articles about how education should be free

• SUGGESTED TOPICS
• The Magazine
• Newsletters
• Managing Yourself
• Managing Teams
• Work-life Balance
• The Big Idea
• Data & Visuals
• Reading Lists
• Case Selections
• HBR Learning
• Topic Feeds
• Account Settings
• Email Preferences

Should Higher Education Be Free?

• Vijay Govindarajan
• Jatin Desai

Disruptive new models offer an alternative to expensive tuition.

In the United States, our higher education system is broken. Since 1980, we’ve seen a 400% increase in the cost of higher education, after adjustment for inflation — a higher cost escalation than any other industry, even health care. We have recently passed the trillion dollar mark in student loan debt in the United States.

• Vijay Govindarajan is the Coxe Distinguished Professor at Dartmouth College’s Tuck School of Business, an executive fellow at Harvard Business School, and faculty partner at the Silicon Valley incubator Mach 49. He is a New York Times and Wall Street Journal bestselling author. His latest book is Fusion Strategy: How Real-Time Data and AI Will Power the Industrial Future . His Harvard Business Review articles “ Engineering Reverse Innovations ” and “ Stop the Innovation Wars ” won McKinsey Awards for best article published in HBR. His HBR articles “ How GE Is Disrupting Itself ” and “ The CEO’s Role in Business Model Reinvention ” are HBR all-time top-50 bestsellers. Follow him on LinkedIn . vgovindarajan
• JD Jatin Desai is co-founder and chief executive officer of The Desai Group and the author of  Innovation Engine: Driving Execution for Breakthrough Results .

Partner Center

EdSource is committed to bringing you the latest in education news.

But we can’t do this without readers like you.

Will you join our spring campaign as one of 50 new monthly supporters before May 22?

Student journalists on the frontlines of protest coverage

How can California teach more adults to read in English?

Hundreds of teachers in limbo after spike in pink slips

How earning a college degree put four California men on a path from prison to new lives | Documentary 

Patrick Acuña’s journey from prison to UC Irvine | Video

Family reunited after four years separated by Trump-era immigration policy

Black teachers: How to recruit them and make them stay

Lessons in higher education: California and beyond

Keeping California public university options open

Superintendents: Well-paid and walking away

The debt to degree connection

College in prison: How earning a degree can lead to a new life

May 14, 2024

Getting California kids to read: What will it take?

April 24, 2024

Is dual admission a solution to California’s broken transfer system?

College & Careers

Tuition-free college is critical to our economy

Morley Winograd and Max Lubin

November 2, 2020, 13 comments.

EdSource’s journalism is always free for everyone — because we believe an informed public is necessary for a more equitable future for every student. Join our spring campaign as one of 50 new monthly supporters before May 22.

To rebuild America’s economy in a way that offers everyone an equal chance to get ahead, federal support for free college tuition should be a priority in any economic recovery plan in 2021.

Research shows that the private and public economic benefit of free community college tuition would outweigh the cost. That’s why half of the states in the country already have some form of free college tuition.

The Democratic Party 2020 platform calls for making two years of community college tuition free for all students with a federal/state partnership similar to the Obama administration’s 2015 plan .

It envisions a program as universal and free as K-12 education is today, with all the sustainable benefits such programs (including Social Security and Medicare) enjoy. It also calls for making four years of public college tuition free, again in partnership with states, for students from families making less than $125,000 per year.

The Republican Party didn’t adopt a platform for the 2020 election, deferring to President Trump’s policies, which among other things, stand in opposition to free college. Congressional Republicans, unlike many of their state counterparts, also have not supported free college tuition in the past.

However, it should be noted that the very first state free college tuition program was initiated in 2015 by former Tennessee Gov. Bill Haslam, a Republican. Subsequently, such deep red states with Republican majorities in their state legislature such as West Virginia, Kentucky and Arkansas have adopted similar programs.

Establishing free college tuition benefits for more Americans would be the 21st-century equivalent of the Depression-era Works Progress Administration initiative.

That program not only created immediate work for the unemployed, but also offered skills training for nearly 8 million unskilled workers in the 1930s. Just as we did in the 20th century, by laying the foundation for our current system of universal free high school education and rewarding our World War II veterans with free college tuition to help ease their way back into the workforce, the 21st century system of higher education we build must include the opportunity to attend college tuition-free.

California already has taken big steps to make its community college system, the largest in the nation, tuition free by fully funding its California Promise grant program. But community college is not yet free to all students. Tuition costs — just more than $1,500 for a full course load — are waived for low-income students. Colleges don’t have to spend the Promise funds to cover tuition costs for other students so, at many colleges, students still have to pay tuition.

At the state’s four-year universities, about 60% of students at the California State University and the same share of in-state undergraduates at the 10-campus University of California, attend tuition-free as well, as a result of Cal grants , federal Pell grants and other forms of financial aid.

But making the CSU and UC systems tuition-free for even more students will require funding on a scale that only the federal government is capable of supporting, even if the benefit is only available to students from families that makes less than $125,000 a year.

It is estimated that even without this family income limitation, eliminating tuition for four years at all public colleges and universities for all students would cost taxpayers $79 billion a year, according to U.S. Department of Education data . Consider, however, that the federal government  spent $91 billion  in 2016 on policies that subsidized college attendance. At least some of that could be used to help make public higher education institutions tuition-free in partnership with the states.

Free college tuition programs have proved effective in helping mitigate the system’s current inequities by increasing college enrollment, lowering dependence on student loan debt and improving completion rates , especially among students of color and lower-income students who are often the first in their family to attend college.

In the first year of the TN Promise , community college enrollment in Tennessee increased by 24.7%, causing 4,000 more students to enroll. The percentage of Black students in that state’s community college population increased from 14% to 19% and the proportion of Hispanic students increased from 4% to 5%.

Students who attend community college tuition-free also graduate at higher rates. Tennessee’s first Promise student cohort had a 52.6% success rate compared to only a 38.9% success rate for their non-Promise peers. After two years of free college tuition, Rhode Island’s college-promise program saw its community college graduation rate triple and the graduation rate among students of color increase ninefold.

The impact on student debt is more obvious. Tennessee, for instance, saw its applications for student loans decrease by 17% in the first year of its program, with loan amounts decreasing by 12%. At the same time, Free Application for Federal Student Aid (FAFSA) applications soared, with 40% of the entire nation’s increase in applications originating in that state in the first year of their Promise program.

Wage inequality by education, already dreadful before the pandemic, is getting worse. In May, the unemployment rate among workers without a high school diploma was nearly triple the rate of workers with a bachelor’s degree. No matter what Congress does to provide support to those affected by the pandemic and the ensuing recession, employment prospects for far too many people in our workforce will remain bleak after the pandemic recedes. Today, the fastest growing sectors of the economy are in health care, computers and information technology. To have a real shot at a job in those sectors, workers need a college credential of some form such as an industry-recognized skills certificate or an associate’s or bachelor’s degree.

The surest way to make the proven benefits of higher education available to everyone is to make college tuition-free for low and middle-income students at public colleges, and the federal government should help make that happen.

Morley Winograd is president of the Campaign for Free College Tuition . Max Lubin is CEO of Rise , a student-led nonprofit organization advocating for free college.  

The opinions in this commentary are those of the author. Commentaries published on EdSource represent diverse viewpoints about California’s public education systems. If you would like to submit a commentary, please review our  guidelines  and  contact us .

Share Article

Comments (13)

Leave a comment, your email address will not be published. required fields are marked * *.

Click here to cancel reply.

XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

Comments Policy

We welcome your comments. All comments are moderated for civility, relevance and other considerations. Click here for EdSource's Comments Policy .

Genia Curtsinger 2 years ago 2 years ago

Making community college free to those who meet the admission requirements would help many people. First of all, it would make it easy for students and families, for instance; you go to college and have to pay thousands of dollars to get a college education, but if community college is free it would help so you could be saving money and get a college education for free, with no cost at all. It would make … Read More

Making community college free to those who meet the admission requirements would help many people. First of all, it would make it easy for students and families, for instance; you go to college and have to pay thousands of dollars to get a college education, but if community college is free it would help so you could be saving money and get a college education for free, with no cost at all. It would make it more affordable to the student and their families.

Therefore I think people should have free education for those who meet the admission requirements.

nothing 2 years ago 2 years ago

I feel like colleges shouldn’t be completely free, but a lot more affordable for people so everyone can have a chance to have a good college education.

Jaden Wendover 2 years ago 2 years ago

I think all colleges should be free, because why would you pay to learn?

Samantha Cole 2 years ago 2 years ago

I think college should be free because there are a lot of people that want to go to college but they can’t pay for it so they don’t go and end up in jail or working as a waitress or in a convenience store. I know I want to go to college but I can’t because my family doesn’t make enough money to send me to college but my family makes too much for financial aid.

Nick Gurrs 2 years ago 2 years ago

I feel like this subject has a lot of answers, For me personally, I believe tuition and college, in general, should be free because it will help students get out of debt and not have debt, and because it will help people who are struggling in life to get a job and make a living off a job.

NO 3 years ago 3 years ago

I think college tuition should be free. A lot of adults want to go to college and finish their education but can’t partly because they can’t afford to. Some teens need to work at a young age just so they can save money for college which I feel they shouldn’t have to. If people don’t want to go to college then they just can work and go on with their lives.

Not saying my name 3 years ago 3 years ago

I think college tuition should be free because people drop out because they can’t pay the tuition to get into college and then they can’t graduate and live a good life and they won’t get a job because it says they dropped out of school. So it would be harder to get a job and if the tuition wasn’t a thing, people would live an awesome life because of this.

Brisa 3 years ago 3 years ago

I’m not understanding. Are we not agreeing that college should be free, or are we?

m 2 years ago 2 years ago

it shouldnt

Trevor Everhart 3 years ago 3 years ago

What do you mean by there is no such thing as free tuition?

Olga Snichernacs 3 years ago 3 years ago

Nice! I enjoyed reading.

Anonymous Cat 3 years ago 3 years ago

Tuition-Free: Free tuition, or sometimes tuition free is a phrase you have heard probably a good number of times. … Therefore, free tuition to put it simply is the opportunity provide to students by select universities around the world to received a degree from their institution without paying any sum of money for the teaching.

Mister B 3 years ago 3 years ago

There is no such thing as tuition free.

EdSource Special Reports

Fewer than half of California students are reading by third grade, experts say. Worse still, far fewer Black and Latino students meet that standard. What needs to change?

For the four men whose stories are told in this documentary, just the chance to earn the degree made it possible for them to see themselves living a different life outside of prison.

Amid Israel-Hamas war, colleges draw lines on faculty free speech

The conflict in Gaza has rekindled efforts to control controversy and conversation on campuses. The UC system could be the latest to weigh in.

Dissent, no funding yet for statewide teacher training in math and reading

A bill sponsored by State Superintendent Tony Thurmond would provide math and reading training for all teachers. But money is scarce, and some English language advocates have problems with phonics.

EdSource in your inbox!

Stay ahead of the latest developments on education in California and nationally from early childhood to college and beyond. Sign up for EdSource’s no-cost daily email.

Stay informed with our daily newsletter

Winter 2024

Why Free College Is Necessary

Higher education can’t solve inequality, but the debate about free college tuition does something extremely valuable. It reintroduces the concept of public good to education discourse.

[contentblock id=subscribe-ad]

Free college is not a new idea, but, with higher education costs (and student loan debt) dominating public perception, it’s one that appeals to more and more people—including me. The national debate about free, public higher education is long overdue. But let’s get a few things out of the way.

College is the domain of the relatively privileged, and will likely stay that way for the foreseeable future, even if tuition is eliminated. As of 2012, over half of the U.S. population has “some college” or postsecondary education. That category includes everything from an auto-mechanics class at a for-profit college to a business degree from Harvard. Even with such a broadly conceived category, we are still talking about just half of all Americans.

Why aren’t more people going to college? One obvious answer would be cost, especially the cost of tuition. But the problem isn’t just that college is expensive. It is also that going to college is complicated. It takes cultural and social, not just economic, capital. It means navigating advanced courses, standardized tests, forms. It means figuring out implicit rules—rules that can change.

Eliminating tuition would probably do very little to untangle the sailor’s knot of inequalities that make it hard for most Americans to go to college. It would not address the cultural and social barriers imposed by unequal K–12 schooling, which puts a select few students on the college pathway at the expense of millions of others. Neither would it address the changing social milieu of higher education, in which the majority are now non-traditional students. (“Non-traditional” students are classified in different ways depending on who is doing the defining, but the best way to understand the category is in contrast to our assumptions of a traditional college student—young, unfettered, and continuing to college straight from high school.) How and why they go to college can depend as much on things like whether a college is within driving distance or provides one-on-one admissions counseling as it does on the price.

Given all of these factors, free college would likely benefit only an outlying group of students who are currently shut out of higher education because of cost—students with the ability and/or some cultural capital but without wealth. In other words, any conversation about college is a pretty elite one even if the word “free” is right there in the descriptor.

The discussion about free college, outside of the Democratic primary race, has also largely been limited to community colleges, with some exceptions by state. Because I am primarily interested in education as an affirmative justice mechanism, I would like all minority-serving and historically black colleges (HBCUs)—almost all of which qualify as four-year degree institutions—to be included. HBCUs disproportionately serve students facing the intersecting effects of wealth inequality, systematic K–12 disparities, and discrimination. For those reasons, any effort to use higher education as a vehicle for greater equality must include support for HBCUs, allowing them to offer accessible degrees with less (or no) debt.

The Obama administration’s free community college plan, expanded in July to include grants that would reduce tuition at HBCUs, is a step in the right direction. Yet this is only the beginning of an educational justice agenda. An educational justice policy must include institutions of higher education but cannot only include institutions of higher education. Educational justice says that schools can and do reproduce inequalities as much as they ameliorate them. Educational justice says one hundred new Universities of Phoenix is not the same as access to high-quality instruction for the maximum number of willing students. And educational justice says that jobs programs that hire for ability over “fit” must be linked to millions of new credentials, no matter what form they take or how much they cost to obtain. Without that, some free college plans could reinforce prestige divisions between different types of schools, leaving the most vulnerable students no better off in the economy than they were before.

Free college plans are also limited by the reality that not everyone wants to go to college. Some people want to work and do not want to go to college forever and ever—for good reason. While the “opportunity costs” of spending four to six years earning a degree instead of working used to be balanced out by the promise of a “good job” after college, that rationale no longer holds, especially for poor students. Free-ninety-nine will not change that.

