<p>How many receiving merit scholarships, need based scholarships, etc. understand and accept the societal obligation that comes with that assistance.</p>
<p>Scholarships will not be available for future students if you do not give generously to your school after graduation. Yes, you have incurred a debt! An honor debt.</p>
<p>Excellent point. Students get a chance to pay back into the system with their federal and state income taxes to offset what they were awarded in taxpayer-subsidized and taxpayer-funded grants and loans, but then may not consider that the schools don’t get any of that tax money directly. So joining the alumni foundations is something students, especially those who are awarded those scholarships, can do easily, and help out the next generations of scholarship awardees as their incomes allow. Thanks for the reminder.</p>
<p>I hope the grads keep working long-term. </p>
<p>I wonder what impact student loans will have on donations in the years to come. Hard to donate if you are struggling to make loan payments.</p>
<p>noname87:</p>
<p>If those who receive generous packages(free to almost free) do not contribute, the results could be devastating. I think schools need to do a better job explaining this obligation when handing out financial aid. Many students seem to think they’ve won a prize for being fabulous and owe nothing in return. </p>
<p>I think this is a realization that occurs after a student has graduate and obtained some success in life. That is when we look back at how we got to where we are and “pay it forward”. In my experience Newton’s Third Law goes well beyond physics. Pressuring a young adult or telling them something is obligatory often has an equal and opposite effect. We must trust they will do what is right in the long run.</p>
<p>Too true. But to be honest, I don’t consider my dues a debt. It’s more of a duty. My university has given me a free education and MORE. My family has already given a donation. I’m a first year student. </p>
<p>I don’t feel explaining this act of “paying it forward” as an “obligation” is the best thing to do. With gratefulness and success comes charity…or…it’s supposed to!</p>
<p>In my opinion, education at all levels SHOULD be free.</p>
<p>I would feel no obligation to do so. Although yes, I am completely ignoring the “background” as to how universities get their funds, how they have to allocate them, etc. But that does not affect me as a person.</p>
<p>Someone who got a full ride to the University of Michigan posted on the facebook page in a discussion about scholarships: “Got 1700 and still got more money than yall.” I’m not against people who get financial aid help, but when they are pompous like this …
I feel like reporting him to the school. Of course, this is not my business and life isn’t fair, so I can’t do anything about it.</p>
<p>@walkingdead1480 They might be lying. </p>
<p>We are all paying for it, directly or indirectly. Nothing is really free.</p>
<p>@walkingdead1480…it is one thing for a student like that to get into a university with those stats and significant financial aid, but it is entirely another thing for such a student to make it through all four years and graduate with a degree and achieve any success. That is the only positive spin I can put on such a student, who, if being honest, is a loser and jerk.</p>
<p>@ctesiphon… I wish I could say that you were kidding, because your opinion that all education at all levels “should be free” is absurd, but, unfortunately, there are too many people like you out there who don’t understand that nothing is life is free. Somebody pays, and you are more than happy to let them, because they are not known to you - they are just nameless taxpayers or college donors - and, like you said, knowing the background of where universities get their funding has no affect on you. Of course you feel no obligation. That is the problem with all of the federal financing of college. I wish there was a practical way to prepare a financial aid package for a college student, and along with listing the Pell Grants and other subsidized grants, aid, and scholarships, the student would see a list of names with photos of the taxpayers whose tax money is funding all of that “free” money. Maybe some students would feel a sense of obligation, if not to those individual taxpayers, but to the taxpaying citizenry in general, to the country. We could use more people who felt a sense of noblesse oblige.</p>
<p>I don’t think universities expect new graduates to send back large donations early in their careers, or even large donations ever. If a new graduate can spend $100 a month on a smartphone, then they probably have $25 or $50 to join an alumni group, and should do so if they want to, not because they are compelled to do so.</p>
<p>Ctesphon:</p>
<p>So, college professors and staff should volunteer their time? Should construction companies donate building materials and labor? I assume you’ll be expecting free food and housing as well.</p>
<p>Tell me, Ctesphon. How are these people to feed their families while providing free products and services to you? Is their time on this earth worthless?</p>
<p>And, what exactly do you contribute to this equation?</p>
<p>Niq:</p>
<p>You would be surprised at the number of people who do not share your view of the world.</p>
<p>Thank you for your contributions to a moral and civil society.</p>
<p>I am curious as to how you derived from my post that I think staff & professors should volunteer their time without pay. I do not recall saying that at all. This “nothing in life is free” is simply a statement to sum up currency, which itself is an abstraction that places value on everything, including people themselves.</p>
<p>This is a bigger picture I am talking about. It goes beyond simply paying for education. I am hardly nationalistic. I do not feel any “obligation” to “give” to my “country” because I was born here. I’ll give to something because I care about it as a cause, not because I feel a “civil duty” to my country. </p>
