Fixed Tuition Benefit Analysis
Another possible solution to the rising tuition epidemic would be a fixed tuition rate. “Americans do not believe a dramatic increase in federal funding for higher education will solve the college cost crisis” (Boehner and McKeon, 2). John Boehner is in the U.S. House of Committee on Education and Chairman. Howard McKeon is in the U.S House Subcommittee on 21sst Century Competitiveness. Both of these distinguished men proposed an argument to House to prove the seriousness of this dilemma. It is evident that the United States is in financial turmoil and adding what would be the nation’s student debt on top of it would not help. This solution proposes that the students fund themselves accordingly. For those unaware of what this means, it is best
…show more content…
With acknowledging the faults in both of these solutions, which one brings the most positive outcome? It is clear that due to cost-effectiveness, comprehensive benefits, and proven success a fixed tuition rate would be most ideal. Fixed tuition rate proves itself to be most cost effective due to the fact that it will not impact our National debt any further. Through a fixed number consistency is provided to the student, which leads to financial aid actually helping the student instead of the University. A student, therefore, can be saving money in the long run when compared to the traditional tuition payment plans. Comprehensive benefits are also another reason why fixed tuition is more ideal. Unlike government-funded tuition, fixed tuition will encourage students to be an adult. What this means is that students have to put forth the effort into their degree, it is not simply handed it to them. Some students might also take advantage of government-funded tuition, which then leads to more trouble for the United States. A fixed tuition rate has also already shown proven success with students. At the University of Pennsylvania, a decrease in student loans appeared and also financial stability for the college. While on the other hand, government-funded tuition is a concept that cannot be simply tested out. It would have to be done either wholly or not at
With acknowledging the faults in both of these solutions, which one brings the most positive outcome? It is clear that due to cost-effectiveness, comprehensive benefits, and proven success a fixed tuition rate would be most ideal. Fixed tuition rate proves itself to be most cost effective due to the fact that it will not impact our National debt any further. Through a fixed number consistency is provided to the student, which leads to financial aid actually helping the student instead of the University. A student, therefore, can be saving money in the long run when compared to the traditional tuition payment plans. Comprehensive benefits are also another reason why fixed tuition is more ideal. Unlike government-funded tuition, fixed tuition will encourage students to be an adult. What this means is that students have to put forth the effort into their degree, it is not simply handed it to them. Some students might also take advantage of government-funded tuition, which then leads to more trouble for the United States. A fixed tuition rate has also already shown proven success with students. At the University of Pennsylvania, a decrease in student loans appeared and also financial stability for the college. While on the other hand, government-funded tuition is a concept that cannot be simply tested out. It would have to be done either wholly or not at