why education should be free article

• 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, a Dartmouth-wide chair and the highest distinction awarded to Dartmouth faculty, a Faculty Partner in the Silicon Valley incubator Mach49 , and a Senior Advisor at the strategy consulting firm Acropolis Advisors . 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

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

Is free college a good idea? Increasingly, evidence says yes

Subscribe to the brown center on education policy newsletter, douglas n. harris douglas n. harris nonresident senior fellow - governance studies , brown center on education policy , professor and chair, department of economics - tulane university.

May 10, 2021

• 10 min read

In just a few short years, the idea of free college has moved from a radical idea to mainstream Democratic thinking. President Biden made free college one of his core campaign planks , and one that the first lady has been promoting for years. In his recent address to Congress, the president also signaled that he is ready for legislative action on a scaled-back version of the idea as part of his American Families Plan .

Two weeks ago, the nonprofit College Promise (CP)—led by Martha Kanter, who served as President Obama’s undersecretary for education—also released a proposal that will influence the free college debate. (Full disclosure: I previously advised the Biden campaign and presently advise CP, but have received no compensation for these efforts.)

In today’s polarized environment, the free college idea stands out for its bipartisan support. A majority of self-identified Republicans has supported the notion of free college in some polls. In fact, one of the first such statewide programs was put in place by Bill Haslam, the former Republican governor of Tennessee. While this could go the way of Obamacare, which faced strong GOP congressional opposition despite the law’s origins with Republican Mitt Romney, free college seems different. Biden’s latest plan only applies to community colleges, which focus on career and vocational education of the sort Republicans support, as opposed to universities, which many Republicans view as hostile battlegrounds in a culture war.

But I am less interested in the politics than the evidence of effectiveness. I have studied college access for many years and run two randomized control trials of financial aid , which produced some of the first causal evidence on free college in Milwaukee. Two years ago, Brookings released the first installment of the Milwaukee work, which I carried out with a team of researchers. Since then, we have collected more data and learned more about how students responded over time. Below, I summarize our just-released study (co-authored with Jonathan Mills), compare our results to other financial aid programs, and then discuss implications for the Biden and CP proposals. Consequently, I conclude that the evidence increasingly favors free college and “open access aid” more generally.

What Did We Learn in Milwaukee?

I developed The Degree Project (TDP) in 2009 as a demonstration program in partnership between the nonprofit Ascendium (then known as the Great Lakes Higher Education Corporation and Affiliates) and Milwaukee Public Schools (MPS). TDP offered all first-time 9 th graders in half of MPS high schools $12,000 for college as “last-dollar” aid. Students could use the funds for college if they graduated from high school on time with a GPA of 2.5 and a class attendance rate of 90%. Also, as is the norm with free college programs, students had to fill out the FAFSA and have at least one dollar of unmet need. The aid could be used to attend any of the 66 public, in-state, two- or four-year colleges in Wisconsin. Ascendium provided up to $31 million to fund the grant and, as the main program administrator, sent regular letters to remind students about the program and its requirements. The organization also worked with school counselors to support students becoming eligible for the funds and preparing for college.

TDP was announced to students in the fall of 2011. Using anonymized data, we then tracked students’ high school, college, and life outcomes for eight years, and we recently received data extending through when students were roughly 22 years old. As a rare randomized trial, we could estimate the effects by comparing the control and treatment group outcomes. Here is what we found:

• For students who met the performance requirements, the program increased graduation from two-year colleges by 3 percentage points . This might seem small, but the denominator here is comprised of low-income 9 th graders. Half of the control group did not even graduate from high school, let alone college. The effect amounts to a 25% increase in two-year degrees.
• The framing and design of the program as free two-year college changed student decisions in ways consistent with what free college advocates suggest. The $12,000 maximum award amount was selected because it was sufficient to cover tuition and fees for a two-year college degree. The fact that TDP made two-year college free, but only reduced the cost of four-year college, was clearly communicated to students. This appears to explain one of our main results: Student enrollments shifted from four-year to two-year colleges. This is noteworthy given that students could use the funds at either two- or four-year colleges. In fact, students likely would have been able to use more of the $12,000 if they had shifted to four-year colleges. The only plausible reason for shifting to two-year colleges is that they were really attracted to the idea of free college.
• The “early commitment” nature of the program had some modest positive effects on some high school outcomes . Students learned about TDP in their 9 th grade year, giving them time to change their high school behaviors and college plans. Although it did not improve high school academic achievement, we find that TDP increased college expectations and the steps students took to prepare for college. TDP recipients also reported working harder because of the program (even though this did not show up in the academic measures). This highlights the fact that free college might also help address not only college-going rates, but the long-term stagnancy in high school outcomes.
• The merit requirements undermined the program’s effectiveness . Though the 2.5 GPA and 90% attendance and other requirements were arguably modest, only 21% of eligible students ended up meeting them. So, they ended up excluding many students. We also tested the two main ways that the merit requirements could have been helpful: (a) merit requirements might provide incentives for students to work hard during high school and better prepare for college, and (b) merit requirements might target aid to students who respond to it most. We find no evidence of either benefit. While students did work harder (see point [3] above), this appears to be due to other elements of the program, not the merit requirements.

Overall, these results suggest that aid is most effective when it is “open access”—that is, aid with early commitment and free college framing, but no merit requirements.

What about the evidence beyond Milwaukee?

Our study also reviews other research on financial aid, including federal aid, state merit aid programs, and the newer “promise scholarship” programs that mimic free college. Our study is not alone in finding that financial aid improves student outcomes. In fact, the vast majority of the most rigorous studies find positive effects on college attendance and college graduation. Given the strong average benefits of college, we can expect follow-up studies to show effects on employment earnings, voting, and other outcomes.

What about the costs? Open access aid is more expensive to be sure. More students receive aid and the aid levels per students are larger than traditional financial aid. Is it worth it? Our analysis suggests it is. We carried out new cost-benefit analyses of multiple programs, including TDP, but also other actively studied programs in: Kalamazoo, Michigan; Knox County, Tennessee; Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania; and one statewide program in Nebraska. We also used estimates of the average effects of aid taken from prior literature reviews. All of these programs pass a cost-benefit test. That is, the effects on college outcomes, and the effects of college outcomes on future earnings, is much larger than the cost to the government and society as a whole. Moreover, it appears that benefits-per-dollar-of-cost are at least as high with open access aid as with more restricted programs. This means that open access aid provides greater total benefits to the community as a whole.

Back to the Free College Proposals

What do these results mean for President Biden’s and CP’s proposals? The table below provides a side-by-side comparison. The main difference is the level of detail. This reflects that the CP plan was designed to align with, and flesh out, the Biden campaign proposal. Perhaps the only substantive difference is that the CP proposal (and the Milwaukee program) includes private colleges. The Biden campaign documents exclude private colleges, though the American Families Plan just says “free community college,” signaling alignment with the CP plan. Both proposals are clearly in the category of open access aid.

There are numerous similarities between these provisions and the Milwaukee program that my team and I studied. All three programs make two-year college free (or nearly so) for all students without income requirements and through early commitment of aid. All three require the FAFSA and high school graduation. Importantly, unlike both the Biden and CP proposals, the Milwaukee program had merit requirements, which undermined its success. This is partly why our evidence is so relevant to the current debate.

Some might wonder why the president has scaled back the proposal to just free community college. This reflects that the idea of free college—even the “scaled back” version—is such a marked departure from past policy, especially at the federal level. Free community college alone would still be arguably the largest shift in federal higher education policy in the past half-century.

Caveats and Concluding Thoughts

We cannot make policy from evidence alone, but it can and should play a key role. Sometimes, policy ideas have such limited evidence of effectiveness that it is difficult to make any plausible case for a large-scale, national program. In other cases, there is enough promise for pilot studies and competitive grants to establish efficacy. With free college, we seem to be well beyond that point. In addition to decades of results on general financial aid programs, we have a growing number of studies on state and local programs that all show positive evidence—the “laboratory of democracy” at work. The idea of a large, federal free-college program therefore has more and more credibility.

A decade ago, it was not at all obvious that this is what the evidence would show. There was really no evidence on free college programs when we started this project back in 2009. Also, there were good reasons to expect that such a large increase in aid would suffer from “diminishing returns”—the idea that the next dollar is less effective than the previous one. This could have made free college more costly than the benefits could justify. Now, we know better.

I do still worry a bit about other factors and challenges. For example, the above analyses can only capture the immediate effects of financial aid, yet a federal free college program is such a marked departure in policy that it could alter political and market forces operating on higher education in unpredictable ways, perhaps even lowering college spending and quality. Also, if the proposal remains focused on community colleges, then this will shift students out of four-year colleges and into colleges that currently have very low completion rates. There are also other ways to increase college affordability and access that do not require free college (e.g., increased Pell Grants and income-based loan repayment), some of which target funds more narrowly to the most disadvantaged students. And there are many details to be worked out as the president’s allies in Congress try to generate sufficient support without (a) sacrificing core principles, or (b) creating new problems that can arise when grafting new federal programs on to widely varying state contexts.

Still, it is not often that an idea comes around that addresses a widely acknowledged problem and has both research support and a fair degree of bipartisan political support. The stars seem aligned to make some form of national free college a reality. The more evidence we see, the more that would seem to be a step forward.

Related Content

Douglas N. Harris, Raquel Farmer-Hinton, Debbie Kim, John B. Diamond, Tangela Blakely Reavis, Kelly Krupa Rifelj, Hilary Lustick, Bradley R. Carl

September 20, 2018

Louis Serino

October 2, 2018

Education Access & Equity Education Policy Higher Education

Governance Studies

Brown Center on Education Policy

Rachel M. Perera, Jon Valant, Katharine Meyer

August 12, 2024

Dr. Neil A. Lewis, Jr.

May 14, 2024

Katharine Meyer, Rachel M. Perera, Michael Hansen

April 9, 2024

• 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 .”

Spring 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.

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:

Human rights abuses are happening right now – start a monthly gift today.

• Videos & Photos
• Take Action

Toward Free Education for All Children

Momentum Building to Expand the Right to Millions

BedeOnKidRights

Share this via Facebook Share this via X Share this via WhatsApp Share this via Email Other ways to share Share this via LinkedIn Share this via Reddit Share this via Telegram Share this via Printer

This essay is part of a series highlighting global human rights trends in 2022. Read more  here .

Education is fundamental for children’s development and a powerful catalyst for improving their entire lives. International human rights law guarantees everyone a right to education. But it surprises many to learn that the international human rights framework only explicitly guarantees an immediate right to free primary education—even though we know that a child equipped with just a primary education is inadequately prepared to thrive in today’s world.

Children who participate in education from the pre-primary through to the secondary level have better health, better job prospects, and higher earnings as adults. And they are less vulnerable to exploitation and abuse, including child labor and child marriage.

All countries have made a political commitment through the United Nations “ Sustainable Development Goals ” to providing by 2030 both access to pre-primary education for all, and that all children complete free secondary school education. Yet the world appears on track to fail these targets , and children deserve more than yet another round of non-binding pledges.

For these reasons, Human Rights Watch believes that it’s time to take countries that made these commitments at their word, and expand the right to education under international law. It should explicitly recognize that all children should have a right to early childhood education, including at least one year of free pre-primary education, as well as a right to free secondary education.

We are not alone in this belief.

In 2019, the World Organisation for Early Childhood Education and the Latin American Campaign for the Right to Education met with experts from the United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child to share their research , concluding that the legally binding human rights framework failed to adequately specify that the right to education should begin in early childhood, before primary school.

In December 2021, UNESCO—the UN education organization— concluded that in light of 21st century trends and challenges, the right to education should be reframed, and that recognizing early childhood education as a legal right at the international level “would allow the international community to hold governments accountable and ensure there is adequate investment.”

In 2022, these sparks began to catch fire.

In June, various international children’s rights and human rights experts called for the expansion of the right to education under international law, to recognize every child’s right to free pre-primary education and free secondary education. In September, the Nobel Prize laureate and education champion Malala Yousafzai and the environmental youth activist Vanessa Nakate were among over a half-a-million people around the world who signed an open letter from the global civic movement Avaaz, calling on world leaders to create a new global treaty that protects children’s right to free education—from pre-primary through secondary school.

