Der vorgestellte Beitrag gibt einen Überblick über die gegenwärtige Hochschulfinanzierung in Deutschland; kürzlich haben einige Bundesländer Studiengebühren eingeführt, die zu einer teilweisen Finanzierung der Studienkosten beitragen sollen. Im II. Kapitel werden außerdem kurz die finanziellen Strukturen der tertiären Ausbildung in den OECD-Ländern beschrieben. Dabei geht es vor allem um die Kostenaufteilung zwischen öffentlichem und privatem Sektor. Im III. Kapitel werden dann die Verteilungswirkungen des gegenwärtigen Finanzierungssystems kritisch hinterfragt. Dabei wird auch auf den Lebenseinkommensvorteil einer Hochschulausbildung im Detail eingegangen, bevor dann mögliche Auswirkungen einer Gebührenfinanzierung diskutiert werden. Es wird deutlich hervor gehoben, dass die Einführung von Studiengebühren in eine umfassende hochschul- und bildungspolitische Strategie eingebettet sein muss, damit eine negative Selektionswirkung auf die Jugendlichen aus Haushalten mit prekären Einkommen vermieden wird. / The paper sheds some light on the financial structures of higher education in Germany. Recently in several member states of Germany tuition fees have been introduced. Chapter II describes the current situation in Germany, the financial structures in the OECD countries and sheds some light on the higher education costs as well as parts to be borne by the public and private sector. Chapter III discussed the distributional impacts of the current German system and adds some information on the education returns in Germany in the post war period. The analysis over the whole lifecycle renders results which proof that the higher education advantages are quite remarkable and might be a justification for more intensified financing by tuition fees. But all this has to be embedded into an encompassing strategy of tax and social policy, especially to prevent a strengthened process of social selection, which would be counterproductive for an increased and highly qualified human capital in Germany.

Faculty have been identified as critical players in the implementation of textbook affordability efforts at community colleges. Furthermore, emerging lower-cost alternatives to traditional textbooks present a wide and growing range of options that may help further efforts. This study sought to examine more closely the role of faculty with respect to textbook cost-lowering initiatives. The researcher utilized in-depth interviews to gain a rich picture of the experiences, attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors of nine full-time community college faculty as they confronted textbook affordability efforts and textbook alternatives. The interview data were analyzed using a thematic analysis process. Five major themes and three minor themes were identified. The five major themes were: (a) campus administrators support, but do not mandate, efforts; (b) frequent edition revisions frustrate faculty; (c) departmental approaches to textbook selection vary; (d) content, then affordability, drive selection choices; and (e) faculty have mixed feelings about textbook alternatives. The three minor themes were: (a) faculty efforts to save students money are thwarted by campus bookstores and financial aid policies; (b) English faculty benefit from public domain readings; and (c) more faculty participating in textbook selection means more difficulty deciding on a text. Implications and recommendations were offered for community college leaders, campus bookstores, publishers, and future researchers.