The Burden of Free Tuition in Germany

The Burden of Free Tuition in Germany

The higher education system in Germany has currently been one of the most influential systems across the globe, and it is one of the leaders in its quality of University education and research field. Since Germany is active in most world organizations and the European Union, it is often used as an example for other countries to reference to. One of the more often researched areas within the German higher system; is its free tuition policy for public universities. As much as the German higher education system might be glorified, like many other higher education systems across the globe, it has its flaws. Free tuition is instead placing more burdens on the institutions and on the economy as well.  It is the driving factor that is effecting: elongated program completion rates, tax increases to labors, and it is reproducing the countries social inequalities instead of helping it. The German higher education system is the perfect example of how free tuition comes with a greater price and might instead be disastrous.  

Institution Types and Access

Most higher education systems around the world, Germany has undergone many reforms within higher education. One notable reform to begin with is in 1990 when The Unification Contract was signed. In this reform, Eastern Germany adapted its economic, social, and political context from the Western Germany systems. Ultimately, Eastern Germany adopted the Western Germany binary public higher education system that is in place today. Before students enter into higher education, they must pass the completion exam named the Abitur. Once completing the Abitur, students can enter upon four tracks. Two of them being enrolling in either universities or universities of applied sciences.  The universities of applied science is different from the traditional university as it is highly focused on specific and practical.  Universities of applied science were created to adapt to the needs of the labor market and the need to train narrow specialist in the industry (Belov & Govorova, 2016). The other two options are taking up vocational training in a non-tertiary institution, or entering into workforce right away (Mayer et al., 2007). 

As the public institutions are tuition free, many may argue that access to the higher education can be acquired to everyone; especially to low income families. Many would argue that if low-income families have the opportunities to get degrees then it should be helping the social inequalities. According to Mayer et al. (2007), the choices the students and families make are strongly related to costs and risks involved with the educational track choices. Working class families are more likely to choose the less costly and less risky educational track. According to Belov & Govorova (2016), many applicants choose to study at universities of applied science, because they are more focused on practice” (p 29).  Even with free tuition it seems as if the social inequalities are only sustaining themselves because, working class families are sending their children in the vocational track to get into the workforce faster and have a more reliable work preparedness; while the elite families invest in sending their students onto the universities.

Funding

There is a lot of contest to making universities charge tuition because Germans consider Higher education a fundamental right (Heller & Rogers, 2006). Tuition in Germany has been predominantly tuition free for the past few years. In 2006, German universities were allowed to charge tuition which struct major political backlash and numerous student protests. In 2014, “...tuition was once again being eliminated at the public universities that educate the vast majority of German students. Except for small administrative fees... about $341, most of it for a public transit pass” (Marcus, 2016). Being tuition free, the institutions are funded by the state and in 2016, the cost to taxpayers of subsidizing higher education went up 37% (Marcus, 2016).

Engagement

Germany is an active and longtime member of the European Union, United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), and the Organization for Economic Co-Operation and Development (OECD). UNESCO and OECD are pro-neoliberal in their ideas in having a “world culture” in which education should be accessible, standardized, and measurable around the world. This is why Germany is in conjunction with most of how education is handled in Europe. This is especially true since the 1999 Bologna Declaration; in which members in the European Union could ensure comparability in the standards and qualifications of universities. Due to these unions, agreements, and tuition free policies, Germany encounters a high volume of international students studying abroad making seats for the locals more difficult to achieve.

Tuition Free Policy Flaws and Recommendations

Tuition free higher education in Germany may look like more access to everyone; however, it is bringing in more headaches to institutions and the country then it is beneficial. One of the more common problems with free tuition is the elongated program completions. According to Price (2016), “European studies have found that students who pay more in tuition exert greater effort and are more likely to graduate on time...Germany also found that free tuition led students to extend their time in college.” This is especially true when it comes to lower-income families. Low-income students tend to work part time; therefore, it takes them longer to graduate (Heller & Rogers, 2006).  Lower income families are also choosing the more practical educational tracks do to its faster track into the workforce and quicker access to instant income rather than the wealthier families who can afford their students to take the longer university track.  Making tuition free has also not made a drastic change in the demographics attending higher education (Marcus, 2016).

