NationStates Jolt Archive

DEFINING for the purpose of this resolution:
"Tertiary Education" as the final institution of education that includes undergraduate, postgraduate and vocational education and training.
"Free" as subsidised or provided at no cost by the government of the nation and open to all citizens.

RECOGNISING that for any nation to reach its full economic and technological potential a majority of the population must have the skills to achieve better competency and efficiency in the work force.

UNDERSTANDING that for these skills to be taught workers must undergo tertiary education.

ALSO UNDERSTANDING that tertiary education is hugely expensive and limits the socio-economic status of students.

THEREFORE this resolution proposes for all governments of nations to:

1. REMOVE discrimination of people of race, gender etc. to undergo tertiary education.

2.
A) NATIONALIZE all institutions of tertiary education to avoid private interference.

B) OR SUBSIDISE fees of students attending privatised institutions of tertiary education.

3. In the event that 2A is decided by the government; the government will PROVIDE free tertiary education to all students.

4. CREATE 20% more places in institutions of tertiary education in 10 years for students by:

A)CONSTRUCTION of more tertiary institutions

B)LOWERING benchmark for entrance into non-professional courses.

DEFINING for the purpose of this resolution:
"Tertiary Education" as the final institution of education that includes undergraduate, postgraduate and vocational education and training.
"Free" as subsidised or provided at no cost by the government of the nation and open to all citizens.

RECOGNISING that for any nation to reach its full economic and technological potential a majority of the population must have the skills to achieve better competency and efficiency in the work force.

UNDERSTANDING that for these skills to be taught workers must undergo tertiary education.

I'm not sure I'd consider on-the-job training to be "tertiary education". This seems to cause some problems below. But not bad, to start.

ALSO UNDERSTANDING that tertiary education is hugely expensive and limits the socio-economic status of students.

Not necessarily true for all NationStates. University costs about what people are willing to pay for it, in many locations, and vocational training is not necessarily high-priced if one considers the guild system as a means of learning a trade.

THEREFORE this resolution proposes for all governments of nations to:

1. REMOVE discrimination of people of race, gender etc. to undergo tertiary education.

Please spell out what is meant by the "etc." above. This proposal will be picked apart to death based on that inclusion alone. Not to mention that there are several resolutions that deal with racial and gender discrimination - though I'm not sure whether any target education specifically (or implicitly).

2.
A) NATIONALIZE all institutions of tertiary education to avoid private interference.

No thanks. Government monopolies tend to lead to as many problems as they solve.

B) OR SUBSIDISE fees of students attending privatised institutions of tertiary education.

However we want? Cool. There are probably some nations who will take this to mean that [insert small monetary denomination here] will constitute a sufficient subsidy to be in perfect compliance with this clause.

3. In the event that 2A is decided by the government; the government will PROVIDE free tertiary education to all students.

You *know* that nobody's going to go for 2A unless they were already tending toward socialism or communism to begin with, right?

4. CREATE 20% more places in institutions of tertiary education in 10 years for students by:

A)CONSTRUCTION of more tertiary institutions

B)LOWERING benchmark for entrance into non-professional courses.

Dear Gods, no. Most NationStates are going to build enough schools for their populations - few want dumb, economically noncompetitive people in their borders. Those that do will find a way for "tertiary institutions" to include sweatshops. Those that want to improve education will likely find that the quality of their educational institutions will be diluted as they will be distributing their previous funding among more institutions AND lowering benchmarks for admission. Yuck.

Still, this proposal is salvageable with some work. I would like to see a redraft (or a critique of my critique, if my points are found wanting).

This proposal was the main reason the UN Educational Aid Act was written; now, as I see it, most of it is in contradiction.

2A ought to be changed so the government just has to nationalize at least one. There's no need for the entire education system to be under government control, just one branch of it.

(In the event this is made legal somehow.)

(In the event this is made legal somehow.)

Yeah, and good luck with that bit...

While Ellelt agrees with the sentiment of the draft proposal, and is unsure as to its legality our position is.