Argentina and Spain announced their commitments to support the idea at the UN’s Transforming Education summit in September. In October, the UN’s top independent education expert recommended that the right to early childhood education should be enshrined in a legally-binding human rights instrument. And the year ended on a high note with education ministers and delegations gathered at the November World Conference on Early Childhood Care and Education in Uzbekistan adopting the new “ Tashkent Declaration ,” in which they agreed to enhance legal frameworks to ensure the right to education “includes the right to at least one year of free and compulsory pre-primary quality education for all children.”

So what might happen in 2023? All concerned will turn to the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva to see whether member countries will agree to start the process to begin drafting such a treaty. At least half of all countries already guarantee at least one year of free pre-primary education or free secondary education under their own domestic laws and policies. This includes low- and middle- income countries from around the world. That means that there’d be a large constituency of countries potentially willing to sign such a treaty when adopted.

Even when human rights feel under threat around the world, it’s vital for the human rights movement not to be on the defensive. Making the positive case for strengthening and advancing human rights standards has a critical role in shaping and improving the future. Guaranteeing the best conditions for children to access a quality, inclusive, free education—and thereby to develop their personalities, talents, mental and physical abilities, and prepare them for a responsible life in a free society—is the kind of positive human rights agenda that all countries should rally around in 2023.

Your tax deductible gift can help stop human rights violations and save lives around the world.

• Children's Rights

More Reading

All children have a right to pre-primary education.

Across Africa, Many Young Mothers Face Education Barriers

“How Dare They Peep into My Private Life?”

Children’s Rights Violations by Governments that Endorsed Online Learning During the Covid-19 Pandemic

“Years Don’t Wait for Them”

Increased Inequalities in Children’s Right to Education Due to the Covid-19 Pandemic

Most Viewed

Burkina faso: conscription used to punish prosecutors, judges.

“I Sleep in My Own Deathbed”

Doctor’s Rape, Murder in India Sparks Protests

"How Come You Allow Little Girls to Get Married?"

October 7 Crimes Against Humanity, War Crimes by Hamas-led Groups

Protecting Rights, Saving Lives

Human Rights Watch defends the rights of people in close to 100 countries worldwide, spotlighting abuses and bringing perpetrators to justice

Get updates on human rights issues from around the globe. Join our movement today.

Every weekday, get the world’s top human rights news, explored and explained by Andrew Stroehlein.

Free College – Top 3 Pros and Cons

Pro/Con Arguments | Discussion Questions | Take Action | Sources | More Debates

Free  college  programs come in different forms but generally refer to the government picking up the tab for tuition costs, while students pay for other expenses such as room and board.  [ 50 ]  

32 states and DC have some variation of free college programs. 9 states have statewide programs with “few eligibility limits,” while 23 have “[s]tate sponsored free college tuition programs with income, merit, geographical or programmatic limitations.” 18 states have no free college programs. [ 51 ] [ 52 ]

Tuition at public four-year institutions rose more than 31% between 2010 and 2020. When adjusted for inflation, college tuition has risen 747.8% since 1963. The average student loan debt more than doubled from the 1990s to the 2010s, according to the US Department of Education . About 16.8 million undergraduate students were projected to be enrolled in college in 2022, according to the National Center for Education Statistics. [ 29 ] [ 53 ] [ 54 ]

College tuition is set by state policy or by each individual institution. Some colleges, especially federal land grant schools, had free tuition beginning in the 1860s. And some states had tuition-free policies at state colleges and universities for in-state students well into the twentieth century. According to Ronald Gordon Ehrenberg, Professor at Cornell University, “Public colleges and universities were often free at their founding in the United States, but over time, as public support was reduced or not increased sufficiently to compensate for their growth in students and costs (faculty and staff salaries, utilities etc.), they moved first to a low tuition and eventually higher tuition policy. About 2.9% of American 18- to 24-year olds went to college for the 1909-1910 school year, compared to 40% in 2020. [ 37 ] [ 38 ] [ 39 ] [ 55 ]

At the national level, free college programs have been in effect for military personnel since the 1944 GI Bill . At least 26 other countries have free or nearly free college tuition: Argentina, Austria, Brazil, Czech Republic, Denmark, Egypt, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Iceland, Kenya, Luxembourg, Malaysia, Mexico, Morocco, Norway, Panama, Poland, Scotland, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Turkey, and Uruguay. [ 7 ] [ 8 ] [ 9 ] [ 42 ] [ 43 ] [ 44 ]

According to the 2022 Education Next Survey of Public Opinion, 63% of Americans supported free 4-year college and 66% supported free 2-year college. [ 56 ]

Should Public College Be Tuition-Free?

Pro 1 Tuition-free college will help decrease crippling student debt. If tuition is free, students will take on significantly fewer student loans. Student loan debt in the United States is almost $1.75 trillion. 45 million Americans have student loan debt, and 7.5 million of those borrowers are in default. The average 2019 graduate owed $28,950 in college loans. Approximately 92% of US student loans are owned by the US Department of Education. [ 57] Student loan debt rose 317% between 1970 and 2021, and public college costs rose 180% between 1980 and 2019. Students are coming out of college already buried under a mountain of debt before they have a chance to start their careers. [ 58] [ 59] Senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT), an advocate for free college, stated, “It is insane and counter-productive to the best interests of our country and our future, that hundreds of thousands of bright young people cannot afford to go to college, and that millions of others leave school with a mountain of debt that burdens them for decades. That shortsighted path to the future must end.” [ 6] Read More

Pro 2 The US economy and society has benefited from tuition-free college in the past. Nearly half of all college students in 1947 were military veterans, thanks to President Roosevelt signing the GI Bill in 1944 to ensure military service members, veterans, and their dependents could attend college tuition-free. The GI Bill allowed 2.2 million veterans to earn a college education, and another 5.6 million to receive vocational training, all of which helped expand the middle class. An estimated 40% of those veterans would not have been able to attend college otherwise. GI Bill recipients generated an extra $35.6 billion over 35 years and an extra $12.8 billion in tax revenue, resulting in a return of $6.90 for every dollar spent. [ 7 ] [ 8 ] [ 9] [ 10 ] The beneficiaries of the free tuition contributed to the economy by buying cars and homes, and getting jobs after college, while not being burdened by college debt. They contributed to society with higher levels of volunteering, voting, and charitable giving. [ 11 ] The 1944 GI Bill paid for the educations of 22,000 dentists, 67,000 doctors, 91,000 scientists, 238,000 teachers, 240,000 accountants, 450,000 engineers, three Supreme Court Justices (Rehnquist, Stevens, and White), three presidents (Nixon, Ford, and H.W. Bush), many congressmen, at least one Secretary of State, 14 Nobel Prize winners, at least 24 Pulitzer Prize winners, many entertainers (including Johnny Cash, Paul Newman, and Clint Eastwood), and many more. [ 8 ] [ 12 ] [ 13 ] During the post-World War II era, the United States ranked first in the world for college graduates, compared to tenth today. [ 14 ] Read More

Pro 3 Everyone deserves the opportunity to get a college education. Jamie Merisotis, President and CEO of the Lumina Foundation, stated, “A dramatic increase in the number of Americans with college credentials is absolutely essential for our economic, social and cultural development as a country.” [ 15 ] The rapid rise of tuition has limited access to higher education, which is essential in today’s workforce: three-quarters of the fastest-growing occupations now call for education beyond high school, according to the US Department of Education. College graduates earn $570,000 more than a high school graduate over a lifetime, on average, and they have lower unemployment rates. Students from low- and moderate-income families are unable to afford as many as 95% of American colleges. [ 16] [ 17] [ 29] [ 30] Max Page, Professor of Architecture, and Dan Clawson, Professor of Sociology, both at the University of Massachusetts Amherst, stated: “A century ago high school was becoming a necessity, not a luxury; today the same is happening to college. If college is essential for building a career and being a full participant in our democracy as high school once was, shouldn’t it be free, paid for by public dollars, and treated as a right of all members of our country?” [ 21 ] Read More

Con 1 Tuition-free college is not free college and students will still have large debts. Tuition is only one expense college students have to pay and accounts for anywhere from 28.9% to 73.6% of total average college costs. [ 60] On average, 2021-2022 in-state tuition at a 4-year public college cost $10,740 per year. Fees, room, and board for on-campus housing are another $11,950 . Books and supplies are another $1,240, transportation another $1,230, and other expenses cost another $2,170. Without tuition, college still costs an average of $16,590 per year. [ 60 ] Tuition accounts for just 20% of the average community college student’s budget, which runs $18,830 annually on average. [ 60 ] Sweden has free college and yet students in that country had an average of $19,000 in student debt for living costs and other expenses in 2013, compared to the $24,800 in debt US college students had the same year. [ 24 ] [ 1 ] Read More

Con 2 Taxpayers would spend billions to subsidize tuition, while other college costs remained high. The estimated cost of Bernie Sanders’ free college program was $47 billion per year, and had states paying 33% of the cost, or $15.5 billion. According to David H. Feldman and Robert B. Archibald, both Professors of Economics at William & Mary College: “This will require tax increases, or it will force states to move existing resources into higher education and away from other state priorities like health care, prisons, roads and K-12 education.” [ 25 ] [ 26 ] According to a 2016 Campaign for Free College report, states could lose between $77 million (Wyoming) and $5 billion (California) in tuition revenue from their state colleges and universities, and have to pay an additional $15,000 (Wyoming) to $55 million (New York) to subsidize a tuition-free plan. [ 27 ] Neal McCluskey, Director of the Cato Institute’s Center for Educational Freedom, calculated that free college funded by tax dollars would cost every adult taxpayer $1,360 a year, or $77,500 over a lifetime. “Why should people who want to go to college get it paid for in part by people who pursue on-the-job training or other forms of noncollege education?,” he wrote in the Wall Street Journal , adding, “Indeed, why should anyone get a degree to increase their lifetime earnings on the backs of taxpayers?” [ 28 ] College costs have increased for of a number of reasons unrelated to tuition, including fancy dorms, amenities like lazy rivers and climbing walls, student services (such as healthcare), athletics, increases in administrative personnel, and cuts in state funding. [ 31 ] [ 32 ] [ 33 ] [ 46] Read More

Con 3 Tuition-free college will decrease completion rates, leaving students without the benefits of a full college education and degree. Jack A. Chambless, Economics Professor at Valencia College, said that with a free college program, “Potentially millions of young people who have no business attending college would waste their time — and taxpayer dollars — seeking degrees they will not obtain… Free tuition would dupe young people into a sense of belonging, only to find that their work ethic, intelligence and aptitude are not up to the rigors of advanced education.” [ 34 ] Under California’s community college fee waiver program, over 50% of the state’s community college students attended for free (before a 2017 program change), but only 6% of all California community college students completed a career technical program and fewer than 10% completed a two-year degree in six years. [ 35 ] Vince Norton, Managing Partner at Norton Norris, a campus marketing company, stated, “Students will enroll at a ‘free college’ and borrow money for the cost of attendance. Then, they will drop out and have a student loan – but no skills. Brilliant.” [ 36 ] Read More

Discussion Questions

1. Should college tuition be free? For which colleges/universities? Explain your answers.

2. Brainstorm potential pros and cons of free college for individual students.

3. How would free college benefit (or disadvantage) college communities? Explain your answer(s).

Take Action

1. Analyze the goals of the Campaign for Free College Tuition .

2. Explore US News’ list of 16 colleges that do not charge tuition.

3. Consider Michael Poliakoff’s position that free college could raise tuition costs.

4. Consider how you felt about the issue before reading this article. After reading the pros and cons on this topic, has your thinking changed? If so, how? List two to three ways. If your thoughts have not changed, list two to three ways your better understanding of the “other side of the issue” now helps you better argue your position.

5. Push for the position and policies you support by writing US national senators and representatives .

More College Debate Topics

Is a College Education Worth It? – Proponents of college education say college graduates make more money. Opponents say student loan debt is crippling for college graduates.

Should Student Loan Debt Be Eliminated via Forgiveness or Bankruptcy? – Proponents say debt forgiveness would boost the economy. Opponents say people must be held responsible for their personal economic choices.

Should Colleges and Universities Pay College Athletes? – Proponents say colleges profit unfairly off of the athletes. Opponents say the athletes are paid in tuition.