These are only just a few prevalent issues as a result of free tuition policies happening not only in Germany as well as in other countries with free tuition policies. As a recommendation to tackle graduation rates, access, and social inequalities, I would suggest UNESCO or OECD do a teamwork collaboration with its members to create an accelerated degree program for all. Members can all contribute or receive funding to create an accelerated program offered in every country. The accelerated program will be standardized in every country and it will be an intense three-year program of study that will still be tuition free; however, the living expensive will be covered. The program will initially select a few individuals in each country with low income with good academic merit. This will encourage faster graduation rates for low-income families, which then may result in a greater change in social inequality in the end.

Reference

Belov, V., & Govorova, N. (2016). Role of the universities in contemporary higher education –

the German experience. SHS Web of Conferences, 29, 02005.

Forest, J. F. & Altbach, P. G. (2006) (Eds.). International Handbook of Higher Education,
            Volume 18. Dordrecht: Springer.

Heller, D. E., & Rogers, K. R. (2006). Shifting the burden: Public and private financing of higher

education in the United States and implications for Europe. Tertiary Education & Management, 12(2), 91-117.

Marcus, J. (2016). Germany proves tuition-free college is not a silver bullet for America's

education woes. Quartz, Oct 18, 2016.

Mayer, K. U., Müller, W., & Pollak, R. (2007). Germany: Institutional change and inequalities of

access in higher education. Stratification in higher education: A comparative study, 240-65.

Price, T. (2016, November 18). Student debt. CQ researcher, 26, 965-988. Retrieved from

http://library.cqpress.com/

Can Free Tuition Cut Student Debt and The Growing Trend of Privatization?

           The increasing amount of student debt in the United States is not only frightening but it is
becoming a dangerous scenario to the future economy. “Student debt nationwide totals almost $1.3 trillion — up 350 percent since 2005” (Price, 2016). “Experts say total student debt has risen in part because more students have attended college in this decade than ever before” (Price, 2016). This would mean that enrollment rates at higher education institutes are increasing and more millennials are graduating college. This may sound great; however, more millennials are becoming slaves to student loan payments. One can foresee a hazardous economy to develop from this debt crisis. The idea of having free tuition at higher education institutions may sound like a great solution to tackle student debt issues; however, there are many factors and effects to consider.  Many may begin to question how will the institutions be funded and what socioeconomic effects will it create? Many may also question, will it break the social class barriers or generate a greater divide?

Current U.S. Trends

There have been many proposals and attempts of free tuition policies in the United States; however, they have not achieved any national policies. Glancing at a smaller scope of free tuition policies in the U.S., there have been a few proposals for two-year community colleges to be tuition free such as In North Carolina. “In 2015, North Carolina attempted to join Tennessee, Oregon and Minnesota in launching a tuition-free community-college program, but a bill failed to make it out of committee” (Maurer, 2016). Glancing at a larger example, in New York, there is the Excelsior scholarship program offering free tuition to New York's public colleges and universities (Chen, 2018).

Challenge:  Graduation rates

When considering these trends, the U.S. looks at other free tuition models across the globe.  This semester I primarily focused most of my research with the German higher education system, which is one of the major countries that seems to be the model to compare too. When considering free tuition, there are those who fear that having free college studies will bring a decrease in graduation rates due to young adults starting their higher education with no financial risk to themselves (Eisenstadter, 2016).  According to Price (2016) “European studies have found that students who pay more in tuition exert greater effort and are more likely to graduate on time...Germany also found that free tuition led students to extend their time in college, with some becoming “eternal students””. In my opinion, I can see this as becoming a problem that can happen in the United States as well. In my own experience coming straight from high school and  into middle school, many students like myself were unsure what they wanted to do career wise and enrolled in higher education with a scholarship. I observed other students, like myself, enrolling in any program that sounded promising without necessarily thinking it through since there were no financial repercussions to face. Many students ended up not taking their studies seriously and not pursuing completing the rest of the degree after they were cut off from financial aid. This personal observation only reflects what is happening in other countries across the globe.

Challenge: Admission standards and Privatization

 Another concern that many others have about free tuition is the affect it will have on the admission standards of the public institutions. Many fear that public institution will raise their admission standards so there is not a decrease in the value of the degrees as well as decreasing the influx of students enrolling. For example, “European countries hold down government costs for free tuition by limiting admissions at their higher education institutions. Germany, for instance, begins placing pupils in educational tracks by age 10” (Price, 2016). In a way, this is a good concern to consider; however, I believe there are too many options currently in higher education currently in the U.S. that would counter this challenge.

