Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

My favourite idea for fixing the cost of tertiary education, is for universities to "buy a stake in you".

i.e. You apply for Course X and the university quotes you Y% of your income for the next Z many years. Say 15% for 15 years over say a £20k floor.

Better students get a lower percentage. Courses with poor prospects get punished with having to publish higher percentages before you get in the door. You as the student decide whether the quality of a university and their facilities, outweighs say an extra percentage etc etc.

Aligning the goals of the university and the student is beneficial in other ways as well. If 7 years down the line the field your course pointed you towards implodes and you're laid off - well the university could offer a free course/masters to retrain in a subject that'll get you back earning for them.



This would basically make art degrees and history degrees unattainable except for the rich. Not that I mind, but that is the complaint you'll get with this system.


I'd disagree.

The cost of delivering an arts and history course should be cheaper than say a course requiring a medical-teaching-hospital, a super-computer, wind-tunnel - whatever.

If all you need are some great lecturers, you can poach them and set up a department somewhere with a low cost of living for staff and students.

These subjects are also a fine fit for distance-learning, part-time etc.

Basically, I'd hope that universities would be forced to consider how they could reduce the cost of these courses in a sensible way. Current system of "all of you get on this expensive campus and pay your share" is unfair, as a lot of the benefits of this are skewed.


That's a feature, not a bug.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: