Congressional gridlock is usually the go-to excuse for why something can't be done in Washington, and for good reason. The partisan obstructionism that has paralyzed Washington has transformed Congress from an institution where laws are born from ideas to a legislative hospice where good ideas go to die. That's why some have written off Obama's new higher-education plan.
But what's different about Obama's college affordability plan from other policy ideas is that the core of it can be achieved without Congress. In fact, Congress doesn't even need to vote on this for the remainder of Obama's presidency.To understand why that is, it's important to understand what the plan is. The goal of Obama's higher-education plan is to apply cost-control theories in the allocation of financial aid to shift colleges from the current pay-for-enrollment model to a pay-for-performance model.
warehousing simple as that, they wave shiny things in front of you with little regard to the quality of the product they are selling you. as usual Pres. has a good idea that normally means congress will not act but this is another alternate path to achieve his plan and not even mention their name.
As of now, colleges get more money for enrolling more students. This gives colleges the incentive to increase operating costs by spending money on things that would attract students without actually improving the quality of education or implementing reforms that would lower tuition because doing so mean less revenue. For example, my school, George Washington University, recently spent quite a bit of money renovating the entrance to the library so it would look nice when prospective students tour the campus.The university did not improve the less visible areas of the library that students use to study. The renovated library, while it looks nice, does nothing to increase the graduation rate. It does nothing to improve the quality of my education. It does nothing to improve my prospects of getting a decently-paying job after graduation. What the renovation does is increase my tuition (or prevent it from decreasing) and potentially attract new students.The ideal solution is a pay-for-performance model, where colleges that do the best job educating and graduating students make the most money. In theory, this is easy: tie federal loans to cost and quality metrics so students have the financial incentive to go to schools that are doing a good job educating and preparing students for the real world.
a coat of paint will look good until you raise the hood and see what's inside isn't that deception and misleading, higher education is not at present meant for everyone economical status dictates how you leave that school but not always we've seen lately college grads that are dumber than a bag of broken hammers, so what was it for the thing to do because you have the money.
privilege makes it difficult to those who aspire to learn it lowers the bar so that rich dummies can skate through chances are they won't need the higher learning to get by when they can buy getting by. right wing alumni will not let the facade of ivy league and top colleges be pulled down not by allowing those who can't afford it but by being exposed as "not as advertised".
