There is a common belief that the government should provide free university education for anyone who needs it. In contrast, others think that it should not be implemented. I think that both perspective have their valid arguments.
On the one hand, people think that free education is essential since it ensures equal education access for all people in a country. In other words, it gives the same opportunity for people from diverse backgrounds to pursue a higher level of education. For example, students from a low financial background would be able to enroll in any prestigious institution without worrying about the fees, enhance their talents, and contribute meaningfully to society. Regarding on this situation, the elimination of financial barriers allows students to concentrate fully on their studies, facilitating timely graduation and the development of a skilled workforce.
On the other hand, others think that the tuition-free educational system might lead to the lack of motivation among students to complete their degrees. This is because they do not have a responsibility to engage and prioritize their studies since there is no personal investment associated with the tuition fee. Furthermore, this lack of accountability may lead to increased dropout rates and lower overall educational standards. For example, students who become disengaged with their studies choose to skip classes and absences assignments due to the lack of obligated in their studies
In my opinion, it is prudent for governments to consider subsidizing the costs of higher education for those in need. By alleviating the financial burden on students, the government not only fosters the emergence of well-educated graduates but also enhances the overall standard of education in society. This investment in human capital ultimately contributes to economic growth and social advancement.