
How Germany abolished tuition fees - HarryHirsch
http://www.bbc.com/news/education-34132664
======
allendoerfer
>Can the German university system afford to expand and produce more graduates
under the current taxpayer-funded "free" model?

It does not need to. Germany has a world-class apprenticeship system. Why
would we want to copy the English/American system, when our society is built
on different foundations. I remember the times when Germany was laughed at for
its big industrial sector and was urged to move into (financial) services like
the UK did. One financial crisis later the German way all of a sudden is the
way to go. So for gods sake, do not change a running system.

I would argue that someone, who has a Meister [0] (confusing, because we have
the Master instead of the Diplom now, too) has much better career prospects
than someone who has studied "something with media" as we call it here, just
because he or she did not know what to do.

We lately came up with something new, called Duales Studium, where you work at
a company while you are studying at a special school that grants Bachelors,
similar to the apprenticeship system. The model is quite popular, but I am not
sure if it increases the number of higher education degrees or if their
students would have studied at universities of applied science anyway.

[0]:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Master_craftsman#Germany](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Master_craftsman#Germany)

~~~
momo-reina
I worked as a laborer in my eary twenties in Scotland and they have an
apprenticeship system as well for trades like plumbing, masonry, and joinery
(carpentry). 6 months in the classroom and 6 months apprenticed to a master.

Software Engineering seems to be moving in this direction but I think this is
applicable to almost all fields of study.

~~~
allendoerfer
The German system has multiple tiers, the lowest degree can be reached after 3
years or 2 years in some cases for high-school graduates. To get the degree
you have to pass a test. After that you can get some additional degrees and/or
pass the test to be a Meister, which is quite costly. In the past you had to
have several years of work experience to apply to a Meister exam, but now you
can visit schools, too.

In some professions you are not allowed to start a business if you do not have
the Meister. As a Meister you are now able to train other people doing their
apprenticeship and are allowed to study within your field at a university,
usually to be an engineer instead of a craftsman. So technically you could get
a Phd without having finished school (very unlikely).

------
lordnacho
My experience of the UK and Germanic systems:

In the UK, you can do any degree and people will still hire you for a graduate
job. Something like a bank or a consultancy won't care whether you did
Engineering or Classics. They might care more which university you attended.
The idea seems to be that anyone fairly smart can do anything.

In the Germanic world (Germany, Switzerland, Scandinavia) doing a degree is
choosing a life path. You're an Electronic Engineer? Great, you can apply for
jobs in EE. Nobody else can. And you'll have a hard time doing something else,
relative to the British EE student. There's a real belief that studying
something somehow makes you competent at a job.

Neither of these views is entirely true, of course. Your Classicist will find
it harder than your CS guy to write good OO code. Your German EE guy may well
find himself getting by on soft skills.

What does this mean with regard to tuition fees? I suppose the Germanic system
requires a certain number of graduates in various sectors, and employers would
feel justified in complaining if society does not push out a sensible number
of engineers. Likewise, you will hear the occasional voice in the public
debate about too many people being allowed to do courses with no specific
purpose. Since society is paying for this, everyone who can write to a
newspaper has a voice in what young people get up to. As a young person, you
really need to be on the academic path quite early to beat the selection
system.

In the UK, where having a degree is a sort of entry pass to the middle class,
the debate is more about fairness than economic goals. If you make it
expensive, poor kids have a hard time getting those nice desk jobs that allow
you to buy a house and car. On the other hand, it's individual whether you
want to take out a loan, a risk that's up to each 18 year old. If you want to
climb the ladder, you can pay up and give it a shot.

So there's a big question of what university is for. Is it so that society can
fill out certain jobs? Or is it a vehicle for individual advancement? Of
course it's a bit of both, but there are legitimate arguments for higher or
lower fees, and pros and cons on both sides.

~~~
junto
This is spot on. One final point is that if you get a BSc in electrical
engineering in Germany then you have little choice but to get your masters and
PhD or you just won't get a job.

In the UK the BSc is often enough to get yourself on the job ladder.

Almost all the sciences in Germany have a PhD as an entry point for a good
job. You start working at 30. In the UK you will already have been working for
9 years in industry.

This is simply because in Germany everyone else competing for jobs also has a
PhD!

