Free college around the world

Others have talked about the German system already, so I’m only going to add a few thoughts on specific aspects of the OP’s questions, namely, how long the government will keep on paying for academically substandard students.

The answer is, generally, “for a very long time.” My degree was law (which, in Germany, is a first degree - you don’t need a prior bachelor’s to be admitted, but the course takes about five years in total and ends in a degree which is considered to be at the level of a master’s, though it’s not formally styled such). Law is, in the German society, a typical degree taken up by people who want to go to university but don’t quite know what to do later on, because it offers a lot of opportunities. It is also a degree in which, traditionally, the serious testing comes rather late - the very big test is the final “state examination” at the very end; in most universities, nowadays, you do need to take a series of other exams in between, but they’re not considered particularly challenging, can be re-taken a given number of times if you fail, and don’t count towards the final grade. In addition, law is not a particularly selective degree to be admitted to; you do need the Abitur secondary school diploma to study it, but that’s not such a strong filter in an era when about half of each year’s secondary school cohort graduates with the Abitur, and most states and universities do currently not apply mandatory minimum grades that you need to have scored in your Abitur to be admitted (things are different in other disciplines, e.g. medicine, which is famously selective in very demanding minimum Abitur grades).

So it is perfectly possible for an academically sub-standard Abitur graduate to enrol in a law course, scrape by with the bare minimum for five years needed to pass a series of not-so-demanding exams for five years, and then face the big final examinations at the end and fail those. It doesn’t happen in huge numbers, but it happens in non-negligible numbers. There is no reimbursement claim brought by the government against such students or anything of the sort; they simply drop out and that’s it.

As for other disciplines, I suppose that is rarer. Medicine, as mentioned above, is much more selective in its admission, so the scenario I sketched out is less likely to happen there. The engineering and science courses have a reputation for administering much more stringent mandatory exams during the first year of the course to weed out sub-standard students in the early stages of the degree. I suppose the reason why this is not done in law (even though it is now done to a larger extent that twenty or thirty years ago, or so I hear) is that law is considered by policy-makers to be a “cheap” degree: It doesn’t require costly lab infrastructure, the curriculum consists only of lectures and seminars, and you can cram in a lot of students there (a full auditorium in a major German university can go up to a thousand students in attendance), so the per-capita costs are low.

In Norway you can be a permanent shitty student if you play your cards right. The requirements are as follows:

[ul]
[li]You need to pick courses or programs that are “open enrollment”.* I.e. there are more spots open than there are applicants. Programs with more applicants than spots filter students primarily with a national metric based chiefly on high school grades, with a few modifiers some of them program specific. I guess it’s possible you could pick a course where your high school performance will get you in, but I suspect reapplying after you failed out is different. I don’t know though.[/li][li]You need some way of funding living costs. The national student loan bank will only lend you money for some long, and completing on time is required to convert the bulk of the loan to stipends. Although I suppose it’s possible a part time job could cover your living expenses if you pick a small town college.[/li][/ul]

It used to be the portion of the student loan bank support being considered a stipend was fixed, and you could fail for longer with less economic consequences. This was considered unsustainable, but apparently there are not enough “shitty students” to add more “safeguards” against them using up resources. After all, safeguards cost resources too.

This did remind me of this guy though, who has his own article on Norwegian Wikipedia. Quick summary:

[QUOTE]
Born 1953.
Started studying science in 1971.
Decided to stop washing in 1976.
Was kicked out of student housing in 1978, because of this lifestyle.
Started living in a hole under a tarp close to the university.
Was denied entry to exams in nuclear physics and astrophysics in 1987.
Was involuntarily committed multiple times, but won a 1988 supreme court case stating he couldn’t be committed solely based on his, highly unorthodox choice of lifestyle. He argued that he was practicing a form of asceticism.
Was denied entry to the university area as well.
Was permanently denied entry to any exam in 1991, unless he took a bath, sued the university and took it all the way to the supreme court who ruled in the University’s favour in 1996.

He eventually developed a level of medical issues that caused him to be hospitalized for years, during which he then fought, again all the way to the supreme court, against being washed against his will, a case he lost in a 3-2 decision in 2010.

Died in 2014, in case someone wondered if this approach is a key to longevity.

And my point is really this. Allowing this, I would argue, worse form of shitty student, didn’t really break the system, and it gave the students who encountered him an absolutely fascinating tale to tell and broadened their perspectives. :smiley:

According to my Swiss friend, there are two or three different kinds of secondary schools and if you don’t go to the academic stream, you don’t go to university. By contrast, when I was at U. Illinois any HS graduate in the top 50% of his class was entitled to register there. Of course, many did flunk out in the first year. And U. Ill is a top school. Podunk College will likely take anyone who is still breathing. The systems are simply not comparable.

I never enquired whether there was any way to overcome having graduated from the “wrong” kind of secondary school. Any track for late developers. For example, my brother was in the fifth quintile of his HS class. He then spent four years in the Air Force. When he got out, he applied to Penn State. He took the college boards and did extremely well. Penn State admitted anyone for whom the sum of the HS and CB quintiles is 6 or lower. So he was admitted (albeit to an outlying campus for the first two years). I really dislike the idea of being irreversibly tracked by age 14.

That’s a fascinating story, but what’s the gentleman’s name?

“Quality of university” is not the same thing as “quality of education”. For the most part, in the US as well, you’ll get about the same quality of education at Podunk State College as you will at Harvard or Yale. But what you won’t get is the same quality of networking. There’s value in being able to say “I’m a Harvard alumn”, and there’s value in getting to know a bunch of other people who can say that.

Granted, but is this really a thing outside the US (and maybe also Oxbridge)?

I didn’t go through the German undergraduate system, though I have supervised a few undergraduates of various German universities, and it didn’t seem to me as though any of them were selecting their schools on the basis of networking opportunities or name recognition. My sample size is admittedly small, though. If the richest Germans tend to send their kids to certain universities, I’d like to know what they are.

I get the impression (from famous former attendees who love to name-drop it) that in France the Sorbonne was held in very high esteem. But that institution was splintered long ago, and I don’t know if any of its myriad successors enjoy the same reputation.

I figured he deserved some privacy in death, but for those who cannot but doubt :wink:
Bjørn Pettersen