DEBATE 2/2020 Business Spotlight 29
University education should
be free, most importantly so
that it is considered a public
good, and not just a commod-
ity. University has changed
over the past 30 to 40 years. It
is now considered an individ-
ual good: a graduate aims to
make more money on the job market after getting their degree.
Universities produce research and innovation, which, if it
generates economic growth, should be a public resource. In
places such as Britain and the United States, where high tuition
fees are paid for by loans, students are actually subsidizing that
research and innovation.
It is worthwhile for a society to have a well-educated citi-
zenship. Places such as Germany and Scandinavia achieve this
with free university education. In the UK, the 50 per cent of
the population without higher education is not well provided
for by the educational system because all sorts of jobs require
a university degree today. Jobseekers are faced with either tak-
ing out a student loan to gain a degree, or not getting a decent
job. Governments should make university access completely
universal, as they do with secondary education. Or even better,
they should match qualifications to occupations because a lot
of the assumptions that a university degree leads to a job were
based on periods when only 15 to 25 per cent of the population
went to university.
The wealthiest students have their university fees paid up
front by their parents. The rest of the current generation, who
take out large student loans, are not only paying for their own
education, they are paying for the expansion of the university
sector to feed the high-tech service and knowledge economy.
This expansion could be better achieved by investing a percen-
tage of GDP in universities and other forms of training and
education. Currently, anyone doing work that does not require
a degree is disadvantaged by a system in which the principal
means of social mobility is via expensive higher education. Just
when women and minorities started to have access to university,
the government changed the system so that everyone needs to
pay for that education themselves. That can be a huge problem
for people who wish to enrol in a university. Nobody should be
excluded from attending university if they could benefit from it.
YES
“University education should
be considered a public good, not just
a commodity”
Eric LybeckNO
“There are challenges that come
with funding a university system that
is entirely free”
Karmjit KaurDR ERIC LYBECK
is presidential academic
fellow at the University
of Manchester
(www.manchester.ac.uk)assumption
[E(sVmpS&n]
, Annahme
cap [kÄp]
, Obergrenze
commodity
[kE(mQdEti]
, Wirtschaftsgut
decent [(di:s&nt]
, anständig
degree [di(gri:]
, (akademischer)
Abschluss
enrol in a university
[In)rEUl In E
)ju:nI(v§:sEti]
, sich an einer Universität
immatrikulieren
fund sth. [fVnd]
, etw. finanzierenGDP (gross domestic
product) [)dZi: di: (pi:]
, BIP (Bruttoinlands-
produkt)
graduate [(grÄdZuEt]
, (Hochschul-)
Absolvent(in)
grant funding
[(grA:nt )fVndIN]
, Zuschussfinanzierung;
hier: Ausbildungsförderungpay sth. up front
[)peI Vp (frVnt]
, etw. vorstrecken
point of use: at the ~
[)pOInt Ev (ju:s]
, zum Zeitpunkt der
Nutzung
secondary education
[)sekEndEri
)edju(keIS&n]
, Sekundarschulwesensubsidize sth.
[(sVbsEdaIz]
, etw. subventionieren
sustainably
[sE(steInEbli]
, nachhaltig, dauerhaft
tuition fee
[tju(IS&n fi:]
, StudiengebührUCAS (Universities and
Colleges Admissions
Service)
[(ju:kÄs] UK
, Zentrale Vergabestelle
für Studienplätze im
Vereinigten Königreich
worthwhile
[)w§:T(waI&l]
, erstrebenswertUniversity education must be
sustainably funded. If, as some
political parties propose, we see
tuition fees cut, this would need
to be compensated in full by
government grant funding. It’s
not just a question of whether
university education should be
free at the point of use for students — it has to be a high-quality
education and experience for students. A funding deficit per stu-
dent would affect universities’ ability to deliver the experience
students deserve, resulting in larger class sizes, poorer facilities
and less advice, support and choice.
There are challenges that come with funding a university
system that is entirely free for its students. Is it possible, for
example, to maintain the right amount of funding per student
without imposing a cap on the number of students who go to
university to keep the system affordable? With the number of
students wanting to go to university showing no signs of falling,
there may be a risk of damaging access for students, including
those from disadvantaged and underrepresented groups.
This raises the question of whether there would be adequate
public funding to meet the significantly higher number of stu-
dents expected in the years following the rapid demographic
increase. With more 18-year-olds wanting to study at universi-
ty (new UCAS figures show a record rate of 34 per cent of UK
18-year-olds entering higher education in 2019, totalling 241,515
young people), we estimate that this could increase the cost of a
no-fees policy by more than £2 billion (about €2.4 billion) a year
from the 2025–26 academic year onwards. Any new funding plan
needs to consider these rising numbers and associated costs.
The system also needs to be fair. The Institute for Fiscal Stud-
ies has said that getting rid of the fee and loan system would be
of most benefit to wealthier graduates: under the current sys-
tem, the least wealthy graduates do not pay back their loans.
There is also the question of who benefits from higher educa-
tion and, therefore, who should contribute to the system. While
graduates can benefit from relatively higher salaries, there are
societal and wider economic benefits to having more univer-
sity graduates in the economy, too. All students deserve a high-
quality, well-funded university experience, with enough money
in their pockets to make the most of it.KARMJIT KAUR
is assistant director
of political affairs at
Universities UK
(www.universitiesuk.ac.uk)