~~~
nickff
This indicates that education is an arms race, built around signalling
relative qualities, not a human capital building exercise centred on the
pursuit of knowledge and skills. If it were about gaining knowledge and
understanding, your relative level of credentialing, and the selectivity of
the institution would be almost irrelevant to employers. If education is an
arms race, subsidizing it will only cause people to spend more time in school,
studying to beat the competition.

We should also forget that this arms race is very costly regardless of tuition
prices, as most of the cost of education (to the average post-secondary
student) is not tuition, but lost wages.

~~~
collyw
David Garber describes this phenomenon in his book "The Utopia of Rules".
Basically everythng that used to be learned on the job, becoming a craftsman,
has now been replaced by studying a degree in it - essentially reenfocing the
class sytem, as only the middle and upper classes will be able to afford it.

------
lorenzhs
I think the article is very quick to dismiss the difference in number of
graduates between Germany and the UK (27 vs 48%, was it?). Why do half of
young Brits get a University degree, while only a quarter of young Germans do?
One part of the answer is of course the German school system, which only
permits students who attended a "Gymnasium" (grammar school) to attend
university, but that applies to roughly half of all students [1]. Since
schools are tiered by academic ability, it would be safe to assume that those
wishing to pursue higher education would attend a Gymnasium, so we're nearly
back to square one.

Statistics [1] also show that in Germany 43% started a university education,
but only 28% completed one. Meanwhile, UK universities boast with their high
retention rates, which might raise the question of how they achieve this
without compromising the quality of the degrees. (My experience in the UK was
that just about anyone got a degree, and a third (that's a grade, not a
fraction) is basically worthless)

All this, I think, leads to two points. First, a lot of jobs in the UK require
a degree, although it is not clear to me why. Secondly, while German
universities might not be as present at the very top, the baseline seems to be
a lot higher than in the UK (several factors play into this, among them the
ability to switch subjects (due to lack of fees and very little social stigma)
and not caring about retention rates, i.e. letting bad students fail), which
is probably while the German diploma was so highly regarded.

(Another major difference I noticed was that in German universities, nobody
checks up on you, and you are expected to take responsibility as an adult,
whereas in England, it felt like the University was trying to be my Mummy.)

Lastly, the omnipresent reminder: foreigners don't pay tuition in Germany,
either. There is a language barrier, but I probably don't need to point out
all the articles which were here on HN not so long ago about increasing
numbers of US and British students in Germany.

[1]
[https://de.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abiturientenquote_und_Studie...](https://de.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abiturientenquote_und_Studienanfängerquote#Studienberechtigte)

~~~
lispm
> Gymnasium" (grammar school) to attend university

first: there are different types of Gymnasium. I started not at a Gymnasium
and then switched to a technical gymnasium.

Second: there are many other ways and an entire education industry devoted to
get one to a University or similar. The 'Zweiter Bildungsweg'.

[https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zweiter_Bildungsweg](https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zweiter_Bildungsweg)

~~~
lorenzhs
I'm fully aware, but allgemeinbildendes Gymnasium and technisches Gymnasium
account for nearly everyone at university in my state. There are a bunch of
different ways of getting into uni, which also kinda vary by state, but that's
not all that relevant here.

------
SagelyGuru
The article is written from an English perspective. It does follow very
closely the usual worn out consensus of recent decades that it is mandatory to
further increase the numbers of graduates, despite their growing personal
indebtedness.

Apparently, according to the author, this is all justified by the fact that
graduates have lower unemployment rates than non-graduates.

I think it is time to start questioning this dogma. It is the more able half
of the population that is typically selected for entrance by the UK
universities (and so it should be). Surely, it would be very surprising
indeed, if they were not also the more employable half, regardless of whether
they study or not? The content of their studies is increasingly irrelevant
anyway, as is confirmed by the fact that "more than half of graduates are
overqualified for their jobs". That means they are the more able people
competing for the same old unqualified jobs and so, of course, they win.

In these circumstances, the "studies" of ever increasing proportion of
population are nothing more than a way of transferring more of their future
incomes to the bankers. It is an interesting "coincidence" that the drive for
expansion of student numbers coincided with the introduction of the american
model of personal loans for education and ever increasing fees.

------
legulere
One reason why there are so few people studying in Germany is that we still
have a really big apprenticeship system where in other countries most people
go to university for (nurses, preschool teachers, there's even an application
developer's apprenticeship).

One reason why Germany can allow itself to have no fees is the language
barrier. Sweden offers lots of English master programmes and has introduced
fees for non-EU citizens (EU citizens have to be treated the same as own
citizens in this regard under EU law ). The Netherlands and Austria already
complain about the masses of German students flocking to them. I guess there's
some anxiety that there would be a storm of foreign students at British
universities if fees were dropped.

