DOCSLIB.ORG

The Political Economy of Higher Education Finance: How Information and Design Afect Public Preferences for Tuition

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Political Economy of Higher Education Finance: How Information and Design Afect Public Preferences for Tuition The Political Economy of Higher Education Finance: How Information and Design Afect Public Preferences for Tuition Philipp Lergetporer (ifo Institute at the University of Munich) Ludger Woessmann (ifo and LMU Munich) Discussion Paper No. 145 February 27, 2019 Collaborative Research Center Transregio 190 | www.rationality-and-competition.de Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München | Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin Spokesperson: Prof. Dr. Klaus M. Schmidt, University of Munich, 80539 Munich, Germany +49 (89) 2180 3405 | [email protected] The Political Economy of Higher Education Finance: How Information and Design Affect Public Preferences for Tuition* Philipp Lergetporer and Ludger Woessmann† Abstract Public preferences for charging tuition are important for determining higher education finance. To test whether public support for tuition depends on information and design, we devise several survey experiments in representative samples of the German electorate (N>19,500). The electorate is divided, with a slight plurality opposing tuition. Providing information on the university earnings premium raises support for tuition by 7 percentage points, turning the plurality in favor. The opposition-reducing effect persists two weeks after treatment. Information on fiscal costs and unequal access does not affect public preferences. Designing tuition as deferred income-contingent payments raises support by 16 percentage points, creating a strong majority favoring tuition. The same effect emerges when framed as loan payments. Support decreases with higher tuition levels and increases when targeted at non-EU students. Keywords: tuition, higher education, political economy, survey experiments, information, earnings premium, income-contingent loans, voting JEL classification: I22, H52, D72, D83 February 25, 2019 * For valuable comments and discussion, we would like to thank Nick Barr, Eric Bettinger, Leonardo Bursztyn, Sue Dynarski, Achim Goerres, Rick Hanushek, Juanna Joensen, Wilbert van der Klaauw, Volker Meier, Richard Murphy, Ricardo Perez-Truglia, Randall Reback, Lisa Simon, Marty West, and seminar participants at Harvard, Stanford, Ohio, Prague, Munich, Konstanz, Freiburg, Karlsruhe, Nuremberg, ifo Institute, the FRBNY/NYU education seminar, the CESifo education meeting, the IZA workshop on education, interventions and experiments, and the annual meetings of SOLE in Raleigh, EEA in Mannheim, the German Economic Association in Augsburg, and its economics of education group in Bamberg. We are grateful to Elisabeth Grewenig, Sarah Kersten, Franziska Kugler, Laura Oestreich, and Katharina Werner for their collaboration in designing and executing the surveys. This study is registered in the AEA RCT Registry as AEARCTR-0003873. Financial support by the Leibniz Competition (SAW-2014-ifo-2) and the German Science Foundation (CRC TRR 190) is gratefully acknowledged. † Lergetporer: ifo Institute at the University of Munich; CESifo; [email protected]. Woessmann: University of Munich and ifo Institute; CESifo, IZA, and CAGE; [email protected]. 1. Introduction The question whether higher education should be free or whether students should pay tuition creates strong political tensions. Politicians in countries with long traditions of tuition suggest making higher education free of charge, and countries without tuition see attempts to introduce it. For example, in the last U.S. presidential election campaign, Democratic candidate Bernie Sanders created substantial public attention by campaigning for tuition-free colleges. In traditionally tuition-free Germany, seven of the sixteen states introduced tuition in 2006/07. Clearly, whenever governments try to introduce or raise tuition, there is substantial public opposition. Plans for tuition raises in England in 2010 triggered a wave of student unrest, and proposed tuition hikes regularly spark campus protests in the United States.1 In Germany, four of the seven state governments that had introduced tuition got voted out of power in the next election, and all abandoned tuition within a few years. In political debates, proponents argue that charging tuition provides universities with resources necessary to maintain quality and make future well-offs pay for part of the services they receive. By contrast, opponents argue that tuition undermines access and equity in tertiary education. The fiscal, human capital, and equity implications of charging tuition have been studied extensively in the economics literature (e.g., Lovenheim and Turner, 2017). The public opinion battles over tuition indicate, however, that the feasibility of reforming higher education finance ultimately raises an important political economy question: What determines political majorities for or against charging tuition? In this paper, we study the extent to which two groups of factors affect the electorate’s support for tuition: factual information about central aspects of higher education and the design of the tuition scheme. Recent German history provides a prototype of the political economy conflicts that surround tuition. After the Constitutional Court had declared a federal ban on tuition unconstitutional in 2005, nearly half the states introduced tuition of mostly 500 Euro per semester (see section 2.2 for details). By the end of 2014, however, all of them have abolished tuition again in response to an apparently overwhelming public opposition. In fact, though, little is known about the extent to which the public at large – as opposed to special interest groups – favors or opposes tuition and how these public preferences are shaped. 