Also, I reject the argument that since 3rd level graduates earn higher wages, and benefit "most" from their education, they should bear most the cost.
I agree.I do not think it is fair to burden those who do not attend college with the cost of paying for those who do. Also, I think promoting third level education as "free" leads to a lot of waste - people attending courses for the sake of it and then dropping out. It is not for no reason that colleges refuse to publish drop-out rates of courses.
I do not think it is fair to burden those who do not attend college with the cost of paying for those who do. Also, I think promoting third level education as "free" leads to a lot of waste - people attending courses for the sake of it and then dropping out. It is not for no reason that colleges refuse to publish drop-out rates of courses.
My take would be that by leveraging the education into a higher salaries, 3rd level grads in turn pay more tax, effectively covering the cost of educating them...and then some, longterm.
I think the applications should also be like UCAS where you have to write a personal statement about why you think you'd be right for the course and what research you've done and then follow this with an interview if your application is successful. The CAO system is a joke. Judging a person on points alone when they could be completely unsuited to the course is ridiculous.
In theory it might be a fairer system but it is likely to be abused e.g. college places being given out to children of people who have contacts. It wouldn't really be fair for someone to get 600 points and be refused entry to their preferred course because someone on an interview panel just doesn't like them
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?