Keep your filthy hands off our educational system. We ain't going to privatize it neither are we going to lower our entrance exams system. Those who arnt going to university in my nation are allowed to either take a menial job or allowed to apply for an apprenticeship program where they learn the skills to be skilled labor. It works well for us and we don't need you mucking about our universities and soviet halls.

Vladimir Khernynko
The Elleltian Ambassador to the UN.

A large part of our educational system is a distributed advanced AI which functions as both a teaching program and information resource. While we do have some universities in the traditional sense, we do not believe an individual with sentient rights should be privately owned.

Not no, but hell no.

Feel free to, perhaps, establish a UN University Charter for a singular college sponsored by the UN and dedicated to the study of international law, treaties and interaction, but please leave the several nations' academic structures alone. The way a nation educates its people is part of its culture and of no concern to the UN.

Free Tertiary Education, I've got news for you pal. There's no such thing as a free lunch.

Bob Flibble
UN Representative

I am highly opposed to United Nations involvement in the Republic's educational system. We have tertiary education for all of our citizens, but recognize that not every nation has the need for such a high level of education, or the financial and political wherewithal to implement it.

Hellar Gray

As much as we agree with the sentiments expressed by this resolution, we see no way to implement it on a universal basis, given the diversity of our United Nations community.

We believe that greater emphasis should be placed on fundamental goals. Mandating free tertiary education is useless if we can't ensure quality tertiary education, nor is it valuable if people never have a chance to use what they've learned.

Start with the basics. You want to improve peoples' lives? Mandate 99% literacy in the next 10 years. Mandate vocational training for all who wish it. Mandate job retraining for all who wish it. Establish an international body for the accreditation of institutions of higher learning. Mandate equal access to education without respect to age, sex, species, race, ethnicity, religious belief, and so forth.

But when you do those things, don't tell us how. Don't favor state run schools over private ones or vice versa. Don't mandate the number of years someone must study, or the kinds or degrees they may get. That should be left to the Members, so each can do it in a way that fits their culture and society.

We appreciate the sentiment and goal behind this proposal, and provide subsidized education for those who cannot afford it in our country. However, we also are aware that not every nation wants to run its educational system that way, and that some nations cannot afford to, even if they wished to. For those reasons, Altanar would not be able to support this proposal.

Like many others have already said, I like the ideas behind what you are trying to get at, but you have to look at the entire spectrum. Take into consideration that it would be very difficult for some smaller countries to support such a proposal based on their economic status. Therefore, the people of Etres Vrais are not expressing their approval of this proposal.

Not all highly-lucrative skills lend themselves to structured academic development, or job-based training; nor all all lucrative economic sectors high-tech.

Even so, the remedies proposed are a prescription for a backfire:

1. One COULD nationalize education through the tertiary level.

Government production benefits from economies of scale. Unless production is already prohibitively expensive, the output generally increases in quantity (with diminishing returns) but not quality. Bureaucratization of curricula is almost certain to decrease quality in the intermediate- to long- term.

2. One COULD provide subsidy for private education.

Many countries and corporations already do this as an incentive for achievement or means of recruitment: develop the "best and brightest" you can find and keep them/make them all your own. However, a blanket governmental subsidy spreads a large source of money into quite small individual distributions. Not only are those small amounts are easily out-bid, but outside agents are encouraged to cherry-pick your best graduates from your institutions at the discount your government provides.

This is the classic "brain drain"

3. One COULD simply lower one's standards of production for educated workers - incoming, outgoing, or both.

Averaged over a population, this strategy will always follow GIGO.

Of these strategies, the first has the best likelihood of remediating gross inadequacies in the overall system. Only the last is relatively affordable. At some point, in the face of international competition for intellectual, artistic, and technological resources any of these becomes the economic equivalent of slitting one's own throat. The only question then is how fast the suicide will bleed out.


The Supreme Governor of the Bogostani Peoples sends his regards and cordially encourages you to enact these measures unilaterally for a couple of decades before requesting the Member States follow your well-meant example. He also concurs with Illustrious Glee that a first-year law student could drive a semi-trailer loaded with diesel and fertilizer through the legal loopholes created by "...such as ... ,etc."