~~~
mschuster91
> The Netherlands and Austria already complain about the masses of German
> students flocking to them.

Yeah because our universities either have ridiculous waiting times (six years
in waiting for medicine is THE NORM, even with a perfect 1.0 Abitur degree) or
kick you out when you fail the same exam three times forever - you cannot
continue your study in Germany but have to study abroad.

edit: oh, I forgot to mention the housing situation: most cities with big
universities neglected building affordable housing for YEARS and the market
for small-ish single occupant apartments is running hot, more than most
students without wealthy parents can afford.

~~~
jakobegger
In Austria most studies have the same "fail three times and you're out" rule.

~~~
mschuster91
Yes but IIRC only for the same school and not the entire fucking country.

~~~
cafard
It used to be that states would allow one to take their bar exam a maximum of
three times. I am not a lawyer, but I remember a fellow in Colorado who sued
the state bar association to be allowed a fourth shot.

------
lumberjack
There are less prospective university applicants in Germany because of their
tiered and somewhat controversial secondary education system. It does not have
anything to do with tuition fees.

As for tuition fees, you can make a completely tax funded third level
education system work. Developing countries do it all the time, successfully.
You do this by restricting entrance to the brightest through a harsh selection
process.

The problem with this is that in the long run you end up with a large
percentage of the population who has only minimal education. People might
sneer at somebody with a degree in English Literature but it does make a
difference to live in a country where the majority have some tertiary level
education experience, if only because they appreciate education more and can
instil that sort of appreciation in their kids.

~~~
Mithaldu
> somewhat controversial secondary education system

{{citation}}

I'm a german, have gone through gymnasium and have a sibling who didn't, and
many other family members who went through either of the three tracks. I have
never heard anyone complain and am not aware of any controversy whatsoever,
especially since students are provided ample opportunity to switch tracks at
multiple points, and upgrade after the fact.

Please provide reference to this controversy you claim.

~~~
kuschku
As a German, there is a huuge controversy about it.

\-
[https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regionale_Schule](https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regionale_Schule)

\-
[https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gesamtschule](https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gesamtschule)

\-
[https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Profiloberstufe](https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Profiloberstufe)

The whole discussion about it even led to some states abolishing the old
system and introducing "Gesamtschulen mit gymnasialer Oberstufe", essentially,
the US middle/high-school system. In other places, the Profiloberstufe was
introduced. In even other places, in the same city, Gesamtschulen,
Regionalschulen, G8, G9, Profiloberstufe AND erweitertes Kurssystem exist next
to each other!

~~~
Mithaldu
That's not a huge controversy. A huge controversy is when you have people
actually arguing about it. This looks like a few places experimenting.

> Profiloberstufe

This is a cost-saving measure.

> Regionale Schule

This doesn't include Gymnasium.

> Gesamtschule

This comes close, but effectively is just a school that combines all three
tracks into one, with different students leaving at different grades. Notably
it also has a reduced quality of education.

> some states abolishing the old system

"Abolishing"? Really? Which Bundesland has verboten solitary Gymnasiums? I
couldn't see it in the article about Gesamtschule and google also didn't give
me anything.

~~~
kuschku
Some states forbid Hauptschule and Realschule, and some states forbid G9
and/or Kursoberstufe.

It’s quite a large debate.

------
tim333
The UK had no tuition fees when I went to university in 1983. They even gave
you a couple of grand for living costs if you were hard up. The trouble was
that university education was only available for about 15% of the population,
basically sorted by exam results so if you didn't make that you were kind of
screwed. Now it's like 47% go to university. Neither system was/is perfect.

------
rb2k_
Another interesting part of the equation is BAföG.

From Wikipedia:

> The Bundesausbildungsförderungsgesetz (mostly known as BAföG, its
> abbreviation) is the Federal Training Assistance Act for students at
> secondary schools and universities in Germany. The law, which regulates
> student loans in the country, is often referred to by students who simply
> say they receive "BAföG".

Especially if a student's parents aren't well off, there's a good chance
he/she can get a 0% loan from the government (and 50% of that loan is given as
a gift).

