reid@sask.UUCP (I am NOT your Sweet Baboo) (03/05/87)
With all this talk about student loans and state-supported education,
perhaps a little reality might be appropriate:
A friend of mine through undergrad. here at UofS was from Yellowknife. He
was on a scholarship from the NWT government which paid his tuition and (I
think) part of his living expenses. The terms of the scholarship required
him to return to the NWT and work there for (I think) 3 years. If he didn't
come back, the scholarship turned into an ordinary student loan and had to
be repaid. I'm guessing at this bit, but I think the amount repaid was
reduced if you did part of your time back in the NWT.
This makes perfect sense. The government has decided that educated people
are valuable to the society; it takes steps to create and keep educated
people. If you want to get an education and not stay in the NWT, either
don't take the loan, or repay it afterward. As a number of rational people
on the west coast have said, the government is not, and should not be,
required to pay for the educations of those from whom the society gains no
benefit (ie, those who leave).
As a graduate student, I think the hypothetical system needs some
modifications. Because I am already contributing to society in terms of
research and teaching assistance, this time ought to count for any
residency requirements. Unfortunately, this is a very difficult line to
draw; what about undergrads who do valuable research? What about grads who
don't?
- irving "living on the slippery slope" reid -
--
reid@sask.uucp {alberta, ihnp4, utcsri}!sask!reid
What the world REALLY needs is a good Automatic Bicycle Sharpener.chapman@fornax.uucp (03/06/87)
> don't take the loan, or repay it afterward. As a number of rational people > on the west coast have said, the government is not, and should not be, > required to pay for the educations of those from whom the society gains no > benefit (ie, those who leave). > > As a graduate student, I think the hypothetical system needs some > modifications. Because I am already contributing to society in terms of > research and teaching assistance, this time ought to count for any > residency requirements. Unfortunately, this is a very difficult line to > draw; what about undergrads who do valuable research? What about grads who > don't? > This is good question to raise. Graduate students do need supervision however the current system seems to be one where graduate students are directed (an active verb) - they have become a source of cheap research power. There is a discrepancy between what a graduate student would need to do in order to demonstrate worthiness for a particular degree and what (most) graduate students are made to do to actually aquire a degree. I think anyone who has been a graduate student will recognize the different existence compared to an undergraduate. Curiously most undergraduates percieve graduates to be far better off yet in most respects undergrads get more real respect (as opposed to lip service), have more actual freedom, and have a more well defined set of requirements to meet. Graduate students on the other hand contribute far more in the way of teaching and research. Graduate students are to all intents and purposes apprentice faculty members with the goal of being promoted to full membership in the guild - although they may also be fired (fail to get the desired degree). Perhaps they should be payed as such on a scale commeasurate with their experience and prior education - a sort of "learn while you earn" scheme, or vice versa. It might also be interesting to know what portion of a department's research is conducted by graduate students, on average.