The idea of free tertiary education fully funded by government causes debates in the society. For some people this is the best strategy, while others claim that students should be responsible for their expenses for study. Both opinions have grounds and they need to be closely examined.
On the one hand, the proponents of free access to higher education support their view with some important reasons. Among them is the fact that free education would positively affect the general educational level in a country, which in its turn would expand highly qualified workforce and, as a result, would have improved the economy at large. It is also important to keep in mind that free higher education would provide equal rights to all categories of students, including those who cannot afford to study at a university level.
By contrast, there are people who believe that students should cover their higher education, not government. This can be exemplified by the fact that access to this type of education should be competitive and selective in order to the elevate the status of higher education and prepare a cohort of highly professional specialists. On another note, besides supporting higher education, government has to subsidize many other spheres of public life. Therefore, only school education should be free for all citizens, whereas tertiary studies should be open only for those who can meet the expenses.
To conclude, in my view, there should be a balance in allocating public funding for university education, and governments should provide a certain percentage of merit-based and need-based financial aid to make higher education more accessible. This policy is especially true for those countries which cannot afford entirely free education systems, and this is why avoiding paying higher education is hardly possible in such countries.
The
idea
of
free
tertiary
education
fully
funded by
government
causes debates in the society. For
some
people
this is the best strategy, while others claim that students should be responsible for their expenses for study. Both opinions have
grounds and
they need to be
closely
examined.
On the one hand, the proponents of
free
access to higher
education
support their view with
some
important
reasons. Among them is the fact that
free
education
would
positively
affect the general educational level in a country, which in its turn would expand
highly
qualified workforce and,
as a result
, would have
improved
the economy at large. It is
also
important
to
keep
in mind that
free
higher
education
would provide equal rights to all categories of students, including those who cannot afford to study at a university level.
By contrast, there are
people
who believe that students should cover their higher
education
, not
government
. This can
be exemplified
by the fact that access to this type of
education
should be competitive and selective in order to
the elevate
the status of higher
education
and prepare a cohort of
highly
professional specialists. On another note,
besides
supporting higher
education
,
government
has to
subsidize
many
other spheres of public life.
Therefore
,
only
school
education
should be
free
for all citizens, whereas tertiary studies should be open
only
for those who can
meet
the expenses.
To conclude
, in my view, there should be a balance in allocating public funding for university
education
, and
governments
should provide a certain percentage of merit-based and need-based financial aid to
make
higher
education
more accessible. This policy is
especially
true for those countries which cannot afford
entirely
free
education
systems, and this is why avoiding paying higher
education
is hardly possible in such countries.