Talk:Free education

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 26 May 2020 and 3 July 2020. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): JIAZHI SHUAI.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 21:28, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 25 January 2021 and 12 May 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Zarwahkanwal.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 21:28, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 22 January 2019 and 10 May 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Emhenry27.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 21:50, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

"Free" education
"Free" education is, of course, not free, but merely provided for by taxation. "State" or "universal" education would be a more encyclopedic title for this page. Thoughts? 82.28.5.102 12:07, 3 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Agree. twitter.com/YOMALSIDOROFF (talk) 17:47, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

The classic argument. The problem is that it is de facto defined as "free education". The term for education "payed" by taxmoney is free. One could extend this term to free roads, free healthcare, free air.

Someone has to build those roads, someone has to pay those doctors, heck someone even has to maintain nature and plant new trees in this ever more industrialized world. When a society comes together, indifferent of race, cultural minorites or richess to create something for itself then this is something that becomes free for all to use, thus free-. In turn this is in fact created not by taking money from the individual but through the people agreeing to provide these services to one and other at the expense of their personal wealth.

The easiest way to understand it would be if you tried to imagine a world where nothing cost money. Quite hard to do since even in "socialist" countries one has to pay symbolic fees so that someone just doesn't take everything and store it in his/her house. But imagine that world anyway. Where these are no costs and in fact no profits. Would that mean that you are 100% poorer as all your money has been taken away from you? No, because that money never really existed in the first place as you and the rest of the people in your society had agreed providing all services free of cost and profit.

Free does thus not mean "created without effort"(be that taxmoney indirectly or labour directly). Simply created free of cost and free for all to use.

EDIT: Also Universl is a stupid word to use overall. IT would imply that the universe or at least the planet recives education while not neccesarily implying that the education is free. A more fitting name would be "national education" but even that does not imply *free* national education. Free national education on the other hand does but as the article is about all free education then that term is incorrect aswell. 213.100.108.69 (talk) 18:40, 20 September 2008 (UTC)


 * "this is in fact created not by taking money from the individual but through the people agreeing"... Dubious... twitter.com/YOMALSIDOROFF (talk) 17:47, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

EDIT: Although the previous readers correctly point out that the "free" education referred to is still "paid for" via higher taxes, I strongly disagree with their apparent conclusion that (therefore) the two are basically the same "cost" for all people. This type of "free" educational system does not create a SEPARATION of classes and opportunity. Under the higher-tax system, one doesn't have to acquire a huge debt just to acquire a chance for a career that would then reequire the student to start with a debt many times greater than the actual student-loan value. So actually those from the low-tax system are indeed actually paying a very high tax in the form of many years of compounding interest. The difference here is the freedom and peace of mind that comes from having a pressure free lifestyle in which to learn - and then begin a career, all without this "ax" hanging over your head in the low-tax system. It's clear that the ONLY group of people who would "come out ahead" in the lower-tax system are those wealthy enough to A) not require a loan for the time/tuition expense; and B) earn so much income that (for them) the cost of the "pay-for" education is less than the tax on their income would total. (Which would represent (far) less than 1% of the population, for those who would seek a specialized professional level career/education.) Therein lies the difference... The "less-taxed" country REQUIRES the education seeker to either HAVE or EARN a specific amount of tuition, while the "higher taxed" system students are able to obtain ANY education they seek - REGARDLESS of the amount of money they possess or earn. And, THAT is a significant difference! 66.214.152.196 (talk) 22:10, 3 May 2009 (UTC)


 * "A pressure free lifestyle" can only lend you in one end - poverty. twitter.com/YOMALSIDOROFF (talk) 18:01, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

This would be better suited to be called public education since mostly all free education is public, is previous comment trying to suuport or attack socialism I cannot tell! (Estoniankaiju (talk) 20:15, 4 May 2009 (UTC))


 * Which one? 66.214.152.196? Support. Though I think it does it a disservice. twitter.com/YOMALSIDOROFF (talk) 18:05, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

The above comments accept the title of this article. In fact the word "free" here is used in the economic sense and is misleading because most state funded education is compulsory. See new topic.

Aus
Australia had free education for a small time in its history: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-australia-29699576 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.253.193.238 (talk) 11:24, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

I cannot understand this sentence
Several other European countries, such as England and Germany, had a history of some form of free education, especially in Australia.. Please clarify.--MathFacts (talk) 01:18, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

Looks like this sentence was changed. Perhaps it was trolling (saying Australia is Austria/in Europe) I would delete this section but I don't know how. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.20.208.114 (talk) 17:19, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

Brazil
As far as I know, higher ed is Brazil is far from free. There may be scholarships based on academic merit, but those are rare. The wealthier students go to public universities, who are very good, but very expensive. The less privileged go to private universities/colleges, which are still quite pricey.
 * I see your lips moving and I don't understand what you are saying. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2806:1016:6:344E:9942:3BF4:302D:29AC (talk) 01:55, 20 May 2018 (UTC)

Uruguay
"Greece and Argentina provide free education at all levels, including college and university." Should Uruguay be added to the list? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.64.68.95 (talk) 09:09, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

History section needs expansion?
"In theory these schools were open to all and offered free tuition to those who could not pay fees; however, few poor children attended school, because their labour was economically valuable to their families."

