The national debate still continues as to whether or not students who qualify for admission to our Universities should pay their own fees. The students’ representatives in the country have already registered their protest. Many influential people have also expressed reservations over the decision of the Government on the Students’ Loans Scheme. In fact the critics of the Loans’ Scheme look on Education as investment; and relate educational policy to economic growth. 

However, when educationists speak of education, they have in mind knowledge, abilities, attitudes and values, in short qualities that have been acquired. They incline to the view that one should strive after these qualities for their own intrinsic value and they accuse such people who look upon education as an investment of alienating the basic idea of education. Those people who advocate the democratic principle of equality of opportunity also show concern, when they hear of education as investment. They fear that the principle of seeking the best gains might thereby acquire greater significance than the principle of establishing equality of opportunity. 

The concept of investment is closely linked with the idea of expenditure in the expectation of monetary gain, and thus it is understandable that people in many quarters feel uneasy when they hear of education as investment. For where investments are concerned, it is always a matter of laying out resources which after a period of waiting are to bring about some form of gain. As these resources can be used for different purposes and among other possibilities can be consumed straightaway, there are here possibilities of choice and it would surely be a mistake to ignore these. 

For example, parents can spend the money at their disposal on purchasing consumer goods–like cars, money buildings and so on. Firms can provide the resources available to them for new developments or also for the training of their employees. In its budget, the Government can cut down expenditure on educational establishments in favour of expenditure on road building and health service. 

Decisions of this sort cannot be avoided. But the question arises, on the basis of what motives and criteria they are made. The desire for more people to have education at a higher level, because the act of acquiring it affords pleasure and also because education offers lasting possibilities of employment, surely plays a role in the motives for such decisions. The Loans Scheme does not contradict the objectives and motives of education as an investment. 

It only shifts the burden of University education on to the consumer the student himself. It is, therefore, difficult to criticise the Government’s decision to implement the University Loans’ Scheme.

The economy has not been performing to our desired expectation. Besides, we are committed to rural development and a policy of social justice. Our resources can hardly contain all these ideals in our society. 

Also the pool of intelligentsia is such that free University education is increasingly becoming a luxury. Unless we can easily relate our high-level manpower to revitalise the economy -it is very improbable that we can continue to afford free University education for all. 

However, the implications of the Loans’ Scheme should be understood by the University authorities.

Students’ Loans Scheme will undoubtedly affect the running of our institutions of higher learning. The students will now insist on representation on important University Committees which affect their stay on the campus. The University authorities should now re-appraise  their machinery to reflect the new changes in our educational set-up. 

The “Standard” welcomes the Students’ Loans Scheme. We believe that it will have a meaningful impact on the economy of this country!