Why education cannot be free
DEIRDRE pays less than P50 for “Student fund” every semester. The senior college student’s school fees of about P4,000 for a study load of six units are shouldered by taxpayers every sem est er.
Deirdre has again enrolled in the same six units after dropping both courses last semester. Although permanently disqualified, the co-ed appealed for readmission and was granted re-entry to her program.
The annual family income of Deirdre’s parents qualifies the student to be a state scholar. Balancing school and work as an English tutor is the reason why she is unable to pass the remaining requirements that obstruct her graduation. This semester Deirdre repeated the cycle.
When taxpayers subsidize one student, other youths vying for the privilege are di spl aced.
When the administrators of a state university or college (SUC) evaluate students appealing for readmission, they weigh the investment made by taxpayers in shouldering the initial phase of a scholar’s studies and hope, by granting readmission, that this support will enable the scholar to breast the final hurdle and move on to the next stage after graduation: get a job.
Deirdre demonstrates that this projection is not always accurate or at least, immediate.
How does one deal with the Deirdres in the public education system? Deirdre opens another pressing question in the continuing debate concerning education: will free college education truly benefit the youths and the nation? Proponents claim that the government has the resources to implement if President Rodrigo Duterte signs into law the Universal Access to Quality Tertiary Education bill.
Assuming the government can afford granting free higher education, is this an efficient way of using public funds to grant poor students access to college, employment, and financial security?
Based on experience, there are SUC teachers who are cautious about projecting too high expectations on beneficiaries of free college education.
Just as there are poor students who make the most of assistance to cross from high school to college, as well as complete college, there are the Deirdres who do not regret the wasted opportunities and displacement of other scholars when they do not finish their college education on schedule or achieve the best possible academic performance.
For education to have value, the person being educated must first perceive its value.
There are those who argue that state-subsidized scholars are only spared tuition, miscellaneous fees, and other school-collected costs.
Daily expenses in commuting, eating, and conducting projects required in course work may only be partially covered or not at all by the state.
By securing the funds to cover these other expenses, the scholars or their parents raise their counterpart to the taxes that keep the students in school. Theoretically, the counterparting of scholars or their parents should represent a personal stake in their college education.
However, in practice, this personal counterpart does not always serve as sufficient motivation for some scholars to maximize state-subsidized education. For Deirdre, who pays a little more than one percent of her semestral school fees, dropping and repeating courses is cushioned by the relatively insignificant cash she forks over to be readmitted in her program. She seems only occasionally pressured by her parents’demand that she attains a diploma “soon.”
For tertiary education to be quality, it must not only be free but also be deserved, as gauged from the academic performance scholars turn in to receive the next tranche of financial support.
“Poor and deserving students” may sound like a cliche in education, but it democratizes the need of all students, whether they are in public or private education systems, to gain access to grants, scholarships, fellowships, and other financial aid to help them attain the Filipino dream: quality tertiary education.— Sunnex