Chat with us, powered by LiveChat Research Proposal Why colleges education should be free in the United States | acewriters

A research proposal should be written about the topic of: Why colleges education should be free in the united state? I agree with the idea of the free education as I think it helps the students and the economy. The instruction for the assignment is attached here in word documents ( Proposal instruction, proposal format). Also, two sources about my topic are attached here in a PDF.




Unformatted Attachment Preview

My name
English 102 002
Research Proposal
Working title: “Title here”
Research question: your research question here
Working thesis sentence: answer your research question in 1-2 sentences
Topic: introduce topic and answer questions posed on the research proposal assignment sheet
Current research: In a sentence or two, provide a brief overview of your research so far. In one
to three sentences, describe what your research will do. Try to complete this sentence: “My
research is about…” After, cite at least two sources you have selected thus far like so:
GILLEN, JAY. “An Insurrectionary Generation: Young People, Poverty, Education, and
Obama.” Harvard Educational Review, vol. 79, no. 2, Summer2009, pp. 363-369.
Finally, discuss the following: What kinds of sources – periodicals (newspapers/magazines),
scholarly journal articles, books, etc. – would be most useful to you based on your topic? Where
can/will you find these sources?
Paper #3: Proposal
After conducting some initial research on our topics, we will write a proposal. The purpose of a
proposal is to explain clearly what the question or problem within your topic is and to state how
your idea will address that problem through research. The specific, primary audience of this
paper will be me, since I have the authority to accept your topic idea and plan for moving
forward on your research.
The proposal is meant to record your thinking about your topic and research progress. The
proposal should be about two – three pages in MLA format and should answer the following
Working title: ______________________________
Research Question. What is your overall research question? How does this research question
relate to local, personal, or larger social and cultural issues?
Working thesis. what do you expect your overarching thesis/argument to be at this point,
keeping in mind you can change it after further research? (Your thesis should essentially answer
your research question).
Topic. In a word or phrase, what is your topic? What makes this a debatable or multi-sided
issue? What are some counter arguments you can see surfacing in opposition to your stance?
How will you counter these arguments?
Why is this topic important to you? Why is it important to others? What groups of people will be
interested in reading about this topic? In which publications or types of publications could you
envision scholarly writings about your topic appearing?
Current Research. In a sentence or two, provide a brief overview of your research so far. In one
to three sentences, describe what your research will do. Try to complete this sentence: “My
research is about…”
Next, cite at least two sources you have consulted so far in your research. What kinds of sources
– periodicals (newspapers/magazines), scholarly journal articles, books, etc. – would be most
useful to you based on your topic? Where can/will you find these sources?
Assignment Requirements

Clear working title
A focused research question that leads to an arguable thesis
Working thesis that is arguable and answers research question
A concise description of your topic that explains why the issue is important and who is
affected by it
Evidence of preliminary research using high-quality sources (at least two)
Thorough overview of research: identifies types of sources you plan to use and explains
where you can/will find them
Follows MLA formatting. Free of typos and grammatical errors
Should Higher Education Be Free?
by Vijay Govindarajan and Jatin Desai
SEPTEMBER 05, 2013
In the United States, our higher education system is broken. Since 1980, we’ve seen a 400% increase
in the cost of higher education, after adjustment for inflation — a higher cost escalation than any
other industry, even health care. We have recently passed the trillion dollar mark in student loan
debt in the United States.
How long can a business model succeed that forces students to accumulate $200,000 or more in
debt and cannot guarantee jobs — even years after graduation? We need transformational
innovations to stop this train wreck. A new business model will only emerge through continuous
discovery and experimentation and will be defined by market demands, start-ups, a Silicon Valley
mindset, and young technology experts.
Neither the pedagogical model nor the value equation of traditional higher education have changed
much in the past fifty years. Harvard, MIT, Yale, Princeton, and Stanford are still considered the best
schools in the world, but their cost is significantly higher today than two decades ago.
According to Rafael Reif, MIT’s president, who spoke at the Davos conference this past January,
there are three major buckets that make up the total annual expense (about $50,000) of attending a
top-notch university such as MIT: student life, classroom instruction, and projects and lab activities.
There is a significant opportunity to help reduce the lecture portion of expenses using technology
Get the latest from HBR emailed to your inbox.
Sign up now
According to the American Institute of Physics (PDF), as of 2010,