ProCon/Encyclopaedia Britannica, Inc. 325 N. LaSalle Street, Suite 200 Chicago, Illinois 60654 USA

Natalie Leppard Managing Editor [email protected]

© 2023 Encyclopaedia Britannica, Inc. All rights reserved

• Social Media
• Death Penalty
• School Uniforms
• Video Games
• Animal Testing
• Gun Control
• Banned Books
• Teachers’ Corner

Cite This Page

ProCon.org is the institutional or organization author for all ProCon.org pages. Proper citation depends on your preferred or required style manual. Below are the proper citations for this page according to four style manuals (in alphabetical order): the Modern Language Association Style Manual (MLA), the Chicago Manual of Style (Chicago), the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association (APA), and Kate Turabian's A Manual for Writers of Term Papers, Theses, and Dissertations (Turabian). Here are the proper bibliographic citations for this page according to four style manuals (in alphabetical order):

[Editor's Note: The APA citation style requires double spacing within entries.]

[Editor’s Note: The MLA citation style requires double spacing within entries.]

• 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

Harvard’s Financial Outlook

What to expect after a tumultuous year

Nuclear Treaties and the Russo-Ukrainian Conflict

Mitigating nuclear risks in modern warfare

President Garber, Provost Manning

Harvard’s senior leadership settled.

Most popular

A Right Way to Read?

The science, art, and politics of teaching an essential skill

Academic Freedom and Free Speech

Robert Post explains how they differ—and why it matters, especially now

Crimson Construction

Post-pandemic campus building resumes on a massive scale.

More to explore

What is the Economic Impact of Climate Change on Global GDP?

The impact on global GDP is likely six times greater than previously estimated. 

Art Made Out of Buttons

Works by Harlem-based artist Beau McCall at Brockton's Fuller Craft Museum

John Harvard's Journal

Susan Farbstein on Human Rights Law

Human rights lawyer on law’s ability to promote justice—and shape public understanding

How courts can help, not punish parents of habitually absent students

Can training high school students help address the teacher shortage?

School district sued over broken windows, mold, overheating classrooms and missing teachers

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

Getting Students Back to School

Calling the cops: Policing in California schools

Black teachers: How to recruit them and make them stay

Lessons in Higher Education: California and Beyond

Superintendents: Well paid and walking away

Keeping California public university options open

Getting students back to school: Addressing chronic absenteeism

August 28, 2024

July 25, 2024

Adult education: Overlooked and underfunded

May 14, 2024

Getting California kids to read: What will it take?

College & Careers

Tuition-free college is critical to our economy

Morley Winograd and Max Lubin

November 2, 2020, 13 comments.

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 .

Make a difference with us

EdSource appreciates readers like you – educators, leaders, parents, students – who are building a more equitable future for every student. Until Aug. 30, we're fundraising to support a Local News Fellow who will cover California's underserved communities. Will you help us make a difference?

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 3 years ago 3 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 3 years ago 3 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 3 years ago 3 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 4 years ago 4 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 4 years ago 4 years ago

There is no such thing as tuition free.

EdSource Special Reports

Helping students with mental health struggles may help them return to school

In California, 1 in 4 students are chronically absent putting them academically behind. A new USC study finds links between absenteeism and mental health struggles.

Millions of kids are still skipping school. Could the answer be recess — and a little cash?

Data gathered from over 40 states shows absenteeism improved slightly but remains above pre-pandemic levels. School leaders are trying various strategies to get students back to school.

California districts try many options before charging parents for student truancy

A 2010 law sponsored by then-District Attorney Kamala Harris, allows for the arrest of parents of chronically absent students.

How Washington state stands apart as a model for community college bachelor’s degrees

California’s community colleges are barred by state law from offering bachelor’s degrees in fields like education and nursing, even in remote areas without a four-year university. That’s not the case in Washington.

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

Forgot Your Password?

New to The Nation ? Subscribe

Print subscriber? Activate your online access

Current Issue

• December 19, 2019

Why Public College Should Be Free

Private institutions should be forced to compete with free, high-quality public ones., latest from the nation, the secret power of doug emhoff, bernie among the billionaires, bernie sanders breaks the silence on gaza at the dnc, now is the time for kamala harris to flip the script and win big on abortion, barack obama is the last american transcendentalist, editor's picks.

VIDEO: People in Denmark Are a Lot Happier Than People in the United States. Here’s Why.

Historical Amnesia About Slavery Is a Tool of White Supremacy

Home > Blog > Getting Into College > 5 Reasons Why College Should Be Free

Getting Into College , Is UoPeople Worth it , Paying for School , Tuition Free , Why UoPeople

5 Reasons Why College Should Be Free

Updated: August 15, 2024

Published: January 30, 2020

The cost of college is rising even faster than inflation in the U.S. Many students around the world face financial constraints when it comes to attending college. Because education is such a vital part of life, there are many reasons why college should be free .

Not only do the arguments for debt-free education include personal benefits, but they also show how education helps to positively impact society overall.

Thankfully, the progression in technology is making it possible to increase access to education globally.

However, there is still a long way to go and more schools and countries are weighing the pros and cons of offering an affordable education . The ability to provide free education for all is becoming more of a possibility as time progresses.

Photo by Good Free Photos on Unsplash

Here are 5 reasons that support the case for debt-free education:

1. Improves Society

When people are more educated, they can solve problems better. This means that society can progress at a faster rate.

Additionally, people with education can better understand the history of their society and its current economic conditions. As such, they may be more inclined to participate in politics and improve their country.

Also, when more people have access to a college education, the number of employable people for high-skilled jobs increases. This means that more people will join the workforce, which could help lessen the wealth gap between the upper, middle, and lower classes.

2. Widened Workforce

Along with technological progressions comes a shift in the workforce. Most automated jobs are replacing low-skill workers. Automation is spreading quickly across positions that require repetition, like back-office tasks.

However, automation is not meant to replace the entire workforce. Instead, the needs of most economies are shifting to require a more skilled workforce, with people who have good analytical skills and creative thinking abilities. These skills are both taught and honed with a college education. If more people could attend college for free , then the workforce will expand.

The workforce will also be more agile. In the case of an economic downturn when one industry falters, another generally rises to replace it. Then, workers need to be retrained and taught skills for the job. If more people could enter school and gear their studies towards booming industries, then the population will be more equipped to cope with economic changes.

3. A Boosted Economy

Most students graduate with a massive amount of debt. For example, in the U.S., the average student debt per person is $28,950.

Graduating with significant debt is common in the U.S., where the average student debt is $28,950 per person. This debt can take years to pay off, delaying major life purchases like homes and cars. Without debt, graduates could earn, save, and spend more quickly, stimulating the economy. 

Increased consumer spending boosts demand and creates more employment opportunities, creating a positive economic cycle. Additionally, the fear of debt often deters students from pursuing higher education, so debt-free education could encourage more people to attend college.

4. Increase Equality

Since affordability is a major issue for so many people when it comes to attending college, the playing field has not always been equal.

A lot of the brightest minds in the world stem from low-income households, but that shouldn’t hold them back from continuing their education. If there was an equal opportunity to attend school, then everyone would have the chance to go to school. Affordable education is a major step towards equality.

5. More Focus

When students are not worried about money, they can focus better on their studies. Even when students have loans and financial aid, they may find themselves stuck worrying about how they will have to pay them back in the future. This added stress can negatively impact their focus during the time when they are supposed to be learning.

Photo by Christian Wiediger on Unsplash

5 reasons why college shouldn’t be free.

While free college education has many benefits, there are also arguments against it. Here are some reasons why college shouldn’t be free:

Increased Strain on Government Budgets

Providing free college education would require significant funding from the government. This could lead to higher taxes or cuts in other essential areas like healthcare and infrastructure. 

Governments would face the challenge of maintaining the quality of education with limited resources, which could result in overcrowded classrooms and insufficient support services. 

For example, a First-Dollar Tuition-Free program would cost $58 billion in its first year, totaling $800 billion over 11 years. This significant financial burden could strain government budgets, making it difficult to fund other vital programs.

Devaluation of Degrees

When college is free and accessible to everyone, the value of a college degree may decrease. An oversupply of graduates could lead to increased competition in the job market, making it more challenging for individuals to stand out. 

The increased number of degree holders might also lead employers to raise their expectations, requiring higher qualifications for entry-level positions.

Reduced Accountability for Academic Performance

Students who pay for their education often have a financial stake in their academic success, which can motivate them to perform better. 

When education is free, some students might take it less seriously, leading to a decrease in overall academic performance. The lack of financial investment could diminish students’ accountability and commitment to their studies.

Implementation and Sustainability Challenges

Implementing free college programs is complex and requires careful planning and significant resources. Some countries or institutions that have attempted free college education have encountered financial difficulties or had to limit enrollment due to budget constraints. 

Ensuring sustainable funding and maintaining quality education would be a continuous challenge.

Limited Resources for Non-Academic Paths

Focusing government funding on making college free might divert resources from vocational training and other non-academic career paths that are equally important. 

Not all students wish to pursue a traditional college education, and emphasizing free college could overshadow alternative routes to success, such as apprenticeships and technical training programs. 

Providing diverse educational opportunities ensures that all individuals can find a path that suits their skills and interests.

Countries That Offer Free College

Many countries recognize the benefits of debt-free education and have implemented policies to provide free or low-cost higher education to their residents, and sometimes to international students. Here’s an overview of some countries offering such opportunities:

• Germany : Germany offers tuition-free education for both domestic and international students at its public universities. Students typically only pay a small semester fee, which often includes public transportation. This approach has made Germany an attractive destination for students seeking quality education without the burden of tuition fees.
• Austria : Austrian universities offer free education for EU residents, while non-EU students benefit from relatively low tuition costs. The Austrian education system emphasizes accessibility and affordability, making it a popular choice for students across Europe.
• Finland : In Finland, education is free for students from the EU, and non-EU students can benefit from low tuition fees in many programs. Finnish universities are known for their high-quality education and strong focus on research and innovation.
• Czech Republic : The Czech Republic offers free higher education in Czech for all students, regardless of nationality. For programs taught in other languages, such as English, low tuition fees are typically charged. This policy attracts a diverse group of international students seeking affordable education.
• Spain : Spanish universities provide free education for EU residents, while non-EU students can access low-cost tuition. Spain’s commitment to affordable higher education ensures broad access to its academic institutions, making it an appealing option for students from various backgrounds.

The Takeaway

As we continue to debate the merits and challenges of tuition-free education, we must ask ourselves: Is a future with universal access to education the key to unlocking a more prosperous and equitable society?

The money for tuition-free or cheaper universities will have to come from somewhere. Arguments against free education include potential tax increases on individuals or businesses or reallocating funds from other areas like military spending. Implementing free college programs can also lead to challenges such as maintaining educational quality and managing increased enrollment.

Despite these political considerations, expanding tuition-free education offers massive advantages. It promotes equality, stimulates the economy, and creates a more skilled workforce. Many countries, such as Germany, Austria, and Finland, have successfully implemented models of free or low-cost higher education, demonstrating the potential benefits and feasibility of such systems.

At the University of the People, we are dedicated to providing quality, tuition-free education to students globally, embodying the future of accessible and inclusive higher education. By removing financial barriers, we aim to empower students to pursue their academic goals and contribute to a more educated and equitable world.

FAQ Section

What are the potential benefits of free college education.

Free college education can increase access to higher education, reduce student debt, and promote social equality. It can also lead to a more educated workforce, driving economic growth and innovation.

Can free college increase access to higher education for all?

Yes, free college can remove financial barriers, making higher education accessible to more people, especially those from low-income backgrounds.

Can free college stimulate economic growth and innovation?

Yes, free college can lead to a more educated workforce, boosting productivity, driving innovation, and stimulating economic growth by filling high-skill job positions.

What are the potential drawbacks of free college education?

Drawbacks include increased strain on government budgets, potential degree devaluation, and reduced academic performance accountability. Implementing and sustaining such programs can be complex and financially challenging.

How does free college impact the job market and workforce?

Free college can lead to a more skilled and educated workforce, but it might also result in an oversupply of graduates, making it harder for individuals to stand out in the job market.

How does free college align with other educational reforms?

