can't get enough grants. I'm surprised that I did not receive it at all. I question if it's because I'm white. I hate to be racial about it, but there is often a bias in such things: If not a minority, then you don't get the grant.

 

It seems as though the U.S. Government is looking for ways to protect the Pell Grant. I'm under the belief that tying it into the consumer price index is an attempt to prevent universities from inflating tuition in order to receive more Pell Grant.

 

Perhaps there is some economic aspect where if admins. raise tution, then Pell Grant will increase, but then food prices will drop... or something like that... I'm sure there is a whole economics to it.

 

Many online universities were scamming the U.S. Government the past decade in order to receive a large amount of the pell grant money. Surely, people are attempting to protect distribution of it.

 

I knew this guy from Switzerland who was receiving a free education by the government. However, a combination of too many drops caused him to lose his money. So, you don't always get the free money in a country with free education.

 

However, I would like to state this:

 

In America, it seems more reasonable for the republic to start post-secondary studies at age 24 (or 24 within the semester they are getting the grant--there is more complexity to this), because of the availability of the Pell Grant (free tuition).

 

I think there should be more of a system where if you stay above a particular GPA and make a particular progress, then you'll be awarded more Pell Grant. This might have the side-effect of grade inflation among universities, though.

 

I think that's the purpose of the SMART grant. However, I think there should be something more than the SMART grant, such as the GETSMART grant, for people who keep above 3.5/4.0 GPAs. Some hierarchal funding system.

 

It's crazy. You can get a free education in America... you just have to wait until you're a little older. Best kept secret.

 

Some people think if they wait, they'll be too stupid to start school again. Not true. I think many study habits and work ethics have already been crystallized and just need to be tweaked and refocused.

 

Save up your money and study hard before going to school, ydoaPs.

Edited February 21, 2011 by Genecks

[swansont]

Would having college being more accessible make a more educated voting population?

 

If it isn't watered down by colleges graduating more marginal students, probably yes. And if the education leads to higher incomes, you make the money back in more tax paid. There are a number of ironies in the republicans wanting to slash education. It's an investment that would seem to have a good payout, and makes economic sense. H-1B visas have been so popular, amid all the complaints about businesses not being able to find US citizens to work technical jobs.

[ydoaPs]

And if the education leads to higher incomes, you make the money back in more tax paid.

I had that same thought.

[Pangloss]

There was some talk during the 2008 campaign about implementing a national version of Georgia's HOPE Scholarship program. This is a lottery-funded program put in place during the governorship of Zell Miller that works very well. Under this plan every Georgia high school student gets a FREE college education at any school in the public university system, which includes Georgia Tech, the University of Georgia, and many other fine institutions including several prominent traditional black colleges and universities. Students can even opt for a private institution, receiving a fixed payment instead of general coverage.

 

Students are required to maintain a B average. According to the Wikipedia article almost a million students have now gone to school under this program. And it hasn't cost taxpayers a dime.

 

The program has had problems, such as not covering all fees, and unintended consequences, such as flooding the system with new students and making it harder for people to get into the more popular schools (like Georgia Tech and UGA). It's also been blamed for grade inflation. All of these issues are surmountable, IMO, and Georgia seems to be dealing with them on an ongoing basis.

[ydoaPs]

Students are required to maintain a B average.

This requirement may help with what swansont was talking about with universities graduating more marginal students.

[Pangloss]

Not to digress too far, but yeah, IMO watering-down the bachelors degree is a significant problem these days, fueled by the casual acceptance of online degree programs. These are not only undermining the quality of the Bachelor's degree, they're also ripping the guts out of the alternate/backup education system (community colleges and trade schools). I know "professors" who make well in excess of six figures churning online classes like an assembly line. Why should they work at a community college when they can make that kind of money? And if enrollment at my school continues to decline I might have to take a job like that myself, at least until I finish my PhD (and maybe after).

 

The problem affects graduate schools, too. Masters and doctoral programs have to add students each year, and they have to get them from somewhere. It seems to be settling out into two camps: Schools that still require GRE or GMAT scores, and schools that could care less so long as you have a bachelor's and can get financial aid. The first category seems to be shrinking, the second rapidly growing, and many of the schools in it are surprisingly traditional and respectable -- large non-profits with big-name MBA programs, substantial endowments, and fine reputations! That doesn't necessarily mean that schools in the second category won't give you a good education -- they'll kick you out if you fail. But over time they have little incentive NOT to gradually lower the bar so that students remain in their seats and financial aid money keeps flowing in.

 

It's a very slippery slope.

[ydoaPs]

But over time they have little incentive NOT to gradually lower the bar so that students remain in their seats and financial aid money keeps flowing in.

How could we fix that, but still have post-secondary education more available to all citizens?

[Pangloss]

I wish I knew. It seems like online education is here to stay, but oversight and regulation still have not caught up. And even with advanced Web application technologies, major obstacles remain, such as learner identification and shortfalls in asynchronous strategies. The problem is undermined by a lack of agreement in the industry on even the broadest of definitions. Just agreeing on what constitutes a credit hour is a major hurdle that nobody seems to want to solve.