I am clear about all of that . . . and yet I don’t care. I do not care if free college won’t solve inequality. As an isolated policy, I know that it won’t. I don’t care that it will likely only benefit the high achievers among the statistically unprivileged—those with above-average test scores, know-how, or financial means compared to their cohort. Despite these problems, today’s debate about free college tuition does something extremely valuable. It reintroduces the concept of public good to higher education discourse—a concept that fifty years of individuation, efficiency fetishes, and a rightward drift in politics have nearly pummeled out of higher education altogether. We no longer have a way to talk about public education as a collective good because even we defenders have adopted the language of competition. President Obama justified his free community college plan on the grounds that “Every American . . . should be able to earn the skills and education necessary to compete and win in the twenty-first century economy.” Meanwhile, for-profit boosters claim that their institutions allow “greater access” to college for the public. But access to what kind of education? Those of us who believe in viable, affordable higher ed need a different kind of language. You cannot organize for what you cannot name.

Already, the debate about if college should be free has forced us all to consider what higher education is for. We’re dusting off old words like class and race and labor. We are even casting about for new words like “precariat” and “generation debt.” The Debt Collective is a prime example of this. The group of hundreds of students and graduates of (mostly) for-profit colleges are doing the hard work of forming a class-based identity around debt as opposed to work or income. The broader cultural conversation about student debt, to which free college plans are a response, sets the stage for that kind of work. The good of those conversations outweighs for me the limited democratization potential of free college.

Tressie McMillan Cottom is an assistant professor of sociology at Virginia Commonwealth University and a contributing editor at Dissent . Her book Lower Ed: How For-Profit Colleges Deepen Inequality is forthcoming from the New Press.

This article is part of   Dissent’s special issue of “Arguments on the Left.” Click to read contending arguments from Matt Bruenig and Mike Konczal .

Sign up for the Dissent newsletter:

Socialist thought provides us with an imaginative and moral horizon.

For insights and analysis from the longest-running democratic socialist magazine in the United States, sign up for our newsletter:

• University News
• Faculty & Research
• Health & Medicine
• Science & Technology
• Social Sciences
• Humanities & Arts
• Students & Alumni
• Arts & Culture
• Sports & Athletics
• The Professions
• International
• New England Guide

The Magazine

• Current Issue
• Past Issues

Class Notes & Obituaries

• Browse Class Notes
• Browse Obituaries

Collections

• Commencement
• The Context

Harvard Squared

• Harvard in the Headlines

Support Harvard Magazine

• Why We Need Your Support
• How We Are Funded
• Ways to Support the Magazine
• Special Gifts
• Behind the Scenes

Classifieds

• Vacation Rentals & Travel
• Real Estate
• Products & Services
• Harvard Authors’ Bookshelf
• Education & Enrichment Resource
• Ad Prices & Information
• Place An Ad

Follow Harvard Magazine:

Right Now | Subsidy Shuffle

Could College Be Free?

January-February 2020

Illustration by Adam Niklewicz

Email David Deming 

Visit David Deming's website.

Hear David Deming discuss free college on HKS PolicyCast

etting ahead— or getting by—is increasingly difficult in the United States without a college degree. The demand for college education is at an all-time high, but so is the price tag. David Deming—professor of public policy at the Kennedy School and professor of education and economics at the Graduate School of Education—wants to ease that tension by reallocating government spending on higher education to make public colleges tuition-free. 

Deming’s argument is elegant. Public spending on higher education is unique among social services: it is an investment that pays for itself many times over in higher tax revenue generated by future college graduates, a rare example of an economic “free lunch.” In 2016 (the most recent year for which data are available), the United States spent $91 billion subsidizing access to higher education. According to Deming, that spending isn’t as progressive or effective as it could be. The National Center for Education Statistics indicates that it would cost roughly $79 billion a year to make public colleges and universities tuition-free. So, Deming asks, why not redistribute current funds to make public colleges tuition-free, instead of subsidizing higher education in other, roundabout ways? 

Of the estimated $91 billion the nation spends annually on higher education, $37 billion go to tax credits and tax benefits. These tax programs ease the burden of paying for both public and private colleges, but disproportionately benefit middle-class children who are probably going to college anyway. Instead of lowering costs for those students, Deming points out, a progressive public-education assistance program should probably redirect funds to incentivize students to go to college who wouldn’t otherwise consider it. 

Another $13 billion in federal spending subsidize interest payments on student loans for currently enrolled undergraduates. And the remaining $41 billion go to programs that benefit low-income students and military veterans, including $28.4 billion for Pell Grants and similar programs. Pell Grants are demand-side subsidies: they provide cash directly to those who pay for a service, i.e., students; supply-side subsidies (see below) channel funds to suppliers, such as colleges. Deming asserts that Pell Grant money, which travels with students, voucher-style, is increasingly gobbled up by low-quality, for-profit colleges. These colleges are often better at marketing their services than at graduating students or improving their graduates’ prospects, despite being highly subsidized by taxpayers . “The rise of for-profit colleges has, in some ways, been caused by disinvestment in public higher education. Our public university systems were built for a time when 20 percent of young people attended college,” says Deming. “Now it’s more like 60 percent, and we haven’t responded by devoting more resources to ensuring that young people can afford college and succeed when they get there.” As a result, an expensive, for-profit market has filled the educational shortage that government divestment has caused.

The vast majority of states have continuously divested in public education in recent decades, pushing a higher percentage of the cost burden of schools onto students. Deming believes this state-level divestment is the main reason for the precipitous rise in college tuition, which has outpaced the rest of the Consumer Price Index for 30 consecutive years. (Compounding reasons include rising salaries despite a lack of gains in productivity—a feature of many human-service-focused industries such as education and healthcare.) Against this backdrop, Deming writes, “at least some—and perhaps all—of the cost of universal tuition-free public higher education could be defrayed by redeploying money that the government is already spending.” (The need for some funding programs would remain, however, given the cost of room, board, books, and other college supplies.) 

Redirecting current funding to provide tuition-free public-school degrees is only one part of Deming’s proposal. He knows that making public higher education free could hurt the quality of instruction by inciting a race to the bottom, stretching teacher-student ratios and pinching other academic resources. He therefore argues that any tuition-free plan would need to be paired with increased state and federal investment, and programs focused on getting more students to graduate. Because rates of degree completion strongly correlate with per-student spending, Deming proposes introducing a federal matching grant for the first $5,000 of net per-student spending in states that implement free college. “Luckily,” he says, “spending more money is a policy lever we know how to pull.” 

Deming argues that shifting public funding to supply-side subsidies, channeled directly to public institutions, could nudge states to reinvest in public higher education. Such reinvestment would dampen the demand for low-quality, for-profit schools; increase college attendance in low-income communities; and improve the quality of services that public colleges and universities could offer. Early evidence of these positive effects has surfaced in some of the areas that are piloting free college-tuition programs, including the state of Tennessee and the city of Kalamazoo, Michigan. 

Higher education is an odd market because buyers (students) often don’t have good information about school quality and it’s a once-in-a-lifetime decision. Creating a supply-side subsidy system would take some freedom of choice away from prospective undergraduates who want government funding for private, four-year degrees. But, for Deming, that’s a trade-off worth making, if the state is better able to measure the effectiveness of certain colleges and allocate subsidies accordingly. Education is more than the mere acquisition of facts—which anyone can access freely online—because minds, like markets, learn best through feedback. Quality feedback is difficult to scale well without hiring more teachers and ramping up student-support resources. That’s why Deming thinks it’s high time for the public higher-education market to get a serious injection of cash.

You might also like

Lord Mayor for a Day

Harvard's Michael Mainelli, the 695th Lord Mayor of London.

Law Professor Rebecca Tushnet on Who Gets to Keep the Ring

Harvard law professor gets into the details of romantic legal reform.

Faculty Senate Debate Continued

Harvard professors highlight governance concerns.

Most popular

Update: Harvard Encampment Ends

As protest numbers dwindled, organizers and administrators reached an agreement

Advertisement

More to explore

Dominica’s “Bouyon” Star

Musician “Shelly” Alfred’s indigenous Caribbean sound

What is the Best Breakfast and Lunch in Harvard Square?

The cafés and restaurants of Harvard Square sure to impress for breakfast and lunch.

University People

Harvard Portraitist Nina Skov Jensen Paints Celebrities and Princesses

Nina Skov Jensen ’25, portraitist for collectors and the princess of Denmark. 

• Share full article

Advertisement

Supported by

Should College Be Free?

The Democratic Party is split over whether you should have to pay to get a degree.

By Spencer Bokat-Lindell

Mr. Bokat-Lindell is a writer in The New York Times Opinion section.

This article is part of the Debatable newsletter. You can sign up here to receive it on Tuesdays and Thursdays.

“I believe we should move to make college affordable for everybody,” begins a new, subtweet-y campaign ad from Pete Buttigieg that started airing in Iowa on Thanksgiving.

The mayor of South Bend, Ind., was not only promoting his plan to make public college tuition-free for families earning up to $100,000 a year. He was also drawing a stark, if implicit, contrast with his competitors Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders, who have made eliminating tuition for all students at public colleges (and for Mr. Sanders, at trade schools and apprenticeship programs as well) a core issue of their candidacies.

“There are some voices saying, ‘Well, that doesn’t count unless you go even further — unless it’s even free for the kids of millionaires,’” Mr. Buttigieg continues in the ad. “But I only want to make promises that we can keep.”

The debate: Every American is entitled to a free K-12 education. But in many countries around the world , that right effectively extends to college as well. Should the United States follow suit?

WHAT PEOPLE ARE SAYING

Rich kids should have to pay for college.

Critics of free public college, including Mr. Buttigieg and Senator Amy Klobuchar, argue that it’s a wasteful, even regressive, idea, since students from families wealthy enough to afford tuition would disproportionately reap the benefits. That’s because kids from higher-income families are more likely to attend college and lower-income students on average pay less in net tuition.

By the numbers: Sandy Baum and Alexandra Tilsley at the Urban Institute estimate that more than a third of the total subsidies required for universal free public college would flow to students from families earning $120,000 or more, who already tend to enjoy better K-12 educations.

Ms. Baum and Ms. Tilsley write in The Washington Post:

A national free-tuition plan would provide disproportionate benefits to the relatively affluent while leaving many low- and moderate-income students struggling to complete the college degrees that many jobs now demand . Ironically, free-tuition programs would exacerbate inequality even as they promise to level the playing field. … A progressive educational policy should offer much more narrowly targeted help for students.

“Pete Buttigieg’s college affordability plan is actually the most progressive”

“Universal Free College Would Be a Regressive Scandal”

Higher education is a public good, and public goods should be universal

Supporters of free tuition say that talking points about free-riding “millionaires and billionaires” are misleading — not least because millionaires and billionaires are far less likely to send their children to public universities.

A different crunch of the numbers: Mike Konczal, a fellow at the Roosevelt Institute, estimates that families within the top 1 percent of the income distribution would capture 1.4 percent of total spending on free college — slightly regressive in relative terms, but arguably not an exorbitant price to pay for the 98.6 percent of spending that would benefit everyone else. And crucially, supporters say, under the Sanders and Warren plans, that spending would be financed by raising taxes on the rich.

But Jordan Weissman contends in Slate that to quibble about the relative progressivity of different college tuition funding proposals is largely to miss the point. For many proponents, universal free public college is part of a broader political vision to establish higher education as a public good that everyone buys into, like the fire department or library.

The entire policy agenda of the social-Democratic left is based on the idea that simple, universal government programs are generally better than means-tested benefits, because letting everybody enjoy nice things like higher education for free or cheap creates buy-in for a robust welfare state, whereas programs for the poor are easily targeted for cuts.

Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York pursued this line of thought in a Twitter thread :

Another angle: The notion that the children of millionaires and billionaires shouldn’t have access to free college, some critics say, rests too comfortably on the assumption that wealth is and will continue to be transferred seamlessly from generation to generation — itself a regressive feature of the American class system. That assumption also doesn’t account for the reality that some wealthy parents may wield their financial power to coerce and even abuse their college-age children .

Free public college may not work

Eliminating tuition at state schools would bleed them dry, writes Noah Smith in Bloomberg. The rub, he argues, is that most public universities receive much of their funding from state governments, and many state governments don’t want to increase their education budgets — in fact, they want to cut them. Mr. Smith writes :

If even Vermont’s government won’t pony up the cash, who will? Those on the socialist left seem to believe that the federal government will step in, but this seems overly optimistic given decades of cuts to every major spending item except health care. As soon as a Republican administration or Congress gets into power, federal education spending would be under threat .

The result, Mr. Smith says, would be an era of painful austerity for both students and staff.

The emphasis on college is misplaced

College, free or otherwise, should be lower on the national political priority list, writes Matt Bruenig, the founder of People’s Policy Project.

Defending the value of education for education’s sake is one thing. But Mr. Bruenig sees the issue as a largely economic problem, to which free public college is an inadequate solution: Both its supporters and its opponents seem to accept the premise that a traditional higher education is the only avenue to a limited number of middle-class jobs. But most Americans don’t go to college, he says, and “pushing more and more people through college will not automatically transform all the jobs into good ones.”

Rather, Mr. Bruenig writes :

We should as a society designate ages 18-24 as the attachment zone during which all paths into a career are fully supported by public benefits and services. Students get their free school. But, under the exact same umbrella, nonstudents get their free vocational training, subsidized apprenticeships, in-work subsidies, public jobs, and whatever else it takes to ensure a lasting labor force attachment. That would be a program that is actually in fitting with the ideals of universalism.

Do you have a point of view we missed? Email us at [email protected] . Please note your name, age and location in your response, which may be included in the next newsletter.

MORE PERSPECTIVES ON FREE COLLEGE

“Tuition-Free College Could Cost Less Than You Think,” writes David Deming. [The New York Times]

“For poorer families, even ‘free public college’ isn’t free if only tuition costs are covered,” writes Tiffany Jones. [The New York Times]

David Leonhardt explains his idea of “the best version” of free college . [The New York Times]

Students 13 and older sound off on whether they think college should be free. [The New York Times]

WHAT YOU’RE SAYING

Here’s what readers had to say about the last debate: Sweet Potatoes Are Overrated. Turducken Is Performative.

In response to last week’s headline, I received a note from Judith Butler, the queer theorist and scholar whose work developed the concept of gender performativity :

To Spencer Bokat-Lindell, I very much appreciated your piece on Turducken as performative Turkey, but wanted to caution against the association of ‘performative’ with fake. The term gained meaning through J.L. Austin’s theory of speech acts. There he gives the example of legal performatives such as “I sentence you” or “I pronounce you man and wife.” In those cases the speech act makes something real happen in the world. Someone goes to jail or two people get married. Similarly, in Notes Toward a Performative Theory of Assembly, a title that appears to echo in your interesting piece, assemblies form and act, sometimes exemplifying the very principles for which they call. They bring about a reality, or seek to, but they are not producing a falsehood by virtue of their performativity. Although some take performative to mean ersatz , that is not the main meaning of the term in speech act theory or its queer theory appropriation. Such a construal suggests that performative effects are not real or are the opposite of real. But they can be, under certain circumstances, one way of bringing about a reality. In any case, I enjoyed your piece.