Free college can complement other educational reforms aimed at increasing access, reducing inequality, and improving the quality of education. It should be part of a broader strategy that includes vocational training and lifelong learning opportunities.

What are the long-term implications of implementing free college?

Long-term implications include potential changes in government spending priorities, the need for sustainable funding models, and possible shifts in the value and perception of college degrees.

Can free college address the skills gap in certain industries?

Yes, free college can help address skills gaps by making it easier for students to pursue education and training in high-demand fields, thus aligning the workforce with industry needs.

In this article

At UoPeople, our blog writers are thinkers, researchers, and experts dedicated to curating articles relevant to our mission: making higher education accessible to everyone. Read More

The Argument for Tuition-Free College

Soaring tuitions and student loan debt are placing higher education beyond the reach of many American students. It’s time to make college free and accessible to all.

by Keith Ellison

April 14, 2016

(Shutterstock)

In 1862, President Abraham Lincoln signed the Land Grant College Act into law, laying the groundwork for the largest system of publicly funded universities in the world. Some of America's greatest colleges, including the University of Minnesota, were created by federal land grants, and were known as "democracy's colleges" or "people's colleges."

But that vision of a "people's college" seems awfully remote to a growing number of American students crushed under soaring tuitions and mounting debt. One hundred and fifty years after Lincoln made his pledge, it's time to make public colleges and universities free for every American.

This idea is easier than it looks. For most of our nation's history, public colleges and universities have been much more affordable than they are today, with lower tuition, and financial aid that covered a much larger portion of the costs . The first step in making college accessible again, and returning to an education system that serves every American, is addressing the student loan debt crisis.

The cost of attending a four-year college has increased by 1,122 percent since 1978 . Galloping tuition hikes have made attending college more expensive today than at any point in U.S. history. At the same time, debt from student loans has become the largest form of personal debt in America-bigger than credit card debt and auto loans. Last year, 38 million American students owed more than $1.3 trillion in student loans.

Once, a degree used to mean a brighter future for college graduates, access to the middle class, and economic stability.

Today, student loan debt increases inequality and makes it harder for low-income graduates, particularly those of color , to buy a house, open a business, and start a family.

The solution lies in federal investments to states to lower the overall cost of public colleges and universities. In exchange, states would commit to reinvesting state funds in higher education. Any public college or university that benefited from the reinvestment program would be required to limit tuition increases. This federal-state partnership would help lower tuition for all students. Schools that lowered tuition would receive additional federal grants based on the degree to which costs are lowered.

Reinvesting in higher education programs like Pell Grants and work-study would ensure that Pell and other forms of financial aid that students don't need to pay back would cover a greater portion of tuition costs for low-income students. In addition, states that participate in this partnership would ensure that low-income students who attend state colleges and universities could afford non-tuition expenses like textbooks and housing fees . This proposal is one way to ensure that no student graduates with loans to pay back.

If the nation can provide hundreds of billions of dollars in subsidies to the oil and gas industry and billions of dollars more to Wall Street , we can afford to pay for public higher education. A tax on financial transactions like derivatives and stock trades would cover the cost. Building a truly affordable higher education system is an investment that would pay off economically.

Eliminating student loan debt is the first step, but it's not the last. Once we ensure that student loan debt isn't a barrier to going to college, we should reframe how we think about higher education. College shouldn't just be debt free-it should be free. Period.

We all help pay for our local high schools and kindergartens, whether or not we send our kids to them. And all parents have the option of choosing public schools, even if they can afford private institutions. Free primary and secondary schooling is good for our economy, strengthens our democracy, and most importantly, is critical for our children's health and future. Educating our kids is one of our community's most important responsibilities, and it's a right that every one of us enjoys. So why not extend public schooling to higher education as well?

Some might object that average Americans should not have to pay for students from wealthy families to go to school. But certain things should be guaranteed to all Americans, poor or rich. It's not a coincidence that some of the most important social programs in our government's history have applied to all citizens, and not just to those struggling to make ends meet.

Universal programs are usually stronger and more stable over the long term, and they're less frequently targeted by budget cuts and partisan attacks. Public schools have stood the test of time-let's make sure public colleges and universities do, too.

The United States has long been committed to educating all its people, not only its elites.

This country is also the wealthiest in the history of the world. We can afford to make college an option for every American family.

You can count on the Prospect , can we count on you?

There's no paywall here. Your donations power our newsroom as we report on ideas, politics and power — and what’s really at stake as we navigate another presidential election year. Please, become a member , or make a one-time donation , today. Thank you!

About the Prospect / Contact Info

Browse Archive / Back Issues

Subscription Services

Privacy Policy

DONATE TO THE PROSPECT

Copyright 2024 | The American Prospect, Inc. | All Rights Reserved

• 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

Summer 2024.

Vol. 24, No. 3

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

• About The Journalist’s Resource
• Follow us on Facebook
• Follow us on Twitter
• Criminal Justice
• Environment
• Politics & Government
• Race & Gender

Expert Commentary

‘Free-college’ and ‘tuition-free’ programs: What the research says

While many politicians argue eliminating tuition will help more Americans go to college, studies show the results of “free college” programs differ according to their scope and structure.

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 December 12, 2019

This <a target="_blank" href="https://journalistsresource.org/education/free-college-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;">

In the lead-up to the 2020 elections, the  Journalist’s Resource  team is combing through the Democratic presidential candidates’ platforms and reporting what the research says about their policy proposals. We want to encourage deep coverage of these proposals — and do our part to deter  horse race journalism , which research suggests can lead to inaccurate reporting and an uninformed electorate. We’re focusing on those that have a reasonable chance of becoming federal policy if a Democrat is elected to the nation’s highest office. For us, that means at least 3 of the 5 top-polling candidates  support the idea. Most candidates say they would provide “free college,” but their plans differ in terms of who would qualify to receive it and which postsecondary institutions would participate. Free-college proposals generally aim to cover either tuition or tuition and mandatory student fees.

Candidates in favor of free community college

Michael Bennet *, Joe Biden , Cory Booker *, John Delaney *, Amy Klobuchar *, Deval Patrick *, Tom Steyer *, Andrew Yang *

Candidates in favor of free public colleges and universities

Pete Buttigieg *, Julián Castro *, Tulsi Gabbard *, Bernie Sanders *, Elizabeth Warren *, Marianne Williamson *

What the research says

While politicians argue that eliminating tuition will prompt more Americans to go to college and earn degrees, academic studies find this isn’t necessarily the case. Research shows the results of so-called “free college” programs differ according to their structure and scope.

Higher education can be expensive, and tuition is one part of the overall cost. Meanwhile, most free-college and free-tuition programs take a “last dollar” approach, meaning they cover only the amount of tuition left over after a student’s grants, scholarships and other financial aid money are applied. When structured this way, these programs offer a limited financial benefit to lower-income students . Many lower-income students receive a variety of need-based financial aid, including Pell Grants from the federal government , and if they spend that money on tuition, there’s often little or no tuition left for a free-college program to pay.

“First dollar” programs, on the other hand, are applied to the cost of tuition before other forms of financial aid, allowing students to use other aid money for such things as books, housing, transportation, food, laundry and medication.

Another key difference: Local free-college programs, of which there are hundreds nationally, target different student populations. While some offer free tuition to all students graduating from high schools in a specific geographical area, others are restricted to high-achieving students, full-time students or individuals who meet certain income and work requirements .

Key context

When politicians talk about “free college,” they’re usually talking about free tuition. Yang believes community colleges “should be funded at a level to make tuition free or nearly-free for anyone,” according to his campaign website, while Williamson told The Washington Post she supports “making community colleges and state schools affordable or free.”

Tuition, however, is not the largest expense for many students attending public colleges and universities — the schools most free-college plans target. Meals and housing are generally pricier than in-state tuition at public institutions. At community colleges, in-state tuition and fees totaled $3,642 , on average, for the 2017-18 academic year, according to the National Center for Education Statistics .

Off-campus housing and meals together cost an average of $9,952 that year for community college students who didn’t live with parents or guardians. Room and board on campus averaged $6,791. The NCES and other organizations often lump together tuition and mandatory student fees — science lab fees, student activity fees and athletic fees, for example — because, combined, they represent the cost of taking college courses. The NCES, a key source of national higher education data, also reports room and board as one cost.

Prices were higher at public, four-year institutions, primarily state universities. At those institutions, in-state tuition and fees totaled $9,044 , on average, in 2017-18. Their students paid an average of $10,680 for on-campus housing and food, and $8,683 if they lived off campus but not with family.

Another key piece of context: There are so many different models of free-college programs, and the trend is still relatively new, that it’s difficult to gauge which approach is best at making higher learning more affordable and getting more Americans to and through college. Meanwhile, the number of free-college programs, also commonly referred to as “college promise” programs, continues to grow.

Nationwide, there are 420 college promise programs, according to an online database the University of Pennsylvania’s Alliance for Higher Education and Democracy created to track and study these programs. Fewer than 300 such programs existed in fall 2016, according to a study published in the Educational Researcher in 2018, led by University of Pennsylvania professor of education Laura W. Perna .

Perna and a colleague found that broad conclusions cannot be drawn from their findings, largely because these programs vary tremendously from place to place. Some pay tuition at community colleges across a region while others provide tuition at one specific state university . Some cover tuition and other expenses. Programs also differ in terms of the length of time students can participate and how they are funded — private donations or public money.

Perna and her colleagues write that their 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.”

Formative findings

Free-college and free-tuition programs have existed for decades in the U.S. but, prior to 2010, peer-reviewed research on the topic was limited. These programs became more common after the Great Recession, amid rising college tuition prices, mounting student debt and the growing need for more Americans to have a college education.

Among the first programs was The Kalamazoo Promise , created in 2005 to pay both tuition and mandatory fees for all graduates of public high schools in Kalamazoo, Michigan who enrolled at a two- or four-year public institution in Michigan. In 2015, the Tennessee legislature drew a slew of media attention after passing the Tennessee Promise law, making the state the first in the U.S. to offer free community college tuition to all its high school graduates. Since then, several states have begun offering free community college tuition to some or all of their public high school graduates, including Oregon in 2016 , New York in 2017 and California in 2019 .

In 2017, New York became the first state to offer free tuition at state universities — so long as students meet income requirements and agree to remain in New York after receiving their degrees for the same number of years they received funding.

Early research on these individual programs provides mixed results, but indicates that offering free tuition might not be enough to increase the number of Americans going to college.

For example, a study published in 2010 finds that the Kalamazoo Promise program prompted Michigan high school students to consider a wider range of public colleges than they otherwise would have. After the program’s introduction, more students sent their college-entrance exam scores to the state’s most selective public universities — Michigan State University and the University of Michigan-Ann Arbor — and two local public schools — Kalamazoo Valley Community College and Western Michigan University.

The authors noted that lower-income students responded differently than their wealthier peers. Students whose families earned less than $50,000 a year were more likely to send their test scores to Michigan State University compared with students from higher-income households. They were less likely to send their scores to the local community college, a less expensive option. “Taken together, these estimates suggest that The Promise allows test-takers who are financially constrained to consider institutions that are higher priced and more selective,” the authors write in their paper, published in the Economics of Education Review .

In 2013, researchers published what they learned from examining a similar program a community college in the Pacific Northwest introduced in fall 2007. Under its Promise Scholarship program, the school provided one year of free tuition to all students who graduated from the local public high school, which primarily served racial and ethnic minority students living in a low-income area.

The authors of the study, which appeared in the Community College Journal of Research and Practice, discovered that the percentage of high school graduates who applied to the college soared after the program’s launch. Beforehand, fewer than 10% of graduates applied. In 2008, nearly 60% did. The share of graduates who applied began to fall, though, after that first year to 53% in 2009 and 46.3% in 2010, according to the study.

Not only did more students apply to the college, more students enrolled. Just over 8% of students who graduated from the local high school in 2007 went on to take classes at the community college. Meanwhile, 23% of the Class of 2008 did. The percentage of students who matriculated at the college steadily fell, however, with 20.5% of the Class of 2009 pursuing studies at the college and 17.1% of students graduating in 2010.

The authors also find that students who received free tuition were more likely to take a second semester of classes compared with students who did not, and the overall cost of the program was relatively low. Because most students received government grants or aid that covered the entire cost of their tuition, the program cost an average of $540 a year for each enrolled student, the authors explain.