Grammar school has something about free education round ~1640, i think Isaac Newton went to one. Think i remember the series 'connections' implying that he(/his mother) made use of it being free. Also, should 'universal education' point here? Either way, the history section could use exapnsionm82.171.225.84 (talk) 18:15, 29 May 2012 (UTC)


 * I wonder whether 'universal education' should point here or to Compulsory education. twitter.com/YOMALSIDOROFF (talk) 18:08, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

List of free post secondary education?
I looked at the cost for Scottish Universities that were public such as University of Edinburgh. I think Scotland should be off the list.

I also think a paragraph below should explain about tuition fees, and that students still have to pay room in board.

I also believe the list should be expanded.

I would like to request a new page (related) that's titled: "List of higher education institutions that offer free tuition" example below: — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mooserunner77 (talk • contribs) 22:20, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

Source for "Partial list of countries with free post-secondary education"?
There is no source. Can somebody provide one it or should that section be deleted altogether? Irbananaking (talk) 09:27, 8 March 2015 (UTC)
 * I killed it. I don't think a partial and unsourced list is helpful. A color-coded map would be a good idea if someone finds a good source. czar ⨹   15:03, 8 March 2015 (UTC)

United States paragraph of Countries section
It seems to give too much weight to opponents, so this is worth addressing, although I'm not certain of the best way to do so at the moment. Dustin ( talk ) 05:09, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

Article Evaluation
Hello, I am evaluating this article as part of an assignment for my English 101 class. While evaluating the article I noticed a few things that can be improved. I will list a few of these items below: Emhenry27 (talk) 02:46, 8 February 2019 (UTC)
 * All of the other countries are given more information about the education while the United States has a few words.
 * Some of the sources aren't valid
 * Other examples of free education is under presented
 * Biased towards European countries

Wrong or not proven content
The statement "Its graduates went on to receive 10 Nobel Prizes, more than any other public university." is not validated by the given reference (anymore). The reference does not state anything about the Nobel Prizes. Furthermore, there is e.g. a German university - TUM - which is public and there are more than 10 Nobel Prize laureates that attended this university. I would simply suggest removing the statement about the Nobel Prizes. SimonVanEndern (talk) 09:14, 29 November 2019 (UTC)

Proposal to replace Template:Educational research with the Template:Education
The Template:Educational research box should be removed from this article for the reasons discussed here: Template talk:Educational research. Sda030 (talk) 15:37, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

Critiques
After reviewing this article, there are a few things I feel I should comment on. 1. It seems that many of the sources referenced in this article are news sources such as CNN, BBC News and The Washington Post. I think this article could be improved if it's contained information came from more reputable and reliable sources like scholarly articles and peer-reviewed journals. It's clear that many of these news sources would have a bias that may affect the accuracy of the information contained in their articles. 2. There is a statement made in this article that does not cite any source at all: "Governments typically fund compulsory education through taxes. Aggravated truancy can be prosecuted. Homeschooling, private or parochial schooling usually offer legal alternatives." This is not something that could really be considered common knowledge and thus should contain a citation of some kind. 3. I think in general the section in this article discussing the history of free education could be expanded to discuss not just the development and implementation of free education in America but also its history in other countries known for their universal higher education. KT2002 (talk) 02:03, 26 April 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: English 1101 033
— Assignment last updated by Lishgketto (talk) 20:07, 16 November 2022 (UTC)

Change the misleading article title to something like State funded education
I came to this page while looking for articles about education that is "decentralised", i.e. funded by the state but managed by education professionals and learners themselves instead of politicians and business interests.

The title should be changed to something like "State funded education" Janosabel (talk) 12:06, 4 December 2022 (UTC)

Please sign your contributions
Wikipedia guide rule: "Please sign your posts on talk pages, using four tildes ... even if you are not logged in..." Janosabel (talk) 12:19, 4 December 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia Ambassador Program course assignment
This article is the subject of an educational assignment at Peer-to-peer University (P2PU.org) supported by Wikipedia: Aim for Featured Article and the Wikipedia Ambassador Program&#32;during the 2011 Q3 term. Further details are available on the course page.

The above message was substituted from by PrimeBOT (talk) on 16:04, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

There aint no such thing as "free education"
Tax payers have to fund such education with their money. 62.226.84.81 (talk) 00:16, 5 August 2023 (UTC)


 * Yes, and the first sentence of the article literally states "Free education is education funded through government spending or charitable organizations rather than tuition funding". Mind  matrix  12:41, 5 August 2023 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: Research Process and Methodology - SP24 - Sect 201 - Thu
— Assignment last updated by Wangzitong1018 (talk) 23:35, 28 March 2024 (UTC)