1 For example, one protest against plans to raise tuition in England drew 50,000 students in November 2010 (BBC, 21 November 2012, http://www.bbc.com/news/education-20412792 [accessed 9 October 2018]). Over time, there have been many campus protests across colleges in the United States against proposed tuition hikes (e.g., Washington Post, 20 November 2014, http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post- nation/wp/2014/11/20/university-of-california-students-protest-tuition-hikes-a-look-at-some-campus-protests-over- the-years/ [accessed 9 October 2018]), and observers increasingly raise concerns over soaring student debt (e.g., Oreopoulos and Petronijevic, 2013). 1 To elicit the electorate’s preferences for tuition, we conducted five annual representative surveys (2014-2018) of the German voting-age population with over 19,500 observations in total. To study determinants of the public’s preferences for tuition, we implemented a series of randomized experiments in the surveys. The first set of experiments tests the effects of correcting potentially biased beliefs about different economic aspects of the higher education system on public support for tuition.2 Our main focus is on studying the effects of randomized information provision about the earnings differential between persons with and without a university degree. We subject this experimental treatment to several tests of robustness and replicability and study persistence in a follow-up survey about two weeks after the information treatment. Additional experimental treatments provide information on the overall public cost per university student and on unequal access to university education by family background. The second set of experiments investigates the effects of the design of the tuition payment scheme on public preferences. Our main focus is on whether public support for tuition depends on whether payments are due while attending university or deferred until students earn sufficient income. Our experimental treatment allows us to compare preferences for regular upfront tuition to preferences for income-contingent tuition that is due after graduation and has to be paid only if income exceeds a certain threshold.3 We again test for replicability of results, as well as for robustness to framing income-contingent tuition as loan payments. We also complement our results for the voting-age population with a separate survey of adolescents, the highly relevant interest group of potential future university students. Public opposition may not only focus on the basic principle of charging tuition, but also on its level. Another design experiment thus varies tuition levels across experimental groups to study the public’s responsiveness towards the level of tuition. A final experiment compares preferences for universal tuition versus tuition for non-EU citizens to test the extent to which public support is affected by which group of students is targeted. 2 Previous evidence suggests that people are ill-informed about relevant aspects regarding university tuition (e.g., Bettinger et al., 2012; Hoxby and Turner, 2015; McGuigan, McNally, and Wyness, 2016). 3 Economic research generally indicates positive equity and efficiency aspects of income-contingent tuition (e.g., Chapman, Higgins, and Stiglitz, 2014; Findeisen and Sachs, 2016; Stantcheva, 2017; Diris and Ooghe, 2018; Barr et al., 2019), which is currently in place in Australia, England, and New Zealand. A related concept – income share agreements where tuition is paid as a percentage of later income – is gaining ground also in the U.S. It has been adopted, for example, by Purdue University and by an online learning start-up that recently raised major funding by leading venture capitalists (see New York Times, 8 January 2019, https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/08/business/dealbook/education-student-loans-lambda-schools.html [accessed 16 February 2019]). However, the topic never took center
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Tuition Fall 2018 Prepared By: Stephanie Bertolo, Vice President
    POLICY PAPER Tuition Fall 2018 Prepared by: Stephanie Bertolo, Vice President Education McMaster Students Union, McMaster University Danny Chang, Vice President University Students’ Council, Western University Catherine Dunne, Associate Vice President University Students’ Council, Western University Matthew Gerrits, Vice President Education Federation of Students, University of Waterloo Urszula Sitarz, Associate Vice President Provincial & Federal Affairs McMaster Students Union, McMaster University With files from: Colin Aitchison, Former Research & Policy Analyst Ontario Undergraduate Student Alliance Mackenzie Claggett, Former Research Intern Ontario Undergraduate Student Alliance Martyna Siekanowicz Research & Policy Analyst Ontario Undergraduate Student Alliance Alexander “AJ” Wray, former Chair of the Board Federation of Students, University of Waterloo 2 ABOUT OUSA OUSA represents the interests of 150,000 professional and undergraduate, full-time and part-time university students at eight student associations across Ontario. Our vision is for an accessible, affordable, accountable, and high quality post-secondary education in Ontario. To achieve this vision we’ve come together to develop solutions to challenges facing higher education, build broad consensus for our policy options, and lobby government to implement them. OUSA’s Home Office is located on the traditional Indigenous territory of the Huron- Wendat, Haudenosaunee, and most recently, the territory of the Mississaugas of the Credit River. This territory is part of the Dish with One Spoon Treaty, an agreement between the Anishinaabe, Haudenosaunee, and allied nations to peaceably share and care for the resources around the Great Lakes. This territory is also covered by Treaty 13 of the Upper Canada Treaties. This Tuition Policy Paper by the Ontario Undergraduate Student Alliance is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
