When you fail to study before exams...

[cookderosa]

I'm actually really interested in seeing compiled data for this. My nearest CC is $5500 / academic year (tuition only and I believe there is a 30sh cap with a per credit fee afterward, not 100% on that though). A 60sh AA will run north of $11k with books et al. I wonder if there are some that are even higher out there?

If you're compiling data, let me know what you find.

[cookderosa]

I agree with part of your post. I do not agree with $75 a week being easy to afford. If I didn't receive the Pell Grant, I would not have been able to afford $75 per week. Luckily, Texas CCs aren't that expensive anyway.

I worked full-time, but I had bills to pay. I wasn't living at home with my mother. I also had a dependent to provide for making less than $9 per hour. $300 per month would have made us homeless. Of course, one can take on a second job, but that means that there would be practically no time left to put in an adequate amount of effort on schoolwork, especially if one is attending on campus.

The woman in the video does have a point. Making CCs free should be around the same cost as offering grants since grants are often give in excess. Of course, eliminating grants, though, would mean that students would have to take out loans to help with books and living expenses.

While some may believe that some college presidents make too much (a very small percentage make as much as CEOs), reducing their salaries will probably drop tuition rates a couple of dollars at most.

The required fees do hurt. Students should be able to opt out of access to things they won't use.

I guess my problem is that I don't see it as a problem that needs solving.

We do have Pell Grants- and it's true not everyone qualifies, but many do! https://studentaid.ed.gov/sa/types/grant...ships/pell
There are avenues to access scholarships while you're enrolled, especially at the community college level (Rebel can share his daughter's awesome story)
CLEP exams are accepted in some amount at most community colleges in the country for those so inclined
Somewhere around 60% of large companies offer tuition reimbursement in some amount
College isn't the only way to earn a living in this country, only about half the adults even have college degrees
K-12 is already mandated and funded by the government, secondary education is still a privilege - but people are arguing as if it's an entitlement.

Everyone on this board is a shining example of exceptional motivation not exceptional privilege or exceptional talent (though I'm sure we have both, too) and frankly, a little more chutzpah will take a person farther than a few more dollars.

[davewill]

Apples and oranges, not antipathy. A graduate with an AA for transfer hasn't yet earned their job skills they'll earn when they do their major. In other words, the "free community college" hasn't paid for 2 (+) years that matter- the last 2.

You can't do the second two without doing the first two. I guess I don't understand since you need both. 2 times 20k beats 4 times 20k.

[sanantone]

Apples and oranges, not antipathy. A graduate with an AA for transfer hasn't yet earned their job skills they'll earn when they do their major. In other words, the "free community college" hasn't paid for 2 (+) years that matter- the last 2.

They matter because you need the first two years to earn the 4-year degree. Let's say that there is a shortage of people with bachelor's degrees in computer science (according to the government, there is). The average associate's degree at a community college will cost $6,000. The average cost of the last two years of college is $18,000, but the cost of the last two years doesn't really matter. Free community college just saved that student $6,000 making it easier for him or her to afford the last two years or to graduate with less debt.

I guess my problem is that I don't see it as a problem that needs solving.

We do have Pell Grants- and it's true not everyone qualifies, but many do! https://studentaid.ed.gov/sa/types/grant...ships/pell
There are avenues to access scholarships while you're enrolled, especially at the community college level (Rebel can share his daughter's awesome story)
CLEP exams are accepted in some amount at most community colleges in the country for those so inclined
Somewhere around 60% of large companies offer tuition reimbursement in some amount
College isn't the only way to earn a living in this country, only about half the adults even have college degrees
K-12 is already mandated and funded by the government, secondary education is still a privilege - but people are arguing as if it's an entitlement.

Everyone on this board is a shining example of exceptional motivation not exceptional privilege or exceptional talent (though I'm sure we have both, too) and frankly, a little more chutzpah will take a person farther than a few more dollars.

Eliminating the Pell Grant eliminates the middle man and waste. You can educate more people with roughly the same amount of money by distributing the money more efficiently.

College isn't the only way to earn a living, but those with associate's and bachelor's degree do earn more than people with just a high school diploma or GED, on average.

[dfrecore]

I would just like to remind everyone that there would not be "free" community college! I, and everyone who pays taxes, will be funding it. Just because YOU don't have to pay for it doesn't mean that it's free! (and that's a YOU as in anyone who doesn't have to pay, not pointing the fingers at anyone in particular).

I also would like to point out that our RIGHTS are spelled out in the constitution, and education is not one of them. Certainly I'm all about education, but I think people tend to forget that just because they want something doesn't make it a RIGHT. Education and healthcare are 2 great examples of recently of things people claim are a right, but just aren't. Not saying they aren't important, or that we shouldn't make it easier in some ways for people to get them, but they are not a right.

[dfrecore]

Rant: What we really need is to stop the ridiculously extravagant expenditures that our public universities seem to think they need. University presidents don't need salaries like CEOs (of course CEOs aren't worth that money either).

At least with CEO's, they get paid based on making a company profitable and other things like that. If shareholders don't like what a CEO is paid, or don't think they are doing a good job, they get fired (people that don't like how a company operates sell their shares, prices go down, and the CEO takes the ultimate blame if that happens).

With public universities, it is our tax dollars paying them, but we have no say in whether or not they should get paid that amount. There is no way to get them fired if we don't like what they do. And the real problem is that they are not paid to try to make college more affordable for people or anything in the public's interest. They are just not accountable to the people who pay their salaries, and it stinks.

[davewill]

...
I also would like to point out that our RIGHTS are spelled out in the constitution, ...

A common mistake. Some of our rights are spelled out in the Constitution. Your mistake is why some of the founders hesitated to include the bill of rights in the document. They feared people would consider the list exhaustive. Our rights are what our actions, laws, and the courts determine them to be.