~~~
solistice
Also BAFöG does not need to be paid back for 5 years after graduation, with a
years worth of extension if the student cannot affort the associated costs
when requested.

~~~
Dinoso
There is even a discount if you pay back the full amount of money. I think it
was around 25% but I'm not sure.

~~~
rb2k_
And another one if you are in the top x% of your study

------
morb
One Finnish student describes his experiences with the German education
system:

[http://www.zeit.de/studium/hochschule/2015-08/study-
abroad-g...](http://www.zeit.de/studium/hochschule/2015-08/study-abroad-
germany)

~~~
lorenzhs
Having studied in Germany, I have a few quibbles with that article.

On 1: teachers not uploading material is hardly a systemic issue. Not all
academics are great teachers, that is true. But complaining about having to
take notes seems a bit whiny to me.

On 2: whether you spend the semester learning and then have a quick recap
before the exam, or whether you spend it goofing off and then quickly memorize
everything until the end of the exam is your choice, and your responsibility.
If you need constant motivation to keep working, that is not the universities
problem. You have to work on that yourself.

3\. I have never taken such an exam, but the exams described here are just
terrible. I assume this is related to point 1.

4\. I've only ever had one card at Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, for the
library, the cantina, building access, printing credit, admin stuff, and
student ID. As the author noted, this is being changed in Cologne too, so I'm
not sure what's the point except a good rant.

5\. No argument here. Administration seems to be universally terrible.

6\. This is Point 1 again.

7\. Wtf, Cologne?

8\. Duplicate of #5.

I'm not claiming that everything is roses in Germany, but some of the author's
points are about individual teachers or issues at the University of Cologne,
and do not do the title justice.

~~~
endzone
it's not a problem specific to germany, but he makes a legitimate criticism of
the classic lecture format. it is an antiquated mode of delivery, an extremely
poor use of students' time, and really should not be part of university
education any longer. i suppose it is one way of limiting cost...

~~~
collyw
What do you see as being better alternatives?

I am not saying they are not there, but compared to online course for example,
I think pyscially attending lectures gives more incentive to learn having
invested the effort to actually turn up.

What do other people think?

~~~
jlg23
> What do you see as being better alternatives?

Online lectures. Uploaded scripts. (At least in my university good scripts
were followed so closely, that a "lecture" was exactly what the name says
"somebody reading the script". And bad lectures were an utter waste of time. I
remember one math prof who permanently corrected his proofs back and forth -
in the end we just took photos of his blackboard "art" (back in 2000), because
taking notes was absolutely pointless.)

With modern technology those could be annotated; students could have online
discussions about those (think "soundcloud-style interface").

Everyone could benefit from those, not only students. Can I please live in a
world where I can do _every_ course from home, at my own pace? I'd happily pay
to have my all tests evaluated and finally for time spent by university
employees on my exams - for which I'd sign up whenever I am ready and without
formally being enrolled as a student.

> I think pyscially attending lectures gives more incentive to learn

Or it allows for less time to learn. In my university the different institutes
are distributed across the whole city and I spent _12_ hours every week just
on commutes between those. Thus, people who need to work for paying for their
studies (not tuition, but rent, food, transportation) are already excluded by
being forced to physically attend. Same for people who already have a job. I
am not talking about those few who can study while working because their
employer supports this, I'm talking about the carpenter with an interest in
theoretical physics, astronomy or arts.

~~~
lorenzhs
> Online lectures. Uploaded scripts.

Online lectures provide too many distractions. Constant urge to check emails
or HN. I tried a MOOC once (Andrew Ng's Machine Learning), and the pace was
too slow for me to stay concentrated for even a couple of minutes. Still,
recorded lectures can be useful (e.g. if you get sick, you can catch up after
recovering). I just don't think that they're very well suited to being the
_primary_ delivery format.

There is rarely a good excuse not to upload scripts, though, and at my
university most are uploaded. My university also uploads lots of recorded
lectures on youtube and provides discussion forums. Everyone can watch the
lectures and download the material.

> In my university the different institutes are distributed across the whole
> city

That's unfortunate, but it's a fairly rare problem in Germany. Many of the
best universities are in fairly small cities like Heidelberg, Tübingen,
Freiburg (all of these have a population between 90k and 150k). Those that
aren't are often not that strewn about, or at least clustered (TU München has
a Garching campus for natural sciences, but afaik students don't have to
travel between the centre and Garching a lot).

My university (Karlsruhe) is a centrally located campus university. Everything
is within 10 walking minutes.

> I'm talking about the carpenter with an interest in theoretical physics,
> astronomy or arts.

I'm all in favour of enabling that, but you neglect that 90%+ of students are
full-time students, and that is the model that universities cater to.

------
dghughes
Eliminating tuition fees depends on the benefit to the region.

In my little province for as long as I can recall there have always been
complaints about the cost of tuition and any fees at the University.

It's a small University with a mix of local students, regional (within
~400km), some from the northeastern US and others from outside US/Canada
(China in particular).

Eliminating any fees just means the student gets a break then as always when
they are done with school immediately leaves the province for a job elsewhere.
That's zero benefit to the taxpayers who would cover the cost.