            This challenge also ties into the current growing trend of privatization of higher education. Many may see that having free public higher education can combat the growth of privatization and its prestigious allure that makes students go into student debt. Free tuition for public universities is a major concern in the private sector as they anticipate a huge detour of students straying away from their school and running to the free options. I would have to say that in my opinion, I do not see this affecting the private sector as long as they can keep marketing their old reputable prestige. The top elite private universities have enough money in donor funds and endowments to make their institution tuition free; yet they do not choose to be tuition free. According to Chen (2018), once the excelsior scholarship was initiated many feared it would lower enrollment rates for private universities; however, numbers show that universities near the excelsior program schools have not dropped in enrollment and that some have even increased in enrollment.

Thoughts

Overall, I do not think free tuition is the greatest solution to reduce student debt by itself. As we see in other countries, free tuition can generate other problems such as higher dropout rates, and higher admission standards. I feel there should be a combination of many things to target this problem. I am more favorable towards free community colleges as I believe it can reduce the student debt crisis in the least harmful way. I would argue that free tuition for two-year institutions can tackle the dropout rates for the senior colleges, as those who transfer into senior colleges will be more serious on completing a four-year degree, as there may not be a chance they are getting a full free ride for a BA or BS degree. Free two-year college degrees can also give both the private and public institutions the same competition to recruit students and they will be more of an even chance at enrollment. Free tuition for two years can cut the average student debt in half since the students are only paying for last two years of their studies in a four-year program. Having students enroll in a two-year institution can give the students a test run in higher education and they can then begin to plan where they would want to go from there.

 References

Chen, D. W. (2018, February 17). Despite Free Public Tuition, Private College Bids Are Up. New York Times, p. A18(L). Retrieved from http://link.galegroup.com.remote.baruch.cuny.edu/apps/doc/A527876404/AONE?u=cuny_baruch&sid=AONE&xid=88195d0a



Eisenstadter, I. (2016). Free tuition is not the solution. Barron's, 96(22), 33. Retrieved from http://remote.baruch.cuny.edu/login?url=https://search-proquest-com.remote.baruch.cuny.edu/docview/1792372968?accountid=8500



Maurer, K. (2016). Disagree on free: College sans tuition could halt student debt. Business North Carolina, 36(9), 22.



Price, T. (2016, November 18). Student debt. CQ researcher, 26, 965-988. Retrieved from http://library.cqpress.com/

Student Affairs Professionals VS International Students

       

       With the effects globalization on the rise, higher education institutions around the world are encountering more international students than before. In this week’s readings, the journals articles explored whether or not institutions are providing enough student support for international students to become successful. As an international student, studying in a foreign country comes with more challenges than your average local student. International students face more challenges than your local students since they face more challenges adjusting to life outside the classroom in addition to the academic challenges. There are student affair professionals that research these challenges and try to strategize ways to help and incorporate them in higher education practices. The readings this week narrowed the topic of student affairs and its use for international students as well as student affair practices in other countries.
Student affairs professionals research the challenges that different student populations face both inside and outside higher education institutions. The Harper and Quaye (2015) article focuses on student engagement and its relation to international students. Harper and Quaye (2015) would best describe student engagement as “participation in educationally effective practices in both inside and outside the institution” (p. 2). They also emphasizes the difference between involvement and engagement. Harper and Quaye (2015) highlight that even though students may be involved in activities it does not necessarily mean that they are engaged (fully participating) in the activity. They argue that student affair professionals should focus on students who lack engagement in the university since engagement has shown great correlation to student success. This would then lead into the conversation of international students and how do they relate to engagement and other student affair challenges.
        Lee (2015) describes that international students are challenged by many issues that involve Language/learning conflicts, social isolation, cultural norms, financial problems, discrimination, and racism. Lee (2015) would argue that student affair professionals should focus on international student and working towards making their institution a more welcoming and supportive environment for international students. Lee (2015) suggests forming connections with international student, providing financial support, thinking of campus practicality, and encouragement for more advocacy for international students.
        The McClellan et. al. article researches whether student affair practices are more professionalized than in other countries. In this research article, McClellan et. al. find that there is a “higher degree of professionalism in student affairs reflected in the qualifications data from Africa, Central America, Europe and North America” (p. 18).
      Although the student affairs issues are not the greatest in regards to international students here in the US, there is a lot more research developing to focus on these issues compared to other countries. Lipka (2010) would argue that “student affairs as a profession has largely developed in the United States, some foreign universities are inclined to compress the last 50 years of research and practice here”. In other words, it seems other countries seem to build on their student affair professions on what other countries are doing (particularly in the US). Lipka (2010) would argue that it is a good idea to research global trends in student affairs; however, there is no size that fits all. Every country do not always encounter the same issues as everyone else; therefore, one strategic practice may not be useful to students in another country.
       I would have to personally say that in creating this entry, I had tried to find articles on student affairs trends in Germany and came up with zero results. It was frustrating yet it was also an eye opener. I questioned whether it was just that I have not encountered translated articles in student affairs trends in Germany or was there not much research in the field. I can only assume that there is “minimal” research in this subject and that there is more on this matter in the US.