A 2014 study of a free-college program in Massachusetts finds it has “little net benefit,“ the authors write in the American Economic Journal: Applied Economics .

At the time of the analysis, the John and Abigail Adams Scholarship covered tuition at in-state, public colleges for Massachusetts high school graduates who earned test scores that exceeded multiple thresholds. The authors explain that while the Adams Scholarship improved college enrollment, it encouraged high-achieving students to attend lower-quality public institutions, resulting in depressed college graduation rates.

The program, they write, “reduces by about 200 students per year the number of colleges degrees earned by Massachusetts high school graduates. All in all, these considerations suggest the state is spending large amounts of money for little net benefit or even net harm to its students.”

Recent research

Three academic studies conducted in recent years offer additional insights into the structure and impact of free-college and free-tuition programs.

A study that appeared in 2015 in the Journal of Student Financial Aid looks at a Pittsburgh program that paid up to $20,000 in tuition over four years for students who graduated from the city’s high schools with a certain grade-point average and attendance record. The authors’ main takeaway: The program, called the Pittsburgh Promise, did not affect college enrollment.

They found that in years immediately following the program’s introduction in 2007, there was no statistically significant change in the odds that a student with the qualifying grade-point average and attendance record enrolled in college. The authors did, however, detect a small uptick in the probability of enrolling at a public university. When they looked at other schools, they learned that even though the program “made two-year schools cheaper and out-of-state schools relatively more expensive, enrollment in these schools was for the most part unaffected.”

In looking at New York’s statewide free-college program, a study published earlier this year in Education Economics concludes that it had a “negligible” effect on college enrollment within its first few years.  The state’s Excelsior Scholarship offers free tuition at state-funded colleges and universities to state residents whose household incomes fall under a certain threshold. Recipients also must agree to remain in New York after college graduation for the same number of years they received the award.

That study finds that the program, at least in its early years, “created minimal to zero effects on enrollment in New York’s colleges and universities.”

The author writes that the post-graduation residency requirement might be a reason more students chose not participate in the program. “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,” the author writes.

On the other hand, another 2019 paper finds the Kalamazoo Promise has demonstrated positive results in terms of college attendance, persistence and degree completion. To qualify for the program, which pays up to 100% of students’ tuition and fees at any public postsecondary school in Michigan, students must have attended a Kalamazoo public school continuously since ninth grade, live in and graduate from the school district and get accepted into a state college or university.

That free-college program, funded by anonymous private donors, also takes a first-dollar approach.

The authors analyzed data for students who graduated in 2003, 2004 and 2005 and compared with students who graduated in 2006 through 2013. What they learned: Kalamazoo Promise improved the odds of students enrolling in any college within six months of graduating high school by an estimated 14%. It boosted the odds of students enrolling in a four-year college by an estimated 23%.

Students took more classes, too. “We find that the cumulative number of [course] credits attempted increased by 13 percent as of two years after high school graduation, and these effects persist,” the researchers write in the paper, published in The Journal of Human Resources . “At two years out, the effects imply one additional class attempted; at four years out, they imply an additional two classes attempted.”

The authors discovered the free-college program also increased the percentage of students earning any postsecondary credential within six years of graduating high school by 10 percentage points. The proportion of racial and ethnic minorities who earned a bachelor’s degree within six years of graduating high school rose an estimated 7.4 percentage points, representing a 46% jump, according to the study. Researchers estimate the proportion of white students who received a bachelor’s degree within six years of graduating high school climbed 3 percentage points — a 7.5% bump.

Despite the improvements, the researchers note the program’s potential is limited. “As one might expect, ‘free college’ is insufficient by itself to ensure successful postsecondary education,” they write. “However, our results indicate that a simple, universal, and generous scholarship program can significantly increase educational attainment of American students. In addition, our results indicate that a simple universal scholarship can help low-income as well as non-low-income students, and therefore have broad benefits.”

Further reading

The Effects of the Kalamazoo Promise on College Choice

Rodney J. Andrews, Stephen DesJardins and Vimal Ranchhod. Economics of Education Review , 2010.

The gist: “We find that the Kalamazoo Promise increases the likelihood that students from Kalamazoo Public Schools consider public institutions in Michigan. In addition, we find that the Kalamazoo Promise especially impacts the college choice set of students from families who earn less than $50,000 in annual income.”

The Effect of a Community College Promise Scholarship on Access and Success

Elizabeth A. Pluhta and G. Richard Penny. Community College Journal of Research and Practice , 2013.

The gist: “The promise of a [tuition] scholarship plus an intensive outreach effort resulted in the majority of graduating seniors submitting scholarship applications and a four-fold increase in the proportion of graduates from the high school who subsequently matriculated at the community college. Once at college, the student recipients demonstrated a high rate of quarter-to-quarter retention. However, few placed into college-level courses in English and math, and their academic progress at the end of the first year was modest.”

Merit Aid, College Quality, and College Completion: Massachusetts’ Adams Scholarship as an In-Kind Subsidy

Sarah R. Cohodes and Joshua S. Goodman. American Economic Journal: Applied Economics , 2014.

The gist: The authors find that “students are remarkably willing to forgo college quality and that [free-tuition] scholarship use actually lowered college completion rates.”

  Using a Merit-Based Scholarship Program to Increase Rates of College Enrollment in an Urban School District: The Case of the Pittsburgh Promise

Robert Bozick, Gabriella Gonzalez and John Engberg. Journal of Student Financial Aid , 2015.

The gist: “Findings showed that the scholarship had no direct effect on the overall rate of college enrollment. However, scholarship-eligible graduates were more likely to attend four-year schools in the years in which the scholarship was available.”

Understanding the Promise: A Typology of State and Local College Promise Programs

Laura W. Perna and Elaine W. Leigh. Educational Researcher , 2018.

The gist: This study offers a broad overview of U.S. “college promise” programs. “The study addresses the following questions: What are predominant types of promise programs that are operating across the United States? What are the programmatic characteristics of different types of promise programs? How do state-sponsored promise programs compare with other promise programs?”

Free Tuition and College Enrollment: Evidence from New York’s Excelsior Program

Hieu Nguyen. Education Economics , 2019.

The gist: “ Since the fall of 2017, New York has offered free tuition to eligible residents attending its state-funded two-year and four-year colleges under its unique Excelsior Scholarship program. We …  document that institution-level enrollment effects are negligible.”

The Effects of the Kalamazoo Promise Scholarship on College Enrollment and Completion

Timothy J. Bartik, Brad J. Hershbein and Marta Lachowska. The Journal of Human Resources , 2019.

The gist: “According to our estimates, the [Kalamazoo] Promise significantly increases college enrollment, college credits attempted, and credential attainment. Stronger effects occur for women.”

Subject experts

Michelle Miller-Adams , professor of political science at Grand Valley State University and research fellow at the W.E. Upjohn Institute.

Robert Bifulco , a ssociate dean, chair and professor for the Public Administration and International Affairs Department at Syracuse University and senior research associate at the Center for Policy Research and the Education Finance and Accountability Program at the Maxwell School of Citizenship and Public Affairs.

Celeste Carruthers , associate professor in the Haslam College of Business at the University of Tennessee with a joint appointment in the Department of Economics and the Boyd Center for Business and Economic Research.

Sarah Cohodes , associate professor of economics and education at Teachers College, Columbia University.

Joshua Goodman , associate professor of economics at Brandeis University.

Jennifer Iriti , research scientist at the Learning Research & Development Center at the University of Pittsburgh.

Lindsay Page , associate professor in psychology in education at the University of Pittsburgh School of Education and research scientist at the University of Pittsburgh’s Learning Research & Development Center.

Laura W. Perna , professor of education and executive director of the Alliance for Higher Education and Democracy, University of Pennsylvania.

Hosung Sohn , assistant professor in the School of Public Service at Chung- Ang Unuiversity.

*Dropped out of race since publication date.

If you’re interested in free-college and tuition-free programs, please check out our tip sheet featuring University of Pennsylvania professor Laura W. Perna. She offers five tips to help journalists improve their coverage of the issue .

This image was obtained from the Flickr account of Truckee Meadows Community College and is being used under a  Creative Commons license . No changes were made.

About The Author

Denise-Marie Ordway

More From Forbes

The benefits of free college.

• Share to Facebook
• Share to Twitter
• Share to Linkedin

A new report considers the effects of tuition-free community college programs and their impacts on ... [+] enrollment and degree completion.

A new working paper from the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) investigates who benefits from free college programs. Examining three ways to make community colleges tuition-free, the report considers the effects of the programs and their impacts on enrollment and degree completion.

Background On Free College

Before jumping into the results of the FTC study, it is helpful to understand the differences in “free college” plans across the country. When people hear the phrase “free college” they likely have different ideas about what that actually means. In practice, it typically means eliminating tuition through three variations of policy design: first-dollar, last-dollar, and/or need-based. And it almost always means undergraduate tuition for public colleges and universities.

The primary distinction among free college plans is whether or not they are a first- or last- dollar benefit . First-dollar programs eliminate tuition before all grants and scholarships. A last-dollar approach eliminates tuition after all scholarships and grants. So, students who receive outside scholarships or a Pell Grant would have any remaining tuition covered by the government. The third variation is typically a modification of a last-dollar design, where the program is targeted to students with more financial need. Under these programs, the gap is only filled for a set of students based on income thresholds.

The author of this study examined these three policy designs focused on community colleges and had some interesting findings about who benefits, shifts in enrollment, impacts on tuition at other colleges and more. Here are some of the findings:

First-Dollar

The author found the most positive impact from programs that covered community college tuition outright through a first-dollar program. By eliminating community college tuition, the author estimated a 26% increase in overall enrollment in higher education. And 86% of the increase at community colleges would be due to students who otherwise would not have attended higher education.

Best High-Yield Savings Accounts Of 2024

Best 5% interest savings accounts of 2024.

Additionally, the research showed a 22% increase in degree completions. This suggests that cost is a factor for students enrolling and completing a degree. The researcher also found that this policy would lead to tuition increases at for-profit colleges and non-selective four-year colleges due to students shifting where they enroll and colleges raising prices to make up for the lost revenue.

When looking at who benefits from the program, the study showed that middle-class students benefit the most in terms of reducing tuition paid because low-income students often don’t pay tuition because their Pell Grant can cover the cost. However, low-income students are able to use their Pell Grant to cover living expenses since their tuition is paid.

Last-Dollar

A number of states have chosen to enact last-dollar programs because they cost less to provide. This study found that these programs increase enrollment in higher education by 10%, nearly a third of the increase of first-dollar programs. Similarly, last-dollar programs increase degree completions, but at a lower rate (11%) compared to first-dollar programs (22%).

Many criticize last-dollar plans as regressive because they provide more benefit in tax dollars to people who do not qualify for need-based aid programs like the Pell Grant. This critique is born out in the research. The author found that low-income students would likely not benefit from the program and that students from families with incomes higher than $75,000 would benefit the most.

This study showed that need-based free community college programs would increase higher education enrollment by 11%, a rate comparable to last-dollar programs, though lower than first-dollar programs. The researcher found that these programs do benefit low-income students, as they fill in any gap students may have to cover tuition.

However, the study showed that middle- and high-income students would actually be harmed because, as low-income students shift their enrollments from for-profit and non-selective four-year colleges, the schools would raise tuition to make up for the lost enrollment. When it comes to increasing the number of degrees, the author found that it only increased degree completions by 4%—a rate significantly lower than the other two policy options.

Why This Matters

This research is important for policy conversations today. Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden has proposed making public higher education tuition-free under a first-dollar program. However, his plan is more expansive than the ones studied here. Biden’s proposal also includes public four-year colleges and universities, as well as private Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs) — though there are only a small number of those. Biden also includes a need-based component. His plan would only totally eliminate tuition for students from families earning less than $125,000, but that accounts for the majority of America’s college students.

Related Readings:

Joe Biden and Kamala Harris’s Plan For Student Debt

How For-Profit Colleges Might Fare Under Joe Biden And Kamala Harris

Follow me on  Twitter  and connect with me on  LinkedIn .

• Editorial Standards
• Reprints & Permissions

Thank you for reading!

Please log in, or sign up for a new account and purchase a subscription to continue reading.