Spencer Bokat-Lindell is a writer for the Opinion section.  @bokatlindell

• Search Search Please fill out this field.
• Student Loans
• Paying for College

Should College Be Free? The Pros and Cons

Types of Publicly Funded College Tuition Programs

Pros: why college should be free, cons: why college should not be free, what the free college debate means for students, how to cut your college costs now, frequently asked questions (faqs).

damircudic / Getty Images

Americans have been debating the wisdom of free college for decades, and more than 30 states now offer some type of free college program. But it wasn't until 2021 that a nationwide free college program came close to becoming reality, re-energizing a longstanding debate over whether or not free college is a good idea. 

And despite a setback for the free-college advocates, the idea is still in play. The Biden administration's free community college proposal was scrapped from the American Families Plan . But close observers say that similar proposals promoting free community college have drawn solid bipartisan support in the past. "Community colleges are one of the relatively few areas where there's support from both Republicans and Democrats," said Tulane economics professor Douglas N. Harris, who has previously consulted with the Biden administration on free college, in an interview with The Balance. 

To get a sense of the various arguments for and against free college, as well as the potential impacts on U.S. students and taxpayers, The Balance combed through studies investigating the design and implementation of publicly funded free tuition programs and spoke with several higher education policy experts. Here's what we learned about the current debate over free college in the U.S.—and more about how you can cut your college costs or even get free tuition through existing programs.

Key Takeaways

• Research shows free tuition programs encourage more students to attend college and increase graduation rates, which creates a better-educated workforce and higher-earning consumers who can help boost the economy. 
• Some programs are criticized for not paying students’ non-tuition expenses, not benefiting students who need assistance most, or steering students toward community college instead of four-year programs.  
• If you want to find out about free programs in your area, the University of Pennsylvania Graduate School of Education has a searchable database. You’ll find the link further down in this article. 

Before diving into the weeds of the free college debate, it's important to note that not all free college programs are alike. Most publicly funded tuition assistance programs are restricted to the first two years of study, typically at community colleges. Free college programs also vary widely in the ways they’re designed, funded, and structured:

• Last-dollar tuition-free programs : These programs cover any remaining tuition after a student has used up other financial aid , such as Pell Grants. Most state-run free college programs fall into this category. However, these programs don’t typically help with room and board or other expenses.
• First-dollar tuition-free programs : These programs pay for students' tuition upfront, although they’re much rarer than last-dollar programs. Any remaining financial aid that a student receives can then be applied to other expenses, such as books and fees. The California College Promise Grant is a first-dollar program because it waives enrollment fees for eligible students.
• Debt-free programs : These programs pay for all of a student's college expenses , including room and board, guaranteeing that they can graduate debt-free. But they’re also much less common, likely due to their expense.  

Proponents often argue that publicly funded college tuition programs eventually pay for themselves, in part by giving students the tools they need to find better jobs and earn higher incomes than they would with a high school education. The anticipated economic impact, they suggest, should help ease concerns about the costs of public financing education. Here’s a closer look at the arguments for free college programs.

A More Educated Workforce Benefits the Economy

Morley Winograd, President of the Campaign for Free College Tuition, points to the economic and tax benefits that result from the higher wages of college grads. "For government, it means more revenue," said Winograd in an interview with The Balance—the more a person earns, the more they will likely pay in taxes . In addition, "the country's economy gets better because the more skilled the workforce this country has, the better [it’s] able to compete globally." Similarly, local economies benefit from a more highly educated, better-paid workforce because higher earners have more to spend. "That's how the economy grows," Winograd explained, “by increasing disposable income."

According to Harris, the return on a government’s investment in free college can be substantial. "The additional finding of our analysis was that these things seem to consistently pass a cost-benefit analysis," he said. "The benefits seem to be at least double the cost in the long run when we look at the increased college attainment and the earnings that go along with that, relative to the cost and the additional funding and resources that go into them." 

Free College Programs Encourage More Students to Attend

Convincing students from underprivileged backgrounds to take a chance on college can be a challenge, particularly when students are worried about overextending themselves financially. But free college programs tend to have more success in persuading students to consider going, said Winograd, in part because they address students' fears that they can't afford higher education . "People who wouldn't otherwise think that they could go to college, or who think the reason they can't is [that] it's too expensive, [will] stop, pay attention, listen, decide it's an opportunity they want to take advantage of, and enroll," he said.

According to Harris, students also appear to like the certainty and simplicity of the free college message. "They didn't want to have to worry that next year they were not going to have enough money to pay their tuition bill," he said. "They don't know what their finances are going to look like a few months down the road, let alone next year, and it takes a while to get a degree. So that matters." 

Free college programs can also help send "a clear and tangible message" to students and their families that a college education is attainable for them, said Michelle Dimino, an Education Director with Third Way. This kind of messaging is especially important to first-generation and low-income students, she said. 

Free College Increases Graduation Rates and Financial Security

Free tuition programs appear to improve students’ chances of completing college. For example, Harris noted that his research found a meaningful link between free college tuition and higher graduation rates. "What we found is that it did increase college graduation at the two-year college level, so more students graduated than otherwise would have." 

Free college tuition programs also give people a better shot at living a richer, more comfortable life, say advocates. "It's almost an economic necessity to have some college education," noted Winograd. Similar to the way a high school diploma was viewed as crucial in the 20th century, employees are now learning that they need at least two years of college to compete in a global, information-driven economy. "Free community college is a way of making that happen quickly, effectively, and essentially," he explained. 

Free community college isn’t a universally popular idea. While many critics point to the potential costs of funding such programs, others identify issues with the effectiveness and fairness of current attempts to cover students’ college tuition. Here’s a closer look at the concerns about free college programs.

It Would Be Too Expensive

The idea of free community college has come under particular fire from critics who worry about the cost of social spending. Since community colleges aren't nearly as expensive as four-year colleges—often costing thousands of dollars a year—critics argue that individuals can often cover their costs using other forms of financial aid . But, they point out, community college costs would quickly add up when paid for in bulk through a free college program: Biden’s proposed free college plan would have cost $49.6 billion in its first year, according to an analysis from Georgetown University Center on Education and the Workforce. Some opponents argue that the funds could be put to better use in other ways, particularly by helping students complete their degrees.

Free College Isn't Really Free

One of the most consistent concerns that people have voiced about free college programs is that they don’t go far enough. Even if a program offers free tuition, students will need to find a way to pay for other college-related expenses , such as books, room and board, transportation, high-speed internet, and, potentially, child care. "Messaging is such a key part of this," said Dimino. Students "may apply or enroll in college, understanding it's going to be free, but then face other unexpected charges along the way." 

It's important for policymakers to consider these factors when designing future free college programs. Otherwise, Dimino and other observers fear that students could potentially wind up worse off if they enroll and invest in attending college and then are forced to drop out due to financial pressures. 

Free College Programs Don’t Help the Students Who Need Them Most

Critics point out that many free college programs are limited by a variety of quirks and restrictions, which can unintentionally shut out deserving students or reward wealthier ones. Most state-funded free college programs are last-dollar programs, which don’t kick in until students have applied financial aid to their tuition. That means these programs offer less support to low-income students who qualify for need-based aid—and more support for higher-income students who don’t.

Community College May Not Be the Best Path for All Students

Some critics also worry that all students will be encouraged to attend community college when some would have been better off at a four-year institution. Four-year colleges tend to have more resources than community colleges and can therefore offer more support to high-need students. 

In addition, some research has shown that students at community colleges are less likely to be academically successful than students at four-year colleges, said Dimino. "Statistically, the data show that there are poorer outcomes for students at community colleges […] such as lower graduation rates and sometimes low transfer rates from two- to four-year schools." 

With Congress focused on other priorities, a nationwide free college program is unlikely to happen anytime soon. However, some states and municipalities offer free tuition programs, so students may be able to access some form of free college, depending on where they live. A good resource is the University of Pennsylvania Graduate School of Education’s searchable database of Promise Programs , which lists more than 100 free community college programs, though the majority are limited to California residents.

In the meantime, school leaders and policymakers may shift their focus to other access and equity interventions for low-income students. For example, higher education experts Eileen Strempel and Stephen Handel published a book in 2021 titled "Beyond Free College: Making Higher Education Work for 21st Century Students." The book argues that policymakers should focus more strongly on college completion, not just college access. "There hasn't been enough laser-focus on how we actually get people to complete their degrees," noted Strempel in an interview with The Balance. 

Rather than just improving access for low-income college students, Strempel and Handel argue that decision-makers should instead look more closely at the social and economic issues that affect students , such as food and housing insecurity, child care, transportation, and personal technology. For example, "If you don't have a computer, you don't have access to your education anymore," said Strempel. "It's like today's pencil."

Saving money on college costs can be challenging, but you can take steps to reduce your cost of living. For example, if you're interested in a college but haven't yet enrolled, pay close attention to where it's located and how much residents typically pay for major expenses, such as housing, utilities, and food. If the college is located in a high-cost area, it could be tough to justify the living expenses you'll incur. Similarly, if you plan to commute, take the time to check gas or public transportation prices and calculate how much you'll likely have to spend per month to go to and from campus several times a week. 

Now that more colleges offer classes online, it may also be worth looking at lower-cost programs in areas that are farther from where you live, particularly if they allow you to graduate without setting foot on campus. Also, check out state and federal financial aid programs that can help you slim down your expenses, or, in some cases, pay for them completely. Finally, look into need-based and merit-based grants and scholarships that can help you cover even more of your expenses. Also, consider applying to no-loan colleges , which promise to help students graduate without going into debt.

Should community college be free?

It’s a big question with varying viewpoints. Supporters of free community college cite the economic contributions of a more educated workforce and the individual benefit of financial security, while critics caution against the potential expense and the inefficiency of last-dollar free college programs. 

What states offer free college?

More than 30 states offer some type of tuition-free college program, including Arkansas, California, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Indiana, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Missouri, Montana, Michigan, Nevada, New York, Oklahoma, Oregon, Rhode Island, Tennessee, Virginia, and Washington State. The University of Pennsylvania Graduate School of Education lists over 100 last-dollar community college programs and 16 first-dollar community college programs, though the majority are limited to California residents.

Is there a free college?

There is no such thing as a truly free college education. But some colleges offer free tuition programs for students, and more than 30 states offer some type of tuition-free college program. In addition, students may also want to check out employer-based programs. A number of big employers now offer to pay for their employees' college tuition . Finally, some students may qualify for enough financial aid or scholarships to cover most of their college costs.

Scholarships360. " Which States Offer Tuition-Free Community College? "

The White House. “ Build Back Better Framework ,” see “Bringing Down Costs, Reducing Inflationary Pressures, and Strengthening the Middle Class.”

The White House. “ Fact Sheet: How the Build Back Better Plan Will Create a Better Future for Young Americans ,” see “Education and Workforce Opportunities.”

Coast Community College District. “ California College Promise Grant .”

Georgetown University Center on Education and the Workforce. “ The Dollars and Cents of Free College ,” see “Biden’s Free College Plan Would Pay for Itself Within 10 Years.”

Third Way. “ Why Free College Could Increase Inequality .”

Georgetown University Center on Education and the Workforce. “ The Dollars and Cents of Free College ,” see “Free-College Programs Have Different Effects on Race and Class Equity.”

University of Pennsylvania Graduate School of Education. “ College Promise Programs: A Comprehensive Catalog of College Promise Programs in the United States .”

Why Education Should Be Free: Exploring the Benefits for a Progressive Society

Written by Dan

Last updated February 13, 2024

The question of whether education, particularly higher education, should be free is a continuing debate marked by a multitude of opinions and perspectives.

Education stands as one of the most powerful tools for personal and societal advancement, and making it accessible to all could have profound impacts on a nation’s economic growth and social fabric.

Proponents of tuition-free education argue that it could create a better-educated workforce, improve the livelihoods of individuals, and contribute to overall economic prosperity.

However, the implementation of such a system carries complexity and considerations that spark considerable discourse among policymakers, educators, and the public.

Related : For more, check out our article on  The #1 Problem In Education  here.

Within the debate on free education lies a range of considerations, including the significant economic benefits it might confer.

A well-educated populace can be the driving force behind innovation, entrepreneurship, and a competitive global stance, according to research.

Moreover, social and cultural benefits are also cited by advocates, who see free higher education as a stepping stone towards greater societal well-being and equality.

Nevertheless, the challenges in implementing free higher education often center around fiscal sustainability, the potential for increased taxes, and the restructuring of existing educational frameworks.

Table of Contents

Key Takeaways

• Free higher education could serve as a critical driver of economic growth and innovation.
• It may contribute to social equality and cultural enrichment across communities.
• Implementation of tuition-free higher education requires careful consideration of economic and structural challenges.

Related : For more, check out our article on  AI In Education  here.

The Economic Benefits of Free Education

Free education carries the potential for significant economic impact, notably by fostering a more qualified workforce and alleviating financial strains associated with higher education.

Boosting the Workforce with Skilled Workers

Free education initiatives can lead to a rise in college enrollment and graduation rates, as seen in various studies and practical implementations.

This translates into a larger pool of skilled workers entering the workforce, which is critical for the sustained growth of the economy. With more educated individuals, industries can innovate faster and remain competitive on a global scale.

The subsequent increase in productivity and creative problem-solving bolsters the country’s economic profile.

Reducing Student Loan Debt and Financial Insecurity

One of the most immediate effects of tuition-free education is the reduction of student loan debt . Students who graduate without the burden of debt have more financial freedom and security, enabling them to contribute economically through higher consumer spending and investments.

This financial relief also means that graduates can potentially enter the housing market earlier and save for retirement, both of which are beneficial for long-term economic stability.

Reducing this financial insecurity not only benefits individual lives but also creates a positive ripple effect throughout the economy.

Related : For more, check out our article on  Teaching For Understanding  here.

Social and Cultural Impacts

Free education stands as a cornerstone for a more equitable society, providing a foundation for individuals to reach their full potential without the barrier of cost.

It fosters an inclusive culture where access to knowledge and the ability to contribute meaningfully to society are viewed as inalienable rights.

Creating Equality and Expanding Choices

Free education mitigates the socioeconomic disparities that often dictate the quality and level of education one can attain.

When tuition fees are eliminated, individuals from lower-income families are afforded the same educational opportunities as their wealthier counterparts, leading to a more level playing field .