there are about 9,400 physics
teachers teaching undergraduates every September in the United States. Are all of these great
teachers? No. If we had 10 of the very best teach physics online and employed the other 9,390 as
mentors, would most students get a better quality of education? Wouldn’t that lead to lower per unit
cost per class?
Yes, you might argue the lack of “classroom experience” is missing. But when it comes to core
classes which don’t require labs or much in-person faculty interaction, does the current model
justify the value-price equation?
What is traditional college education really worth?
In a recent interview, Laszlo Bock, SVP of people operations at Google, said, “One of the things
we’ve seen from all our data crunching is that G.P.A.’s are worthless as a criteria for hiring, and test
scores are worthless — there is no correlation at all except for brand-new college grads, where there’s
a slight correlation.” Even more fascinating is his statement that “the proportion of people without
any college education at Google has increased over time,” leading to some teams in which 14% have
not gone to college. “After two or three years,” Bock said, “your ability to perform at Google is
completely unrelated to how you performed when you were in school, because the skills you
required in college are very different.”
Mr. Bock’s comments suggest that smart people can figure out how to pass college tests if they can
master what the professor wants, resulting in great test scores — but this skill and knowledge has
very little relevance to solving daunting business problems with no obvious answers.
Once leading companies embrace what Google is already doing, seismic shifts and breakthroughs
will occur in college education. Maybe a two year college degree will be sufficient instead of four.
Imagine a business model where you take two years of courses online with the world’s best teachers,
followed by two years in structured problem-solving environments. Driven by market forces, such
new business models could emerge faster than we expect.
So what is happening now? Who are some of the new education providers experimenting with new
business models?
Emerging new education models
There are three strong players with millions of students and thousands of course offerings, all for
free and available to anyone in the world. Coursera, Udacity, and edX have over four million enrolled
students in their Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs).
All three uniquely (and differently) replicate the classroom experience. Each uses top-notch
professors and technologies in a creative manner — but not without challenges. One of the authors
(Jatin Desai) enrolled in a few courses to test out the environments and found that, just like in the
traditional classroom, courses vary greatly based on who is teaching. Some professors use the
technology brilliantly and others use it as minimally as possible. (Access to higher bandwidth greatly
enhances the experience.)
These three are not the only ones in the MOOC movement; many others
are quickly joining. In fact, the New York Times dubbed 2012 “The Year of the MOOC”
and Time magazine said that free MOOCs open the door to the “Ivy League for the Masses.”
According to a recent Financial Times article, many employers are unsure of what to make of MOOC
education — unsurprising, since many new technologies and business models go through multiple
evolutions. The good news, according to the article, is that 80% of respondents surveyed would
accept MOOC-like education for their internal employee development. We can extrapolate from this
survey that the employer demand for online education exists — and, moreover, that it is only a
matter of time until universities and well-funded venture capitalists will respond to this white space
in the market very soon.
Georgia Tech, in fact, has already responded; in January, it will begin offering a master’s degree in
computer science, delivered through MOOCs, for $6,600. The courses that lead to the degree are
available for free to anyone through Udacity, but students admitted to the degree program (and
paying the fee) would receive extra services like tutoring and office hours, as well as proctored
In the near future, higher education will cost nothing and will be available to anyone in the world.
Degrees may not be free, but the cost of getting some core education will be. All a student needs is a
computing device and internet access. Official credentialing from an on-ground university may cost
more; in early 2012, MIT’s MOOC, MITx, started to offer online courses with credentials, for “a small
fee” available for successful students — and we’re eager to see how Georgia Tech’s MOOC degree will
transform the education model.
What’s next? How far are we away from new business models where MOOC-type pedagogy will
dominate the first two years of college experience? When will most employers begin to accept nontraditionally credentialed MOOC-based education? And what will this mean for the education
industry? With luck and ongoing innovation, perhaps the US’s broken education system may be
Vijay Govindarajan is the Coxe Distinguished Professor at Dartmouth’s Tuck School of
Business and a Marvin Bower Fellow at Harvard Business School. He is the author of The Three Box
Solution: A Strategy for Leading Innovation (HBR Press, April 2016).
Jatin Desai is co-founder and chief executive ofcer of The Desai Group and the author of Innovation Engine: Driving
Execution for Breakthrough Results.
This article is about EDUCATION
Leave a Comment
We hope the conversations that take place on will be energetic, constructive, and thought-provoking. To comment, readers must sign in or
register. And to ensure the quality of the discussion, our moderating team will review all comments and may edit them for clarity, length, and relevance.
Comments that are overly promotional, mean-spirited, or off-topic may be deleted per the moderators’ judgment. All postings become the property of
Harvard Business Publishing.
The Case Against Free College | Dissent Magazine
About Us
The Case Against Free College
The Case Against Free College
Matt Bruenig
Fall 2015
Student debt activists at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, March 2014 (Light Brigading / Flickr)
This article is part of Dissent’s special issue of “Arguments on the Left.” Click to read
contending arguments from Tressie McMillan Cottom and Mike Konczal.
In the United States, as in much of the rest of the world, college students receive
three kinds of public benefits: tuition subsidies, living grants, and public loans.
Through various combinations of this benefit troika, almost all students are able to
finance their college education. Some on the left are very unhappy with the precise
mix of student benefits currently on offer. Student debt activists, among others,
complain that tuition subsidies and living grants make up too little of the student
benefit bundle, while public loans make up too much of it.

