Government’s responsibility of funding its university students is a controversial issue. Some people argue that government should pay for all students regardless of any factors. On the other hand, there are those who try to prevent high education funding. Each side has its evidence and explanations which is thought to be enough to persuade the majority. It seems that both parties have completely different opinions that may confuse people.
The proponents of funding think that if the government does not carry its responsibility in this matter, that may affect some citizens, and it might lead to a social problem. There are many brilliant students who come from poor families may stop their study, because they cannot afford tuition fees. In addition to that, it may divide the society into two classes, those who are rich and could fund their children to get high qualified education, and inherit their positions in the future. The other type is those who are poor or even do not have enough money to fund their children, so they may stop their study, because of their poverty and frustration. This may bring back the 17th and 18th centuries way of life when some countries were controlled by some rich families. Those who are in favour of the funding want to give equal opportunity for poor and rich students to complete their learning.
In a controversy, the opponents rely on two factors: one is related to the education outcome quality, and the other is involved in a social issue. They say it is better for the government to avoid the payment, and that will reduce the number of students who graduate from the universities. This may help to concentrate on a lower number of students, and the outcome quality would be very high. Although paying much amount of money may harm some families, it may push some students to look for a job, which would be one of low class types, and this would reduce the number of unemployment.
In conclusion, this argument seems to be complicated, because every aspect of both sides could convince many people, They defend social factors, and talk about citizens’ right in a different point of view. The proponent party focuses on protecting the citizens’ right to have a free high education. While opponent side considers the outcome that would be beneficial for the country. As a result of this controversy, it could be said that funding the students may help them to concentrate on their learning, and it will give them a chance to start their career without any debt.