Expanding educational access enables all members of society to pursue a wider array of careers and life paths, broadening personal choices and promoting a diverse workforce.

Free Education as a Human Right

Recognizing education as a human right underpins the movement for free education. Human Rights Watch emphasizes that all children should have access to a quality, inclusive, and free education.

This aligns with international agreements and the belief that education is not a privilege but a right that should be safeguarded for all, regardless of one’s socioeconomic status.

Redistributions within society can function to finance the institutions necessary to uphold this right, leading to long-term cultural and social benefits.

Challenges and Considerations for Implementation

Implementing free education systems presents a complex interplay of economic and academic factors. Policymakers must confront these critical issues to develop sustainable and effective programs.

Balancing Funding and Taxpayer Impact

Funding for free education programs primarily depends on the allocation of government resources, which often requires tax adjustments .

Legislators need to strike a balance between providing sufficient funding for education and maintaining a level of taxation that does not overburden the taxpayers .

Studies like those from The Balance provide insight into the economic implications, indicating a need for careful analysis to avoid unintended financial consequences.

Ensuring Quality in Free Higher Education Programs

Merit and quality assurance become paramount in free college programs to ensure that the value of education does not diminish. Programs need structured oversight and performance metrics to maintain high academic standards.

Free college systems, by extending access, may risk over-enrollment, which can strain resources and reduce educational quality if not managed correctly.

Global Perspectives and Trends in Free Education

In the realm of education, several countries have adopted policies to make learning accessible at no cost to the student. These efforts often aim to enhance social mobility and create a more educated workforce.

Case Studies: Argentina and Sweden

Argentina has long upheld the principle of free university education for its citizens. Public universities in Argentina do not charge tuition fees for undergraduate courses, emphasizing the country’s commitment to accessible education.

This policy supports a key tenet of social justice, allowing a wide range of individuals to pursue higher education regardless of their financial situation.

In comparison, Sweden represents a prime example of advanced free education within Europe. Swedish universities offer free education not only to Swedish students but also to those from other countries within the European Union (EU).

For Swedes, this extends to include secondary education, which is also offered at no cost. Sweden’s approach exemplifies a commitment to educational equality and a well-informed citizenry.

International Approaches to Tuition-Free College

Examining the broader international landscape , there are diverse approaches to implementing tuition-free higher education.

For instance, some European countries like Spain have not entirely eliminated tuition fees but have kept them relatively low compared to the global average. These measures still align with the overarching goal of making education more accessible.

In contrast, there have been discussions and proposals in the United States about adopting tuition-free college programs, reflecting a growing global trend.

While the United States has not federally mandated free college education, there are initiatives, such as the Promise Programs, that offer tuition-free community college to eligible students in certain states, showcasing a step towards more inclusive educational opportunities.

Policy and Politics of Tuition-Free Education

The debate surrounding tuition-free education encompasses a complex interplay of bipartisan support and legislative efforts, with community colleges frequently at the policy’s epicenter.

Both ideological and financial considerations shape the trajectory of higher education policy in this context.

Bipartisan Support and Political Challenges

Bipartisan support for tuition-free education emerges from a recognition of community colleges as vital access points for higher education, particularly for lower-income families.

Initiatives such as the College Promise campaign reflect this shared commitment to removing economic barriers to education. However, political challenges persist, with Republicans often skeptical about the long-term feasibility and impact on the federal budget.

Such divisions underscore the politicized nature of the education discourse, situating it as a central issue in policy-making endeavors.

Legislative Framework and Higher Education Policy

The legislative framework for tuition-free education gained momentum under President Biden with the introduction of the American Families Plan .

This plan proposed substantial investments in higher education, particularly aimed at bolstering the role of community colleges. Central to this policy is the pledge to cover up to two years of tuition for eligible students.

The proposal reflects a significant step in reimagining higher education policy, though it requires navigating the intricacies of legislative procedures and fiscally conservative opposition to translate into actionable policy.

Frequently Asked Questions

This section addresses common queries regarding the prospect of free college education, its impact, and practical considerations for implementation.

What are the most compelling arguments for making college education free?

The most compelling arguments for tuition-free college highlight the removal of financial barriers, potential to increase social mobility, and a long-term investment in a more educated workforce , which can lead to economic growth.

How could the government implement free education policies without sacrificing quality?

To implement free education without compromising quality, governments need to ensure sustainable funding, invest in faculty, and enable effective administration. Such measures aim to maintain high standards while extending access.

In countries with free college education, what has been the impact on their economies and societies?

Countries with free college education have observed various impacts, including a more educated populace , increased rates of innovation, and in some instances, stronger economic growth due to a skilled workforce.

How does free education affect the accessibility and inclusivity of higher education?

Free education enhances accessibility and inclusivity by leveling the educational playing field, allowing students from all socioeconomic backgrounds to pursue higher education regardless of their financial capability.

What potential downsides exist to providing free college education to all students?

Potential downsides include the strain on governmental budgets, the risk of oversaturating certain job markets, and the possibility that the value of a degree may diminish if too many people obtain one without a corresponding increase in jobs requiring higher education.

How might free education be funded, and what are the financial implications for taxpayers?

Free education would likely be funded through taxation, and its financial implications for taxpayers could range from increased taxes to reprioritization of existing budget funds. The scale of any potential tax increase would depend on the cost of the education programs and the economic benefits they’re anticipated to produce.

Related Posts

About The Author

I'm Dan Higgins, one of the faces behind The Teaching Couple. With 15 years in the education sector and a decade as a teacher, I've witnessed the highs and lows of school life. Over the years, my passion for supporting fellow teachers and making school more bearable has grown. The Teaching Couple is my platform to share strategies, tips, and insights from my journey. Together, we can shape a better school experience for all.

Join our email list to receive the latest updates.

Add your form here

Free college for all Americans? Yes, but not too much

Subscribe to the brown center on education policy newsletter, dick startz dick startz professor of economics - university of california, santa barbara @profitofed.

July 22, 2019

Promising free college has obvious political attraction for presidential candidates. From my perspective, free college is the right idea, but some of the promises go too far; in fact, exactly twice too far. There is a very strong argument for promising two years “free” at public colleges; the argument for a four-year free ride—not so much.

In a nutshell, my argument is that America has long supported free K-12 education and that two years of college is pretty much what K-12 used to be, with most Americans now obtaining at least some college education. For most people, getting some college is the key to the middle-class—creating a case for public support during the first two years after high school.

Douglas Harris has a great Chalkboard post that will bring you up to date on what candidates have said, and will give you many of the pros and cons for various higher education proposals. Harris also talks about popular support for different proposals in another Chalkboard post . Here, I’m going to stick to the narrower question of why paying for two years of public college is the right goal.

In the picture that follows I present educational attainment numbers for the American population from 1950 through the most current data. I’ve divided the population into those with a high school education or less, colored in red, those with some college but less than four years, blue, and those with four or more years of college, colored in green. (The category “some college” includes vocational training such as certificate programs at community colleges as well as more purely academic courses.

The vertical axis shows the fraction of the population with a given educational attainment—categories are stacked at each point in time to sum to 100%.

You can see that in the early post-war years, most Americans had no more than a high school education. Today the majority has picked up at least some college. I’ve also drawn in a line at the 50% point on the theory that the middle is “middle class.” Up until about 1990, the median American had a high school education or less. That’s fallen to about a third, and the median American now has some college. So “some college” has replaced high school or less as the standard educational attainment. If it made sense in the past to provide free public education through high school, then doing the equivalent today means paying for some level of college. Note that the green (4+ years of college) area is still way, way above the 50% line. Only about 30% of the population currently attains that much education. So such an appeal to the past does not provide an argument for four years of free college.

There are many motivations for increasing education, but probably the strongest is that it leads to better jobs and higher incomes. The next figure links educational attainment to income, plotting median income in each educational group against the overall national income distribution. In “the old days,” the median person in both the high school or less and the some college categories earned near the middle of the national income distribution. That’s still true for “some college.” The middle person with some college education gets to be right in the middle of the national income distribution. But getting to the middle is now much more difficult for those in the “high school or less” category. The middle person in the bottom group reaches just above the bottom third of the national income distribution. So in terms of income, “some college” has replaced “high school or less” as the middle-class norm.

Some presidential candidates propose free community college, others advocate that all public college should be free. One reaction to the latter position is that we shouldn’t be subsidizing college graduates as they typically end up with higher incomes than the rest of the population. Look at the green line in the figure above. Not only does the average person with four or more years of college have a higher income than most people—they have a much higher income. You can argue that the 70th percentile of income is still middle class. (In the United States, it seems that everyone below the top 0.1% thinks of themselves as being in the middle class.) But the fact is that the income in the top educational attainment group is a lot higher.

The argument that “some college” is the new “high school” and should be similarly free makes sense to me, but this logic doesn’t extend to a free ride for four years.

Data from census and American Community Survey from IPUMS USA, University of Minnesota, www.ipums.org.

Higher Education

Governance Studies

Brown Center on Education Policy

Annelies Goger, Katherine Caves, Hollis Salway

May 16, 2024

Sofoklis Goulas, Isabelle Pula

Melissa Kay Diliberti, Elizabeth D. Steiner, Ashley Woo

• Follow us on Facebook
• Follow us on Twitter
• Criminal Justice
• Environment
• Politics & Government
• Race & Gender

Expert Commentary

The pros and cons of ‘free college’ and ‘college promise’ programs: What the research says

We've gathered and summarized a sampling of research to help journalists understand the implications and impacts of “free college,” “tuition-free” and “college promise” programs.

Republish this article

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License .

by Denise-Marie Ordway, The Journalist's Resource October 8, 2019

This <a target="_blank" href="https://journalistsresource.org/economics/free-college-promise-tuition-research/">article</a> first appeared on <a target="_blank" href="https://journalistsresource.org">The Journalist's Resource</a> and is republished here under a Creative Commons license.<img src="https://journalistsresource.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/cropped-jr-favicon-150x150.png" style="width:1em;height:1em;margin-left:10px;">

More than 19.9 million students are taking classes at colleges and universities across the United States this semester, up from 14.9 million two decades ago, according to the National Center for Education Statistics.

As enrollment has swelled, so has the price of college. The average combined cost of undergraduate tuition, fees, room and board at four-year schools has doubled since 2000 . The average cost of attendance for full-time students living on campus at an in-state, public college or university during the 2017-18 academic year totaled $24,320 . It totaled $50,338 at private institutions.

Heavy student debt loads created America’s student loan crisis. A recent report from the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis shows that outstanding student loan debt topped $1.6 trillion in the U.S. during the second quarter of 2019.

State and federal lawmakers and 2020 presidential candidates have put forward a range of plans aimed at reducing college costs to curb student debt and encourage more Americans to pursue degrees. Most programs and proposals focus on eliminating tuition at community colleges and state universities. But some also aim to cover educational costs such as mandatory student fees, which schools charge to help pay for student events, health services and other campus offerings.

These initiatives often are referred to as “free college” — even when they only cover tuition — and as “tuition-free” programs. A number of cities, counties and states have introduced “college promise” programs, which also pay students’ tuition and, sometimes, other expenses at two- and four-year institutions.

Recent research indicates there are hundreds of college promise programs in the U.S. Some are small, serving students in a city or public school district. Others are open to students across a state. In 2015, Tennessee became the first state in the country to offer free tuition at all of its community colleges and technical schools with its Tennessee Promise Scholarship . Earlier this month, officials in San Antonio announced AlamoPROMISE , which will allow students who graduate from one of 25 local high schools to receive 60 credits worth of free tuition at five area community colleges starting in fall 2020.

New York’s Excelsior Scholarship , launched in 2017, is the nation’s first statewide program to provide free tuition at state-funded two- and four-year colleges. The program is open to New York residents who have a household income of $125,000 or less and agree to live and work in New York for the same amount of time they receive the scholarship.

To help journalists understand the implications and impacts of these efforts, we’ve gathered and summarized a sampling of research on “free college,” “tuition-free” and “college promise” programs. Because most programs are relatively new, scholars are continuing to study them. We will add new research to this collection as it is published or released.

Also check out these five tips for reporting on free college and college promise programs from Laura Perna, an education professor at the University of Pennsylvania who’s also executive director of its Alliance for Higher Education and Democracy.

Merit Aid, College Quality, and College Completion: Massachusetts’ Adams Scholarship as an In-Kind Subsidy Cohodes, Sarah R; Goodman, Joshua S. American Economic Journal: Applied Economics , 2014.

This study examines a Massachusetts program that offers tuition waivers to high-achieving students who graduated from Massachusetts public high schools. The waivers, a key component of the John and Abigail Adams Scholarship Program , cover the cost of tuition for up to eight semesters at any Massachusetts state college or university.

The key takeaway: While the scholarship induced some of these students to remain in Massachusetts for college — a primary goal of the program — it reduced college completion rates, find the authors, Sarah Cohodes , an associate professor of economics and education at Teachers College, Columbia University, and Joshua Goodman , an associate professor of economics at Brandeis University. After the program started, about 200 fewer Massachusetts high school graduates per year earned college degrees.

Cohodes and Goodman find that each scholarship, valued at less than $7,000, encouraged students with high test scores to attend in-state public colleges and universities, which “were of lower quality than the average alternative available to such students.” Going to a lower quality school is associated with higher odds of dropping out, possibly because public institutions spend substantially less on instruction than private, non-profit colleges, the authors suggest. They analyzed a variety of data on Massachusetts students who graduated high school between 2005 and 2008, tracking them through 2012.

“The scholarship, though relatively small in monetary value, induced substantial changes in college choice,” Cohodes and Goodman write. “College completion rates decreased only for those subsets of students forgoing the opportunity to attend higher quality colleges when accepting the scholarship. We describe the magnitude of this response as remarkable because the value of the scholarship is dwarfed by estimates of the forgone earnings of attending a lower quality college or failing to graduate.”

Free Tuition and College Enrollment: Evidence from New York’s Excelsior Program Nguyen, Hieu. Education Economics , 2019.

New York’s Excelsior Scholarship — the nation’s first statewide “free college” initiative — has had a “negligible” effect on undergraduate enrollment in four-year colleges in the state, finds Hieu Nguyen , a researcher at the University of Tennessee, Knoxville.

Nguyen examined enrollment at public and private higher education institutions to gauge how students are responding to the initiative, launched in 2017 with the goal of helping more New York residents go to college. He looked at full-time undergraduate enrollment in the fall semesters between 2010 and 2017. He finds that even though students were offered free tuition, there was no statistically significant change in enrollment.