Harper, S. R., & Quaye, S. J. (2015). Making engagement equitable for students in US higher education. Student engagement in higher education: Theoretical perspectives and practical approaches for diverse populations, 1-14.

Lee, J. J. (2015). Engaging international students. Student engagement in higher education: Theoretical perspectives and practical approaches for diverse populations, 105-120.

Lipka S. (2010) Student affairs gains a global hub. Chronicle of Higher Education. Aug 1.

McClellan, G. S., Woodard, D. B., Zhou, Q., Marques, C., Reséndiz, J. E., & Kwandayi, H. The global practice of student affairs/services: An exploratory international survey.

Study Abroad Classifications and Georgia Tech

Engle and Engle’s Five Level of Study Abroad Projects

     Engle and Engle (2003) describe the different classifications of program types for institutions providing study abroad programs.  Engle and Engle (2003) raise the concerns regarding the quality of the programs and whether or not the students enrolled in these programs are learning any useful and meaningful cultural knowledge. Engle and Engle (2003) then describe a useful five level classification system to distinguish the differences in the many study abroad programs.
In the first level, known as the “Study Tour”, are very small limited durations abroad in another country. This would include field trips or small site visits. These are very short visits and have minimal exposure to the country’s culture. An example of this would at the D’Amore-McKim’s school of business at Northern University. The students in the MBA program can do a trip to Greece and Turkey. The visit is a one-week field studies trip to Greece and Turkey. The trip visits four companies in certain cities, and According to their website, the students get a chance to explore the cultural and historical sites of these two ancient cities.
    The second level is “Short Term Study”. This level is mostly just a few weeks long and provides more exposure to cultural interactions than the “study tour” level. An example of this would be at Brooklyn College, in which there is a summer study abroad program in locations like China. The program is only a few weeks during the summer in China in which, the program is supposed to provide “an extensive cultural and historical exploration of China, allowing students an opportunity to experience this unique country and culture through observation and interaction with local people and places.”
    The third level is “Cross-cultural contact Program”. In this level, the students usually spend a semester abroad but mostly taking courses in English. An example of this would be the Uganda Studies Program at Wheaton University. According to their website, this program is in English and while abroad they aim to “Encourage students to participate in Ugandan life and explore the intricacy of cross-cultural relationships...these relationships encourage deeper thought about your own cultural identity and how you engage with the world around you”.
The Fourth level is the “Cross-cultural Encounter Program”. This level is similar to level four except that the students are more exposed to courses in another language other than English. An example of this is the Paris Exchange program at Queens College. The students are required to have passed three college level courses in French before approval.
The fifth level is the “Cross-cultural Immersion Program”. In this level, the course is in the host language and can include internships or professional projects abroad. An example of this is The Lang Global Immersion Program in the New School. In the program, the students live with a host family in Costa Rica and study at the Institute for Central American Development Studies. According to their website, while studying abroad students are to “carry out brief social and ecological research projects while living and traveling together primarily in rural communities”.

Level	Example	Description
“Study Tour”	D'Amore-McKim’s school of business at Northern University	One week trip to Greece and Turkey
“Short Term Study”	Brooklyn College- Study Abroad in China	A few weeks in the Summer studying in China.
“Cross-cultural contact Program”	Uganda Studies Program at Wheaton University	A Full Semester in Uganda studying in English while experience Ugandan Culture.
“Cross-cultural Encounter Program”	Paris Exchange program at Queens College	A full semester in France. Must have passed 3 college level courses in French.
“Cross-cultural Immersion Program”	The Lang Global Immersion Program in the New School	Living with host family and working in  ecological research projects

 The International Plan at Georgia Tech

      The International Plan at Georgia Tech had several study abroad programs when it was first initiated; however, many individuals began to question whether the program was generating student to be “global competent”. As the program was intended to prepare graduates to become “global citizens”, it was argued that the program structure at the time was not meeting this goal. The International Plan originally offered courses abroad which were mostly summer programs that lasted 6 - 11 weeks. While abroad, the students lived together, had limited contact with local cultures, and they were taught by faculty members from Georgia Tech. According to Rollins (2009), “We came to the conclusion that simply sending student to spend a period of time studying in another country, especially as it is typically done, is not sufficient, in and of itself, to produce graduates who are globally competent” (p. 425).  

The International Plan at Georgia Tech see’s “global competence” as having an understanding of globalization, awareness and adaptability to diverse cultures, and ultimately carry the ability to “collaborate across cultures and to effectively participate in social and business settings in other countries” (Rollins, 2009, p. 426).

In order to meet these goals Georgia Tech developed a new approach to the International Plan program. The revised program requires students to be proficient in a second language, take a capstone class, and meet the international experience requirement. The capstone class evaluates students whether or not they are able to shift cultural frames to solve problems in their disciple, function in multicultural work environments, and have knowledge of global systems. In order for students to meet the international experience requirement, students are to spend at least 26 weeks overseas and participate in a research project or work overseas. 

Engle and Engle would classify The International Plan at Georgia Tech as shifting from a “Short Term Study” program to a “Cross-cultural Immersion Program”. In my opinion, although the program is now more intense, it is in the best interest of the students because they will truly be closer to being “globally competent”.

Engle, L., & Engle, J. (2003). Study abroad levels: Toward a classification of program types. Frontiers: The interdisciplinary journal of study abroad, 9(1), 1-20.

Rollins, H. (2009). Georgia Tech’s Comprehensive and Integrated Approach to Developing Global Competence’. The Handbook of Practice & Research in Study Abroad: Higher Education and the Quest for Global Citizenship, Routledge, New York.

Money is The Root of All Evil: How The World Bank Is The Most Influential Organization In International Higher Education

      

      As economic globalization intensifies in today’s world, it is no surprise that education systems across the globe are becoming directly affected. As a result of globalization, there have been many international organizations that emerged who play a significant role in influencing higher education policies in many countries. The more significant organizations that have most influence in higher education are: the World Bank, the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OEDC), the World Trade Organization (WTO), and the United Nations Education Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). All these organizations play a great influence on how education is valued as a way to improve both social and economic development. These organizations may claim to help improve education, and economic development; however, they are not all the same. Some organizations carry specific and unique roles and some organizations have a greater influence than others do. The OEDC, UNESCO, and WTO are all respectable organizations with a great influence in policy change; however, when there is money being flashing around, the World Bank will always outshine the others.
    With the rapid expansion of globalization and higher education becoming more market driven, countries across the globe are focusing on their human capital and comparing their own stance in the competitive race against the others. All these International organizations have influenced some countries at some point with policy reforms and/or instruments of assessments. The OEDC, UNESCO, WTO, and the World Bank all recognize these “global realities” and can all be seen as promoting “neoliberalism”.
      The OEDC stands out from the other international organizations as it views higher education as “both a public and a private good: public because it contributes to the economic development of a community; and private because it serves individual interests within a competitive labour market” (Rizvi & Lingard, 2009, p. 451). It is also important to note that unlike the World Bank, the OEDC does not have any “legally binding mandates over it’s members; nor does it have the financial resources at its disposal to encourage policy adaptation” (Rizvi & Lingard, 2009, p.439). In other words, the OEDC can only suggest policy reforms and implementations to a certain extent. Countries have no obligations to make any higher education policy reform. This limitation for policy implementation is the same for UNSECO and the WTO. One of the most talked about and most influential achievement from the OEDC is the Programme for International Student Assessment (also known as PISA). PISA is used as a comparative instrument of student success under their international standard. PISA has become a common instrumental tool and standard to compare the educational levels of countries across the globe.
     UNSECO also has somewhat of differential stance on internationalized higher education. According to Verger (2010), UNSECO has claimed that the WTO and its General Agreement on Trade Services treaty (GATS), promotes “the trade liberalization of higher education for purposes of economic profit whereas UNSECO promotes a non-profit internalization concerned with full respect for cultural diversity and with the right to education for all” (p.127).  As higher education becomes a competitive market internationally, unlike the WTO, UNSECO raises concerns of education access, quality, linguistics, and cultural diversity (Verger, 2010). UNSECO may have its moral campaign to back up its influence; however, it is no match to the beast of the World Bank. According to Edwards et al. (2017), UNSECO is constantly challenged by its peers on its legitimacy within its field of global education policy ideas. “The most prominent example was the World Bank’s creation of the FTI (Fast Track Initiative) in 2002, which attracted the attention and resources of donors, and which arguably outshone UNESCO’s efforts to make progress on EFA (Education For All)” (p. 412). This amplifying the case that Money (the World Bank) has more influence than human morale (UNSECO).
     The WTO stands out from the other organizations mostly for its GATS treaty. The GATS treaty is distinctive in the sense that it favors the idea of a neoliberal education with the main focus of “deregulation and the opening up of national markets to trade and competition…” (p. 59). The WTO wishes to remove barriers in the trade system and with the GATS treaty, its reinforces higher education towards commercialization and privatization.
      Like all the other international organizations, The World Bank is often accused of being “the satanic tool of “neoliberalism” while others complain that it is plainly ineffective” (Castro, 2009,  p. 459). Although the World Bank is not technically a bank, The World Bank primarily provides credit to participating countries; however, the interest for loans in some countries are higher than the others. The bigger and richer countries (such as the United States, Germany, Japan, and the UK) have the lower interest rates compared to the other smaller or poorer countries (Castro, 2009). The loans are intended to promote and stimulate social and economic growth within a country. For example, the loans can be taken out for implementing a program to improve infrastructures in the schools or to hire more teachers that are qualified. The loans may be taken out in the intention to improve the country, but in most cases, as the American saying goes, “the devil is in the detail”.  This of course refers to the “fine print” or in this case the banks conditionalities. In my opinion, the reason why the World Bank has the most influence in international higher education policy reform is mainly that some of the loans carry conditionalities to them. This would mean that if a country were to take out a loan, the country must fulfill a certain number of requirements in order to get the loan (Castro, 2009). The conditionalities would then give the World Bank the upper hand in a say for any policy reform implementation, especially to the smaller countries. Smaller countries are more likely to take out loans and tend to take the advice from then banks because of the conditions on them (Castro, 2009).
     Overall, all these international organizations are similar in which they all have a great influences in the neoliberal idealized views of an internationalized higher education system. Some may carry more unique influences than the others may; such as OEDC creating the PISA tool for Assessment, The WTO and its GATS treaty, or the UNSECO promoting a moral concern. All of these influences at the end of the day are minor compared to the World Bank’s loan conditionalities. According to Castro (2009), “The World Bank is currently the leading agent on education and development issues. As a result of the loans it grants and the related loan conditions, it has become the most influential external actor in the educational policies of Southern countries” (p. 128). In other words, The World Bank has a better chance of imposing countries to follow their agenda since there is money, terms of agreement, and many risks involved.

