The Instigator
Nursultan
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
kjorstad
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

should universities be paid

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 10/28/2013 Category: Education
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 943 times Debate No: 39556
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (3)
Votes (0)

 

Nursultan

Pro

I think that education should be free. Because a lot of smart people who do not have enough money to be able to study at the university. In my country there are two types of education: free and paid. Those who are studying for free get a scholarship. If you hand over all of the exams for high scores, the scholarship becomes greater. It is very good for not rich students. Sorry for my english, it's not perfect.
kjorstad

Con

Thank you to my opponent; I am sure this will be a good debate!

-While having the government pay for everyone"s university education would provide everyone the opportunity to attend a college or university, there would be countless consequences. There are currently options for poorer students who want to attend college, such as taking a loan.

-The cost of university education is too great for the government to sustain. The current average cost (in the United States) of tuition and fees for a public 4-year institution is $38,300. The National Center for Education Statistics places the number of students attending a university in 2013 at around 17.5 million. In other words, in 2013 alone the government would have to pay 870 Billion to cover university costs. And that"s the costs for 2013; university expenses are projected to more than double over the next 18 years. This kind of spending is ridiculous and unsustainable.

-It unjustly benefits one subset of society over the others. The government will have to find some way of paying for this enormous added expense, and the obvious (and only) answer is through increased taxes. This means that the taxpayers who can afford to pay their own education because they were willing to work for it now have to pay for the education of others who won"t necessarily do the same.

-Individuals are much less likely to strive for education if everything is free; if university education is suddenly made free, the overall quality of education will suffer enormously. The value of this privilege will be suddenly devalued if everyone has the option to have it for free. I don"t think I understand what a "scholarship" is where you come from, but in America students have to strive to be the best to get a scholarship; they have to make the university want them.

-Likewise, if states are in charge of the student"s tuition being paid, essentially the states/government has complete control over the university"s funding. Especially in high schools and public colleges here that depend on state funding, the state strives to increase university attendance for political purposes without ever increasing the funding the institution receives. This results in larger class sizes, less spending per student, and an overall poorer education. State control would also mean standardized acceptance/curriculum criteria, which means that student"s individual learning needs aren"t met nearly as well. As shown through the "No Child Left Behind" act (in which the entire class"s learning pace is slowed to accommodate the students who learn slower), the brighter students are held back because of the slower students.

-There is no fundamental right to university education. Individuals are guaranteed an education through 12th grade; the knowledge gained through these grades are essential to functioning in society and the state is well-served in providing it. University education, however, is not essential in the same way. We can be functional and responsible citizens leading decent lives without it. The state is right in seeing university education as such: a non-essential service which people should pay for if they wish to experience it, but not an entitlement owed by the state to everyone.

-With fees for attending a university, (A) funding increases, because the university can increase fees as its needs grow, resulting in a consistent quality of education; (B) quality of teaching improves, in professors and degree programs, because they want students to desire their college; and (C) the overall quality of students and their desire to learn will increase because they are making an investment in their future. The knowledge that they will have to pay off their loans is a motivator for these students. A perfect example of higher education stemming from fees is the United States, which has 20 of the top 50 universities in the world.
Debate Round No. 1
Nursultan

Pro

I couldn"t agree more with the opinion that education should be free to everyone. Free education can not only enhance person, but also is beneficial to society.
On one hand, each person has the duty as well as the right to receive education. When we were born, the brain is empty: we were not able to speak and to cognate the world. The parents taught us little by little, and we did learn it. As we grow up, we want to know more about and to explore the world. However, it is beyond the capability of the family to resolve. So, government should freely provide the opportunity of study for them, no matter young people or adult. I strongly agree that free education will cost much money. However, in fact, the money comes from people"s tax. As a social group, you must do your best to enhance people. As an individual, you must know the world with objective mind, which need rich experience and knowledge.
On the other hand, enhancing every person is beneficial to society. As the saying, science is the first productive force. The advancement of science strongly depends on the social education. Only the society provides a good education, people can learn more knowledge. Education is the driving force of social progress.
About The United States education I can't say anything because I live in Central Asia.
kjorstad

Con

-First, I would simply like to point out that you have only responded to my point about the cost of university education, and left the rest alone. You haven"t addressed the various flaws in this concept or the numerous harms of higher education being paid for by the government that I have brought up, so I can only conclude that you have no response to them.

****On one hand, each person has the duty as well as the right to receive education. When we were born, the brain is empty: we were not able to speak and to cognate the world. The parents taught us little by little, and we did learn it. As we grow up, we want to know more about and to explore the world. However, it is beyond the capability of the family to resolve.****

-My next point would be to respond to your claim that higher education is essential to an individual. All you have done as of yet through your arguments is claim that education is "beyond the capacity of the family to resolve." And I"m not arguing against this. One of the points I brought up in my first argument is that pre-university education serves to accomplish everything you say the individual needs in society; and if the family can"t pay for it, there are methods through which the government does cover the expenses to the family. However, to pay for the college/higher education expenses for every single student in a nation is to make an uncertain investment into the future, hoping that the people whose education you are paying for do become functioning and contributing members of society. There"s absolutely no guarantee that they will use the education they gain, especially immediately following college. In most nations where higher education is free, students don"t feel the pressure to work right away to pay off debts and instead choose to simply wander for several years. In Ireland for example, the average student takes at least 2 years off to "sightsee."

-This also plays into the fact that you would have to pay for this through taxes. However, how would you guarantee that each person pays their fair share for their education? In the current system, each person pays for their education. If government covered the cost, you would end up with a system in which the people with more money end up paying for not only their education but also for that of others. And this still leaves every single issue of governmental involvement in education that I brought up in my first response, which you ignored completely.

-Please don"t mistake my arguments as trying to say that education isn"t good for the individual; I absolutely agree, higher education is quite beneficial. However, once you get past basic level education (high school), further education becomes a privilege that you should be willing to pay money for. You are making an investment for a better future job, which will get you better pay. Your payment for college is a way of saying "I am going to work hard for this privilege." As soon as you make higher education free, the individual no longer has that pressure to do well "or else."

-Yet another problem is that in nations where education is government-paid, there are virtually no expulsions from institutions due to a lack of effort or low marks on the part of the student. This is yet another way in which the students feel no pressure whatsoever to do well.

-Out of curiosity, what nation do you currently live in? Maybe I can focus my arguments better if I know a little more about your personal education system.

-And, I would once again simply like to reiterate your lack of responses to the points I have put forward in regards to higher education.
Debate Round No. 2
Nursultan

Pro

Nursultan forfeited this round.
kjorstad

Con

I shall simply refer back to my previous arguments.
Debate Round No. 3
Nursultan

Pro

Nursultan forfeited this round.
kjorstad

Con

kjorstad forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
Nursultan

Pro

Nursultan forfeited this round.
kjorstad

Con

kjorstad forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 5
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by SloppyJoe6412 3 years ago
SloppyJoe6412
The meaning of the proposal is clear, it means free for the specific student, which does exist in many countries and works very well, as I can attest having graduated in my homeland without paying a cent.
Posted by kjorstad 3 years ago
kjorstad
Sorry for not responding promptly; class is just starting for me. I'll respond within a couple of hours, promise!
Posted by Flipz 3 years ago
Flipz
Your resolution is very different from the content of your post. Even if an education is "free" to the citizens, the government provides payment to keep the university afloat.
No votes have been placed for this debate.