Please log in, or sign up for a new account to continue reading.

Thank you for reading! We hope that you continue to enjoy our free content.

Welcome! We hope that you enjoy our free content.

Thank you for reading! On your next view you will be asked to log in or create an account to continue reading.

Thank you for reading! On your next view you will be asked to log in to your subscriber account or create an account and subscribe purchase a subscription to continue reading.

Thank you for signing in! We hope that you continue to enjoy our free content.

Checking back? Since you viewed this item previously you can read it again.

• Contact: 802-479-0191
• Saved items

Barre, VT (05641)

Cloudy early with showers for the afternoon hours. High 66F. Winds WNW at 5 to 10 mph. Chance of rain 40%..

Partly cloudy skies. Slight chance of a rain shower. Low 49F. Winds light and variable.

Updated: August 22, 2024 @ 12:23 am

• Full Forecast

Lambers: Support free school meals

• Aug 22, 2024
• 38 mins ago
• Copy article link

As this new school year opens, let’s all work together to ensure free school meals for every child. No child should go hungry.

As President Harry Truman said in 1946 when starting the National School Lunch Program, “no nation is any healthier than its children.”

The National School Lunch and Breakfast programs provide free or reduced price meals for eligible kids. Some states, like Massachusetts, have gone a step further and have passed universal free school breakfast and lunch legislation. More states are trying to follow.

When school meals are free for all kids, less time and cost is spent on paperwork to determine eligibility and more time focusing on nutrition. The free school meals ensure that no kid slips through the cracks of bureaucracy and falls into hunger.

“Universal free school meals increase participation and reduce food insecurity,” said Massachusetts Education Secretary Patrick A. Tutwiler.

“As a former teacher, I know that providing free breakfast and lunch for our students is one of the best investments we can make to lower costs, support Minnesota’s working families, and care for our young learners and the future of our state,” said Governor Tim Walz of Minnesota, whose state also provides universal free school meals.

In Connecticut, the advocacy group School Meals 4 all CT says “Research shows us when meals are offered at no cost at school to everyone, there is less absenteeism, less bullying, and kids are prepared to learn.”

Universal free school meals is a family friendly policy and the whole country should participate.

Americans overwhelmingly support universal free school meals. The Food Research and Action Center says, “63 percent of voters nationwide support legislation that would make free school meals permanently available to all students.”

Our domestic and foreign policies are better off when child nutrition and school meals are a priority.

President Dwight Eisenhower, for example, followed up Truman’s initiative when starting a national school milk program in 1954. Eisenhower said, “We have seen a remarkable increase in milk drinking by school children. This forward-looking program greatly benefits the health of our children and helps build a sturdier generation of young Americans.”

Likewise, Truman and Eisenhower supported school meals as an important part of foreign policy. It was U.S. sponsored school meal programs in Europe that played a big role in post World War Two recovery.

President Eisenhower’s Food for Peace program supported school lunches in South Korea and other countries in need.

The Greatest Generation showed us that we can feed hungry children at home and overseas at the same time. You just need the heart and will. Today, as we provide lunches and breakfast for needy children at home, we must also be expanding school meals abroad.

Numerous countries are suffering from hunger because of war and climate change. Relief agencies like the U.N. World Food Program, CARE, Save the Children, and Catholic Relief Services are seeing a huge demand for school meals.

The charity Mary’s Meals sees up close the desperate hunger in Tigray, Ethiopia, and the need for school meals.

“It’s hard to exaggerate just how serious the situation is in Tigray. People are already dying of hunger, and everything we’re hearing on the ground points to a well-founded fear of much worse to come if the world doesn’t respond” said Mary’s Meals CEO Magnus MacFarlane-Barrow, who recently visited Ethiopia where the charity is trying to expand school lunches.

The United States should expand its support of school meals overseas by increasing funding for the McGovern-Dole Food for Education program. Named after former senators George McGovern and Bob Dole, the initiative provides school meals in impoverished countries.

Free school meals is good for America’s domestic and foreign policy. Prioritizing child nutrition and school meals is of great value to America and the world. Think of what a difference it makes for any country to eliminate child hunger and have healthy kids at school learning.

William Lambers is an author who partnered with the U.N. World Food Program on the book “Ending World Hunger.”

Latest e-Paper

Times argus.

MSU Extension Michigan Substance Use, Prevention, Education and Recovery (MiSUPER)

Fentanyl facts you should know, part 4: where myths come from and why they spread.

Tanner Derror <[email protected]> and Elizabeth Williams <[email protected]> , Michigan State University Extension - August 19, 2024

Correcting misinformation about fentanyl is important to keep our communities safe. Find out where the most common fentanyl myths come from and how they spread.

This is part of a series covering myths about fentanyl. Read part one here , part two here,  and  part three here .  Many different myths about fentanyl get relayed through media outlets, social media posts, and word of mouth. Fentanyl is a synthetic opioid that is 50 to 100 times as strong as morphine and used to treat severe pain in medical settings.

While it is true that fentanyl can be very dangerous when used outside of a controlled medical setting and is responsible for most drug overdose deaths , there are many ways to protect yourself and others from fentanyl exposure properly. It is important that we address misinformation, so our communities feel better prepared to address the opioid crisis together. Check your own knowledge of fentanyl myths by reading the other articles in this series, linked above.

Where have myths come from?

Researchers have traced myths about the exaggerated risk of fentanyl exposure back to a prominent source: the U.S. Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA). In 2016, the DEA released an advisory and training video that warned: "Just touching fentanyl or accidentally inhaling the substance…can result in absorption through the skin and that is one of the biggest dangers with fentanyl. The onset of adverse health effects, such as disorientation, coughing, sedation, respiratory distress, or cardiac arrest, is very rapid and profound, usually occurring within minutes of exposure."

This statement was paired with an image of tiny, allegedly lethal doses of fentanyl put next to a penny for scale. As we discussed in part 3 of this article series, this information has contributed to many first responders falsely believing they can overdose by touching fentanyl. Many other authorities, including the Department of Justice and National Police Foundation, echoed this false and incorrect message.

Experts refuted the DEA’s claims

In response to these claims, the American Academy of Medical Toxicology and the American Academy of Clinical Toxicology released a joint statement clarifying that fentanyl toxicity from incidental exposure is so unlikely as to be nearly impossible . After the release of this joint statement, professionals from other countries, such as Canada and the United Kingdom, updated their guidelines with correct information for first responders. Unfortunately, many United States law enforcement agencies continue to believe and repeat the incorrect information in the DEA’s report. The DEA’s original statement has since been retracted; however their training video repeating this false information is still available online.

The spread of misinformation surrounding fentanyl overdose risk is a serious problem. A research team conducted a review to determine how misinformation about fentanyl overdose risk has spread and found that “misinformed media reports received approximately 450,000 Facebook shares, potentially reaching nearly 70,000,000 users from 2015 to 2019.” They also found that misinformation, “amplified by erroneous government statements,” received a troubling 15 times as many shares as correct information, which only had 30,000 shares.

Why it is important to correct these myths

Perhaps the most important reason why it is important to correct these myths is that these beliefs may lead to delays in life-saving care and cost someone who is overdosing their life. During an opioid overdose , people stop breathing, and the body’s oxygen supply is cut off. It is important to provide naloxone and rescue breathing as soon as possible. Myths exaggerating the risk of fentanyl exposure may also further stigmatize people who use drugs as being toxic and dangerous to be around or touch.

People who use drugs already report experiencing stigma and abuse from healthcare professionals, leading them to avoid seeking medical care. Additionally, research has found that almost half of law enforcement officers believe there should be a limit on how often someone who overdoses should be able to receive life-saving naloxone, and 83% view the presence of naloxone as an excuse for people to continue using drugs.

These cultural attitudes, worsened by myths about fentanyl and misunderstanding why people use drugs, may cause someone to hesitate to call life-saving emergency services during a potential overdose to avoid interacting with these agencies.

MSU Extension supports harm reduction

The  Michigan Substance Use Prevention, Education, and Recovery (MiSUPER)  team works to increase awareness of opioid use in rural communities regarding prevention, addiction treatment options, and recovery support so that community members and healthcare professionals can recognize signs of problematic opioid use, suggest options for professional treatments, and support those in recovery.

The MiSUPER team offers training and resources on opioid use disorder, harm reduction, and how policies, systems, and environments criminalize and punish people who use substances. As our work evolves in this space, please help us promote harm reduction strategies in your community by sharing this article and continuing to learn and educate others about  harm reduction .

You can sign up and learn more about other health promotional programs offered by MSU Extension by visiting  www.extension.msu.edu/healthprograms .

This article was published by Michigan State University Extension . For more information, visit https://extension.msu.edu . To have a digest of information delivered straight to your email inbox, visit https://extension.msu.edu/newsletters . To contact an expert in your area, visit https://extension.msu.edu/experts , or call 888-MSUE4MI (888-678-3464).

Did you find this article useful?

Msu extension meat cutter training course, fiscally ready communities: from fundamentals to best practices.

new - method size: 3 - Random key: 0, method: tagSpecific - key: 0

You Might Also Be Interested In

MSU researcher awarded five-year, $2.5 million grant to develop risk assessment training program

Published on October 13, 2020

MSU Product Center helps Michigan food entrepreneurs survive and thrive throughout pandemic

Published on August 31, 2021

Protecting Michigan’s environment and wildlife through the Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program

Published on September 1, 2021

MSU Extension to undertake three-year, $7 million vaccination education effort

Published on August 17, 2021

MSU to study precision livestock farming adoption trends in U.S. swine industry

Published on March 15, 2021

MSU research team receives USDA grant to evaluate effectiveness, cost of new blueberry pest management strategies

Published on February 19, 2021

• chronic disease
• chronic pain
• food & health
• healthy relationships
• msu extension
• personal action toward health
• chronic disease,
• chronic pain,
• food & health,
• healthy relationships,
• msu extension,

Why music therapy should be available in health, education and welfare systems

Music therapy has been found to help learning and personal growth. Photo / Getty Images

Opinion: In the early 80s, as a young mother, music teacher and gig musician, I was vitally aware of the role of music in my life and how crucial it was to my wellbeing. Various pieces could improve my mood, help me to move faster or for longer when exercising, emotions and memories would suddenly return when I heard certain pieces, and I found it easier to remember facts and numbers when I chanted them rhythmically. When making music with fellow musicians, I felt powerfully connected to them; and even singing with a group of strangers, at a sports event for example, I would experience a sudden sense of pride and belonging to the wider group.

Yet, until my daughter was born deaf in 1984, I had not seriously contemplated the range of significant barriers that prevent many people from experiencing and benefiting from music. Working alongside the team at Van Asch Deaf Education Centre, I recognised that using carefully planned and executed music programmes enabled the children to access music and helped their learning and personal growth. Suddenly, the concept of “music therapy” became not only logical, but crucial, and I had found my calling in life.

Since then, I have witnessed numerous ways that making, listening to, or composing music can support the development of a therapeutic relationship, and positively transform the lives of people who have a wide range of identified emotional, intellectual, physical or social needs.

What a joy it has been, for example, to help a mum sing lullabies to her premature baby; accompany the movements of non-speaking autistic children from the piano, to see them recognise the connection and begin reciprocal musical communication; to see a child with cerebral palsy take their first steps supported by my carefully timed and planned rhythmic accompaniment; and to collaborate with a group of adolescents with intellectual challenges who evaluated what music meant to them and ultimately won a national research award.

What a privilege it was to witness the love between a woman living with dementia and her husband, as together we sang “their song”; to compose a song with a dying man that he would record as a legacy for his family; and to hear a young man in the prison system thank me simply because, through our music making, he felt genuinely listened to.

Music therapists work with people of all ages and abilities, with individuals and groups, and in many different settings – so perhaps it is unsurprising that it can be difficult to describe in a few words what music therapy is. But people who experience or witness such beautiful moments generally become committed and passionate supporters.

I have been fortunate to author the published history of Music Therapy New Zealand , to be launched at its golden anniversary celebrations this year.

Yet, despite successes, music therapy is not always easily accessible to those who need it. If there were more equitable, flexible and sustainable funding options for disabled people or people with mental health needs, for example, they would be more able to access services such as music therapy and be less prone to poverty, stress and isolation.