We made free public education a right for our children. It is not listed in the Constitution, yet we felt so strongly about it that not even parents are allowed to interfere with that right. If we as a society decide that free higher education should be a right, it can be done.

[cookderosa]

You can't do the second two without doing the first two. I guess I don't understand since you need both. 2 times 20k beats 4 times 20k.

They matter because you need the first two years to earn the 4-year degree. Let's say that there is a shortage of people with bachelor's degrees in computer science (according to the government, there is). The average associate's degree at a community college will cost $6,000. The average cost of the last two years of college is $18,000, but the cost of the last two years doesn't really matter. Free community college just saved that student $6,000 making it easier for him or her to afford the last two years or to graduate with less debt.

.

YES! But the flawed assumption is that if taxpayers fund the first 2 years, then students will:

a) finish the first 2 years (currently only 13% of community college students currently finish an associate's degree- most enter and exit the CC system multiple times and eventually leave w/o a degree)

b) plan to pursue additional education beyond what is being provided for free (and some % of those students will not have an AAS/AOS, it will be AA/AS....which doesn't yield return on tax dollars because they haven't learned their contributable skill yet)

c) have the resources to pay for years # 3 and 4

d) can geographically attend years #3 and 4
-or-
have a computer and reliable internet to attend years #3 and 4 as a distance learner assuming that's an option in their major

e) will contribute back into society with their degree by becoming employed in some way that elevates our economy- though occupation incentives aren't part of this discussion.

The point is that for my tax dollars, this is a bad plan. Beyond being unnecessary, even if we had the money to spend (we don't) there is an obscene risk with absolutely zero upside. We already spend tons of money on Pell Grants (which helped my family multiple years btw). Current reports simply do not support that funding a student's education increases outcomes (graduation). This report summarizes a huge analysis of of Pell recipients:

An unprecedented look at Pell Grant graduation rates from 1,149 schools - The Hechinger Report

"The study found that Pell recipients had a six-year graduation rate of 51 percent in 2013 compared to 65 percent for non-Pell students."

(there are multiple barriers to completion that have nothing to do with paying tuition- I think this is lost in translation somewhere, why does everyone think it's just cost?)

"Pell grants are the U.S. Department of Education’s largest single expenditure, making up $31.5 billion of its budget in 2013-14. Because of a quirk in federal policy, there is very little accountability for this money, however; schools must provide their Pell student graduation rates to any prospective applicant who asks, but are not required to report this information to the Department of Education."

(so, we don't even track this money to see if they graduate!)

EDIT to add: I still stand by my position that I don't think cost is the barrier to admission or completion.

[sanantone]

A common mistake. Some of our rights are spelled out in the Constitution. Your mistake is why some of the founders hesitated to include the bill of rights in the document. They feared people would consider the list exhaustive. Our rights are what our actions, laws, and the courts determine them to be.

We made free public education a right for our children. It is not listed in the Constitution, yet we felt so strongly about it that not even parents are allowed to interfere with that right. If we as a society decide that free higher education should be a right, it can be done.

Exactly. The Constitution basically says that not all rights are enumerated. It is not and never was intended to be an exhaustive list. It would actually be pretty scary if it were because it is humanly impossible to come up with an exhaustive list. The right to privacy is NOT in the Constitution, so I guess people don't think that's a right? The government does not give rights; it recognizes rights. I'm giving everyone a homework assignment. Read the 9th Amendment.

YES! But the flawed assumption is that if taxpayers fund the first 2 years, then students will:

a) finish the first 2 years (currently only 13% of community college students currently finish an associate's degree- most enter and exit the CC system multiple times and eventually leave w/o a degree)

b) plan to pursue additional education beyond what is being provided for free (and some % of those students will not have an AAS/AOS, it will be AA/AS....which doesn't yield return on tax dollars because they haven't learned their contributable skill yet)

c) have the resources to pay for years # 3 and 4

d) can geographically attend years #3 and 4
-or-
have a computer and reliable internet to attend years #3 and 4 as a distance learner assuming that's an option in their major

e) will contribute back into society with their degree by becoming employed in some way that elevates our economy- though occupation incentives aren't part of this discussion.

The point is that for my tax dollars, this is a bad plan. Beyond being unnecessary, even if we had the money to spend (we don't) there is an obscene risk with absolutely zero upside. We already spend tons of money on Pell Grants (which helped my family multiple years btw). Current reports simply do not support that funding a student's education increases outcomes (graduation). This report summarizes a huge analysis of of Pell recipients:

An unprecedented look at Pell Grant graduation rates from 1,149 schools - The Hechinger Report

"The study found that Pell recipients had a six-year graduation rate of 51 percent in 2013 compared to 65 percent for non-Pell students."

(there are multiple barriers to completion that have nothing to do with paying tuition- I think this is lost in translation somewhere, why does everyone think it's just cost?)

"Pell grants are the U.S. Department of Education’s largest single expenditure, making up $31.5 billion of its budget in 2013-14. Because of a quirk in federal policy, there is very little accountability for this money, however; schools must provide their Pell student graduation rates to any prospective applicant who asks, but are not required to report this information to the Department of Education."

(so, we don't even track this money to see if they graduate!)

EDIT to add: I still stand by my position that I don't think cost is the barrier to admission or completion.

You just made an argument for getting rid of the Pell Grant. It would lead to better tracking and more accountability. It would also mean that, since the federal government is holding the purse strings, it can put constraints on prices as it does with Medicare.

[jsd]

Exactly. The Constitution basically says that not all rights are enumerated.

Yup, it explicitly says this in fact. The ninth amendment is short an to the point, and reads:

The enumeration in the Constitution of certain rights shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.