Nguyen indicates the program’s requirements might have discouraged some students from participating. “Apart from having to meet the state residency requirement to be eligible for the program, Excelsior recipients are expected to stay and work within the boundary of the state for the same number of years for which they receive the financial aid,” he explains in the paper. “While this constraint can be interpreted as fairly lax and reasonable by some, it might be viewed by others as too stringent, considering that New York has a high average cost of living relative to other states, and that Excelsior scholars are only awarded up to $5,500 per year after all other aid resources are exhausted.”

He notes that the Excelsior Scholarship is unlikely to change enrollment patterns among low-income students, whose tuition often is covered by other forms of financial aid such as federal Pell grants. Nguyen also notes the Excelsior program lacks a coaching component — unlike the Tennessee Promise program, which uses “community coaches” to help guide high school students toward graduation and immediately into college.

Understanding the Promise: A Typology of State and Local College Promise Programs Perna, Laura W.; Leigh, Elaine W. Educational Researcher , 2018.

This academic paper offers a detailed look at the characteristics of college promise programs and introduces a framework for classifying them. The researchers analyzed 289 programs operating in the U.S. in fall 2016 and found they varied in numerous ways, including in their eligibility requirements, the types of costs covered, the structure of financial awards, the length of time students can receive the awards, and the number and types of higher education institutions that participate in the program.

“Perhaps most importantly, the analyses underscore the need for policymakers, practitioners, and researchers to recognize the diversity of approaches that is masked by the college promise label before drawing conclusions about the transferability of findings about one college promise program to another,” write the researchers, Laura W. Perna and Elaine W. Leigh of the University of Pennsylvania.

Perna and Leigh find that college promise programs have these features in common:

• They aim to boost higher education attainment.
• They offer a financial award to eligible students.
• They have a place-based requirement such as residing in a specific city or state or attending a certain school or group of schools.
• They tend to target the traditional college-age population.

Some other findings:

• College promise programs exist nationwide, but the largest share of those that were analyzed — 37% — are in the South. A quarter are in the Midwest while 24% operate in the western U.S. and 14% are in the Northeast.
• Just over half of the college promise programs are state-sponsored. More than three-quarters of state-sponsored programs require award recipients to live in the state for a year. Most — 80% — allow students to attend a two-year or four-year school.
• Of those not sponsored by a state, 23% target students in a specific county, 24% target a school district and 11% target a city. More than half of programs that are not state-sponsored offer awards only to two-year colleges.
• Of the programs examined, 28% cover full tuition and take a “last dollar” approach, meaning they cover the amount of tuition left over after a student’s grants, scholarships and other financial aid money are applied. Meanwhile, 12% cover the full cost of tuition on a “first dollar” basis, meaning the award is applied first, allowing students to use other forms of financial aid to pay for other education-related expenses such as books, housing and food .

About The Author

Denise-Marie Ordway

What Does Free College Really Mean?

• Posted January 17, 2017
• By Casey Bayer

Free college sounds great as an idea, but how do states actually finance it?

Most states propose to fund free college plans as “last-dollar” scholarships. This means that the state commits to covering unmet financial aid after all other eligible funds — such as the federal Pell grant — are exhausted. Additionally, most plans cover tuition and fees but not additional expenses such as room and board or textbooks.

This “last-dollar” approach helps keeps program costs low, but it is only possible because of the generosity of existing financial aid programs.

Why is free college appealing from a state’s perspective?

College is expensive, and the process of applying for and receiving financial is complicated and stressful. Many families do not realize that they will likely pay only a fraction of the sticker price of college. In contrast to the byzantine system of federal and state financial aid programs, free college is a very easy concept to understand.

The political appeal is obvious as well. Nearly all families want their children to attend college, yet they are deeply concerned about whether they can afford it. Policymakers who commit to providing “free college” are easing the minds of their constituents, even those who have very young children and thus are many years away from the actual expense.

What are some of the concerns around free college tuition plans?

I support the goal of free college. More than ever, a college degree is a ticket to the middle class. The question is how to get there.

One concern — raised by others such as Matt Chingos at the Urban Institute — is that most of the benefits of free college plans accrue to higher-income families. The reason goes back again to the “last dollar” design. Low-income students already receive a lot of need-based financial aid from the federal government. Many states also already have need-based aid programs. The additional value of a last dollar scholarship is relatively low for these students — they are already paying close to zero in tuition and fees. In contrast, families that make too much money to be eligible for need-based programs will see a much larger price reduction from free college. This is not a bad thing! College is a financial burden for nearly every family. But it is worth clarifying that the biggest beneficiaries of free college plans are usually middle-class families.

A second more fundamental concern is about the single-minded focus on costs. The value of a college degree depends on its price, but also on the quality of the education itself — the benefits as well as the costs. My main concern with free college plans is that focusing solely on college costs will push us toward an outcome where college is cheap but also relatively low quality. If you lower the price of college to zero, you are going to get a lot more students enrolling. Absent significant increases in state funding for higher education, the same pool of resources will then be spread across many more students. This could lead to larger classes, less guidance and mentoring, and a generally lower quality experience. It is not at all clear that lower prices and lower levels of spending will be a good thing overall for students.

It sounds like you are saying that prices don’t matter.

Not at all. Lower prices are always better from the student’s perspective! On the other hand, state higher education budgets are under enormous pressure. My concern is that states will pay for “free college” by cutting the subsidies that they currently send directly to the public colleges in the state. This raises the question: Is it better to subsidize education on the supply side (by funding public institutions out of tax revenues) or on the demand side (by giving financial aid to students directly)?

Let me make this very specific. Every public college in the U.S. currently spends more on a student’s education than they charge in tuition. For example, a public university might charge $10,000 per year in tuition and fees but actually spend $20,000 per student. The difference comes mostly from subsidies — called appropriations — coming directly from state taxpayers through the legislature. Suppose an extra $1,000 per student suddenly becomes available. The university has two choices. First, they can pass that $1,000 on to the student as a price reduction — charging $9,000 per year and still spending $20,000. Alternatively, they can keep the price at $10,000 but now spend $21,000 per student, with the extra money going to things like smaller classes, more student advising and mentoring, or perhaps climbing walls and nap pods.

Which choice will do more to help a student complete their college degree? Free college — and most of the existing federal financial aid system — assumes that price reduction is most important. But a growing body of work — including a recent paper I’ve written with Chris Walters — suggests that spending may be a more important factor for degree attainment.

We see this is a recent study of the Adams scholarship in Massachusetts. The Adams scholarship provided four years of tuition and fees in a Massachusetts public college or university to students who met a minimum MCAS score standard. The study found that these students took up the offer of “free college,” opting to attend a Massachusetts public institution instead of a private college. Strikingly, the authors found that students who took up the Adams scholarship were less likely to graduate from college. They show persuasively that this is due to differences in college quality. The private colleges had higher levels of per-student spending and higher graduation rates, but students were lured to lower quality public institutions by the offer of “free college.”

I am not saying that “free college” plans will lower graduation rates. In particular, there are many more high-quality private institutions in Massachusetts than elsewhere in the U.S. But this study underscores the perils of a singular focus on lowering costs. College quality matters, and public policy ought to focus equally on improving and maintaining quality so that more students can ultimately earn a degree and go on to succeed in the labor market and in life.

The latest research, perspectives, and highlights from the Harvard Graduate School of Education

Related Articles

Can School Counselors Help Students with "FAFSA Fiasco"?

Support for low-income prospective college students and their families more crucial than ever during troubled federal financial aid rollout   

Tips for Navigating Financial Aid

The first in our series on how students, families, and colleges can find their way through the government’s “FAFSA Fiasco”

How to Survive Financial Aid Delays and Avoid Summer Melt

A pre-matriculation checklist can help high school seniors persist with their college dreams 

RSS feed Facebook Twitter   Donate Share -->

• News & blog
• Monitoring guide
• Education as a right
• United Nations
• Humanitarian Law
• International Human Rights Mechanisms
• Inter-American
• Regional Human Rights Mechanisms
• What information to look at
• Where to find information
• Comparative Table on Minimum Age Legislation
• Adult education & learning
• Education 2030
• Education Financing
• Education in Emergencies
• Educational Freedoms
• Early Childhood Care and Education

Free Education

• Higher education
• Technology in education
• Justiciability
• Marginalised Groups
• Minimum Age
• Privatisation of Education
• Quality Education
• News and blog

You are here

Un_523257_classrom_timor.jpg.

According to international human rights law, primary education shall be compulsory and free of charge. Secondary and higher education shall be made progressively free of charge.

Free primary education is fundamental in guaranteeing everyone has access to education. However, in many developing countries, families often cannot afford to send their children to school, leaving millions of children of school-age deprived of education. Despite international obligations, some states keep on imposing fees to access primary education. In addition, there are often indirect costs associated with education, such as for school books, uniform or travel, that prevent children from low-income families accessing school.

Financial difficulties states may face cannot relieve them of their obligation to guarantee free primary education. If a state is unable to secure compulsory primary education, free of charge, when it ratifies the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR, 1966), it still has the immediate obligation, within two years, to work out and adopt a detailed plan of action for its progressive implementation, within a reasonable numbers of years, to be fixed in the plan (ICESCR, Article 14). For more information, see General Comment 11  (1999) of the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights.

'Progressive introduction of free education' means that while states must prioritise the provision of free primary education, they also have an obligation to take concrete steps towards achieving free secondary and higher education ( General Comment 13 of the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, 1999: Para. 14).

• Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948, Article 26)
• International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (1966, Articles 13 and 14)
• Convention on the Rights of the Child  (1982, Article 28)
• Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women  (1979, Article 10)
• Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (2006, Article 24)
• UNESCO Convention against Discrimination in Education  (1960, Articles 4)
• ILO Worst Forms of Child Labour Convention (1999, Preamble, Articles 7 and 8)
• African Charter on the Rights and Welfare of the Child (1990, Article 11)
• African Youth Charter (2006, Articles 13 and 16)
• Charter of the Organisation of American States (1967, Article 49)
• Additional Protocol to the American Convention on Human Rights, Protocol of San Salvador (1988, Article 13)
• Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union  (2000, Article 14)
• European Social Charter  (revised) (1996, Articles 10 and 17)
• Arab Charter on Human Rights  (2004, Article 41)
• ASEAN Human Rights Declaration (2012, Article 31)

For more details, see International Instruments - Free and Compulsory Education

The following case-law on free education includes decisions of national, regional and international courts as well as decisions from national administrative bodies, national human rights institutions and international human rights bodies.

Claim of unconstitutionality against article 183 of the General Education Law (Colombia Constitutional Court; 2010)

Other issues.

• Higher Education

Don’t Ruin College by Making It Free

The 2020 Democratic primary has changed the debate on higher education in the United States. When Senator Bernie Sanders first proposed making public college free during his 2016 campaign, most commentators, myself included, dismissed the idea as radical and unrealistic, along with his candidacy.

Just four years later, Sanders is a serious contender for the nomination and many of the other Democrats also propose some form of “free college.” The idea has taken hold more quickly than many expected—but will it work? My answer: yes. But not well. In fact, free college could be the fastest way to destroy precisely what makes higher education in this country exceptional. And there are better ways to achieve its goal of removing the economic barriers to college.

The appeal of free college is clear. Americans have long embraced the college degree as an important mechanism for social mobility, but the price tag has increasingly put higher education out of reach for many. Making public college free would ensure that everyone could afford this ticket to prosperity, and in that sense, would deliver a piece of the American dream. Frankly, it’s hard to argue that this would be a bad thing.

But college is already free to the lowest-income students, who benefit from generous state and federal grants, as well as private scholarships from their college or university. According to a recent Urban Institute report , around 27% of students who are currently enrolled in college do not face any cost for tuition or fees. Additional spending to make college universally free will necessarily flow to more well-off students who weren’t already benefiting from the existing means-tested programs.

Despite the drawbacks of this seemingly unprogressive approach, “universality” does also offer some distinct advantages relative to means-tested aid. First, the administration of a means-tested financial aid program is expensive, both for individual students proving their eligibility and for the government offices that exist solely to review reams of paperwork and disburse aid. Doing away with means testing could generate savings in administrative costs, which would offset at least some of the revenue lost from eliminating tuition.

Another, and less obvious, benefit of free college is that it could potentially eliminate the information barrier that currently keeps many disadvantaged students from even applying to college. Despite the fact that nearly one-third of students already attend college for “free,” many assume that higher education is out of reach. These potential college students are victims of the opaque structure of our college application and pricing system. Students considering college generally need to apply, then wait months before learning how much they’ll receive in aid. The message that “college is free” would encourage more people to apply than would have otherwise, bringing down the economic barrier to education—and that’s a good thing.

But do these benefits outweigh the tremendous cost? Many on the right worry about the economic weight of a free-college regime. It’s difficult to estimate how much it would cost, but according to Sanders , even just to replace the current revenue collected from public college tuition, we’d need to come up with $70 billion per year. The real cost would undoubtedly be higher due to increased enrollment. To put that in perspective, the same $70 billion would allow the U.S. to double our current spending on SNAP (Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program) and related programs aimed at eliminating hunger.

While the financial burden should be taken seriously, we stand to lose far more than money in implementing free college. In fact, the fiscal cost pales in comparison to the threats to quality and innovation.

In the current system, colleges operate in a market of sorts, albeit a highly regulated and subsidized one. Colleges are competing for students and the tuition dollars that come with them. As a result, we’ve seen the introduction of services like online coursework, competency-based education, which appeals to working adults, and even dramatic alternatives like coding bootcamps. The result of these changes is that higher education is more diverse than ever before. These innovations have expanded access to college to populations that weren’t served, or weren’t served well, by the traditional college model.

Some innovations, like the rise of for-profit colleges, haven’t served all students well. But we shouldn’t write off all innovation to protect against potential abuses. Better to embrace smart oversight while maintaining the incentives for colleges to innovate.

A free college regime would dampen the market forces that encouraged these innovations. The pull of “free” would divert students away from private colleges and training programs and into the public options.

Institutions in the public sector generally have less incentive to innovate because they have less to gain by improvements in quality and less to lose from falling short. For example, private colleges that don’t deliver for their students will have to close their doors. That’s a risk that public colleges just don’t face. The public colleges thus don’t have the same need to think of new ways to deliver education more effectively or efficiently. Sure, some public colleges consolidate campuses, and others innovate (think of Arizona State University), but those are exceptions.

Even the most generous free college regime couldn’t avoid these problems, because they are not a question of funding. The shift in incentives inherent in a public takeover would necessarily threaten innovation and quality.

Just because free college would cause more harm than good, though, doesn’t mean the status quo is the best way forward. The status quo was designed to deliver the most aid to the neediest students. That’s hard to beat—but there is room for improvement.

