Dispelling the myth of free tuition
THE PROTRACTED protest and long-standing debate about university fees refers.
It is high time the facts relating to this issue are elucidated and the fiction and myths presented by the protagonists of “free” higher education laid to rest.
The #FeesMusFall protesters, backed by some university academics, politicians and the public, need some direction and nothing could be more relevant and decisive than a recent article by Damtew Teffera in The Conversation this month.
With due acknowledgement to the author of the article and the publications that have espoused its contents, I wish to review it and bring the salient points to the attention of your readers.
Foremost is the reference to the term “free education”. The author points out it is a myth.
The fact that the cost has to be borne by governments, sponsors, aid agencies and other sources indicate that there is no such thing as free education.
Perhaps to make the point clear, I may add that fresh air, rain water and sunlight fit the the word “free” as no one has to pay for nature’s blessings.
We continue in the vein that if governments have to meet the costs of higher education, then the revenue it gains mainly through taxation must be sufficient and sustainable over a long term.
This requires a burgeoning middle class, many rich citizens and an expanding economy. Countries which boast such “free” higher education like Germany and some Scandinavian countries may have the tax base to meet the costs of higher education.
But this is in itself a travesty as the not-so-wealthy income earners have to contribute to the fees of the rich who can afford to pay for the education of their children.
There is also the possibility of excessive tax demands on all citizens for the situation to be sustainable.
One does not have to be a rocket scientist or economics expert to understand that our poor GDP, the government’s budget deficits and the possibility of a downgrade do not augur well for “free” higher education.
In fact as your own paper said (“Week of make, break” October 17), such a decision would also have an adverse effect on the National Development Plan.
Teferra also goes on to state that higher education is a resource-intensive enterprise, meaning that it is unrealistic given limited public funds.
More students are enrolling at tertiary institutions each year making the cost even more unsustainable in the long run.
With only about half of those who enter universities actually completing their degrees, it is money down the drain.
T e f e r r a refers to the work of Professor Philip Altbach, one of the foremost experts in the funding of higher education who asserts that “without a stable funding base, neither access nor excellence can be achieved”.
The increased costs of higher education each year Rathan B Garrib Write to Letters Editor
There’s also the possibility of excessive tax demands on all