~~~
wirrbel
This is a problem, even more so if you have regions with and without tuition.
If provinces have the same tuition rates, there is not much damage done,
because your province will receive employees from other provinces.

I have been to Canada for an exchange semester and it was an astonishing
experience to me in regards to tuition. Most students I talked with where in
favor of tuition fees (although they hit them quite a bit financially). In
general, they were quite willing to spend a considerable amount of money on
top of tuition for university related things. 3 books $200 each on the
syllabus for a lecture that is not borrow-able in the university library? Not
an issue, people just bought them (I actually bought one book via German
amazon in its translation, because it was ~50 EUR there and ~200$ in Canada,
so I saved considerably even when including shipping costs). In Germany,
Professors often offer their lecture notes (often book grade layed out with
latex) as free downloads.

In Germany I have lived in a dorm and had roommates that would probably not
have studied with tuition as high as in Germany (back then my home state had a
EUR 1200 a year tuition, a measure that was in place for roughly 5 years I
think and quickly repealed because it was enormously unpopular). Knowing that
education is sponsored by the state makes me much more willing in paying my
taxes, now that I actually earn a living.

In the 19th century, lecturers apparently collected tuition upon entrance at
the door of the lecture hall. Dunno if this might be a model for tuition to
compromise on. Only pay for the services you take. Looking at American tuition
fees, I sometimes wonder why students would not just pay for private tutors...

------
jakobegger
Comparing the number of "graduates" is pretty much pointless. We always had a
low number of graduates in Austria, partly because of the apprenticeship
system, but also because many schools just didn't award degrees.

For example, if you become a Kindergarten teacher, or a primary school
teacher, or a nurse, you just dodn't receive an academic degree.

A few years ago this started to change. Most schools were formally changed to
"Hochschulen" and now award degrees. On paper, this measure vastly increases
the number of academics in Austria. But in practice, not much has changed.

Such circumstances should be taken into account when comparing the percentage
of graduates across countries. The raw numbers don't tell the whole story.

------
TurboHaskal
I might have the wrong picture, but apparently here in Germany teachers and
parents decide at a short age which of the three education and career paths
their kid is to follow depending on how dumb / smart he is.

You can apparently switch tracks later on, but at a greater cost in time and
effort, and the stigma and consequences of this will affect you during your
whole professional life.

As a late bloomer myself I find it sickening that I'm contributing to such
system with my taxes.

------
k__
Sadly I studied in the 4 years, which had these fees.

Paid about 3500€, but made enouh money to get rid of them in the first year
after I got my degree.

~~~
rb2k_
Same here, even got one of the last years of the draft :)

In the end, the money I paid is barely anything compared to the salary it
resulted in. Especially considering that I was able to get BAföG which
basically paid for itself in the end.

------
jostmey
Can anyone no matter what their grades move onto college? If not, then the
German system is extremely unfair. People unable to attend college end up
partially subsidizing those who can.

Can someone clarify how higher education works in Germany?

~~~
rb2k_
You can't easily attend university unless you went to the "Gymnasium". There
are ways for those who didn't, but it's a lot harder.

> People unable to attend college end up partially subsidizing those who can.

How? The people that did attend college will more taxes over their lifetime,
so you could argue that the college people are subsidising the other college
people.

~~~
walshemj
And the ones who didn't get to go to the Gymnasium -> University route will
hit a ceiling and be unable to progress beyond a certain point.