<p>Education, access to be able to make a living, should not be required to be paid for. The irony here is that to become an engineer, a scientist, a public health specialist, a nurse, teacher, one must go to college. One has to go to college to gain access to a career that “contributes to the equation”. To become an active and contributory member of society that will advance technology, health, quality of life, education, anything, one needs a college education. Those that do not go to college and may end up as a manager of a car place or something. While that would help him get a living, is he necessarily “contributing to the equation”. He is selling used cars, and he makes a living, and I’m sure he may (or may not!) be fine with that. </p>
<p>If access to be able to contribute to society is being limited by monetary restraints, there is simply something wrong with the system. This goes further than the education system itself. I am not here to turn this into a debate over the flaws of capitalism. I am defending myself because people are making assumptions based on a thought that I may have.</p>
<p>Ctesiphon:</p>
<p>Ok. Take money out of the equation. What are you willing to exchange for the time and expertise of staff & faculty? Do you agree that they should expect something of equal value from you?. </p>
<p>@chesterton Thanks for putting in words exactly how i feel about this. I know with that character, he’ll never get much out of life. I just don’t want to see the university’s money going to rude people instead of people who actually need it.</p>
<p>You are viewing education as a different system than I am. I am not looking at it like a business, where there is a provider and a consumer, in this case, the professor and a student.I am viewing it as a necessity for a developed nation. Professors are hired by universities to do research and educate people to go into a variety of different paths in life. It’s like not students are hiring these professors and paying them hourly wages to teach them. Nobody should “expect” anything from each other, more so just each spends their time wisely. It is safe to say that professors who have earned a PhD must really have a passion for their subject, and they do it because they feel a calling towards it. There are many other careers that take much less time and effort than it does to take a PhD. Professors have their positions because they love it, want to research it, maybe want to teach it, etc. Students go to college and major in these areas because they love it, want to become involved in it one day. There is a mutual friendship here. (This scenario of course, is devoid of the money that people are held to when they attend universities). My rant is more on currency, private property, capitalism as a whole, but it is fairly idealistic when we are talking about something as specific as education. My dream is likely in achievable any time soon.</p>
<p>BUT if we are putting money in the equation, there are so many unnecessary expenditures in our (USA) budget that can be put towards education. People having to “pay” for an education is an archaic principle, historically reserved for the upper echelons of society. I do not think that only people that have the money deserve to go to college. Everyone should be at least guaranteed the funding to go to one of their state universities. It is up to them to take that or not. If the family can already pay for it then there is no need for the free $$$. Of course this is my solution in the context of our current materialistic society that enshrines money as love and success. Cooper Union (a technology school in new york)'s message said "should be accessible to those who qualify, independent of their race, religion, sex, wealth or social status, and should be “open and free to all” Unfortunately of course there is simply not enough money to go around to ensure every school could do something like Cooper Union was able to do, they are discontinuing their policy of full funded tuition for this year’s next class. </p>
<p>The education system is flawed from the start, with the more affluent families being able to afford better resources for their children to enhance their abilities, while it is possible, and we see it all the time on this site, students from less wealthy upbringings are still able to get into places like Harvard, Columbia, UChicago. Of course, the majority of schools that are able to offer consistent need-based aid to poorer families are very selective. I applaud those from less wealthy families that ace their ACT/SAT, get great GPAs and are involved in activities they like… Even for familes that maybe dont qualify for the aid, i think everyone should not have to worry about what they will do for later life…</p>
<p>Ctesiphon:</p>
<p>Your post is well taken. The idea behind Cooper Union was noble indeed. With a healthy endowment provided by a wealthy entrepreneur/industrialist, the school was able to offer free tuition. However, after erecting a new building and losing money during the crash, Cooper Union became financially stressed. In addition, many graduates FAILED to follow in the generous footsteps of their founder. Certainly, Cooper has many successful graduates.</p>
<p>Thus, the point of this thread. </p>
<p>Is there money in bloated govt budgets that could be redirected to institutions of higher learning? This may well be the case. In fact, it is highly probable. However, unlike Peter Cooper, the govt creates nothing. It is force and force alone. It must take from one to give to another. The “fairness” of this force is a topic for another day.</p>
<p>In the real world, beyond the walls of government, we work within constraints. Money is a hard constraint. It took one man to build the Cooper Union foundation. Certainly, millions of us working together can do the same.</p>