Sure, there is a chance for everybody. But why make it a chance that will certainly remain unfulfilled for a significant majority?
Let's assume we're talking about Georgia, a place with a low cost of living and access to a high quality engineering school.
Year 1: Work in the state, securing in-state tuition costs Year 2+3: Go to Georgia Perimeter College (2 year tuition cost: $4600) Year 4+5: Attend Georgia Institute of Technology on the transfer program (2 year tuition + fee cost: $12,400)
Total cost of tuition is now $17,000 over 4 years.
To get at your point about information logistics: nothing has ever been more useful in my life than being surrounded by intelligent people going through the same grueling process that you are, supporting each other and working together for the single point of trying to learn material and complete assignments under unreasonable deadlines.
There's also difference between access to the best instruction on the planet and having direct communication to some of the best instructors doing some of the most interesting work on the planet.
Oh, come on, people tend to survive university.
I am thinking of models for educational institutions here, not golf clubs.
Of course the environment is important but that is not an argument for artificial exclusivity and if only in context of the material given.
Pay for the direct line if you wish to do so since information is more widely available today, the difference between formal and "guerilla" education will get smaller.
And there should be a vast economic interest to decrease this distance. With the exception of business interests of universities of course.
The environment isn't important, it's the deciding factor in the quality of your education. A good environment with the right curriculum is the single most effective way to learn a difficult subject, develop the habits that help you learn, and have the conversations that lead to retention.
There is a vast economic interest to decrease the distance here. You have a ton of eLearning resources at your disposal. They just don't work as well for most people.
I would also like to mention that the UC system is one of the more open, impactful universities when compared to the privates.
So more or less access to a country club. Isn't it?
That's probably because reading/watching materials isn't everything what education is or what brings its value. Just the fact that the system manages to get 8-18 year olds to read those materials and learn them makes a start difference, not to mention allows access to mentors and peers doing the same thing.
1. Value of a service is how much the market is willing to pay.
2. In the times of abundant, easy access to service X, a high price tag is indicator of quality and rarity. I.e., it's a feature, not a bug.
So ...
> How do you explain the cost of education
... was more of a rhetorical question.
