Community Colleges Should Be Free, Essay Example

Ross MacDonald’s essay “Why Community Colleges Should be Free” (2014) argues that the benefits of community colleges on local economies, work-forces, and individual well-being are numerous enough to warrant the offering of free two-year educations to students. MacDonald’s references a recent law in Tennessee which “will make Tennessee’s two-year community colleges and technical schools free to any high school graduate starting in 2015” (MacDonald, para.2). The essay starts with the proposition that providing a free two-year education to all students is a progressive and cost-effective measure. Mac Donald goes on to support this central thesis by citing four or five key virtues that can be expected to result from the offering of free community colleges. This perspective is corroborated by a recent statistical study conducted by Kevin Pennington, Robert Pittman and Casey Hurley which suggests that even such a disparate area of social development as agriculture is noticeably strengthened through the presence of community colleges. I agree with both the Mac Donald article and the conclusion of the statistical survey. Furthermore, I believe that an objective examination of the facts indicates that a free two year education should be the default policy in every state.

MacDonald mentions that the initial benefits of community colleges emerge from the fact that these schools cater to STEM disciplines. He notes that “Community colleges are pillars of STEM (science, technology, engineering and mathematics) education. They train technicians for jobs in leading-edge industries and grant associate’s degrees that let students finish the last half of their higher education at a four-year institution.” (MacDonald, para. 3) Obviously, one direct benefit from this system is that students are receiving an education in areas that are practically geared toward future jobs and careers. This is a crucial point because communities and states are in need of STEM-based workers and experts. Therefore the resulting employment of STEM trained students would generate ongoing benefits for communities that exceed the cost of the free two-year programs.

A further benefit that is closely connected to the spread of STEM-based education is the idea of social mobility. In regard to community colleges a greater number of first-generation college students and minority students are encouraged through the spread of community colleges. MacDonald cites the fact that “community colleges serve as gateways for the underrepresented and the working class” (MacDonald, para. 3). The increase in social mobility as well as the spike in worker-knowledge and abilities further strengthens communities and states. The offering off free community college is an investment in the community itself and in the people who make the community run.

MacDonald does mention that certain serious challenges face the implementation of a free community college policy in Tennessee or any state. One of the big challenges is that many students who arrive at community college fail to possess sufficient skills in reading and writing and comprehension to adequately pursue the two-year curriculum. These students require remedial education which places a further economic burden on the community. Associated with the need for remedial education is the danger of high drop-out rates. Simply because a free education is offered does not mean that every aspiring student will be prepared to attend. Therefore, according to MacDonald, a great effort must be made by community colleges to ensure that their remedial programs are as efficient and as widely available as possible.

One final point made by MacDonald is that new educational techniques can find a place for exploration in the expanded community colleges. Techniques such as integrating online/off campus classes with in-class assignments would enable a more dynamic approach to learning, one that would facilitate a more practical use of in-class time. This approach is known as “flipped classrooms.” Basically a flipped classroom is one where what is traditionally known as “homework” is in fact carried out in the classroom, whereas lectures are presented off campus in an online setting. These innovations can be used at the community college level where they are likely to be most needed and most effective. Two year colleges can stand at the forefront of experimental policies and systems like flipped classrooms because they offer a robust and fast-moving student body by which to gauge their effectiveness. The nature of two-year colleges also makes it easier to implement needed improvements to programs in a timely fashion.

A community that offers free community college education is one that is more likely to stimulate job growth, economic opportunity and innovation. These are the primary pragmatic results of the policy according to MacDonald. However, MacDonald’s essay also strongly implies that further benefits, some less readily pinpointed, are also part of the discussion. These benefits include a higher degree of civic pride, individual happiness, and a sense of growth and opportunity. There is also an implied sense of community acceptance in that education is no longer rooted in class-identity and economic power. Overall, MacDonald’s article offers several indisputable points that bolster the idea that fee two-year education programs should become more widespread, if not universally adopted, in America. One might convincingly argue that MacDonald’s presentation of the debate is one-sided. There is little if any space in the article devoted to the opposing view. Despite this legitimate criticism, the essay is founded on solid facts and is articulated in a logical and convincing way.

Further evidence that community colleges represent an important part of a community’s well-being is the previously mentioned study by Pennington, Pittman and Hurley that approaches the issue through pure statistics. While some of the authors’ findings contradict the assumptions given by MacDonald, one key discovery in the statistical analysis adds a powerful potential benefit to the offering of free community college education. This finding is that co0mmunity colleges, especially those that are well-attended, increase the agricultural value of the community in which they are active. The authors note that “In looking at the total picture, it seems safest to conclude that the mere presence of the community college has not taken struggling economies and transformed them into booming ones” (Pennington, Pittman, and Hurley) . That said, the authors go on to state that the presence of community colleges increase the agricultural efficacy of a given community by as much as 11%.

This is a significant number. More importantly, it is a number that is derived from the mere presence of community colleges in a given region. It is not a statistical study of how free two-year education would impact the agricultural value of a community. Obviously, if an increase of 11% can be scientifically proven in regard to the simple existence of community education, then free two year education should cause this number to go even higher. Since the agricultural value of a given community (or a nation) is one of its most important attributes, this increase in value, taken across the entire nation, would raise the GNP to levels that might even be able to compete with government spending. If such a proposition sounds like wishful thinking, the idea that a raise in the national GNP would result from an increase in national education is completely supported by Pennington, Pittman and Hurley. Statistics are objective facts. Alone, they do not represent any particular political or social ideal. For this reason, I find the study to be a powerful argument on behalf of the idea of free community college.

Whether or not an individual believes that college education is desirable or necessary, it seems increasingly difficult to substantiate the view that only those who can afford to do so should have access to higher education. The “pay to play” policies that are default in the United States only encourage class division and stagnation in social mobility. Personally, I feel that this state of affairs is one that has been created by design by those who enjoy economic superiority in our society. The restriction of higher education for only those who can afford it is simply a way of enforcing social castes that enable of social strata (the “one-percent”) to exploit and control workers. Education is generally acknowledged as being the best way to inject social and class mobility into any society. Class divisions are often also based on racial and ethnic discrimination. Both economic disparity and racism are unhealthy for society as a whole.

Due to these considerations, it appears obvious that the offering of free two-year college educations to all students is not only a sound idea, but a necessary one. In order to strengthen America’s working-class, heal racial divides, and reinvigorate the infrastructures and workforces of our nation, free community college must become the law of the land. As the statistical survey indicated the proliferation of community colleges will not solve all of America’s economic problems immediately, nor will such a policy turn a bad economy instantly good. Rather, the implementation of free community colleges would start a long-term process that would eventually culminate a stronger and more just society for every American citizen. When this reality is coupled with the conclusion that America’s overall GNP would irrefutably rise through the implementation of the free community education policy, those who stand against such a policy-shift in America may find it very difficult to bolster their position without also advocating the furthering of the same widespread impoverishment and class struggle that has brought America to its present state of decay.

Works Cited

MacDonald, Ross. “Why Community Colleges Should Be Free.” Scientific American.com; accessed 9-29-14; http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/why-community-colleges-should-be-free/

Pennington, Kevin L., Robert B. Pittman, and J. Casey Hurley. “An Assessment of the Community College’s Influence on the Relative Economic Development of a County.” Community College Review 29.1 (2001).