References

Castro, M. (2009). Can multilateral banks educate the world?. International handbook of
comparative education. Springer Science & Business Media. 455-477.

Edwards, D. B., Okitsu, T., Da Costa, R., & Kitamura, Y. (2017). Regaining Legitimacy in the
Context of Global Governance? UNESCO, Education for All Coordination and the
Global Monitoring Report. International Review of Education, 63(3), 403-416.

Rizvi, f., & Lingard, B. (2009). The OECD and global shifts in education policy. International
handbook of comparative education. Springer Science & Business Media. 437-453.

Verger, A. (2010). GATS, markets and higher education. WTO/GATS and the global politics of
higher education. Taylor & Francis group. 42-62.

Verger, A. (2010). For or against education liberalization. WTO/GATS and the global politics of
higher education. Taylor & Francis group. 126-148.

Globalization and "World Culture"

Higher education is rapidly expanding and growing in many countries around the world. Some countries are expanding more rapidly than others. Evan Schofer and John Meyer explore and theorize the similarities of expansion in some countries as well as the global trends as a whole. The authors seem to be more optimistic to the idea of a global integrated education system, or the idea of one day unifying “world culture”. In contrast to this idea, Gita Steiner-Khamsi, also explores globalization, but seems to argues the idea of a common international model to be more “Imaginary” rather than it becoming a reality. Both of these authors make compelling arguments and I find myself wondering whether an international common model can be created and most importantly will it work? 

Schofer & Meyer Main Views of Globalization

Before one can explore the Idea of globalization and higher education, Schofer & Meyer first describe the original power dynamics related to higher education in society. According to Schofer & Meyer (2005), Before World War II, higher education was generally seen and used to generate a limited set of elites to fulfil a set number of elite national society and occupational systems positions. There was a point in time in which there was a fear of “over education” and too many unemployed graduates. This idea weakened once there was a worldwide hegemonic view that higher education would generate human capital that benefits not only the individuals but more importantly the country. Schofer & Meyer then make their argument that after World War II,  the rise of democratization and human rights movements worldwide sparked the expansion of higher education. Higher education began to open their doors to minorities and other demographics that could not have enter before. Along with the new developments and technology systems across the world,  countries then began to want to “race to the top” and encourage research and more educated civilians to better the country. 