The Case Against Free College

The Case Against Free College | Dissent Magazine
Recently, this complaint has begun to coalesce into a number of movements and
proposals for “free college.” I put the phrase in quotes because it means different
things to different people. For some, “free college” means subsidizing tuition to
zero. For others, it means subsidizing tuition to zero and providing living grants high
enough to completely cover room and board. For still others, it appears to mean
putting in place some mix of means-tested tuition subsidies, living grants, and even
subsidized work-study jobs that, combined with expected parental assistance, allow
nearly all students to leave college with little to no debt.
One could write at great length about these different conceptions of “free” and the
policy proposals that have formed around them. For instance, since people who do
not attend college also have housing and food costs, is it really correct to say room
and board is a cost of attending college? Why do none of these conceptions
consider as a cost of college all of the potential wages students forego by choosing
to study rather than work? Does parental assistance with college really help to make
it free or is it more properly understood as a family wealth transfer that students
then pay towards their higher education?
Of greater importance than all of those questions, however, is the more basic
question about the fairness of free college as an idea. Those clamoring for free
college make normative claims about the nature of a just and good society. As
currently argued, however, these claims are largely uncompelling. Without a
dramatic overhaul of how we understand student benefits, making college more or
entirely free would most likely boost the wealth of college attendees without
securing any important egalitarian gains.
The main problem with free college is that most students come from
disproportionately well-off backgrounds and already enjoy disproportionately welloff futures, which makes them relatively uncompelling targets for public transfers.
At age nineteen, only around 20 percent of children from the poorest 2 percent of
families in the country attend college. For the richest 2 percent of families, the same
number is around 90 percent. In between these two extremes, college attendance
rates climb practically straight up the income ladder: the richer your parents are, the
greater the likelihood that you are in college at age nineteen. The relatively few poor
kids who do attend college heavily cluster in two-year community colleges and
cheaper, less selective four-year colleges, while richer kids are likely to attend more
expensive four-year institutions. At public colleges (the type we’d likely make free),
students from the poorest fourth of the population currently pay no net tuition at
either two-year or four-year institutions, while also receiving an average of $3,080
and $2,320 respectively to offset some of their annual living expenses. Richer
students currently receive much fewer tuition and living grant benefits.
Given these class-based differences in attendance levels, institutional selection, and
current student benefit levels, making college free for everyone would almost
certainly mean giving far more money to students from richer families than from

The Case Against Free College

The Case Against Free College | Dissent Magazine
poorer ones. Of course, providing more generous student benefits might alter these
class-based skews a bit by encouraging more poor and middle-class people to go to
college or to attend more expensive institutions. But even reasonably accounting for
those kinds of responses, the primary result of such increased student benefit
generosity would be to fill the pockets of richer students and their families.
Student benefit campaigners tend not to focus on these sorts of distributive
questions, preferring instead to gesture towards a supposed student debt crisis to
prove that those who attended college really are a hurting class needing higher
benefits. While there are certain extreme cases of students with very high debts,
and certain college sectors such as for-profits that are truly immiserating specific
groups of students, the reality remains that college graduates are generally on track
for much better financial outcomes than non-attendees. Even in the wake of the
Great Recession, which hit young people harder than anyone else, those with
bachelor’s degrees had median personal incomes $17,500 higher than young high
school graduates. Just one year of this income premium would be enough to wipe
out the median debt of a public four-year-college graduate, which currently stands
slightly above $10,000.
Although extending extra benefits to such a disproportionately well-off group is a
deeply suspicious idea, the way American student benefit campaigners talk about it
is somehow worse still. Due to the toxic American mix of aversion to welfare
benefits, love of individual rights, and faith in meritocracy, the typical line you hear
about free college is that it should be a right of students because they have worked
hard and done everything right. The implicit suggestion of such rhetoric is that
students are really owed free college as the reward for not being like those less
virtuous high school graduates who refuse to do what it takes to better themselves
through education.
Needless to say, such thinking is extremely damaging to a broader egalitarian
project, even more so in some ways than its goal of setting aside a part of our
national income for the inegalitarian aim of making college free. If we are actually
going to push a free college agenda, it should not be under a restrictive students’
rights banner, but instead under a general pro-welfare banner. The goal of free
college should not be to help students per se, but instead to bind them to a broader
welfare benefit system. By presenting their tuition subsidies and living grants as
indistinguishable from benefits for the disabled, the poor, the elderly, and so on, it
may be possible to encourage wealthier students to support the welfare state and to
undermine students’ future claims of entitlement to the high incomes that college
graduates so often receive. After all, the college income premium would only be
possible through the welfare benefits to which the rest of society—including those
who never went to college—has contributed.
Without understanding and presenting student benefits as welfare handouts, a free
college agenda has no real egalitarian purpose. Giving extra money to a class of

The Case Against Free College

The Case Against Free College | Dissent Magazine
disproportionately well-off people without securing any reciprocal benefit to poor
and working-class people who so often do not attend college, all while valorizing the
college student as a virtuous person individually deserving of such benefits, would
be at worst destructive, and at best, totally pointless.
Matt Bruenig is a writer who researches poverty, inequality, and welfare systems.
This article is part of Dissent’s …
Purchase answer to see full

error: Content is protected !!