    [Show full text]
  • Higher Education Reform: Getting the Incentives Right
    Higher Education Reform: Getting the Incentives Right CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis CHEPS Van Stolkweg 14 University of Twente P.O. Box 80510 P.O. Box 217 2508 GM The Hague, The Netherlands 7500 AE Enschede, the Netherlands ISBN 90 5833 065 6 2 Contents Contents Preface 9 Introduction 11 1 The Dutch higher education system 15 1.1 Binary system 15 1.2 Formal tasks 16 1.3Types of institutions 16 1.4 Funding structure 17 1.5 Public expenditures on higher education 19 1.6 Tuition fee policies 21 1.7 Student support system 23 1.8 Admission policies 24 1.9 Quality control 25 1.10 Enrollment 26 Annex:Public funding of higher education in the Netherlands, performance-based models 29 2 Economics of higher education 35 2.1 Why do people attend higher education? 35 2.1.1 The human capital approach 35 2.1.2 The signalling approach 36 2.1.3How high are the financial and non-financial returns to higher education? 36 2.2 Why public support of higher education? 38 2.2.1 Human capital spillovers 38 2.2.2 Capital market constraints 39 2.2.3Risk 40 2.2.4 Imperfect information and transparency 41 2.2.5 Income redistribution 42 2.2.6 Tax distortions 42 2.3How to fund higher education? 42 2.3.1 Student support 43 2.3.2 Funding of higher education institutions 43 2.4 Public versus private provision of higher education 44 2.5 Should the higher education sector be deregulated? 45 2.6 Why combine education and research in universities? 46 5 Higher Education Reform: Getting the Incentives Right 2.7 Why and when should research be publicly funded?
    [Show full text]
  • Finance Handbook Academic Year 2021-2022
    Finance Handbook Academic Year 2021-2022 JUNE 2021 | Version 1 1 Tuition Fees ............................................................................................................................... 3 How to pay ................................................................................................................................. 4 Via Bank transfer .................................................................................................................... 4 Online ....................................................................................................................................... 4 Payment Schedule .................................................................................................................... 5 1) Payment in full .................................................................................................................... 5 2) Payment in instalments ..................................................................................................... 5 Late payments and additional charges ................................................................................. 10 Terms and Conditions ............................................................................................................ 11 JUNE 2021 | Version 1 2 Tuition Fees Home (UK) Overseas EU Academic Year 2021/2022 Full-time Part-time Full-time Part-time Full-time Part-time Postgraduate Taught (PGT) Standard Course (90 ECTS) € 11,150 € 5,575 € 18,750 € 9,375 € 14,100 € 7,050 Postgraduate Taught (PGT)
    [Show full text]
  • Financial and Human Resources Invested in Education
    Chapter B FINANCIAL AND HUMAN RESOURCES INVESTED IN EDUCATION Overview CHAPTER B Classification of educational expenditure Educational expenditure in this indicator is classified through three dimensions: • The first dimension – represented by the horizontal axis in the diagram below – relates to the location where spending occurs. Spending on schools and uni- versities, education ministries and other agencies directly involved in provid- ing and supporting education is one component of this dimension. Spending on education outside these institutions is another. • The second dimension – represented by the vertical axis in the diagram below – classifies the goods and services that are purchased. Not all expenditure on educational institutions can be classified as direct educational or instructional expenditure. Educational institutions in many OECD countries offer various ancillary services – such as meals, transports, housing, etc. – in addition to teaching services to support students and their families. At the tertiary level B spending on research and development can be significant. Not all spending on educational goods and services occurs within educational institutions. For example, families may purchase textbooks and materials themselves or seek private tutoring for their children. • The third dimension – represented by the colours in the diagram below – dis- tinguishes among the sources from which funding originates. These include the public sector and international agencies (indicated by the light blue colour), and households and other private entities (indicated by the mid-blue colour). Where private expenditure on education is subsidised by public funds, this is indicated by cells in the dark blue colour. The diagram is repeated at the beginning of each indicator to illustrate each indicator visually.
