How to improve our education system

Our educational system is not the most effective, as it provides individuals with misguided incentives that place them in a position where they are rewarded for poor decisions or not held accountable for them. Additionally, the state is too slow in adapting the educational system to the needs of our globalized and rapidly changing world.

In the following, I will present four key solutions that can help improve the success of students, their choice of education, and the overall quality of education.

1. Introduction of Symbolic Tuition Fees Throughout the Entire Educational Process

Instead of complete free education, a portion of the costs—say, 10% of the actual expenses—would be financed directly by students, while the remaining 90% would still be covered by public funds.

What are the benefits?

• Incentive for Thoughtful Choices: Knowing that changing programs or extending their studies increases their personal costs, students are encouraged to carefully consider their choices and motivations from the outset.

• Incentive for Timely Completion: Symbolic fees could increase if studies are significantly prolonged, reducing the likelihood that students exploit “free education” to idly extend their student status.

• Improved Quality Oversight: Students who personally fund a portion of the costs become more invested in the value they receive for their money (e.g., program quality, instructor competence, school infrastructure). This creates stronger external pressure on educational institutions to improve.

  
  

Requiring users to cover part of the cost of a service prevents moral hazard and encourages more rational decision-making.

2. Higher Tuition Fees for Those Who Don’t Complete Their Studies on Time

Students who fail to complete their education within the designated timeframe (e.g., four or five years, depending on the program) would cover a larger share of the costs. This mechanism could be progressive, meaning that the state’s co-financing share gradually decreases after the standard deadline.

For students who extend their studies beyond the official timeframe, the symbolic tuition fee could rise to, for example, 25%. This percentage could increase further with additional years of delay.

Why would this work?

• Encouraging Timely Completion: Gradually increasing financial pressure motivates students to finish faster and avoid unnecessary delays.

• Reducing Public Costs: As tuition fees rise with prolonged studies, the burden on the state budget for extended education is significantly reduced.

  
  

3. Repayment of Costs for Those Who Don’t Complete Their Education

If an individual decides to drop out or never intends to complete their studies, they would be required to repay all public funds spent on their education. This model sends a clear message to students that “free education” is not limitless or without consequences.

Why would this work?

• Reducing Adverse Selection: Those who enroll just to delay entering the job market or exploit student status would be deterred, as the risk of having to repay costs becomes real.

• Market Principles: Free market principles emphasize a clear link between benefits and costs. When the state bears all expenses, it indirectly encourages undesirable behavior.

  
  

4. Vouchers to Support the Development of Private Educational Institutions

Parents and students would receive vouchers (financial resources) from the state, which they could use to enroll in any public or private educational institution. The state would set the voucher amount, and users would be free to choose the school or program that best suits them.

Why would this work?

• Competitiveness and Innovation: Schools would need to “earn” each student, as their funding would depend on whether users redeem their vouchers with them. This fosters innovation in teaching, adaptation to market needs, and greater flexibility in program design.

• Tailored to Needs: Parents and students can select the most suitable school or program based on their own needs, interests, and goals, increasing satisfaction and, consequently, the effectiveness of education.

• Openness to Private Initiative: Private institutions, competing with public ones, must meet or exceed standards to attract students’ vouchers, positively impacting the entire education market.

  
  

Vouchers combine the state’s role in ensuring funding (and thus accessibility) with free market mechanisms in service delivery. This merges the advantages of public funding (social solidarity, access to knowledge) with competitive incentives.

All the solutions above share a common thread: they encourage accountability among participants in the education system while ensuring institutions operate in a competitive environment. Partial tuition coverage for prolonged studies and repayment for uncompleted education promote rational decision-making. However, the most significant step toward a better educational system lies in introducing vouchers, which link public funding with private initiative and innovation.