Schofer & Meyer Findings in Global Trends 

When it comes to global trends, Schofer & Meyer ‘s (2005) study find some interesting results. According to Schofer & Meyer (2005), “Higher education expansion expands faster in countries with expanded secondary education systems” (p.916). This would make sense in the fact that there are more people attending high school or high school equivalent education, that the population of qualified individuals entering into higher education would increase as well. Another interesting finding to note, according to Schofer & Meyer (2005), higher education in countries with more diverse ethnicities and languages are slower in expansion. Schofer & Meyer (2005) suggest this is because competing groups generate more exclusions and that governments have to capacity to limit their growths. 

The Elite fear of Expansion in Comparison to Germany

From reading the Schofer & Meyer article, I found interesting how countries were originally worried about expanding higher education not in the sense of the economy but more so concerns associated in protecting the elite class. Schofer & Meyer (2005) mention how in the United States of America, the East coast tried to block Western universities from expanding at first, which as we all know it was a failed attempt. According to Schofer & Meyer (2005), There were strong states in Britain and France that were able to delay the  higher education expansion for a great extent to keep the elite programs as they were. According to Schofer & Meyer (2005), after the 1970’s communist countries sharply restricted  further higher education expansion. This reminded me of my previous case study of the massification of the German Higher education. According to Mayer et. al (2002) German professors were at first opposed to open access of universities as they saw it as a an “intellectual downfall” and therefore wanted to limit access to higher education.  According to Mayer et. al (2002), In 1993 the German Science Council  recommended the influx of students be redirected away from universities and towards the vocational (blue collar) institutions. 

Stiener-Khamsi’s Argument

 I found Stiener-Khamsi’s argument of the common international higher education model to be unrealistic a fascinating one. Stiener-Khamsi’s main argument that the idea of a common model of education is imaginary is mostly due to the growth of new patriotism in some countries and the effects of the lower developed country not having the resources to keep up with the new demand. In  my opinion, what I believe Stiener-Khamsi is trying to say is that there will always be  competitive countries trying be more elite than others when it comes to education. This would mean that as long as countries try to be more advanced than the others, there will be a few countries who would rather exclude commonality and “preserve” their eliteness. I also believe that Stiener-Khamsi is trying to argue that if this common international model were to become a reality, it would only become a burden to under developed countries who do not have the sources to facilitate such new higher standards of educations. 

Conclusion

Overall, in my opinion, I would love to see a common international education model happen. This would hopefully tackle a lot of inequalities throughout the world and make things more level. In all honesty, I would have to side with Stiener-Khams and say that this idea is more “imaginary”. As my international higher education class has shown me so far, higher education and its meaning and values are not consistent globally. There is no perfect education system model and there are too many conflicting views on what needs to be taught, what should be taught, and more importantly who needs to has access this education. In the current political climate, we see some numerous political figures battling both nationally and international on many ideas and none of them seem to be a remedy to local inequalities. A perfect example of the countries not cooperating with each other is the recent “brexit” the United Kingdom had with the European Union. The European Union was created to unify the nations together yet the United Kingdom is in the process of breaking its ties with the EU. If the UK breaks away from the EU, which has been in place for years, then how are we as a worldwide identity to all to come to a common international education and all be in favor for it?

References

Mayer, K., U., Walter, M., Pollak, R. (2002).  Institutional Change and Inequalities of Access

in German Higher Education. Institutional Forms and Equality of Opportunity, Prague.

Schofer, E., & Meyer, J. (2005). The Worldwide Expansion of Higher Education in the              Twentieth Century. American Sociological Review, 70(6), 898-920.

Steiner-Khamsi, G. (2004). The global politics of educational borrowing and lending. New  York:  Teachers College Press.

A brief overview of the German higher education and it’s stratification.