    [Show full text]
  • An Analysis of the Right to Education in Hurley and Moore V. Secretary of State for Business, Innovation & Skills and Its Application in the United States
    Washington University Global Studies Law Review Volume 13 Issue 2 2014 An Analysis of the Right to Education in Hurley and Moore v. Secretary of State for Business, Innovation & Skills and its Application in the United States Emma Melton Washington University School of Law Follow this and additional works at: https://openscholarship.wustl.edu/law_globalstudies Part of the Civil Rights and Discrimination Commons, Comparative and Foreign Law Commons, Constitutional Law Commons, Education Law Commons, European Law Commons, Human Rights Law Commons, International Law Commons, Law and Race Commons, and the Law and Society Commons Recommended Citation Emma Melton, An Analysis of the Right to Education in Hurley and Moore v. Secretary of State for Business, Innovation & Skills and its Application in the United States, 13 WASH. U. GLOBAL STUD. L. REV. 393 (2014), https://openscholarship.wustl.edu/law_globalstudies/vol13/iss2/10 This Note is brought to you for free and open access by the Law School at Washington University Open Scholarship. It has been accepted for inclusion in Washington University Global Studies Law Review by an authorized administrator of Washington University Open Scholarship. For more information, please contact [email protected]. AN ANALYSIS OF THE RIGHT TO EDUCATION IN HURLEY AND MOORE V. SECRETARY OF STATE FOR BUSINESS, INNOVATION & SKILLS AND ITS APPLICATION IN THE UNITED STATES In the past seventy years, the idea of education as a fundamental right has spread in democratic countries throughout the world.1 Multiple constitutions and international treaties have codified an inalienable right to education provided by the government.2 Recent litigation has highlighted a possibility that high tuition rates for universities may effectively serve as barriers to accessing higher learning and infringe upon this fundamental right to education.
    [Show full text]
  • Ideas on Higher Education Funding: Internal Financing of Student Loans
    4 INTERNATIONAL HIGHER EDUCATION Special Focus: Financing Higher Education nancial sacrifice. This development has pervaded North American higher education for much of the 20th cen- Ideas on Higher Education tury, but it is an idea that has taken hold in East Central Funding: Internal Financing of Europe only in the last nine years. The extent to which the concept of short-term personal sacrifice for long- Student Loans term benefit becomes part of the educational culture of these countries will impact how many of these private institutions flourish and how many die. Arthur M. Hauptman Arthur M. Hauptman is a consultant specializing in higher education Another factor in the long-term viability of the pri- finance. He has taught in the higher education program at Boston Col- vate sector of higher education involves the extent to lege. Address: 2701 N. Upshur Street, Arlington, VA 22207. which the institutions are so closely tied to the charac- ter and personality of their founders. The majority of any countries are now either considering whether these institutions were the creations of one or two per- Mto impose tuition fees for the first time or substan- sons of vision and energy. However, there are major tially increasing what have been nominal fees in the past. questions about what will happen to these institutions How students and their families will pay for these fee in- when the founders decide they want to pursue other creases is a critical issue. Financial aid, particularly loans, is interests or simply to retire from an institutional lead- being looked to as the primary means for helping students ership role.