Tuition isn’t the only, or even the most important, barrier to enrollment for low-income students. The rest of life’s expenses—food, clothing, housing, transportation—for oneself, and often a family, are what stand in the way between many young people and a degree. For them, free college isn’t enough. Rather than make college free for all, those funds should be spent to offset these non-tuition costs for the poorest students through expanded Pell Grants, the federal need-based grant program.

For those worried about the growing burden of student debt, a subtle change in that same program could be a game-changer. By moving grant eligibility up earlier in the course of college enrollment, we could substantially reduce the risk of attending college. Those who struggle most with unaffordable student loans are those who take on debt but don’t achieve a degree. By moving grant-based support into the early years of college, we would allow students at all income levels to try college with less financial risk.

Simply adding more money won’t eliminate the information barrier that stands between many low-income students and college enrollment. A better idea would be to automate the process of federal financial aid so that grant awards and loan eligibility can be retrieved from a website, perhaps hosted by the IRS, at any time. This might require some tweaks in how eligibility is determined, but would be worth the cost to ensure that every potential college student understands exactly what they can expect to spend on a degree. Some students would be surprised to find that “free college” has been true for them all along.

Yes, free college would work, insofar as it would make college free. While this has its merits, its laudable goals are ultimately outweighed by the harm it would do to higher education in the U.S. We should aim to reduce the economic barriers to college while maintaining the market structure that drives the quality and innovation that make our system exceptional.

Beth Akers is a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute and co-author of Game of Loans: The Rhetoric and Reality of Student Debt .

Last Updated

License this Content

Latest Issue

Spring 2024.

Vol. 24, No. 2

We Recommend You Read

Sanders Outdoes Warren in Tapping Voter Anger

by Matt Dickinson

In the News: Skipping Free College and Federal Loans

by Education Next

Can We Design Student Loan Forgiveness to Target Low-Income Families?

by Matthew M. Chingos

From virtual tutors to accessible textbooks: 5 ways AI is transforming education

AI is transforming education Image:  Unsplash/Compare Fibre

.chakra .wef-1c7l3mo{-webkit-transition:all 0.15s ease-out;transition:all 0.15s ease-out;cursor:pointer;-webkit-text-decoration:none;text-decoration:none;outline:none;color:inherit;}.chakra .wef-1c7l3mo:hover,.chakra .wef-1c7l3mo[data-hover]{-webkit-text-decoration:underline;text-decoration:underline;}.chakra .wef-1c7l3mo:focus,.chakra .wef-1c7l3mo[data-focus]{box-shadow:0 0 0 3px rgba(168,203,251,0.5);} Andrea Willige

.chakra .wef-1nk5u5d{margin-top:16px;margin-bottom:16px;line-height:1.388;color:#2846F8;font-size:1.25rem;}@media screen and (min-width:56.5rem){.chakra .wef-1nk5u5d{font-size:1.125rem;}} Get involved .chakra .wef-9dduvl{margin-top:16px;margin-bottom:16px;line-height:1.388;font-size:1.25rem;}@media screen and (min-width:56.5rem){.chakra .wef-9dduvl{font-size:1.125rem;}} with our crowdsourced digital platform to deliver impact at scale

Stay up to date:, horizon scan: nita farahany.

• Artificial intelligence (AI) holds great potential for addressing the gaps global education systems are struggling with, a new report from the World Economic Forum finds.
• Global education could benefit from AI's ability to overcome technology and financial divides and create more personalized learning approaches.
• Educators around the world have already taken to AI, with successful pilot projects and wider rollouts underway.

“About 220 million children are out of school at the moment. About seven out of ten children in least developed economies, at the end of grade four, cannot read one simple sentence or write a simple paragraph,” Laura Frigenti, CEO of the Global Partnership for Education, told the World Economic Forum.

“Not only do we have a large number of children that are out of school and have to be brought back into the system, but those who are in school are obviously not learning the skills that will make it possible for them to have a successful transition into the labour market.”

Frigenti described the situation as a “recipe for disaster”.

A new report from the Forum looks at how artificial Intelligence (AI) can help education systems fill these and other gaps.

Shaping the Future of Learning: The Role of AI in Education 4.0 highlights the potential of the technology to support teachers by automating administrative tasks and allowing them to spend more time with students as a result.

Have you read?

The future of learning: how ai is revolutionizing education 4.0, how we can prepare for the future with foundational policy ideas for ai in education.

AI can also improve how students are assessed and guided while also helping to build digital literacy, critical thinking, creativity and problem-solving skills. These are among the most sought-after skill sets according to the Forum’s Future of Jobs report. Above all, AI promises a more personalized approach to teaching and learning, designed to suit each student’s needs and preferences.

5 case studies show AI's benefits in education

AI's rapid rise has led educators to use the technology to prepare learners for the future. Here are five examples from the Shaping the Future of Learning report showing how AI can positively impact educational outcomes.

AI-powered textbooks level the educational playing field in South Korea

South Korea's Ministry of Education plans to introduce AI-powered digital textbooks in primary and secondary schools starting in 2025. It’s a bid to address educational inequality as well as the reliance on private education and the country’s highly competitive education culture.

AI will be deployed to create personalized learning opportunities so pupils can learn at their own pace. The programme will start by offering mathematics, English and informatics, and eventually encompass the entire roster of subjects. The Ministry has emphasized taking a collaborative approach between human teachers and AI assistance.

In a panel session on the use of AI in education at the Forum’s recent Special Meeting on Global Collaboration, Growth and Energy for Development, Gaspard Twagirayezu, Rwanda’s Minister of Education, also underscored the value of personalized learning: “AI has the potential to assess the ability of individual students and then be able to customize content for them to learn.”

In response to the uncertainties surrounding generative AI and the need for robust AI governance frameworks to ensure responsible and beneficial outcomes for all, the Forum’s Centre for the Fourth Industrial Revolution (C4IR) has launched the AI Governance Alliance .

The Alliance will unite industry leaders, governments, academic institutions, and civil society organizations to champion responsible global design and release of transparent and inclusive AI systems.

Facilitating personalized learning in the UAE

Creating an equitable educational environment is also at the heart of an initiative by the Ministry of Education in the United Arab Emirates (UAE).

The project, set to launch later this year, aims to boost students’ academic performance and enhance critical thinking skills through AI-powered personalized learning. An AI tutor will tailor lessons to individual students’ needs and learning styles, proffering the level of support they require.

It will also manage students’ continuous assessment, give targeted feedback and provide the right resources a learner needs to develop. Real-time analytics enable teachers to deploy adaptive, personalized strategies.

By automating certain teaching tasks, the project aims to enable teachers to focus more on strategic and interactive elements of the learning journey. A pilot project has already vindicated the approach by demonstrating a 10% increase in learning outcomes.

Making teaching more inclusive with AI

AI can also improve educational outcomes in areas such as accessibility.

Globally, there are 240 million children with disabilities. A large majority of them do not have accessible learning materials, technologies or educational support, the Forum’s report says. UNICEF is now leveraging AI to overcome this, creating digital textbooks that cater for diverse learners. The textbooks make content adaptable to individual students’ needs by offering functionality such as sign-language videos, interactivity, audio descriptions and text-to-speech conversion.

Students will be able to download the materials and use them offline. This will be a vital advantage in countries with large digital divides, as Deemah Al Yahya, Secretary-General of the Digital Cooperation Organization, stressed at the Special Meeting: “We have 2.7% of the population unconnected. They're not even on the grid, they don’t have basic connectivity or internet.”

West African learners get support from an AI mentor

An educational technology start-up in Mali, West Africa aims to upskill young people in a setting with limited formal employment prospects. More than 80% of employment in Africa is informal. Kabakoo Academies uses social media content and local partnerships to reach young people in urban and semi-urban West Africa.

Kabakoo focuses on experiential learning with a real-life network of students and mentors. However, its app makes an AI-based virtual mentor available 24/7, offering guidance, resources and advice as needed. It also provides personalized feedback on learners’ assignments.

Among the successes reported by students is a 44% increase in income six months after completing the programme.

Raising literacy levels in Brazil

With Brazil underperforming in the OECD’s latest PISA performance rankings , the Letrus programme aims to boost literacy levels across middle and high schools with the help of AI. The programme specifically targets the divergent performance of low- and high-income students.

Letrus focuses on personalized learning through AI, offering real-time feedback for students and progress data to educators and school managers. Teachers benefit from tailored content and practical recommendations for individual students and at class level.

The initiative has shown significant success in improving student performance in writing exams in the state of Espirito Santo, with Letrus being chosen as the official literacy development programme for all of its high schools.

The World Economic Forum’s Shaping the Future of Learning 2024 report concludes that integrating AI into education has great potential for improving student’s learning experiences and outcomes. It also points to the need for scaling AI literacy to prepare learners at all levels for future job markets. However, the Forum also acknowledges the potential risks of AI, especially if it is rolled out too quickly and without the right governance and guardrails in place.

Don't miss any update on this topic

Create a free account and access your personalized content collection with our latest publications and analyses.

License and Republishing

World Economic Forum articles may be republished in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International Public License, and in accordance with our Terms of Use.

The views expressed in this article are those of the author alone and not the World Economic Forum.

The Agenda .chakra .wef-n7bacu{margin-top:16px;margin-bottom:16px;line-height:1.388;font-weight:400;} Weekly

A weekly update of the most important issues driving the global agenda

.chakra .wef-1dtnjt5{display:-webkit-box;display:-webkit-flex;display:-ms-flexbox;display:flex;-webkit-align-items:center;-webkit-box-align:center;-ms-flex-align:center;align-items:center;-webkit-flex-wrap:wrap;-ms-flex-wrap:wrap;flex-wrap:wrap;} More on Education and Skills .chakra .wef-17xejub{-webkit-flex:1;-ms-flex:1;flex:1;justify-self:stretch;-webkit-align-self:stretch;-ms-flex-item-align:stretch;align-self:stretch;} .chakra .wef-nr1rr4{display:-webkit-inline-box;display:-webkit-inline-flex;display:-ms-inline-flexbox;display:inline-flex;white-space:normal;vertical-align:middle;text-transform:uppercase;font-size:0.75rem;border-radius:0.25rem;font-weight:700;-webkit-align-items:center;-webkit-box-align:center;-ms-flex-align:center;align-items:center;line-height:1.2;-webkit-letter-spacing:1.25px;-moz-letter-spacing:1.25px;-ms-letter-spacing:1.25px;letter-spacing:1.25px;background:none;padding:0px;color:#B3B3B3;-webkit-box-decoration-break:clone;box-decoration-break:clone;-webkit-box-decoration-break:clone;}@media screen and (min-width:37.5rem){.chakra .wef-nr1rr4{font-size:0.875rem;}}@media screen and (min-width:56.5rem){.chakra .wef-nr1rr4{font-size:1rem;}} See all

AI is changing the shape of leadership – how can business leaders prepare?

Ana Paula Assis

May 10, 2024

These are the top ranking universities in Asia for 2024

May 8, 2024

Globally young people are investing more than ever, but do they have the best tools to do so?

Hallie Spear

May 7, 2024

Reskilling Revolution: The Role of AI in Education 4.0

Why investing in people is essential to revive growth: Key quotes from leaders at the #SpecialMeeting24

Gayle Markovitz and Kate Whiting

May 2, 2024

In Haiti, a bold project for education is delivering results

Jean-Claude Brizard

May 1, 2024

Enrichment only for the rich? How school segregation continues to divide students by income

Seventy years after brown v. board, school funding policies continue to segregate students by wealth. it doesn't have to be that way..

Kathy Giglio’s high school memories in Bridgeport, Connecticut, include regular lockdowns and the sound of gunfire in the lobby. Classrooms lacked basic supplies and teachers didn’t notice how often she skipped class . Desks tended to be broken and textbooks decades old. 

“​​You could tell it was very poverty-driven, with the attitudes of the students and the attitudes of the staff,” said Giglio, 34. “It was a zoo in my high school – there wasn’t a lot of learning that you were able to do because life was in the way.” Her 10-year-old daughter now attends school in the same district, and conditions haven’t improved much.

Giglio, who is Latina, appreciates living in the community she grew up in, near her parents and among other people of color working hard to give their children as many opportunities as possible. Most Bridgeport residents are Black or Latino.

She has also seen how different learning is for others in the area through her job at an after-school program in Westport, which feels like a world apart even though it’s a short drive away. The students learn on electronic whiteboards and eat in cafeterias that spill into beautiful courtyards. Kids who are struggling get one-on-one tutoring.

This week marks 70 years since Brown v. Board of Education, the landmark U.S. Supreme Court case that determined school segregation violated the Constitution. Decades later, severe divides like those Giglio has seen persist in communities around the country. Although they have received a historic infusion of relief funding since COVID-19 capsized learning, many schools are struggling to help kids catch up – especially low-income ones. School funding has remained uneven, which means the disparities could worsen once relief dollars expire later this year. 

Data shared exclusively with USA TODAY shows that even within the same metropolitan area, school districts in wealthy communities often get more dollars per pupil than lower-income districts. In many regions, state funding policies designed to offset these disparities don’t make much of a dent, according to the analysis by the think tank Bellwether. Bellwether's research found some of the greatest funding disparities in blue states like Connecticut. Some of the most equitably funded metro areas are in red states such as Texas. 

The findings provide a window into the insidious forces that continue to segregate children – decades after the high court ruled it was unfair to deny a Black girl access to a better-resourced school blocks from her Kansas home. In 2024, students are still sorted into school systems that reinforce rather than level out inequities.

"It's been a long road since Brown v. Board," said Alex Spurrier, an associate partner with Bellwether who helped lead the research.

"A lot of progress has been made on many fronts," he said, "but looking at the way we resource our schools right now, it's very clear there's still a lot of progress to be made."

The communities are side by side. They have wildly different education outcomes – by design.

The reality after Brown v. Board: Same urban area, starkly different worlds

Bellwether, a research nonprofit that focuses on educational equity, examined 123 metro areas across 38 states. Low-income districts tend to get the most dollars per student in just a third of those metro areas. In 40% of the metro areas, wealthier districts get the most funding. A little more than half of the students in the study live in a metro area where the wealthiest communities get the most resources.

The inequities tend to happen in metro areas divided into tiny school districts that draw in vastly different tax revenue. Schools in affluent neighborhoods rake in so much money from taxes on expensive homes that it dwarfs the amount invested in poorer schools through progressive state funding formulas meant to balance the resources.

“If you have a metro area that only has a handful of school districts, that helps to smooth out those differences in the levels of wealth,” Spurrier said. “The more boundaries and borders you have within a metro area, the more there will be these inequities in overall funding.” 

Nationally, local property taxes comprise about 37% of public schools' total revenue. That percentage is often higher in wealthy areas. While state funding formulas usually seek to address the gaps, “it’s just not enough to overcome these vast differences in local revenue,” Spurrier said.

