Display:
Thank you asdf for a good brief description of the American higher educational system.  Mimi's descriptions are so totally inaccurate that I frankly don't know how to respond.  Her earlier posts on this thread claimed the lowest public university tuition was $18,000 per year (later lowered to $12,000).  Following factual references pointed to colleges and universities with tuition of $2000 per year, and those were in California, where I doubt we find the lowest cost universities.  

Thank you asdf for your reasoned comments pointing out the use of scholarships (and I would add loans) for students able to qualify at all levels.  Mimi either doesn't have access to accurate data about the American university system, or has an agenda to present false data and unfairly criticize the system.  It concerns me because I wonder if those on the site with primarily European backgounds might think there was even some accuracy in these comments.

It would be interesting to see if there is an studies, or data, that would allow us to evaluate the upward mobility in the two different systems.  I must admit that my intuitive feel is different than yours, in that you think there may be equivalency.  Based on living in Europe for three years and spending significant portions of time there for 15 years, is that the French and British system still have significant barriers to upward mobility in the government, in business, and socially.  But though I had a lot of experiences, examples, and conversation about this, it's obviously still limited to my own contacts.  In other words, I wouldn't put this forward as a fact.

For example, France has a large immigrant population with Muslim religious background and primarily from Africa.  Are they moving up in the system?  The UK has large black, Pakastani, and Indian minority groups.  Are they moving up in the system?

Perhaps someone knows of comparative data in this area.

by wchurchill on Tue Oct 11th, 2005 at 12:01:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]
There's various stuff on social mobility around, but you'll have to pull it together if you really care. Maybe if you start a diary on the topic people can bung in their links. I'd be interested in seeing it.

Here's a link from the LSE to get you started. Google is your friend: I searched on "comparing social mobility between europe and the US" and that popped up.

I suspect that maybe in Europe getting into the top 20% is harder, but in the US getting out of the bottom 20% is harder. Which way around is would be more desirable?

by Colman (colman at eurotrib.com) on Tue Oct 11th, 2005 at 12:24:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]
thanks, I too have been googling since my post.  I'm finding the same thing you refer to--a number of links.  But also finding that some of the better stuff is available in books, rather than online.  So it could be a heavy slog, getting at this one, I'm afraid.  I did download the pdf associated with the reference you link to.  It seeems to have reviewed UK, US, Canada, and Northern Europe--I think it's the one (I've skimmed a few now) that included Germany, but felt its sample size was too small.  I'm noticing that as I skim, there seems to be data on the UK and Northern Europe, but not France, Italy, Spain (data lacking on Germany), etc.  I hope that there is more data on the rest of Europe, because I think it's going to be difficult use only the Scandanavian countries as a benchmark for continental Europe, as I think they are somewhat unique in terms of homogeneous population as compared to the other countries, and in some cases natural resources.

this is looking a lot bigger than I can take on right now, unfortunately.  It's very interesting, but would require significant study to get it right.

by wchurchill on Tue Oct 11th, 2005 at 01:14:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]
asdf is no more fact based than mimi.  They're both giving opinions based on what they've seen.  Almost everything in asdf's post could be challenged and/or refuted or said to be a generalization.  Mimi's statements are not totally inaccurate -- they just conflict with how you see things from where you are.  From where I am, almost everything asdf says is inaccurate.

Maybe we can eventually make language a complete impediment to understanding. -Hobbes
by Izzy (izzy at eurotrib dot com) on Tue Oct 11th, 2005 at 01:18:58 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Oh, and good to see you back, wchurchill.  Colman's right, we should probably have a throw down in a new diary. ;-)

Maybe we can eventually make language a complete impediment to understanding. -Hobbes
by Izzy (izzy at eurotrib dot com) on Tue Oct 11th, 2005 at 01:35:12 PM EST
[ Parent ]
 but not their own facts."  Daniel Patrick Moynihan

thank you for the welcome Izzie.  Frankly it's always a pleasure to discuss and debate with you.