    [Show full text]
  • Public Service Fellowship (Psf)
    PUBLIC SERVICE FELLOWSHIP (PSF) Deadline: first round – 30 November, 2020; second round – 31 March, 2021 Form: Part of tuition payments deferred or forgiven if student works for public sector after graduation The purpose of the Public Service Fellowships (PSF) is to encourage students from the program to seek public service employment in their countries of origin. The program recognizes that post-communist countries in particular have faced a real need for evidence- and data-based public service, but at the same time a lack of interest by relevant professionals to deliver better public policy. Since the MA in Applied Economics program at CERGE-EI is well suited to develop professionals for these positions, we are setting up a fellowship to encourage public service involvement of our graduates. In addition to receiving a tuition deferment schedule, students will also get additional mentoring from MAE and PhD alumni who work in the public sector. How does Public Service Fellowship work? Public service fellows have a substantial part of their tuition payments deferred until after graduation. Fellows who can demonstrate full time employment by a public service organization in an eligible country for at least 24 months starting September 1, 2022 will have their tuition payments covered by the CERGE-EI Foundation. Otherwise, fellows will be expected to pay their deferred tuition in full plus a service charge of 500 USD. We anticipate offering up to 4 fellowships in the 2021/2022 academic year. Application Process Application deadline: first round – 30 November, 2020; second round – 31 March, 2021. You have to apply to the MA in Applied Economics program by the same deadline to be considered for the fellowship.
    [Show full text]
  • Citi Worldlink Payment Services
    Citi WorldLink Payment Services This Reference Booklet provides information for payments via the following May 2014 communication methods: • CitiDirect • File Transmission • SWIFT The material contained in this Reference Book is for informational purposes only, and is provided solely as a courtesy by WorldLink. Although WorldLink believes this information to be reliable, WorldLink makes no representation or warranty with respect to its accuracy or completeness. The information in this Reference Book does not constitute a recommendation to take or refrain from taking any action, and WorldLink is not providing any tax, legal or other advice. Citigroup and its affiliates accept no liability whatsoever for any use of this material or any action taken based on or arising from anything contained herein. The information in this Reference Book is subject to change at any time according to changes in local law. WorldLink is not obligated to inform you of changes to local law. Citibank Europe plc may, at its discretion, reasonably modify or amend this Reference Booklet from time to time, which modification or amendment will become binding when your organization receives a copy of it. These materials are confidential and proprietary to Citigroup or its affiliates and no part of these materials should be reproduced, published in any form by any means, electronic or mechanical including photocopy or any information storage or retrieval system nor should the materials be disclosed to third parties without our express written authorization. The authoritative and official text of this Reference Booklet—a part of the User Manual—shall be in the English language as used in the United States of America.
    [Show full text]
  • User Fees in Primary Education
    Public Disclosure Authorized USER FEES IN PRIMARY EDUCATION Public Disclosure Authorized THE WORLD BANK July 2004 Raja Bentaouet Kattan Public Disclosure Authorized Nicholas Burnett EDUCATION SECTOR HUMAN DEVELOPMENT NETWORK Public Disclosure Authorized WORLD BANK USER FEES IN PRIMARY EDUCATION CONTENTS Foreword......................................................................................................................................... 3 Executive Summary........................................................................................................................ 4 PART 1: THE GROWING POLICY SALIENCE OF FEES......................................................... 6 PART 2: FEES IN DEVELOPING COUNTRIES......................................................................... 9 PART 3: THE WORLD BANK AND PRIMARY EDUCATION FEES.................................... 20 PART 4: RECOMMENDATIONS............................................................................................... 24 References..................................................................................................................................... 68 Boxes: Box 1: Community Schools in Africa........................................................................................ 11 Box 2: Household Education Expenditures in Africa ................................................................ 15 Box 3: Income and Enrollment .................................................................................................. 17 Box 4: Mexico
    [Show full text]
  • Top 150 Merchant Acquirers Worldwide Companies from 45 Countries Generated 342.2 Billion Purchase Transactions
    ISSUE 1183 SEPTEMBER 2020 ARTICLES IN THIS ISSUE p5 Top 150 Merchant Acquirers p12 Acquiring-as-a-Service Worldwide Platform from FSS p7 Top 100 U.S. Mastercard and p13 Point of Sale Terminal Visa Issuers at Midyear Manufacturers — Part 2 p10 Buy Now, Pay Later Funding p14 Top General Purpose Deals in 2020 Credit Card Issuers in the United States at Midyear p11 PayNearMe Payment Processing TRANSACTIONS (BIL.) IN 2019 Top 150 Merchant Acquirers Worldwide Companies from 45 countries generated 342.2 billion purchase transactions. The six companies listed below accounted for 41% or 141.8 billion of those transactions. Read full article on page 5 FIS (WORLDPAY) 36.72 JPMORGAN CHASE 29.41 SBERBANK 20.61 FISERV 20.36 (FIRST DATA) BANK OF 18.56 AMERICA 16.19 GLOBAL PAYMENTS FOR 50 YEARS, THE LEADING PUBLICATION COVERING PAYMENT SYSTEMS WORLDWIDE CONTENTS COVER STORY Top 150 Merchant Acquirers Outstandings for the top 10 Worldwide Acquirers headquartered in 45 countries included 32 in the U.S. issuers of Mastercard and U.S., 10 in Turkey, 7 in France, Russia, and Iran, and 5 in Brazil Visa credit cards totaled and Japan. p5 $569 bil. as of June 30, 2020, down 9.8% from June 30, 2019 Top 100 U.S. Issuers of Visa and Mastercard Credit Cards at Midyear Rankings are based on outstandings as of June 30, 2020 and on purchase volume for January 1 through June 30, 2020. Acquiring-as-a-Service Platform p7 from FSS Embark is a cloud-based managed service accessed through a single connection and integration.
