There are several arguments that the government should not only cover all costs for learners but also manage the school curriculums. However, I completely discourage this sentiment and the following essay will explain what I stated.
There are various rationales pertaining to provisioning all education free of charge. Firstly, the complete subsidy for the education system might place a burden on the state budget. It can be explained by the fact that the enormous amounts of money that are poured into this sector would cover the teaching staff’s remuneration and the managerial expenses into the bargain. Consequently, this policy might gradually slow down the national economy.
Some might assume that accessing the school syllabus for free can effectively increase the motivation of learners. Nevertheless, I am averse to this notion because of its inadequacy. From a psychological perspective, a majority of students would take the privilege for granted and become demotivated with educational opportunities because the school curriculums are readily available free of charge. Thus, this treatment would eventually be counter-effective.
Another point worth mentioning is that privatization is presently deemed a comprehensive solution for this controversy. In fact, private educational organizations possess certain advantages over state schools such as greater focus and flexibility to meet the ever-changing market demand. For instance, the Ivy League containing 8 top-tier universities in the US in particular and in the world in general is a private institute but not government-operated educational establishments. Therefore, the government could put much concentration on other fields and leave the education sector to private institutions.
In conclusion, in lieu of covering whole expenses for all people, the government could compensate scholarships to motivate the learners’ morale. Furthermore, this approach would ensure that financial supports are acquired by diligent and talented individuals.