Without taking the time to analyze this one in detail, there are a litany of examples from the above thread, regarding Mimi's lack of accuracy.  Such as, Mimi says: "On an average the tuition costs per month is well over $ 2,000.00 plus for the cheapest public university."  A number of examples were given in the commentary of schools with lower tuition; 20+ California State Universities have a tuition per their website of $2000 per year, San Jose University per one poster is at $2500 per year, U of Wisconsin per Izzy is $5600 per year.  Needless to say, these are not the cheapest public universities, and her fact is of by a factor of, should we say, 8?

by wchurchill on Tue Oct 11th, 2005 at 03:24:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Mimi is probably talking about the cheapest prestigious (i.e., research) public universities. Fees in the University of California system are quite steep, but not so at the California State University system and definitely not at  the community colleges. Now, considering that that there are 10 UC campuses, over 30 CalStates and every moderately large town has a community college, who do you think educates the most California undergraduates?

I suspect the same situation is true of most if not all US states.

It is actually rather shameful that the UC will conditionally admit undergraduates that don't meet its minimum English proficiency standards (concerning reading comprehension and essay writing), charge then UC tuition for a whole year while putting them on remedial courses, and throw them out at the end of the year if they fail to pass the infamous "subject A" exam. To cut costs, they have even started to outsource the subject A remedial courses to the University Extension centres and local community colleges, whicle still charging the students UC tuition fees. [The situation I am describing was current as of one year ago, during my last quarter at UC Riverside, the least prestigious of all UC campuses before Merced opened --- it might have changed, maybe for the worst]

guaranteed to evoke a violent reaction from police is to challenge their right to "define the situation." --- David Graeber citing Marc Cooper

by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Tue Oct 11th, 2005 at 04:18:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Thank you, wchurchill!  I admit mimi's statement seemed false on it's face, but she later clarified that she was discussing non-resident tuition (the subject had been foreign students at some point, so I think the context got lost) and she also clearly said "costs" rather than tuition and was including books.  

All in all, with those added in -- non-resident status tuition plus books, her $2000/mo could be accurate for those conditions.  Wildly inaccurate for residents, of course, but not inaccurate for what she was discussing.

That said, I'm still working on that diary -- almost done!  And it's a thing of beauty if I say so -- all stories and emotion, sweeping generalizations and personal anecdote.  There's nary a statistic in sight -- you guys are gonna have a field day in the comments, I swear!  Dueling statistics at dawn, sir!  I will see you in the comments. :-)

Maybe we can eventually make language a complete impediment to understanding. -Hobbes

by Izzy (izzy at eurotrib dot com) on Tue Oct 11th, 2005 at 04:19:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]
heh, heh, we'll we've beaten mimi's comments to death, so i'm looking forward to your diary.
by wchurchill on Tue Oct 11th, 2005 at 06:05:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]
If you want to compare data, then I would suggest we look at the same data in the same manner. The way to do this for tuition costs would be that we compare out of state tuition cost per credit hour at various public and private universities in the US. That's what I looked at, because as a foreign student that's what you have to deal with. Then compare to tution costs at French or German universities per credit hour.  

If you want to talk about upward mobility and compare those from the US vs. Europe, I think that's impossible.

First, define upward mobility, second, compare just two countries with each other, third, look at all factors that determine of why someone moves upward at all.

Education has not the same weight as a root cause for a person's upward mobility in different countries. Considering just higher education alone, tuition costs are not the only determining factor for access to it. Different countries have different ways of restricting or granting access to higher education. You would have to consider these differences as well to make comparisons meaningful at all.

France and Germany have both large immigrant  populations. You have to differentiate here to make any comparisons at all. Are you talking of immigrants, who come as adults to France and/or Germany with or without same mother language, with or without school exit diplomas that allow them to be admitted to universities. There are really several factors which you need to look at, if you want to judge something vague as "upward mobility" through the education you gain in the country you want to move upward in.

I wouldn't know how to comment any further here as long as so many different issues are lumped together.

by mimi on Tue Oct 11th, 2005 at 04:43:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:
Login
. Make a new account
. Reset password
Occasional Series