    [Show full text]
  • THE GLOBAL STATE of HIGHER EDUCATION and the RISE of PRIVATEPFIB0807000-GCPF FINANCE  Introduction
    The Global State of Higher Education ISSUE and the Rise of Private Finance BY RYAN HAHN BRIEF August 2007 INSTITUTE FOR HIGHER EDUCATION POLICY 202 861 8223 TELEPHONE Produced by the Global Center on 1320 19th Street, NW, Suite 400 202 861 9307 FACSIMILE Private Financing of Higher Education Washington, DC 20036 www.ihep.org WEB THE GLOBAL STATE OF HIGHER EDUCATION AND THE RISE OF PRIVATEPFIB0807000-GCPF FINANCE 1 Introduction In the past two decades, higher education around the globe has This first issue brief of the Global Center on Private Financing undergone a remarkable transformation. Technological innovation of Higher Education (hereafter, the GCPF) provides an over- coupled with globalization has drastically altered the structure and view of the role of private finance in higher education globally. finance of educational systems of all countries seeking to benefit A description of the current state of private finance is followed from the global economy. In the countries of the Organisation for by an analysis of the drivers behind the changes that have Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), public funding occurred. The brief concludes with a list of topics for future in- has failed to keep up with the rising costs of higher education. depth research by the GCPF to help universities, governments, In the emerging market economies, public finances have often banks, philanthropists, and others take advantage of private proven insufficient to fund the necessary expansion of higher capital in their quest to improve and expand higher education education or the creation of a differentiated system of vocational around the globe.
    [Show full text]
  • Are International Students Cash Cows?
    Journal of International Students | 512 Peer-Reviewed Article ISSN: 2162-3104 Print/ ISSN: 2166-3750 Online Volume 5, Issue 4 (2015), pp. 512-525 © Journal of International Students http://jistudents.org/ Are International Students Cash Cows? Examining the Relationship Between New International Undergraduate Enrollments and Institutional Revenue at Public Colleges and Universities in the US Brendan Cantwell, PhD Michigan State University (USA) Abstract There has been growing interest in the business of international education. It is often assumed that universities seek international students as a means of generating revenue. The broad purpose of this study was to understand the effects of increased international student enrollment on net tuition revenue. Informed by resource dependency and academic capitalism theory, this study used panel regression techniques to estimate the effect of enrolling an international undergraduate student on tuition revenue among public colleges and universities in the United States Findings show some but not all institutions are able to generate additional income by enrolling additional international students. Keywords: international students, resource dependence, academic capitalism, regression User, or tuition, fees have been on the rise in higher education systems around the world. Fees have recently been increased in many countries and newly implemented in a number of systems where students previously did not pay tuition. In some countries, such as the United Kingdom (UK), fee increases reflect explicit government policy while in others, like the United States (US), higher education institutions (HEIs) have increased fees without explicit changes in government policy designed to increase fees. In both cases, fees have been charged in order to share the cost of providing higher education between the state and the students (and their families) who consume education (Johnstone, 2004; Johnstone & Marcucci, 2010).
    [Show full text]