FREE TUITION- AN EDUCATIONAL PHILOSOPHY ON THE HORIZON

I just watched the 2016 Michael Moore documentary “Where to Invade Next”.  In this film he compared the US to many countries across the globe on a variety of quality of life subject.  Higher learning was a hot topic within his research and it was perfectly timed with the theme of our GDPI811 topic of the philosophy of education.  This got me thinking about the variation of tuition of higher learning within different countries across the globe.

In the documentary Michael Moore interviewed students from Denmark who shared what they claimed was their country’s philosophy about higher learning.  They described that higher learning had so much value that it was fully funded.  It seemed puzzling to them why it might not be funded, given the importance.  It almost seemed insulting to them that people would be not given access to such a basic right.

The reading “Why we must abolish schools” by Ivan Illich merged with Moore’s documentary.  Illich’s argument was that SCHOOLS were too expensive.  SCHOOLS were ineffective.  SCHOOLS were inequitable.  It was not that he didn’t argue for LEARNING, he just didn’t think that formal learning was all it was cracked up to be and that we just didn’t need all the bricks an mortar to enable LEARNING.    And yet, considering Michael Moore’s documentary, there are countries that believe so strongly in schools that they fund them for all.  Hmmmmm…..

This brings me to my professional context.   I work for a community college. During my 19 years working for this institution, I have worked on many projects that have shown me how important access to education is in order to level the playing field for those who are economically disadvantaged.   I helped hundreds of workers who were laid off in the recession of 2008 to use a program called Second Career to access the financial support needed to rise their skill levels so that they could compete.  While many of these laid off workers did have to make modest investments to their own career path, I am proud to say that most of their needs were considered in these 100% grant programs.  With the philosophical goal access to education, this program was charged with part of the responsibility of raising Ontarian’s skills to a highly competitive level.  These social programs made good long-term business sense and aligned with the philosophy of education very well.  More importantly, it provided a chance at a second career to those who needed it most- the laid off workers of that major recession.

A more recent development that aligns with educational philosophy which draws a little closer to the vision of Denmark as described in Michael Moore’s documentary, is access to education for poor.  In 2016 there was a major announcement to address the issue of access:  Free university and college tuition for those who are from families making less than $50,000 per year.    Even with 19 years of working within this Ministry, I never thought this day would come.  Tuition costs being a barrier no longer!   I think this will be a wonderful experiment to see how this changes Ontario’s skill level, how it will address skills gaps as baby boomers exit the labour force and most importantly, how this could lead to innovation and equalization for the most financially vulnerable.   I am overjoyed.  You can read more about this here:

https://news.ontario.ca/maesd/en/2017/01/ontario-provides-free-tuition-for-eligible-students-in-london.html

I am sure that social programs like tuition grants and Second Career will still leave gaps, but they are creative and innovative starting points.  What I know first hand is that there will be data-driven decisions made to improve these programs.  I hope that philosophical and historical thinking will also be applied to consider how learning and teaching can (and indeed will need to) become more nimble, creative and innovative to meet the demand. 

Remaining questions:

What are other socio-economic factors that will be barriers for the poor and working poor, beyond financial considerations?

How will free tuition and education grants change access for the greater student population?

What will be the new selection criteria if educational spaces become limited?

How can business and industry assist in the educational process?

What can philosophy offer to disadvantaged students, in terms of enhancing the educational process?   How will this improve the lives of the economically disadvantaged?

Resources:

Illich, I. (1970, July 2). Why we must abolish schooling. The New York Review of Books, 15(1), 9–15.