Добавил:
Upload Опубликованный материал нарушает ваши авторские права? Сообщите нам.
Вуз: Предмет: Файл:
problems.doc
Скачиваний:
92
Добавлен:
14.03.2015
Размер:
781.31 Кб
Скачать

B. The view of uk tuition fees from the rest of the world

Last December, when the coalition government decided to triple student fees in higher education, create economic markets at the upper and lower levels of the system, and abolish government funding for teaching in the arts, humanities and social sciences, it sent shock waves around the world.

Fees in England will be the highest anywhere, except for the US Ivy League. Will the product be better than before? Don't hold your breath. Market competition in university education sets institutions against one another, takes the heat off government because institutions and not the minister become responsible for better quality, and steepens the degree hierarchy. But there's no hard evidence to show quality improves.

These are not normal markets. Prestige institutions dominate by virtue of age and opacity. The consumer is poorly placed to arbitrate product quality and benefits more from better information than from competition. When education becomes a shopping mall, the noise of huckstering goes up, taking resources out of the classroom, while families with the greatest private wealth tend to win.

Higher education systems and their students everywhere are worried that something like the English market experiment will be introduced in their countries. Britain has been a thought leader in higher education policy.

What makes the new English higher education system especially unusual (apart from high tuition fees) is the government's belief that certain fields of knowledge create no public goods and therefore should not be publicly funded. Every other system provides taxpayer subsidies for teaching in all programmes. This is because all higher education programmes create public goods, known in economics as "externalities" – benefits received by persons other than the individual paying the fees.

A US economist Walter McMahon finds the additional private earnings of graduates – usually cited in support of higher fees – constitute only 30% of the total benefits of higher education. On average, private non-market benefits received by graduates, such as better personal and family health, broader life choices and lower welfare dependence, outweigh the earnings benefits. On top of that, 50% of all benefits of higher education take the form of social externalities.

The list of these is long and includes more stable, cohesive and secure societies, more flexible labour markets, stronger civic institutions, greater cultural tolerance and enhanced democracy. Many of these collective benefits are generated in general education programmes – in humanities and sciences. These increase literacy and are a platform for vocational training at later stages. Without prior general education, vocational education is impoverished. Its graduates are less productive at work, and the people they work with are less productive too.

All societies need general education programmes. All other societies support them. These programmes do not lead to lucrative private incomes. Yet by abolishing public subsidies in the humanities and social sciences, the government expects private graduates to finance the public goods themselves – goods that manifestly benefit employers and society. As the Americans say, "go figure" [16].

Соседние файлы в предмете [НЕСОРТИРОВАННОЕ]