Open Forum - Should University be Free?
(An Outline for Discussion)

Introduction

	Why should this issue be controversial? We have private school education where parents pay quite considerable sums in order to promote their children’s education. Why shouldn’t university students, who now are adults, pay for their education? It is a recognized fact that people with university degrees are usually paid more. So why shouldn’t they pay for that education?

	Intuitively, however, I personally would take another tack. Would society as a whole be better off with its citizens better educated? Society is better off with some of its citizens well-educated. If that were the case then surely society would be better off if more of its citizens that were educated were better educated, and, more people were to find an education at a tertiary level; a state of affairs that would better serve Australia in this the 21st century?

	First, let us discuss what possible roles a university should or might play in society? Second, let us explore what differences payment, part-payment and non-payment have on the population of students and the social ramifications of their debts incurred. Lastly, let us take an overview as to whether we can afford a free education for all Australians who wish to partake a university education, or, whether we should not risk future prosperity of the country by only partially subsidizing this service?

1.	What is or are the Role/s of the University in Society?

1.	Vocational training and/or research.
2.	Storehouses of culture.
3.	Intellectual communities for the redirection of culture, etc.
4.	As a program that augments the critical skills of a society in general.
5.	The acquiring of non-vocational skills.
6.	Other roles?

2.	What are the Ramifications of Payment or Part-Payment?

1.	The incurring of long-term debt by students (does it penalizes them?).
2.	Restriction of access for lower socio-economic groups.
3.	Less social advancement for people on merit overall.
4.	A less critically reflective society.
5.	A reinforcement of the position of elites?
6.	A truncation of the time taken and number of degrees acquired.
7.	Other observations?

3.	Overall Consequences of a Free University Education?

1.	Improvement in worker mobility and flexibility.
2.	A richer sense of cultural reflection, cultural preservation and critical cultural re-direction?!
3.	Other observations?
4.	Some Factual Observations?

1.	Countries with a higher per average education, as a result, have a higher GNP?
2.	There has never been a greater need for vocational education and educational flexibility. Fees work against these two imperatives!
3.	Not all people who seek and get a university education are necessarily going to be employed in such a manner so as to recover the costs of that education in a corresponding field of employment.
4.	For residents education is still considerably subsidized – why can it not be subsidized 100%?
5.	Are true costs completely recovered from non-residents? Are they being subsidized too?
6.	The ‘user pays philosophy’ is being invoked but is not being correctly applied: in effect we have a tax since there is often a fixed price per the same type of course between universities, etc., and, the quantity of money collected is not directly and exactly returned to the schools of origin by the tax department collecting the same. According to this ‘philosophy’ “better institutions should be able to grow faster and collect greater degrees of income.”
7.	Universities are given very little leeway to specialize and improve their standards, whilst at the same time, the measurements of so-called ‘quality’ that are used are usually artificial and neither very informative nor positively encourage an environment of quality improvement.
8.	An over emphasis on the collection of revenue is often perceived as ensuring a lowering of standards both for admission and the awarding of degrees, etc.
9.	Too often emphasis is shifted to revenue collection at the expense of educational priorities and standards.
10.	American model/s need not necessarily fit our historical development, and, at the same time, the better aspects of the same may not be able to be developed here (for a variety of historical and non-historical reasons).
11.	Even though, in this age of globalization, there is a transfer of educated workers out of this country we are also the recipient of numbers of workers educated outside this country. Such flows might be better balanced if we were to stop putting financial obstacles in the paths of possible resident students.
12. 	Even if our educated workers were to effectively migrate from this country they could still positively act as ambassadors for this country.
13.	Reduction in the number of academics with tenure (as a cost cutting practice, etc.) could well impinge upon the exercise of academic freedom (vital to ensuring the ongoing improvement of standards since it is an imperative for this country to both increase the number of suitable people getting a tertiary education and for the quality of that education to improve in time!).
14.	We need to compete against other countries some of which maintain a free education policy (such as e.g., Ireland) or a well-functioning user pays philosophy (such as, e.g., USA?)? In this respect our goals should be long-term and should not be short-sighted.
15.	20 years ago we had a free education policy. We are now a wealthier country and should be more able to put such a philosophy into effect (without restricting the future lifestyles of another generation of students along with its consequences upon later marriages and lowered birthrates [currently being artificially increased by monetary incentives], etc.)!!
16.	Other comments?? 			Noël Tointon, Sydney, 28.9.06/8.10.06.