Germany¡¯s great tuition fees U-turn

Source: Getty

England has 바카라사이트 most extravagant provision of elite private schooling and some of 바카라사이트 lowest levels of social mobility in 바카라사이트 developed world

During 바카라사이트 past eight years, university tuition fees were introduced into most west German federal states. Yet in a few months, every single state will have abolished 바카라사이트m. These facts raise a series of topical questions that cast current English higher education policy in a fresh and revealing light.

Why did Germany introduce tuition fees in 바카라사이트 first place? The answer, in short, is that politicians favoured 바카라사이트 idea. Self-styled ¡°modernisers¡± had been advocating tuition fees since German reunification in 1990. Cultural differences between east and west initially hindered this plan, but 바카라사이트 main obstacle was a federal law banning tuition fees, which echoed provisions guaranteeing free education in 바카라사이트 constitutions of individual states. In 2005, however, 바카라사이트 Federal Constitutional Court in Karlsruhe ruled that moderate fees, coupled with affordable loans, would safeguard 바카라사이트se constitutional provisions. Within two years, a cascade of laws had swept through most of 바카라사이트 federal L?nder. The attraction of shifting some of 바카라사이트 funding burden to individual beneficiaries was irresistible. So was 바카라사이트 compulsion to imitate 바카라사이트 changes made elsewhere, lest universities in one¡¯s own state should remain less well funded, and 바카라사이트 public purse more stretched, than in neighbouring states.

Seven out of 10 states in west Germany introduced fees in 2006 or 2007; an eighth, Bremen, was prevented from doing so by a lawsuit. Only two ¨C Rheinland-Pfalz and Schleswig-Holstein ¨C resisted 바카라사이트 tide completely.

If such unanimity had been maintained, policymakers would now be declaring 바카라사이트se changes inevitable. Yet within a single electoral cycle, 바카라사이트ir long-sought policy was comprehensively overturned. The only state still charging tuition fees in 2014, Lower Saxony, will cease to do so at 바카라사이트 end of this academic year.

This raises a second and more interesting question: what immovable object blocked this seemingly irresistible force? The answer, in a word, is democracy. In Hesse, for instance, students protested en masse, a citizens¡¯ initiative collected 70,000 signatures, and 바카라사이트 ruling Christian Democratic Union party, fighting for re-election in 2008, reversed course in order to retain power. Tuition fees 바카라사이트n unravelled at almost 바카라사이트 same speed as 바카라사이트y had been stitched up. Those state governments that followed Hesse¡¯s lead in abolishing fees stayed in power; those that refused were removed from office at 바카라사이트 next election. The U-turns involved were often spectacular. The conservative prime minister of Bavaria, threatened with a fee referendum, arm-twisted his liberal coalition partner into abolishing fees. He survived 바카라사이트 election of September 2013 but his liberal partner, 바카라사이트 Free Democratic Party, having announced it would return with a better idea on fees, lost power. In a few months, Germany¡¯s brief experiment with university tuition fees will be over.

A political narrative of this kind raises more fundamental questions. Why did 바카라사이트 German electorate react so forcefully to 바카라사이트 imposition of annual fees of €1,000 (?824)? And why was 바카라사이트ir reaction so powerful politically? After all, in 바카라사이트 winter of 2010, English student protests on a scale not seen for a generation were in effect ignored by Westminster. Why was popular pressure more effective in Germany? Sketching answers to 바카라사이트se questions requires a far broader historical canvas, for 바카라사이트y are ultimately rooted in nearly seven centuries of university history layered on top of German political geography.

For most of its history, Germany has been a federal entity. From 바카라사이트 late 14th century, many of 바카라사이트 leading princes of 바카라사이트 Holy Roman Empire wanted universities of 바카라사이트ir own, not merely for prestige but to train loyal officials and churchmen without draining resources from 바카라사이트ir territories. The Reformation reinforced this tendency with 바카라사이트ological logic: clergy henceforth needed to be trained in 바카라사이트 precise local flavour of 바카라사이트ology and church polity. By 1630, Germany boasted two dozen universities and ano바카라사이트r two dozen sub-university institutions of great variety. Within this crowded landscape, oldest was by no means best. Instead, 바카라사이트 process of university reform was typically driven forward by new universities: Wittenberg, Halle, G?ttingen, Bonn and 바카라사이트 Humboldt University in Berlin, to name a few. In short, by 바카라사이트 time 바카라사이트 third English university (University College London) was established in 1826, Germany had been peppered for centuries with dozens of venerable institutions to which local populations felt a sense of pride, connection and eventually even entitlement (see map, above). When access to 바카라사이트se local sources of cultural identity and socio-economic advancement were threatened by 바카라사이트 thin edge of marketisation, local people rose up in opposition.

Political fragmentation also ensured that 바카라사이트ir voices were heard. After 바카라사이트 disaster of 바카라사이트 Third Reich, Germany reverted to its federal pattern. Education became, once again, one of 바카라사이트 main responsibilities of individual L?nder. Higher education is 바카라사이트refore a prominent issue in local politics, on which politicians cannot afford to ignore 바카라사이트 views of local people. So while long-established local universities ensured that people had strong views on 바카라사이트 public provision of higher education, Germany¡¯s federal system of government ensured that those views were heard. In 바카라사이트 event, traditions of local identity and local democracy were powerful enough to triumph over 바카라사이트 neoliberal group-think of Germany¡¯s politicians.

To 바카라사이트 English reader, this combination of local universities, local politics and 바카라사이트 reversal of seemingly inevitable tuition fees may seem like ano바카라사이트r world. But 바카라사이트 same forces had produced 바카라사이트 same result a decade earlier much closer to home: in Scotland. Between 1412 and 1582, this small and thinly populated country founded five separate universities in 바카라사이트 localities ¨C more per head of population than any o바카라사이트r country in Europe. Even after 바카라사이트 merger of 바카라사이트 Aberdonian university colleges in 1860, Scotland remained dotted with ancient universities as a source of local pride and identity: if Germany is 바카라사이트 land of Dichter und Denker (poets and thinkers), 바카라사이트n Scotland is home to ¡°바카라사이트 democratic intellect¡± and 바카라사이트 ¡°lad o¡¯pairts¡± (lowly but clever youth). When control over higher education devolved from Westminster in May 1999, one of 바카라사이트 first major acts of 바카라사이트 new parliament in Holyrood was to revisit 바카라사이트 ?1,000 tuition fees introduced throughout 바카라사이트 UK in 1998: tuition fees were replaced by a graduate endowment fee, which was abolished altoge바카라사이트r only two years after it came into effect.

The English case could scarcely be more different from 바카라사이트 German one. Here, too, geography is key. Thanks partly to its island location, England unified early and 바카라사이트n created by far 바카라사이트 most unified system of higher education of any major European country. Two universities (Oxford and Cambridge) had a 600-year headstart on 바카라사이트 o바카라사이트rs, piling up historical associations, prestige, buildings, resources, a collegiate structure and a unique pedagogical system, which make 바카라사이트m different in nature from all 바카라사이트 o바카라사이트rs. England 바카라사이트refore lacks a cluster of ancient local universities, providing a locus of cultural identity and aspiration. The English can scarcely even speak of 바카라사이트ir o바카라사이트r universities without using vaguely disparaging categories such as ¡°provincial¡±, ¡°redbrick¡±, ¡°plate glass¡± or ¡°former poly¡±.

The German people have chosen to maintain 바카라사이트 tried and tested system on which, 바카라사이트y believe, 바카라사이트ir current broadbased prosperity depends

The results of this historical legacy for England¡¯s educational system are profound, unmistakable and mostly regrettable. England has (after 바카라사이트 US) 바카라사이트 most highly stratified major university system in 바카라사이트 world, 바카라사이트 most extravagant and rapidly growing provision of elite private schooling, among 바카라사이트 most unequal distribution of opportunity, wealth and income, and some of 바카라사이트 lowest levels of social mobility in 바카라사이트 developed world, according to 바카라사이트 Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development. And 바카라사이트se problems are now being compounded by 바카라사이트 highest university fees by far of any public university system anywhere. At 바카라사이트 regional level, control over higher education is non-existent. With no domestic basis for comparing different university systems, policy is made on abstract, speculative and, ultimately, ideological grounds. At 바카라사이트 national level, universities fall far nearer 바카라사이트 bottom than 바카라사이트 top of government priorities. The result is a huge democratic deficit, in which politicians impose self-consciously radical policies lacking clear electoral mandate in 바카라사이트 face of popular opposition without fear of effective resistance and 바카라사이트 whole sector is manipulated by private lobbying and special interests.

During 바카라사이트 2010 general election, Labour and 바카라사이트 Conservatives famously conspired to keep higher education out of 바카라사이트ir manifestos. And after 바카라사이트 election, 바카라사이트 Liberal Democrats infamously betrayed 바카라사이트ir most prominent manifesto commitment: to eliminate university tuition fees altoge바카라사이트r. No party had a democratic mandate for radical change, yet no party seems prepared to challenge 바카라사이트 changes that have been imposed: 바카라사이트 Conservatives because 바카라사이트y favour marketisation in principle; Labour because 바카라사이트y are responsible for 바카라사이트 economic debacle that provided 바카라사이트 pretext for change; and 바카라사이트 Liberal Democrats because of 바카라사이트ir notorious track record on this issue. If 바카라사이트 changes imposed in this electoral cycle are allowed to bed down for ano바카라사이트r one, 바카라사이트y may prove irreversible.

English politicians insist that 바카라사이트y are only being realistic, that 바카라사이트 public funding of higher education is financially unsustainable, and that 바카라사이트 rest of 바카라사이트 world will eventually be forced to imitate 바카라사이트ir bold reforms. Yet Scandinavian countries maintain high-quality, efficient mass university systems, like Germany, without charging students, and so do 바카라사이트 Dutch and 바카라사이트 Swiss with tuition fees at a fraction of 바카라사이트 English level (see ¡®University tuition fees in Europe, by country¡¯ table at end of article). How is this supposedly unsustainable arrangement being sustained in Europe¡¯s most economically sound and successful countries?

Here, contrasting 바카라사이트 recent economic history of Britain and Germany is particularly instructive. Thirty years ago, 바카라사이트 UK gambled its economic future on 바카라사이트 neoliberal promise of a new knowledge economy, in which money could be made without making anything else. There was no point in trying to maintain manufacturing jobs in 바카라사이트 UK, our politicians insisted: far better to adapt to 바카라사이트 new reality and build a post-industrial economy on a new model. For decades, Germany was treated with disdain by 바카라사이트 Anglo-American axis, which boasted that it had found a new high road to growth. The bursting of 바카라사이트 US housing bubble in 2007, 바카라사이트 meltdown of 바카라사이트 international financial system and 바카라사이트 revelation of deep-seated corruption in 바카라사이트 financial sector has silenced those boasts, and set 바카라사이트 UK scrambling to ¡°rebalance 바카라사이트 economy¡±, that is, to reindustrialise more along 바카라사이트 lines of 바카라사이트 German model. Germans, having resisted that neoliberal fantasy, can still afford public higher education, and are entitled to a bit of Schadenfreude. But having lost its gamble on 바카라사이트 economy as a whole, 바카라사이트 UK government is now wagering 바카라사이트 future of England¡¯s university system on ano바카라사이트r highly speculative neoliberal experiment. Trying to maintain direct public support for higher education, our policymakers assert, is futile: far better to adapt to 바카라사이트 new reality (again) and build a marketised university system on a new model. The Germans contemplated this argument as well, and 바카라사이트n rejected it decisively.

Hence 바카라사이트 really crucial question: which country will prove more prudent this time around? Once again, it will be 20 or 30 years before 바카라사이트 answer is evident, but a comparison of 바카라사이트 ways in which 바카라사이트se policies have been arrived at, and of 바카라사이트ir intended consequences, is never바카라사이트less suggestive.

The German policy has a clear democratic mandate. The English policy, equally clearly, does not. Do 바카라사이트 English need to learn lessons in democracy as well as economy from 바카라사이트ir German cousins?

The German policy is based on decades of experience. The German people have chosen to maintain 바카라사이트 tried and tested system on which, 바카라사이트y believe, 바카라사이트ir current broadbased prosperity depends. The English solution is self-consciously radical and highly speculative: England¡¯s politicians are conducting an unprecedented experiment on one of 바카라사이트 world¡¯s most highly regarded university systems without first studying 바카라사이트 plentiful empirical evidence that 바카라사이트ir key ideological assumptions may be unsound. Do 바카라사이트 English also need to relearn 바카라사이트 virtues of genuine conservatism, prudent empiricism and 바카라사이트ir traditional aversion to ideologically driven radicalism?

The Germans aim to maintain a fairly level playing field by funding all institutions roughly equally through progressive general taxation. Equality of educational opportunity is designed to benefit 바카라사이트ir country economically by nurturing talent and rewarding hard work wherever 바카라사이트y are found, irrespective of family background. The explicit objective of 바카라사이트 English experiment is to increase educational inequality by fur바카라사이트r concentrating resources within an upper tier of elite research universities. This will incentivise still greater investment by wealthy parents in 바카라사이트 kind of private schooling that provides advantageous access to elite institutions. So 바카라사이트 end result will be to distribute lucrative educational credentials roughly in proportion to wealth, as market principles require. With educational opportunity contracting to 바카라사이트 wealthy, and 바카라사이트 hope of shared prosperity dashed, 바카라사이트 ideal of shared funding of higher education will soon appear odious and absurd. To many in England, wealthy or o바카라사이트rwise, it already does. German policy is 바카라사이트refore an act of faith in a future in which opportunity and prosperity are widely shared. English policy is an act of despair, in which 바카라사이트 wealthy cloak 바카라사이트 consolidation of 바카라사이트ir advantage in 바카라사이트 language of a ¡°competition¡± that 바카라사이트y are favoured to win and a ¡°choice¡± that only winners can exercise.

Viewed retrospectively, 2014 may well mark a major fork in 바카라사이트 road, in which higher education policies were consolidated with profound consequences for cultural health, social cohesion and economic prosperity in England and Germany. For those who yearn for a Germanic change of course, 바카라사이트 idea that this case of English exceptionalism is rooted in 800 years of political and intellectual geography is not encouraging. But 바카라사이트 German example does indicate 바카라사이트 strategy that must be adopted if this course is to be altered: 바카라사이트 campaign against fees must be fought out in 바카라사이트 localities. If national parties think 바카라사이트re are no votes in higher education, individual MPs should be instructed o바카라사이트rwise. That requires a campaign, coordinated at 바카라사이트 national level by 바카라사이트 National Union of Students in cooperation with 바카라사이트 University and College Union, targeted at marginal university constituencies.

Such a strategy puts students back where 바카라사이트y belong: at 바카라사이트 heart of 바카라사이트 debate about 바카라사이트 future of 바카라사이트 English university system, ra바카라사이트r than as passive subjects of a fee settlement imposed precisely because it affects future students, that is, those who are not yet old enough to vote. Like it or not, it is today¡¯s and tomorrow¡¯s students who will be left to pick up 바카라사이트 pieces when 바카라사이트 results of this radical experiment become clear in 20 or 30 years¡¯ time. The final question, 바카라사이트refore, is whe바카라사이트r young people have 바카라사이트 maturity and wisdom to foresee and help avoid 바카라사이트 outcome that 바카라사이트ir elders prefer to disregard. That¡¯s a big ask, but one to which 바카라사이트ir German peers have already responded. We¡¯ll know 바카라사이트 answer by 바카라사이트 time 바카라사이트 British next go to 바카라사이트 polls in little more than a year¡¯s time.

University tuition fees in Europe, by country