After 50 years of hard work, music therapy is now established as a research-based allied health discipline that should be available as a routine option within our health, education, and welfare systems.

Daphne Rickson is president emeritus and life member of Music Therapy New Zealand. Her book will be launched at the music therapy conference in Wellington next month.

Latest from The Listener

Suburban gothic brides: Yvonne Todd's weirdly captivating wedding photography

The Hewitson Profile: Arts Laureate Yvonne Todd in the frame

Guyon Espiner: Alcohol causes $9.1 billion of social harm. Surely that’s too high a price?

We Were Dangerous: A joyous, two-finger salute to the establishment

World Choir Games: Tawa triumph

New poetry collections explore trauma and ordinary life in comic detail

• Share on Facebook
• Share on SMS
• Share on Email

• Beryl aftermath
• Harris County
• Hurricane season
• Our Story, Our History
• Texans Helping Texans
• Education Station
• Great Day Houston
• Health Matters
• KHOU 11 70 years
• Investigations
• At the border
• Live Webcams

Should AI be used for grading schoolwork?

More Videos

Next up in 5

Example video title will go here for this video

HOUSTON — Each school year, the rise of technology has changed the way students learn. Now, it's also changing how their work is scored.

"As far as grading goes, I think that is more complicated given the abilities of the AI systems we have now," said University of Houston assistant law professor Peter Salib.

Salib, an artificial intelligence expert, believes there are pros and cons with implementing AI into grading and that it shouldn't be the only method used to determine grades.

"In my experience, most of the language models that are publicly available are not sufficiently reliable that I would be comfortable relying on them to grade multiple choice tests," Salib said. "For things like essays, I also, in my experience, the systems are not sophisticated enough to assign grades in the sense of rank ordering the student work."

Earlier this year, Texas started using AI to partially grade STAAR tests, with organizing citing it as a cheaper and faster method.

As for the downside, in recent years, the topic of cheating has raised concerns with systems like Chat GPT becoming so advanced that humans couldn't tell if the work was original or generated through AI.

"Some of the anti-cheating or anti-plagiarism products, like TurnItIn.com have added this kind of putative filter for AI-produced work. They are accurate, but probably not accurate enough to be useful," Salib said.

So, until the protective systems become better at catching things like plagiarism, Salib said a hybrid system of AI and human graders works best.

Before You Leave, Check This Out

KHOU would like to send you push notifications about the latest news and weather.

Notifications can be turned off anytime in the browser settings.

We couldn’t find any results matching your search.

Please try using other words for your search or explore other sections of the website for relevant information.

We’re sorry, we are currently experiencing some issues, please try again later.

Our team is working diligently to resolve the issue. Thank you for your patience and understanding.

News & Insights

Here's Why You Should Retain Hilton (HLT) Stock for Now

August 21, 2024 — 08:23 am EDT

Written by Zacks Equity Research for Zacks  ->

Hilton Worldwide Holdings Inc. HLT is poised to benefit from strong RevPAR performance, lifestyle properties and expansion initiatives. Also, the focus on strategic partnerships and hotel conversions bodes well. However, economic uncertainties are headwinds. Let’s discuss the factors highlighting why investors should retain the stock for the time being.

Growth Catalysts

Strong RevPAR Performance: In the second-quarter 2024, system-wide RevPAR increased 3.5% year over year. The upside was driven by robust group performance, a continued recovery in business transient travel and favorable holiday comparisons. Transient RevPAR grew 2% year over year, with increases in both business and leisure demand. Leisure transient RevPAR exceeded prior peaks, fueled by strong summer travel demand, especially in international markets. Group RevPAR saw a more than 10% year-over-year increase, with strong demand for corporate and social meetings and lengthening booking windows. The company anticipates the momentum to persist for some time. For third-quarter 2024, management forecasts system-wide RevPAR (on a currency-neutral basis) to increase in the 2-3% band on a year-over-year basis. Expansion Initiatives: Hilton’s development strategy remains a key driver of long-term growth. The company continues to expand its global presence, surpassing 8,000 hotels worldwide. In the second quarter, Hilton opened 165 new properties, achieving a net unit growth of 6.2%. The addition of brands like Graduate Hotels and NoMad, along with partnerships like Small Luxury Hotels of the World, enhance Hilton’s portfolio and boost its offerings in the fast-growing lifestyle segment. Growth in Lifestyle Segment: Hilton’s lifestyle segment has reported significant growth, driven by increasing demand for unique and immersive travel experiences. The company expanded its lifestyle offerings by more than 30% in the past year, fueled by brands like Curio and Tapestry, and the acquisition of Graduate Hotels. With approximately 400 lifestyle properties and more in the pipeline, Hilton is well-positioned to capitalize on this growing market. Strategic Partnerships and Conversions: Strategic partnerships have played a crucial role in Hilton’s growth strategy. The company’s exclusive agreement with Small Luxury Hotels of the World and the addition of AutoCamp properties have broadened its luxury offerings and enhanced HLT’s network. Conversions accounted for half of the openings in the second quarter, reflecting the strength of brands like Graduate and DoubleTree. These initiatives are expected to contribute positively to Hilton’s overall performance. Solid Pipeline: Hilton’s pipeline remains robust, with 63,000 rooms signed in the quarter, bringing the total pipeline to approximately 508,000 rooms. This represents an 8% increase from the previous quarter and a 15% year-over-year rise. The company’s construction starts were up 160% year over year, indicating a strong growth trajectory. With about 60% of the pipeline located outside the United States and nearly half under construction, Hilton is on track to exceed prior peak levels of starts by 2024-end.

The company’s shares have gained 3.9% in the past three months against the industry 's 1.9% decline.

While Hilton has delivered strong results in the second quarter, the current macroeconomic environment poses certain risks. Elevated inflation and interest rates have led to delays in new openings and developments. Additionally, challenging financing conditions in some regions could impact the company’s ability to access cash or secure new financing arrangements. Hilton’s management remains cautious and focused on mitigating these challenges while continuing to execute its growth strategy.

Our Thoughts

Hilton remains a strong stock to hold, thanks to impressive RevPAR performance, strategic expansion and growth in its lifestyle segment. The company's solid pipeline and recent outperformance against the industry declines highlight its positive trajectory. However, potential investors should remain mindful of the economic headwinds, including elevated inflation, interest rates and the associated risks of delays in openings and development. HLT trades at a premium with a forward 12-month P/E ratio of 27.51X, compared to the industry average of 21.57X and higher than the median of 27.39X, indicating a stretched valuation. The stock's premium valuation adds to the risk-reward consideration.

Overall, Hilton’s growth prospects and strategic initiatives and the Zacks Rank #3 (Hold) justify retaining the stock.

Some better-ranked stocks in the Zacks Consumer Discretionary sector are as follows: Royal Caribbean Cruises Ltd. RCL currently sports a Zacks Rank of 1 (Strong Buy). You can see the complete list of today’s Zacks #1 Rank stocks here. RCL has a trailing four-quarter earnings surprise of 18.5%, on average. The stock has rallied 59.9% in the past year. The Zacks Consensus Estimate for RCL’s 2024 sales and earnings per share (EPS) calls for growth of 18.1% and 69.9%, respectively, from the year-ago levels. DoubleDown Interactive Co., Ltd. DDI currently flaunts a Zacks Rank of 1. DDI has a trailing four-quarter earnings surprise of 22.1%, on average. The stock has surged 76.6% in the past year. The Zacks Consensus Estimate for DDI’s 2024 sales and EPS indicates an increase of 12.6% and 15.8%, respectively, from the year-ago levels. Monarch Casino & Resort, Inc. MCRI carries Zacks Rank #2 (Buy). MCRI has a trailing four-quarter negative earnings surprise of 3.5%, on average. The stock has increased 13.1% in the past year. The Zacks Consensus Estimate for MCRI’s 2024 sales and EPS indicates an increase of 2.3% and 10%, respectively, from the year-ago levels.

Research Chief Names "Single Best Pick to Double"

From thousands of stocks, 5 Zacks experts each have chosen their favorite to skyrocket +100% or more in months to come. From those 5, Director of Research Sheraz Mian hand-picks one to have the most explosive upside of all.

This company targets millennial and Gen Z audiences, generating nearly $1 billion in revenue last quarter alone. A recent pullback makes now an ideal time to jump aboard. Of course, all our elite picks aren’t winners but this one could far surpass earlier Zacks’ Stocks Set to Double like Nano-X Imaging which shot up +129.6% in little more than 9 months.

Want the latest recommendations from Zacks Investment Research? Today, you can download 7 Best Stocks for the Next 30 Days. Click to get this free report

Royal Caribbean Cruises Ltd. (RCL) : Free Stock Analysis Report

Monarch Casino & Resort, Inc. (MCRI) : Free Stock Analysis Report

Hilton Worldwide Holdings Inc. (HLT) : Free Stock Analysis Report

DoubleDown Interactive Co., Ltd. Sponsored ADR (DDI) : Free Stock Analysis Report

To read this article on Zacks.com click here.

Zacks Investment Research

The views and opinions expressed herein are the views and opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of Nasdaq, Inc.

Stocks mentioned

More related articles.

This data feed is not available at this time.

Sign up for the TradeTalks newsletter to receive your weekly dose of trading news, trends and education. Delivered Wednesdays.

To add symbols:

• Type a symbol or company name. When the symbol you want to add appears, add it to My Quotes by selecting it and pressing Enter/Return.
• Copy and paste multiple symbols separated by spaces.

These symbols will be available throughout the site during your session.

Your symbols have been updated

Edit watchlist.

• Type a symbol or company name. When the symbol you want to add appears, add it to Watchlist by selecting it and pressing Enter/Return.

Opt in to Smart Portfolio

Smart Portfolio is supported by our partner TipRanks. By connecting my portfolio to TipRanks Smart Portfolio I agree to their Terms of Use .

• Share full article

Advertisement

Supported by

The Only Way to Save Higher Education Is to Make It Free

College was already a financial house of cards. Then coronavirus hit.

By Claire Bond Potter

Dr. Potter is a professor of history.

In January 2020, while I was in New Hampshire canvassing for Elizabeth Warren, a campaign organizer urged me to tell voters why I supported her. For me, that was easy. “As a college teacher,” I said when someone answered the door, “I believe that higher education is a house of cards because Americans won’t tax ourselves to support it.”

I didn’t know how right I was, or how quickly my words would bear out.

Two months later, Covid-19 closed American colleges and universities, and the cards came tumbling down. Millions of dollars in refunded housing and dining fees created yawning budget gaps. And the crisis isn’t over, especially if students don’t return in the fall. In the United States, tuition payments represent , on average, about a quarter of a public college’s budget, and about 35 percent of a private college’s. For many, it is far more.

The crisis highlights the unjust, unsustainable fact that higher education is surviving on ever higher tuition payments — and, going forward, will most likely lean even harder on students and their families to make ends meet. The frank conversation that Bernie Sanders and Senator Warren started during the primary season has now become a crisis. We urgently need to change how we pay for college, and that starts with removing the burden of tuition from working families.

Will college be free under a Democratic president? Probably not. But we can reduce the bill significantly if we imagine that education as part of an economic New Deal. That means more than just making college free or inexpensive for most students. It means re-evaluating the place that higher education occupies in our society.

Financing tuition through taxes works for other countries. In 2014, Germany abolished tuition for all students from the European Union. Ireland, France, Norway, Sweden and Denmark charge no tuition for all European Union students, and provide low-interest loans to cover other college expenses: in Sweden, at a rate of just 0.13 percent . In Australia and Britain , public tuition is half what Americans pay, and in Israel, a 10th. In Australia, students repay loans as a percentage of income when they reach a livable income threshold.

We are having trouble retrieving the article content.

Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.

Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and  log into  your Times account, or  subscribe  for all of The Times.

Thank you for your patience while we verify access.

Already a subscriber?  Log in .

Want all of The Times?  Subscribe .