For example, in the greater Columbus, Ohio, area, affluent districts raise $13,477 per pupil on average, compared with $9,129 per pupil in lower-income districts like Columbus proper. Even with state dollars, the suburbs maintain a $1,333 advantage. 

In the San Francisco Bay Area, elite districts such as Piedmont raise more than twice as much as poorer ones – and despite state interventions, they still eke out a $2,379 per-pupil advantage. Similar phenomena are seen in Philadelphia and its surrounding districts. 

See which wealth class in your metro area receives the most funding:

Inequities have become ‘normalized’.

Bridgeport is another metro area where funding differences result in vastly different educational experiences for poor and wealthy kids. The city’s local tax rate is more than four times higher than the rate in Greenwich, but the affluent suburb can still produce more per-pupil funding because of property values.

Wealthy districts in the Bridgeport area, such as Greenwich, raise an average of $24,922 per pupil in local revenue. That’s $18,325 more than Bridgeport and Danbury, another poor city nearby. The additional $6,763 these low-income districts receive from the state only goes so far: Even after that funding, the elite districts still generate $11,548 more in per-pupil dollars. 

According to separate research by the think tank New America, Connecticut is home to many of the country’s most unequal sets of neighboring school districts. The report compared economic circumstances in districts that sit next to each other. In Connecticut, acute differences in wealth and funding between districts almost always correlate with acute differences in racial composition. 

Steven Hernández, the executive director of a local advocacy organization called ConnCAN, said these inequities are rooted in Connecticut’s past: It is a provincial state whose borders were drawn based on centuries-old religious, economic, racial and ethnic divides. Some of those drastic divides are relics of former eras, but they reverberate for present-day students.

“Each town considers itself different from the others in meaningful ways,” he said. But “these days, what you see more than anything is the divide between the haves and have-nots.”

In conversations with USA TODAY, more than a dozen Bridgeport parents and students highlighted the lack of resources. 

Chantal Almonte, a parent who immigrated from the Dominican Republic, explained in Spanish that while she’s generally happy with her children’s teachers, the school facilities are abysmal. During a heat wave last year, her son was sent home early several times with headaches because his school didn’t have air conditioning.

Francisca Gabriel García, a Bridgeport resident who grew up in Mexico, cares for her niece and two children. Visiting different campuses, she has seen how unequal the funding is. Before she was accepted into her daughters’ magnet program, Gabriel García’s niece often said she was afraid to attend her former school because she worried the building would collapse. The school routinely closed for days at a time because the classrooms couldn’t operate in the heat.

The magnet program also has issues. Every Monday, the school sends home a packet of homework and activities for the week. Almost always, Gabriel García said, it comes with a note requesting the students bring basic supplies – paper towels, crayons, disinfecting spray.

“I don’t understand – my question has always been, why? Why are towns like Fairfield, Trumbull reputed to have a much better system if they are also public schools, if we also pay taxes?” Gabriel García, who volunteers as a community advocate , said in Spanish. “I am afraid that in the future – when my daughters go to high school – they will not be competitive girls.”

Giglio has considered moving to another district so her daughter, who was recently diagnosed with ADHD, could get tutoring and other necessary support. But doing so has felt nearly impossible, she said. She tried to take advantage of a program that allows select students to attend schools in other districts, but her daughter didn’t get in. 

“I don’t work in a field that pays well enough” to move, Giglio said, remarking on the high cost of homes. According to Realtor.com, the median sold home price in Westport, where Giglio works, is $2.3 million. 

The not-having has become “normalized,” said Tracey Elizabeth Garcia, a 15-year-old freshman in Bridgeport. One of her earliest school memories is of a teacher cautioning her and her classmates to share and conserve their gluesticks. As a freshman in high school, the lack of resources is stymying her ability to prepare for college – her school doesn’t have enough counselors. 

School district lines are ‘arbitrary’

The landmark Brown v. Board of Education ruling focused on the segregation of students by race – it didn’t tackle the more subtle dynamic of uneven school funding . However, recent studies show that funding disparities break down along racial lines. A 2018 report found that school districts with the greatest number of students of color received $1,800 – or 13% – less than those with the fewest. 

To address these seemingly intractable disparities, Bellwether estimates that states would need to increase allocations to poorer districts in areas with gaps by more than 20% on average. But such vast funding increases aren’t realistic, Spurrier said. Instead, he and his colleagues propose limits on how much districts can pull from local tax revenue or policies that allow the revenue to be spread more evenly across a metro area. Another solution could be consolidating districts.

“School district lines are an arbitrary thing,” said Preston Green, a professor of educational leadership and law at the University of Connecticut who studies school funding and segregation. “Other than the politics, there’s nothing that prevents us from redrawing school district lines.”

The politics are a major barrier, parents said. As one mother, Elizabeth Robinson, put it when asked about district consolidation: “I think as a resident of Bridgeport, it’s is a great idea, but if I was a resident of Southport? Absolutely not.” The median sold home price in Southport is $1.2 million. 

Connecticut is known as “the Land of Steady Habits,” said Hernández, from ConnCAN. And in an educational context, habits have become a curse. “There is this quiet complicity between the haves and have-nots about the way things are. … The people who live in poverty will always live in poverty.” Decision-makers might never say that explicitly, “but that’s how they budget.” 

Mixed messages: Parents think their kids are doing well in school. More often than not, they're wrong.

This persistent inequity forces families that can do so to vote with their feet. Some Bridgeport families USA TODAY interviewed said they had been forced to attend or send their children to schools elsewhere to avoid the poor conditions of city campuses. 

Jackson Thomas, who now attends a Trumbull private school thanks to tuition help, noted how much safer and higher-quality his education is now – he went from struggling with failing grades to earning A’s and B’s and playing on the football team. Arantza Victoria Gonzalez Cardenas, who goes to school in Milford, said her learning now feels more organized, relaxed and connected. Everything is different, she said.

More: Supreme Court allows Louisiana's congressional map with new, mostly Black district

Several mothers who have participated in a local parent leadership institute told USA TODAY they would invest in the Bridgeport system if the system invested in them. 

“Being in Bridgeport, in order for your child to really succeed, you have to go into a private school setting,” said Arlene Harris-Webber, whose son was denied special-needs services in Bridgeport schools. She later discovered her son tested in the top percentile. “If his IQ is so high, why is he failing?”

Graphics: Javier Zarracina , USA TODAY

Contact Alia Wong at (202) 507-2256 or [email protected]. Follow her on X at @aliaemily.

Billions are spent on educational technology, but we don’t know if it works

Professor of Reading and Children’s Development, The Open University

Disclosure statement

Natalia Kucirkova receives funding from the Norwegian Research Council and The Jacobs Foundation. She works in WiKIT AS, which is a university spin-off concerned with EdTech evidence. She is affiliated with the University of Stavanger, The Open University and University College London.

The Open University provides funding as a founding partner of The Conversation UK.

View all partners

During the COVID lockdowns, schools and universities worldwide relied on education technology – edtech – to keep students learning. They used online platforms to give lessons, mark work and send feedback, used apps to teach and introduced students to programs that let them work together on projects.

In the aftermath of school closures, the market for edtech has kept on growing. The value of the sector is projected to rise to US$132.4 billion globally by 2032 (£106 billion).

The problem is that we don’t know very much about how effective many edtech apps or programs are – or if they are effective at all .

And some effects may be negative. Some of the so-called educational apps advertised to families show many adverts to children. They may use manipulative features to keep children on screens without teaching them anything new.

This technology is here to stay and will remain a significant part of how children learn – so knowing whether it works is imperative.

Assessing and addressing the quality of edtech is a significant task, especially when it is already so widely used. For edtech under development, a valuable option is to foster closer collaboration between tech developers and scientists who study learning to embed existing research and knowledge into the design.

Research consultancy firms can carry out swift assessments to provide edtech developers with information on how well what they are offering works. Transparency and integrity in the research process is vital, though, to prevent bias. Ways of ensuring this include pre-registration : reporting that a study is going to take place before it happens.

Partnerships with schools could also provide valuable feedback . However, minimum standards of quality and ethical considerations would need to be assured before technologies are sent to schools.

Setting a standard

When it comes to edtech that is already available, what is really needed is some kind of standardised metric to assess how well it works.

But establishing minimum standards for the effect of edtech is easier said than done. There is, historically, a lack of standardised metrics for assessing educational impact within impact economics – the study of how businesses create financial returns while ensuring positive social or environmental outcomes.

Without standardisation, there are too many ways to assess edtech. A review commissioned by the UK government of evaluation criteria and standards for edtech analysed 74 methods for assessing their quality.

Similarly, I carried out a research study with colleagues on available criteria to assess the effectiveness and efficacy of edtech produced specifically for schools. We found 65 different frameworks for evaluating whether these school-specific offerings work.

The abundance of evaluation possibilities can be confusing for edtech businesses. The multitude of options makes it difficult to ascertain the quality of their products. It is confusing to investors too, especially those who want to prioritise not only edtech’s return on investment but also a return on education and community.

Read more: Schools are using research to try to improve children's learning – but it's not working

A yardstick that establishes the minimum quality requirements for a edtech product to be used in schools is crucial to ensure technology does more good and no harm. The creation of a yardstick needs to take into account both the product quality and the process of using the technology – whether it works for diverse populations and diverse learning environments.

The independent verification of evidence is vital , considering that any company can simply “generate” a study with the data they daily collect on users. In my research work with colleagues, I have argued for a focus on the rigour and validity of various research types.

New initiatives, such as the International Certification of Evidence of Impact in Education , have begun to consolidate the different research approaches, standards and certifications related to evidence of edtech impact globally. Ultimately, the goal is to make it easier for schools and parents to navigate the thousands of educational apps and online platforms available.

Whether individual countries will create the legal and institutional frameworks to enforce any of the standards remains to be seen. Countries will need to select standards that suit both their economic and educational agendas. An important shift is needed so that schools can strategically select edtech they know will help children’s learning.

• Young people
• educational apps
• Keep me on trend

Compliance Lead

Lecturer / Senior Lecturer - Marketing

Assistant Editor - 1 year cadetship

Executive Dean, Faculty of Health

Lecturer/Senior Lecturer, Earth System Science (School of Science)

How to Get Holocaust Education Right

“Educate them about the Holocaust.”

That’s the rallying cry for many of those who feel shocked by skyrocketing antisemitism and Islamophobia on college campuses and K-12 schools. Learning about the Final Solution, the reasoning goes, steers young Americans against bigotry.

As the grandson of Auschwitz and Buchenwald survivors and an educator and documentary filmmaker who often tells Holocaust-related stories, I used to subscribe to this notion. But I’ve come to realize that despite being embedded in K-12 social studies, world history, and English literature curricula throughout the country, Holocaust education has failed to uproot hate and ignorance.  

Social media, where teens spend about five hours a day on average, teem with “ Holocaust denial and distortion ,” as well as antisemitic and Islamophobic conspiracy theories. The latest, for instance, falsely blames the Jews for Congress’ TikTok crackdown . No wonder K-12 schools’ incidents of antisemitism and Islamophobia have skyrocketed , even before the Israel-Hamas War erupted and broke the hydrant of hatred wide open.

Read More: Who Needs Holocaust Remembrance Day in 2024?

In recent weeks, a flood of Israel-Hamas War-related hostility has forced an increasing number of university administrations around the country—such as Columbia, the University of Texas at Austin, and the University of Southern California—to summon the police in an attempt to quell student protests. Columbia moved all classes online on the eve of Passover, suspended some protesters , and threatened to expel those who’d occupied a campus building. USC revamped its commencement plans. And although most protests have played out as legitimate political activism reminiscent of the 1960s student movements, some have reportedly crossed the line into antisemitic and Islamophobic vitriol and violence.

On campuses and schoolyards, Jews and Muslims have suffered physical and psychological harm—from being jabbed in the face by a flagpole and requiring hospitalization to being called “terrorists” and needing mental-health counseling. The U.S. Department of Education’s Civil Rights Office has been investigating several universities and school districts.

Holocaust education, in its foundational intention, was supposed to nip much of this in the bud. Taught at elementary, middle, and high schools throughout the country since the 1970s, it’s been positioned for wide impact. Twenty-six states require the instruction of the Holocaust. Most of the other states have funded commissions and councils to advance opportunities to educate students about the Nazis’ murder of 6 million Jews and millions of people with disabilities, homosexuals, and Romani people, among other groups.

Read More: The Holocaust Began Not With Concentration Camps, But With Hateful Rhetoric. That Part of the Story Cannot Be Forgotten

Historically, conservatives and liberals alike have embraced Holocaust education. The 2020 Never Again Education Act passed by a 393-5 vote at the U.S. House of Representatives and unanimously at the U.S. Senate. Further setting Holocaust education up for success, nonprofits ranging from USC’s Shoah Foundation in Los Angeles to the Holocaust Memorial Museum in Washington, DC, have been supporting teachers for decades. Organization like Pittsburgh-based Classroom Without Borders have taken educators to the sites of Nazi death camps in Eastern Europe. On May 5, March of the Living is sending teachers and students, as well as the chancellors and presidents of SUNY (State University of New York), Towson, and other universities, to Poland. Stateside, 85 Holocaust museums and memorials have hosted countless school field trips.

Yet, Holocaust education has fallen far short even of its fundamental goal to raise awareness. Polls show young Americans lack “basic knowledge” about the Holocaust. About two-thirds know nothing or very little about Auschwitz and grossly underestimate the number of Jewish victims.

Alarming conversations I’ve had with students make it impossible for me to ignore these statistics. Following a university screening of a rough-cut of one of my documentaries, “ Cojot ,” two freshmen sheepishly told me they’d “never heard of this.” I assured them few have heard of French business consultant Michel Cojot’s quest to kill his father’s Nazi executioner.

Shaking their heads, the freshmen said they’d “never heard about any of this.”

They were talking about the Holocaust.

The encounter sent me on a mission of my own: help fulfill Holocaust education’s promise. I started by contemplating what knowledge, insights, and skills their students must obtain to put antisemitism and Islamophobia in the rearview mirror.

A couple of observations informed my thinking about the knowledge part of the equation: Traditional Holocaust education’s emphasis on disseminating historical facts has generated disappointing results and, in the long run, even A-students retain only a fraction of the information they absorb in school. They ofttimes memorize a lesson, regurgitate it on a test, then discard it from their brains.

So I focused on insights and skills, which tend to be stickier. An understanding of how democracies function and malfunction can stay with children and adolescents for life, sharpening their worldview and lending them a moral compass. Critical thinking, fact-finding, and active listening can boost empathy and productive civic discourse, enabling students to better navigate the present, past, and future.

