The need for the provision of a free community education in the United Sates began due to the inadequacy of trained workforce companies. The situation stroke the attention of the U.S. President to make a proposal to the state and the federal government to facilitate the free education (McKeown-Moak 98). The main purpose of the program is to create opportunities for less fortunate and financially challenged individuals, who could easily access the colleges nor attain postsecondary education job. However, the program rose a debatable argument on whether it would be an investment or an expensive prerogative with low returns on the venture. The notion of this paper is to substantiate the need to provide free college education system by outweighing the possible impacts to the U.S. economy and its community.
People from middle and low-class societies consider the cost of tuition fee more compared to the quality of course offered by a college. There are suggestions that a free education at the college level can lead to higher rates of enrollments in the nation’s community postsecondary education institutions (Hanson 75). The program is more beneficial to the individual who are price sensitive and those in the most growing population that make the first group in their families to attend college. National assistance for subordinate students conceals most of tuition fee for community colleges, the petition of free create the possibility for the less fortuned individuals who considered it less probable.
The cost living including daily expenses and stationery is high, compared to the tuition fee in community colleges. Related researchers argue that when scholars finance the expenses associated with college by spending more hours working than studying, leads to a drop in the number of graduates (Hanson 75). Most students from low-income families spent most of their school hours doing part-time jobs to fund their college expenses. Improved education levels fueled the economic growth for the U.S. placing it on the top of other nations who were unsuccessful in making comparable reserves (McKeown-Moak 98). It began with providing free education programs for both primary and secondary levels, which facilitated increased number of postsecondary graduates.
Intensifying learning and job training helps constrict both the gaps assistances for jobs and improve equivalence of chances. According to the strategic plans, the power of the idea of free community college is that it is valid for the entire community, both from low, middle, and high classes. The main purpose of the new program is to ensure that the U.S. labor force gets equipped with skills compulsory to top a knowledge-based economy (Hanson 75). The present proposed the program as an investment in the U.S. economy. The role of outstanding community colleges is to formulate all students for victory (Harbour 25). An increased number of skilled labor promotes the country’s productivity hence a boost in the economic levels.
Monica Herk (56) argues that it is important to limit tuition fees to needy individuals and those fields of study that generate employment, as this helps to lower the expensive cost with low rates of returns on investment. The debatable situation supports the reasons that make free community college proposal unsuitable. The suggestion that not all students require free tuition narrows down to targeting the less fortunate students only. Providing free education to everyone is like transferring wealth with no positive impact (Cohen and Florence 180). The effort to advance Education and skills to Americans regardless of income levels can lead to crowding in the community colleges. Several high-class and middle students may enroll to avoid catering for tuition hence pushing out the less-advantaged students.
The fact that limited fields of study require taxpayer support may cause a huge loss to the country’s economy. The program should work with several swift students to pursue degrees and complete training in skills, which are in high demand among workforces. The nation may benefit from higher gross domestic product due to an increase in human labor (McKeown-Moak 98). The students and the entire community enjoys the benefit of employment and future salaries. However, students who decide to take courses that fail to grant them jobs at the end of their completion become expenditure to the government. Free education should be to those skills, coursework, and degrees in high demand by companies.
Free education increases the family expenses through high taxations. The federal government will cater for approximately 75% of the tuition hence posting the cost to taxpayers (Hanson 75). The government justifies its expenditures when their public benefits exceed their costs. (Cohen and Florence 180). Most public institutions face the challenges of low-quality education, which lowers their rates of retention. Provision of advance education training and educational skills assist the student to excel. Institution needs to assist students to plan their educational objectives, collaborate more with industries to shape curriculum, and provide the internship.
The education at the college level is becoming a norm currently, even though; monetary provisions from government source deplete. The need for free college education program sets a modern standard that fits the civilized knowledge economy. Making higher education free for all members of the community is conceivable if the state pays for the level of human capital required by the nation. The government and public institutions must work together to achieve the benefits that come with the provision of free college education. The instructors need to assist in goal making and planning for their students as this helps to link them with the outside world.
Cohen, Arthur M, and Florence B. Brawer. The American Community College. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 2008. Internet resource.
Harbour, Clifford P. John Dewey and the Future of Community College Education. , 2015. Internet resource.
McKeown-Moak, Mary P. Higher Education Finance Research: Policy, Politics, and Practice. , 2014. Internet resource.