I have chosen the country of Germany to briefly study its system of higher education
and it’s stratification. As the average part time graduate student with a tight schedule
and other assignments to manage, I regrettably was only able to read the Kehm
and Mayer et. al chapter excerpts as my main sources and one additional peer
reviewed source. I also need to mention I watched few unofficial YOUTUBE videos for a  better
visual explanation of the complex education structure. I will say that the chapter
excerpt by Mayer, Muller, and Pollak was highly confusing and the chapter excerpt
by Kehm to be more useful. The whole public education system in Germany is
very complex and not so linear like the American public education system.
This being said, it was personally challenging for me to differentiate the significance
between Gensamthochschulen, Fachhochschulen, Berufsakademie, Realschulde, and
Gymnasium. As a non-German language speaker, I found myself rereading the material
several times and having to turn to YOUTUBE for graphic visuals.
Before I touch upon higher education systems in Germany, I have to first explain the
public school system before the university level tracks. Unlike the linear American
public education (in which children attend Kindergarten through high school) in Germany,
children at the age of eleven, are to make a choice of completing their public education
in one of three tracks. One track leading to higher education studies, one track leading
to a possible higher education of the vocational nature, and the last track leading an
earlier transition into the workforce. Before students can transition into higher education,
they must take the Abitur, which is slightly comparable to the American SAT exam; however,
the exams are different depending on field of study. The Abitur, is more of a completion
exam rather than the American SAT exam which is mostly used for college entrance
requirements.
The public higher education system in Germany is primarily characterized as a binary
system in which most students enroll in Universities or Fachhochschulen (which are
universities with applied sciences). Public higher education in Germany is tuition free.
There is a small fee per semester; however, this fee includes a student commuter pass
allowing student to use the German public transportation systems. It is also important to
mention that there is also Berufsakademie’s, which are colleges of “advanced vocational
studies”. Berufsakademie’s are private schools with a direct vocational three year focus. 
The public higher education system in Germany has had several reforms and expansions
throughout history. The more focused reform and expansion takes place after the fall of the
Berlin wall. The Unification Contract, which was signed in 1990, set off a drastic change
in the economic, social, and political context that mostly focused on Eastern Germany
adapting to the Western Germany systems. This would mean that Eastern Germany also
adopted the Western Germany Binary public education system that is in place today.
Policy reformers were able to liberate higher education institutions directly from the
state allowing them to be more autonomous; however, the institutions are now evaluated
with more instruments other than the state in regards to measuring performance, quality
of teaching, and accountability. 
Similar to American higher education history, since its original start, there has been a
tremendous growth in higher education enrollment and an increase in its diversity.
Mayer et al. (2007),  would describe the reason for  the growth of enrollment as a way
for former elite sectors of the system trying to maintain their relative status as well as
the “less privileged parts of the system continuously striving to catch up with the status
and resources of the more privileged ones” (p. 241). According to  Mayer et al. (2007), 
In 1993, the influx of enrollment led the German science council to recommend “the
new influx of new students be redirected away from the universities and toward the
Fachhochschulen (Universities with applied sciences)” (p.244).
 Mayer et al. (2007), find that educational inequality declines in terms of gender as well
as in terms of class of origin. According to Mayer et al. (2002), in the long run, social
inequalities in obtaining tertiary education have declined. The decline in overall
educational inequality is mainly due to declining inequality in the early transitions of
the German educational system. Mayer et al.’s (2002), findings suggest that social
inequalities at the post-secondary and tertiary level of education are strongly correlated
to the educational choices made by children of different class levels and educational
background among the different options available in the German educational system.
The choices the families make are strongly related to costs and risks involved with the
specific educational track choices. The working class families choose the less costly
and less risky options. Working class families tend to choose the non-tertiary level
vocational education and trainings  to avoid the more costly and risky alternatives at
the Fachhochschule and more so at the universities. The vocational alternative would
appear to be more  secure, inexpensive and well valued on the labor market.
Mayer et al. (2002), conclude that “ differential (constrained based) choice among
different institutionally shaped options is the main mechanism driving the process
of class based social inequalities in tertiary education attainment” (p.50).  In other words,
the different education track choices keeps the overall social inequalities to repeat itself
since the working class families tend to keep choosing the vocational tracks and the
elite families to keep selecting the elite universities. 

References 

Forest, J. F. & Altbach, P. G. (2006) (Eds.). International Handbook of Higher Education, 
Volume 18. Dordrecht: Springer. 
Mayer, K., U., Walter, M., Pollak, R. (2002).  Institutional Change and Inequalities of Access
in German Higher Education. Institutional Forms and Equality of Opportunity,Prague.
Shavit, Y., Arum, R. & Gamoran, A. (Eds) (2007). Stratification in higher education:
a comparative study. Stanford: Stanford University Press