In building this approach, I combined old methods in a new way. For a pedagogical anchor, I turned to practitioner inquiry, also called action research. This well-regarded yet underutilized professional development (PD) mechanism helps K-12 teachers examine and improve their practice. I hypothesized that although it was rarely if ever used in such a way, practitioner inquiry would upgrade Holocaust education when fitted with four lenses: contextual responsiveness, which enables educators to make their lessons relevant to the here and now; trauma-informed, which steers them away from age-inappropriate material and assists them in identifying and coping with trauma in their classrooms and schools; apolitical educational equity, which values every child and adolescent; and asset-based, which directs teachers’ attention to their students and communities’ strengths. 

To test this properly, I founded the nonpartisan, pedagogically orientated Holocaust, Genocide and Human Rights Education Initiative at Penn State . It provides PD programs in five states and counting to K-12 educators, many of whom know what but not how to effectively teach difficult topics.

The first rule of the initiative—to borrow a phrase from David Fincher’s “Fight Club”—is you do not have to talk about the Holocaust. Research my colleagues and I have conducted indicates the effective instruction of any difficult topic, be it slavery or evolution or gender, can get at the Holocaust’s underlying causes.

Participants in the initiative’s programs, who represent various roles, disciplines, and grade levels, choose a difficult topic from their curriculum or community. They learn to teach it confidently by conjuring up compelling questions, finding credible sources, collecting and analyzing data, examining the findings with experts and colleagues, drawing up an implementation plan, and applying it in their classrooms and schools. Thus, they meet their students where they are in authentic ways.

Our participants, who include nearly as many music and biology as social studies and English teachers, empower their students to come up with their own guiding questions and seek the truth and its implications for themselves. To teach in this unconventional manner, educators must shift from acting as sages on the stage to setting the stage for their students’ experiential learning.

This mindset change typically requires a mind-twisting effort. Why would teachers—already overburdened meeting state, district, and parental expectations—add this to their trays? Their motivations range from resetting the tone in their classroom to removing the perception of indoctrination to redefining student success. A longtime elementary school teacher, for instance, aimed to make her Civil War lessons more thought-provoking. “I was interested in ways to help my students think for themselves,” she told me. And a mid-career middle-school teacher sought to instill empathy in her seventh-graders. Referencing Jim Crow and Nazi propaganda, she challenged her students to investigate her thesis that “if you spend enough time talking negatively about people, you start to believe it.”

She tasked her students with logging “everything they said and heard in one day.” The hands-on assignment opened the seventh-graders’ eyes and, eventually, hearts. They reported hearing numerous hurtful judgements and “conversations about fighting,” the middle-school teacher said. “The data collected were overwhelmingly negative.” In the following weeks, the students “wanted to talk about it more” and grew to “understand why they do what they do and reassess what they say about each other.”

Much of K-12 looks far into the future. Ace biology or math now and become a doctor or coder later. Difficult topics inquiry offers students immediately useful takeaways. The empathy and active-listening skills they develop can enrich their inner and social lives. The two-way respect they forge with peers and adults can bolster their communications and self-esteem.

To give students a brighter outlook, individually and collectively, and fortify our democracy, we must reinvent how we teach difficult topics. We must trust students to chart a constructive course for themselves and society. This will forge a sense of control that can propel students on journeys of discovery, during which they learn to conduct primary research, triangulate the information they gather, seek multiple perspectives, and dialogue and debate with classmates. Ultimately, too, it would prompt our next generation to wonder why any student ever chose echo-chamber scorn over face-to-face, heated-yet-respectful civic discourse.

More Must-Reads from TIME

• The New Face of Doctor Who
• Putin’s Enemies Are Struggling to Unite
• Women Say They Were Pressured Into Long-Term Birth Control
• Scientists Are Finding Out Just How Toxic Your Stuff Is
• Boredom Makes Us Human
• John Mulaney Has What Late Night Needs
• The 100 Most Influential People of 2024
• Want Weekly Recs on What to Watch, Read, and More? Sign Up for Worth Your Time

Contact us at [email protected]

32 Questions to Ask on a College Visit

Students should feel free to ask questions during an information session or on tour.

Questions to Ask on a College Visit

Getty Images

Prospective students should conduct at least basic research to facilitate questions to ask during the information session or on tour, experts say.

Key Takeaways

• Before a campus visit, students should do basic research on the school.
• Students and their families have various opportunities to ask questions.
• No question is dumb.

College visits, whether in person or virtual, can help give prospective students a better feel of campus life.

Contrary to popular belief, however, students don’t need to have that “a-ha” moment when they eventually find the campus where they belong, says Thyra Briggs, vice president for admission and financial aid at Harvey Mudd College in California.

“I just don't think that happens for most students,” she says. “I don't want students to walk away from a visit where that didn't happen thinking, ‘Oh, this is not the place for me.’ This is a long-term relationship. It's not necessarily love at first sight. … In this age of instant gratification, I think it's an important thing to give a school a chance to affect you in a different way.”

For an in-person visit, families should prepare ahead of time by checking the weather and dressing comfortably as tours are mostly held outside.

"Leave plenty of time at an individual campus and allow yourself to enjoy the experience, be present in the moment and (don't) feel rushed because that could also skew your perception of things," says Bryan Gross, vice president for enrollment management at Hartwick College in New York.

It’s also important, experts say, to conduct at least basic research on the institution – even if it’s just looking at their social media accounts – to help facilitate questions to ask during the information session or on tour.

"We know that for some of you, this may be the first time you are going through this," Briggs says. "For others, it's a different student (going through the process) than the student you had who's older. So there’s no bad questions. ... I would hope that any college would welcome any question a student would ask.”

Here are 32 example questions, collected from college admissions and enrollment professions, that students don't always think to ask on college visits. These questions – edited for length or clarity – were provided by Briggs, Gross and Brian Lindeman, assistant vice president of admissions and financial aid at Macalester College  in Minnesota.

Questions About Admissions

• Does this school consider demonstrated interest?
• Is there an opportunity for prospective students to sit in on a class to experience a real lecture?
• Are there options to receive a lunch or dinner pass at the dining hall to try the food?

Questions About Academics

• Where do students typically study?
• How does advising work?
• What are the academic strengths of this school?
• What opportunities are there for study abroad and exchange programs?
• If available, are these global programs directly run by this school – where faculty members travel with students – or are these study abroad programs outsourced to a third-party company?
• Are these study abroad experiences built into the tuition or are there additional fees to participate?

Questions About Financial Aid

• What is this school's average financial aid package?
• What is the average net cost when students enroll?
• What is the current level of funding with endowed scholarships – how much are donors contributing to scholarships?
• Do you offer merit aid ? If so, what are you looking for in a candidate?

Questions About Campus Housing and Community

• What are the housing options?
• What are the fee structures for these different options?
• Are students required to live on campus ?
• How does your campus define diversity, equity, inclusion and belonging?

Questions to Ask Your Tour Guide to Gauge Campus Life

• What surprised you about this school? What's something you didn't expect?
• What keeps you coming back to this school each year?
• Have we seen your favorite place on campus?
• What event on campus gets the biggest turnout every year?
• If you were struggling with an issue, would you know who to turn to? Who would that be?

Questions About Work and Research Opportunities

• What are the opportunities for undergraduate research on campus?
• How do those research opportunities give students valuable hands-on experiences that enhance their resumes?
• What are some specific ways this school helps students gain hands-on experience through internships ?

Questions About Student and Career Outcomes

• What is the retention rate from freshman to sophomore year?
• What is the five-year graduation rate?
• What is the job-attainment rate of graduates within six months of graduating?
• What percent of students are going on to graduate school ?
• What percent of students are intentionally taking time off post-graduation compared to those who are not able to find jobs?
• What size is the alumni network?
• How are alumni actively engaging with recent graduates to help connect them specifically to opportunities in their fields?

Searching for a college? Get our  complete rankings  of Best Colleges.

Unique College Campus Visits

Tags: colleges , education , campus life , college applications , students

Ask an Alum: Making the Most Out of College

You May Also Like

10 destination west coast college towns.

Cole Claybourn May 16, 2024

Scholarships for Lesser-Known Sports

Sarah Wood May 15, 2024

Should Students Submit Test Scores?

Sarah Wood May 13, 2024

Poll: Antisemitism a Problem on Campus

Lauren Camera May 13, 2024

Federal vs. Private Parent Student Loans

Erika Giovanetti May 9, 2024

14 Colleges With Great Food Options

Sarah Wood May 8, 2024

Colleges With Religious Affiliations

Anayat Durrani May 8, 2024

Protests Threaten Campus Graduations

Aneeta Mathur-Ashton May 6, 2024

Protesting on Campus: What to Know

Sarah Wood May 6, 2024

Lawmakers Ramp Up Response to Unrest

Aneeta Mathur-Ashton May 3, 2024

• International edition
• Australia edition
• Europe edition

UK free school meal allowances too low for healthy lunches, study finds

Researchers also find lack of fresh fruit and vegetables in schools and say portion sizes sometimes not enough

Free school meal allowances are not enough for students from lower-income backgrounds to buy healthy school lunches, research suggests.

The study, presented at the European Congress of Obesity (ECO), involved 42 pupils aged between 11 and 15 at seven schools across the UK.

The students were provided with a daily budget that was equivalent to the free school meal (FSM) allowance at their school, which was between £2.15 and £2.70. The pupils kept food diaries that detailed what they bought, the quality of the food and whether they felt full for the rest of the school day.

The researchers concluded that the allowance meant students were mainly restricted to meal deals, despite the fact that non-meal-deal items may have been healthier but more expensive.

They also found that the students felt under pressure to make quick decisions that may not have been the healthiest due to the limited amount of time they had during their break, leading them to “grab and go”.

In most schools the students were not able to access their school meal allowance before lunch, meaning they were often hungry during the morning break.

The study also found there was a lack of fresh fruit, vegetables and salad available in schools, and that in four of the schools no fruit was bought by the students taking part in the study.

Dr Sundus Mahdi, of the University of York, said the findings showed that under the current FSM allowance the students were restricted to buying meal deals that were not necessarily the healthiest option.

“What we also found was that non-meal-deal items were generally more expensive but they can also be healthier, which is also very relevant in terms of what we are seeing now with the cost of living and inflation that healthier food just tends to be more expensive,” Mahdi said.

“Unfortunately, the portion sizes given to some pupils were not enough to sustain them during the school day. There was actually one participant that said that during the week they actually brought a packed lunch with them in addition to their free school meal allowance, because it just wasn’t filling them up.”

She said there was agreement among the researchers and participants that the FSM allowance needed to be increased so that students would be able “to buy a more filling meal and to not go hungry throughout the school day”.

The researchers also called for an amendment to the school food standard so that schools have to include two portions of vegetables with every meal.

Separate research by the Food Foundation suggests it is 45% more expensive for parents to provide their children with a healthy packed lunch compared with a less nutritious one.

Out of five supermarket chains, Aldi had the largest gap (77%) between the cost of a healthy and unhealthy packed lunch, at £10.08 and £5.68 respectively. Tesco had the smallest gap, at 9%, with the healthy option costing £8.56 compared to the unhealthy alternative at £7.82.

Prof Maria Bryant, the chief investigator, said: “We know that 30% of daily meal intake in primary schoolchildren happens during the school day, so it’s a substantial part of food intake. Poor meal choice often is a result of a lack of funding and often driven by contracts and procurement processes.”

About 1.9 million children are eligible for free schools meals in England. To be eligible, a household must earn less than £7,400 after tax and before benefits.

• School meals
• Education policy

Most viewed

Meet Gemini Education: Three ways Google is equipping students and educators with AI

Google's Gemini assistant can optimize nearly every step of a user's workflow, including emails, presentations, documents, and more. 

Also: 3 reasons to upgrade to Gemini Advanced, from Google I/O 2024

On Thursday, Google introduced new plan add-ons, protections, and features, so educational institutions, teachers, and students can also take advantage of Gemini's perks. 

1. Gemini Education

Initially announced in February, Gemini Education is an add-on that educational institutions can sign up for to access AI features in Google Workspace. The add-on includes extra protections and features that make it a better fit for academic needs. 

The add-on is being offered in two different tiers: Gemini Education, a lower-price offering with a monthly usage limit, and Gemini Education Premium, which provides users with full access to generative AI tools in Workspace and more advanced features like AI-powered note-taking, summaries in Meet, and more. 

Also: This subtle (but useful) AI feature was my favorite Google I/O 2024 announcement

The Gemini Education add-ons do not have a minimum purchasing requirement, making it possible for educational institutions to personalize their subscriptions to suit their needs. However, both tiers are only available for users 18 years or older. Interested educators can visit the Workspace for Education  page  for pricing information. 

Google said educators found assistance during testing from Google Workspace on all sorts of tasks, including putting together lesson plan templates, grant proposals, or job descriptions, summarizing long email threads, creating agendas for development sessions, and generating engaging images in Slides.

2. School account users get free data protection 

All educators and students over 18 with school accounts will soon have access to added data protection when they access Gemini at no additional cost. These extra protections ensure educators' and students' data is not reviewed by anyone else, used to train artificial intelligence models, or shared with other institutions or users, according to Google. 

This new level of protection is important because it addresses concerns about academic integrity. Students can have peace of mind knowing that if they input an essay for proofreading, it won't be used to train models and potentially appear in an AI-generated answer for the same topic. 

Also:  5 ways AI can help you study for finals - for free

There is no additional information on when to expect the feature other than that it is coming soon. 

3. New Chat with Gemini features 

Google is also "soon" adding two new extensions to Chat with Gemini and a new guided practice quiz feature to enhance users' learning experiences. 

An OpenStax extension will allow Gemini to pull information from Rice University's OpenStax educational resources by typing "@OpenStax" in the chat, followed by a query. 

As seen in the video above, the responses from Gemini include citations and links to "relevant peer-reviewed textbook content", according to Google. These citations help address a significant pain point for users when they use generative AI models -- the trustworthiness of an answer. 

Also: Google Glass vs. Project Astra: Sergey Brin on AI wearables and his top use case

A Data Commons extension allows users to visualize data about complex topics by typing in "@Data-Commons", followed by the subject they'd like to learn more about. The responses will come from "authoritative sources", according to Google. 

Lastly, students can prepare for exams with the new guided practice quizzes feature. This feature allows Gemini to test students' knowledge of a subject and provide feedback on their responses. All a student has to do is type in "Quiz me on", followed by the topic. 

Artificial Intelligence

3 reasons to upgrade to gemini advanced, from google i/o 2024, 5 exciting android features google just announced at i/o 2024, meet gemini ai live: like facetiming with a friend who knows everything.