.:: Invest Right ::. Review on Education as Business

Long time ago, it used to be the responsibility of the state to take care of its citizens. It would be ensured that they received the best education and food possible and access to any kind of help would solely be on the basis on merit. Society prospered and there was peace all around. But, as is the human nature, it slowly became ingrained in the minds of the people that it was not enough for the society as a whole to prosper.

It was also important to be richer, prosperous and healthier than your peers. So as these thoughts proliferated, it became a common habit to ask for more help to get more benefits. Soon, it came to the realization of a few that if people needed the extra help, they might as well pay for it and thus the foundations of socialism stood challenged and what we see today is an extreme form of that development where any kind of service is available albeit at a price. Now, should it apply to education as well? We shall soon see.

As we discuss the merits of education being a free entity, we are inclined to acknowledge the fact that a learned person is likely to be more beneficial to the society by rendering various services in the form of health, technology, business etc. This is a very noble thought and is certainly not debatable. After all, if a kid is not taking lessons at school, he or she would be more likely to steal apples at the bazaar. By the same yardstick, a hungry person is as likely to go stealing to satisfy his need. In fact there is a higher likelihood of that happening.

So, to ensure that no person stays hungry, food should be made affordable as well, which it is. Basic food is comparatively affordable as is basic education. But have you ever heard of free pizza delivery for 30 days a month, 365 days a year? Same logic applies to education. Basic primary education is free, but if you want to eat at a fancy restaurant for all days of the month, you would have to shell out that extra money.

Some may argue that in the process we might lose out on some very good candidates who are unable to pay for their education. So, we would like to believe that good education must not entirely be a form of business but should be free, based on need.Now, we are getting somewhere.

The only potential problem I see with this argument is how could anyone possibly determine the magnitude of the need. Should education be subsidized for a certain section of society that does not have enough representation in the educated class or should the family income be the sole criteria? Does Merit qualify for any need based aid? Or should the decision be aided by weighing all the factors. Such forms of subsidies already exist. And it is anybody?s guess as to how much this has helped those classes of society that had benefited from this scheme.

There are some notable exceptions here and there, but it remains to be seen if the combined costs necessary to implement these measures have been outweighed by the benefits as a result of these subsidies. To continue with the same argument, wouldn?t it be more realistic that if a student deserved a waiver on his education, it must entirely be the prerogative of the school to decide on that and no interference whatsoever must apply.

Hence a need based funding of certain students might be necessary considering that the costs required for the same might be outweighed by the returns. However if the schools were to offer the necessary waivers, they would need to more funded. How would the universities raise the necessary money so that some bright students would not be needed to pay for their education? Should the government be responsible for it? How would the government raise the money? One way is to raise taxes. Now that would not be a viable solution, since the tax rates are already high in many places and the citizens would not take it well, if they had to pay extra to educate some bright students in the society.

The government could divert some of the funds it invests in other areas like defense (and risk being attacked), infrastructure (and let other businesses suffer) or medicine (a more sick society).Since this does not seem like a feasible solution, the schools would have to resort to other means to raise the money. One way to do it would be through industrial networks which would again translate it into a business transaction. Most schools might not be able to provide direct returns on such investments.

Another option to achieve such financial targets would be to extract it from some students who can afford to pay for their education and divert it to educate some deserving candidates who do not have the wherewithal. That in my opinion seems to be the most practical solution and allows the school to be self sustained as far as investment in core areas like labs, teachers and students is concerned. That is the model followed by most private schools and it seems to be fair to everybody at the risk of being termed as a business by a few.

This model has some eminent risks associated with it leading to over commercialization of education. New colleges are being formed each day with limited facilities and exorbitant tuition fees. Similar is the state with the number of coaching classes in every nook and corner of the country. Several argue that this would lead to reduction in standards. I am not debating on that. There will always be good schools and bad schools. And it is anybody?s guess as to which ones will thrive.

What is happening in India is there is government interference at various levels which in itself is not healthy. If a good school chooses to put a price on its education, then it seems to be a valid decision. After all top schools like Carnegie Mellon haven?t thrived by offering free education. If a school can offer good returns on investment, I do not see any problem with that.

While basic education may be a right, higher education is more of a privilege. If good education today comes at a price, then it is justified considering the returns it can offer. So it is reasonable to ask someone to pay for their education or deserve enough to get the fees waived. If education was made entirely free, then everyone would find their way to a university having a faint idea about the benefits it might offer or be unaware of its value. However, if scores of sub standard institutions have sprung up all over the places, then we have been responsible for their rise.

The over emphasis on formal education as the sole way of learning has lead to this unhealthy trend. So while education as a business might make sound sense, like every shroud businessman we need to watch out for what we are investing into. If a person can achieve a higher return on investment out of an affordable law school (regarding his/her interest in the field), investing in an expensive technical school might be a bad idea. Similar logic would apply for pursuing graduate studies. Before you invest into a graduate school, decide for yourself if it would be worth it. Life offers various avenues for learning and more often than not they lie outside the realms of the classroom.

--damo--

The story about the fall of socialism has been recalled from memory. It appeared in one of the articles by Dr.Raber about the fall of socialism.