• Featured Essay The Love of God An essay by Sam Storms Read Now
• Faithfulness of God
• Saving Grace
• Adoption by God

Most Popular

• Gender Identity
• Trusting God
• The Holiness of God
• See All Essays

• Best Commentaries
• Featured Essay Resurrection of Jesus An essay by Benjamin Shaw Read Now
• Death of Christ
• Resurrection of Jesus
• Church and State
• Sovereignty of God
• Faith and Works
• The Carson Center
• The Keller Center
• New City Catechism
• Publications
• Read the Bible
• TGC Pastors

U.S. Edition

• Arts & Culture
• Bible & Theology
• Christian Living
• Current Events
• Faith & Work
• As In Heaven
• Gospelbound
• Post-Christianity?
• The Carson Center Podcast
• TGC Podcast
• You're Not Crazy
• Churches Planting Churches
• Help Me Teach The Bible
• Word Of The Week
• Upcoming Events
• Past Conference Media
• Foundation Documents
• Regional Chapters
• Church Directory
• Global Resourcing
• Donate to TGC

To All The World

The world is a confusing place right now. We believe that faithful proclamation of the gospel is what our hostile and disoriented world needs. Do you believe that too? Help TGC bring biblical wisdom to the confusing issues across the world by making a gift to our international work.

Why Paul Is a Complicated Missionary Model

More by elliot clark.

In the world of evangelical missions, it’s common to appeal to Paul’s example when developing or defending missionary praxis. Many seek to articulate a Pauline approach or critique others for diverting from it. While Roland Allen wasn’t the first to do this, his classic work on Paul’s missionary methods presented them as the plumb line for contemporary missions.

More recently, some missiologists have questioned the degree to which we’re called to follow Paul’s example, but I’m convinced we have much to learn from the great apostle to the nations (Rom. 11:13). However, whenever we seek to construct missionary methods based on a Pauline model, we encounter various challenges.

Much of Paul’s life and ministry isn’t revealed in Scripture. Even when we can observe what he did, we don’t always know why he did it. Most challenging of all, missiologists must come to terms with how Paul’s calling and world were far different from ours. This doesn’t negate the possibility, or even necessity, of following Paul’s missionary example, but it suggests we must be careful when trying to reconstruct a Pauline approach.

Critical Differences

Any attempt to build a methodology from Paul’s ministry must reckon with the reality that he wasn’t your average missionary. Paul was uniquely called and specifically commissioned by our Lord. While the Bible can use the term apostolos for a variety of people, the church has long acknowledged a defined group of individuals who hold unique authority to transmit Christ’s teaching and thus serve as the foundation for his church (Eph. 2:20). Paul was one of those apostles.

No missionary today can claim a similar apostolic position. We don’t speak on behalf of Christ with the same authority, nor should we expect churches to receive our teaching in the same way. While this truth is rarely debated, it means we can’t always assume a one-to-one correspondence between Paul’s ministry and ours. It’s like comparing a foundation stone to a roof rafter.

Paul didn’t only have a unique role in the founding of the church; certain historical factors also make his example rarely replicable. From what we know, Paul never had to learn another language. Wherever he went, he could operate in Greek or Aramaic or Hebrew. And although culture wasn’t monolithic in the Roman Empire, Paul wasn’t a cultural outsider in the way many missionaries are today. He possessed a deep awareness of social dynamics and could quote popular sources, bringing the gospel to bear on the various groups he encountered.

Paul didn’t only have a unique role in the founding of the church; certain historical factors also make his example rarely replicable.

For most cross-cultural missionaries today, attaining a similar fluency and aptitude in their context could easily take more than a decade. They can’t walk into a global city or a tribal village and immediately communicate the gospel as clearly or effectively as Paul.

Remaining Unknowns

Another major reason it’s hard to form a missionary strategy from Paul’s example is that there’s so much we simply don’t know.

For example, what was Paul doing during the “silent years” of his ministry? Why did he travel to Arabia, and what did he do there? When he visited Jerusalem, did he receive instructions—or even an assignment—from the church or the other apostles? When Paul landed back in his home region of Cilicia for nearly a decade, what was his mission? Through reports of his later travels, we learn of a church (or churches) in Cilicia (Acts 15:41), but we can only speculate about their founding or what part Paul played in them.

This raises another question we can’t fully answer: Did Paul often travel where the gospel had already gone? At Pentecost, we know there were Jews and proselytes in Jerusalem from across the Roman Empire (2:5–11). Many of those Pentecost pilgrims received the gospel and likely returned home. When we read of Paul traveling to some of those same cities and regions (about 15 years later), he appears to encounter those who’ve already believed, such as Apollos or Aquila and Priscilla (18:2, 24). It’s quite possible many of the places Paul visited already had disciples and churches (see 19:1). If that’s the case, it gives us a different perspective on Paul’s pioneer work.

Missiologists sometimes infer certain missiological priorities or ministry timelines based on Paul’s travels. However, it’s hard to discern a self-conscious strategy from Paul’s example since he was so often on the run. We simply don’t know how long Paul may have stayed in a certain place, given the opportunity. In the case of Cilicia, Paul was there 10 years before Barnabas asked for his help in Antioch. In every other city, Paul seems to have been forced out against his will. Even in Ephesus and Corinth, the places where he remained the longest, we have good reason to believe Paul left because of persecution (20:3) or to avoid further escalation (v. 1).

Example to Follow

Given what we know of Paul’s ministry—as well as what we don’t—we must admit reconstructing a Pauline model for missions is incredibly complicated. We’re not able to appropriate everything Paul did, nor can we take one anecdote from his ministry and make it an all-encompassing approach. Biblical descriptions of his mission aren’t necessarily meant to supply us with a blueprint to follow.

It’s hard to discern a self-conscious strategy from Paul’s example since he so often was on the run.

Nevertheless, as we consider Paul’s ministry, we can observe self-conscious priorities and patterns of ministry instructive for us today. For example, wherever Paul goes, we find him “occupied with the word” (18:5), proclaiming the gospel and teaching the “whole counsel of God” (20:27). Paul repeatedly says he desires converts who are sanctified in the Spirit and mature in Christ (Rom. 15:16–18; Col. 1:28); therefore, he prioritizes long-term relationships and deep discipleship—even when he’s forced to leave a place prematurely.

Paul is clearly eager to push into new territories with the gospel (Rom. 15:20), but that ambition doesn’t preempt his concern for the churches in his care (2 Cor. 10:13–16; 11:28). So he constantly writes to and visits those congregations, and eventually he entrusts them to local leaders who will show that same commitment to the gospel and their faith.

Missionaries are right to follow Paul’s example. We should note that Paul, writing with apostolic authority, repeatedly instructs churches to imitate him (Phil. 4:9; 1 Thess. 1:6). He specifically charges church leaders to follow his pattern of life, both his faithful teaching and his sacrificial suffering (Acts 20:17–35; 2 Tim. 1:8–2:3). And, perhaps most pertinent for this discussion, Paul calls all believers to emulate his evangelistic ambition, doing everything for the glory of God and the salvation of the nations (1 Cor. 10:31–11:1). His is an example we all should follow.

Why Do So Many Young People Lose Their Faith at College?

New Testament professor Michael Kruger is no stranger to the assault on faith that most young people face when they enter higher education, having experienced an intense period of doubt in his freshman year. In Surviving Religion 101 , he draws on years of experience as a biblical scholar to address common objections to the Christian faith: the exclusivity of Christianity, Christian intolerance, homosexuality, hell, the problem of evil, science, miracles, and the Bible’s reliability.

TGC is delighted to offer the ebook version for FREE for a limited time only. It will equip you to engage secular challenges with intellectual honesty, compassion, and confidence—and ultimately graduate college with your faith intact.

Elliot Clark (MDiv, The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary) has served in international missions since 2009, first as a church planter in Central Asia, and then as a teacher equipping international church leaders. He currently serves with Reaching & Teaching and is the author of Evangelism as Exiles: Life on Mission as Strangers in Our Own Land (2019) and Mission Affirmed: Recovering the Missionary Motivation of Paul (2022).

Now Trending

1 as a single man, i felt little pressure to get married. i wish i had., 2 the curious case of the christian reformed church, 3 when spiritual disciplines took over my life, 4 where the political parties stand on social issues in 2024, 5 limiting my phone expanded my view of god.

The 11 Beliefs You Should Know about Jehovah’s Witnesses When They Knock at the Door

Here are the key beliefs of Jehovah’s Witnesses—and what the Bible really teaches instead.

Quality Christian Music: 15 Artists to Watch

Tim Keller’s Neo-Calvinism

How One Liberal Theologian Found Jesus

‘Of the Civil Magistrate’: How Presbyterians Shifted on Church-State Relations

Olympic Gold to Missionary Sacrifice: Eric Liddell’s Legacy at 100

Should You Send Your Kids to Catholic School?

Latest Episodes

Trevin wax on reconstructing faith.

Apostasy and Its Effects on the Church (Matt. 24:1–28)

Examining the Current and Future State of the Global Church

David Brooks Explores the Amazing Power of Truly Seeing Others

Welcome and Witness: How to Reach Out in a Secular Age

Outdo One Another: Final Season of ‘You’re Not Crazy’

Gaming Alone: Helping the Generation of Young Men Captivated and Isolated by Video Games

Let Kingdom Expansion Encourage You

Faith & Work: How Do I Glorify God Even When My Work Seems Meaningless?

Let’s Talk Reunion: The Blessings of Bible Study with Friends

Getting Rid of Your Fear of the Book of Revelation

Looking for Love in All the Wrong Places: A Sermon from Julius Kim

Introducing The Acts 29 Podcast

The valuable role video games play in the classroom

Do video games belong in the classroom?

It may sound counterproductive to learning, but experts say the right games can help students stay engaged and learn about history, science, math and more.

A 2019 study from Carnegie Mellon University found that nearly 75% of teachers have used digital game-based learning in their lesson plans.

Games like "The Oregon Trail" have been teaching students about 19th-century pioneer life since the 1970s in American classrooms, but today, students and teachers have so many more options.

"Games in American society tend to get a bad rap because they get associated with things like violence and addiction. But in fact, games have immense interpersonal possibilities. And so, games are a great way of teaching people things,” said Patrick Jagoda.

Jagoda has a bit of a dream job: at the University of Chicago, he teaches game studies and game design. His lab is filled with board games, and he gets to talk about video games all day.

But as the faculty director of the university's Weston Game Lab, Jagoda emphasizes that video games, board games and role-playing games aren't just for fun, he says they can be valuable for interactive learning.

"You can learn about economies, you can learn about political systems, you can learn about climate change through games, for instance,” Jagoda said.

RELATED STORY | Why more teachers are incorporating science experiments inside their classrooms

"We have a game called 'Infection City' that we produced, and this is a game where you have one player play the infection ... and then the rest of the players are playing as epidemiologists,” said Ashlyn Sparrow, game designer for the University of Chicago.

Jagoda mentioned another.

"Right now, our team is working on 'Haven,' which is a game for all of the incoming students, and the learning objectives are focused on freedom of expression,” he said. “So the idea is, how do you have a debate or how do you have a conversation about something you disagree about?"

Jagoda and Sparrow said games are safe places for students to fail and learn from their mistakes. Interactive puzzles can either be collaborative or competitive, and compelling stories can be played from multiple perspectives.

"There was a game that came out in 2007 called 'Peacemaker' that came out of Carnegie Mellon. And you could play either as the Palestinian or Israeli president or prime minister. And you have to create peace in the region,” Jagoda said.

"There's 'Cytosis,' which is another kind of science game,” said Sparrow. “There's a game on freedom that talks about abolition. There's a new game that's going to come out called 'Chicago 68,' which is talking about protesting."

For teachers curious about getting games into the classroom, Jagoda and Sparrow say students can help lead by talking about what they're playing, connecting it back to lessons, or even by designing their own games for the class.

"Games are their art form in the way that film or novels were for previous generations,” Jagoda said.

RELATED STORY | 4-day school weeks growing in popularity

Most Recent

Tim Walz brings a football pep talk to the DNC as he accepts VP nomination

Amanda Gorman illustrates the 'American dream' through poetry at the DNC

Former NYC Mayor Bill de Blasio: Walz could bring new group of voters

After tearing into Trump, Pelosi tells DNC Harris-Walz are 'onward to victory'

President Bill Clinton calls Harris 'the president of joy' during DNC speech

After dozens of arrests on Tuesday, protests outside DNC Wednesday begin calmly

Get a look at America’s news tonight with Maritsa Georgiou.

About Scripps News

Download the Scripps News app.