Mexico’s National Autonomous University (UNAM) is the largest in Latin America and among the largest in the world. Its enrollment surpasses the 160,000 undergraduate students and 21,000 graduate students. In 1999 the government did try to add a little tuition, but there was a national student strike and the government backed off. Opponents of fee increases invoked the guarantee of free education established in Mexico’s constitution. The UNAM is not only free but has an extraordinary reputation as one of the best public education systems in the world as reported by The Economist. It was ranked by Britain’s Times Higher Education Supplement in the top 200 in the world.
That’s Mexico, a poor country.
In industrialized countries mainly in Europe there is a strong legal tradition of free public higher education. However, in recent years, European countries have been considering reforming higher education with pieces of legislation terminating the policies that exempt college student from paying tuition. In the United Kingdom for instance (where college education was free until the arrival of right-wing, conservative, governments) there is a maximum tuition fee that cannot exceed the equivalent of $4000 a year.
As the Chronicle reports tuition at public universities in Sweden is free, it is also the case in France where all universities are public and none charges tuition fees.
The Economist reports that in Germany in 2005 a constitutional court allowed tuition fees to be introduced. However, several German states are abolishing these provisions and bringing back free public higher education to its citizens. In Austria thousands of students took to the streets in protest of the governmental attempt to introduce tuition fees.
The Chronicle points out that the main source of financing for many European universities continues to be public monies. However, there are an increasing number of institutions that are pursing various sources of revenue driven by neoliberal ideology whereby corporate culture becomes the model to imitate
Student activism has in some cases (Austria, Germany, Mexico) proved to be successful in resisting the privatization and corporatization of higher education. However, there are some instances like Great Britain where decisions of government have silenced the voices of students
Giroux (2002) when writing about the U.S higher education system argues that “neoliberalism is the most dangerous ideology of the current historical moment.” It is the defining political economic paradigm of our time. The corrosive effect of corporate culture jeopardizes the preservation of the profound democratic values under which our public higher education system was founded.
“Higher education and specifically public higher learning institutions should be viewed as a vital resource to the democratic and civic life of the nation against the current onslaught to corporatize higher education.”
Wow, what these countries must think of the way we're going about higher education! From the statistics you presented, the United Kingdom has a tuition cap of $4,000 per year. That struck me particularly well because when I moved here for my doc program (a year prior), I missed the "in-state" tuition cutoff by 15 days. Therefore, I had to pay over $1,000 per CREDIT for my first semester at UNC. 8 credits were mandatory for my first semester, so I enrolled in 8, and only 8...leaving me short of full-time status to access student health-care coverage. Because of an 8K+ bill in my first semester, I had to work a full-time job alongside of my course-load last fall, and I'm sure we can all vouche for the difficulties associated with "choosing" to work, or not having that choice while pursuing a degree.
ReplyDeleteI hope that didn't sound too much like a "poor me" entry paragraph! ha-ha. I really just wanted to display how one area of high cost (and low accessbility) can affect so many other avenues.
I'm so glad you've opened my eyes to how other countries are allowing accessibility while in some ways we may be preventing it. You've also shown how funding as a whole (i.e. Mexico) plays such a minor role in these decisions.
Many European countries have had established traditions of providing either free or very low cost higher education. And I agree with Giroux's observation about neoliberalism...it is similar to the development of bureaucracies in that once these social beliefs and structures are in place they are nearly irreversible. What is making things in Europe especially difficult is that each country wants to set its own policies regarding tuition, but that higher education is seen as a product (that can be imported and exported)according to General Agreements on Trade (GATs) policies established by the EU. Can you imagine if Mexico, Canada, and the US tried to negotiate a single policy on tuition?
ReplyDeleteIn response to Matt’s comments. I agree that the challenge for the European Union is to reach an agreement with respect to establishing clear policies on tuition, based on GATs. And no, I cannot imagine Mexico, Canada and the US trying to negotiate a single policy on tuition.
ReplyDeleteHowever, unlike Mexico, Canada and the U.S. the history of the European Union (EU) formerly known as the European Common Market (ECM) and The European Economic Community (EEC) speaks of a decisive political will of its richer members (Germany, France, UK) to invest and aid poor member countries, e.g. Greece, Ireland, Portugal, Spain.
The idea being that all member states can share the wealth and benefits of its membership but also that each can succeed economically and politically.
The creation of the European Union dates back to the post-war era. Its main objective in the 50s and 60s was the economic integration of its members and then a political one in the 70s and 80s.
Let us look at some examples. Portugal and Spain were accepted in the European Community on January 1st, 1986. Since their entry these countries have benefited extensively from the so-called “structural funds,” which provided financial support intended to improve the infrastructure and economic development of poor countries like themselves in the union.
For instance, since 1986, Portugal’s average per capita income grew from 56 percent of the EU average to 75 percent, while Spain’s has grown to 79 percent. The purpose of the structural funds was to equalize the per capita income of all members of the union.
The New York Times reports that (http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/18/business/worldbusiness/18iht-funding2.html?emc=eta1)
there are many lessons to learn from the EU experience.
In the case of North America, Canada, Mexico and the US signed NAFTA (The North American Free Trade Agreement) in January 1994, which from a neoliberal perspective was intended to enhance the economic development of the three countries. However, this agreement has damaged and exploited Mexico (http://useconomy.about.com/od/tradepolicy/p/NAFTA_Problems.htm)
Unlike the EU, NAFTA has done nothing to support Mexico or its political and economic development.
There is no provision with respect to providing financial support to the obvious poorest country of the three. Thus, there is no political will on behalf of the richer countries, to support Mexico.
In sum, these three countries cannot even agree on trade let alone begin to consider a single policy on tuition
I'm not sure a single policy on tuition should be the goal between Mexico, Canada, and the United States. Do we want a single currency? United health care?
ReplyDeleteI'm also not sure I agree that the American system of higher education was founded on the principle of a 'democratic' (or, available to everyone) education.
One of the unique facets of American higher education is that we, more or less, have a choice where we go to school. In Britain, you only attend Oxford if you went to the right preparatory schools. In the US, you can go to Harvard (in theory) if you grew up in the Bronx, Birmingham, or Beirut. This system works because some institutions are more competitive and more expensive than others. Harvard, although technically available to everyone, isn't an option for everyone. If we make higher education more truly available to everyone, will we lose our diversity of institutions?
Thanks for a great post, Aldo! Having traveled in Europe, and having many friends from across the world, I have often wondered about the availability of education in those countries as compared to the U.S. Is it simply because they place a higher value on education than we do here? I would tend to say no, as an education at a U.S. institution of higher education seems to be valued world-wide.
ReplyDeleteWhat I do think, however, is that we as Americans have written off implementing policies designed for the common good. As the Occupy movement has been stating, our society today tends to value corporations over people, and that's where I think our priorities have gotten off-track. We need to start taking care of the needs of our citizens, and less about corporate profit. Our greatest strength as a country is in our citizenry. Unfortunately, we have forgotten.