Student fees

[whitelackington]

Let's be honest about this:

Are students going to be responsible for funding their own education, or not?

If they are not, because the payback criteria are such that a significant fraction of these so-called loans will never be repaid, then why are we building such a bureaucratic system of funding tertiary education, why not just fund the institutions directly and let them decide how best to function as universities, I thought this lot were meant to be fond of decentralising decision making, after all?

If they are, then, as I just read elsewhere,

... the prospect of the government lending large amounts of money to people with no collateral smacks just a tiny bit of sub-prime to me.

Still, what could possibly go wrong ?

That's because they are in a coalition with the bleeding hearts pinko Liberals 

[tony from suffolk]

Vince Osborne has a letter from the nice banks saying that loans/fees will not affect a persons ability to get a mortgage.

This seems nonsense to me. When applying for a mortgage the loan repayments will be counted in your outgoings, thus reducing the amount you're able to borrow.

I did 'phone the Lib Dems today to request a copy of their manifesto but was told they'd sold out. I said "I know, but can I have a copy of your manifesto please?"

[kay]

I did 'phone the Lib Dems today to request a copy of their manifesto but was told they'd sold out. I said "I know, but can I have a copy of your manifesto please?"

Is this it?

http://www.libdems.org.uk/our_manifesto.aspx

There's also a useful summary of the manifesto, with key messages such as "Don't settle for low politics and broken promises".

[tony from suffolk]

Why did Nick Clegg cross the road?

Because he said he wouldn't.

[ian.p]

I think the problem i have with this is that wether or not it forms a phisical barrier to people going onto heigher education changing from a system of funding heigher education from taxs to funding heigher education from debt is this:
In a system of heigher education funded by taxes person A from a well of houshould has a free education but it is paid for in greater proportion by there rich parents who pay lots of tax person B from a poor houshold also has a free education paid for by tax payers who already have there jobs.
on coming out of education neither have to wory about there debt or the interest acumulating on it person A and person B start out into proffisonal life as relative equals

In this new system
person A leaves education with a shed load of debt which is promptly paid of by there rich parents who probably benifited form university grants or at least free heigher education. person B leaves uni in the knowledge that he has 30K worth of debt which they will probably not pay of so it will be naging at them till they are 50. That is not equal and we have seen a shift away from trying to give young people from all backgrounds an equal right to education because whatever the government say some people dont want to be living with thousands of pounds worth of debt round there necks before they even realy start out in life. 

futhermore different degrees will cost different amounts of money and saying that this gives controll to students is a joke i mean yeah if your rich choose as you please but if as a bright young person from a poor background your thinking about what you would like to do in life and you know that a humanities degree from a non russle group uni will only cost you say £5000 a year whilst a sciences degree from a russle group uni wil cost £8-9000 a year how is that not going to influence your decision we are making sceince degrees less accesable and we are making our best institutions less accesable to people from disadvantaged backgrounds and if thats ment to good for society then i want no part in it.
if you ask me for this tuition fee rise to come in every graduate in the country that benifited from free heigher education should be given 30k to pay back as well id take that as fair might influence the MPs and ex oil barrans making these decisions.

[RobinGriffiths]

I think the point is that my generation (45 now), and my wife's generation (38 now) got free university education + a grant. Now if I were a youngster of 17 or 18, I would be seriously be pissed off that we managed to get through Uni with about 2k debt rather than the 27K + living costs these youngsters can expect.

You can argue whether we deserved that, but these knobs in parliament who benefited from that as well are going to saddle our children with about half a house mortgage's worth of debt before they even get started.


Robin

[Bob Smith]

  Perhaps we should concentrate on getting a decent grip on educating basic grammar and spelling before we tear into the benefits of tertiary education.  Just a thought. 

   I entered tertiary education fully accepting my upcoming debts, knowing that by gaining said qualification I would be able to afford it. I didn't accept the rants of NUS pricks suggesting that education was a right. But I fully believe that those with the right level of education and the skills and ability to complete a degree shouldn't be denied a place.

[RobinGriffiths]

Of course Nick Cameron/Dave Clegg (sic) were born +/- 1 year of me and benefited from the same university fee cover/grant as I did. Obviously, now that they are poking the upper echelons of society they will have the means to send their children through uni without pilling debt upon them.

[graham]

  Perhaps we should concentrate on getting a decent grip on educating basic grammar and spelling before we tear into the benefits of tertiary education.  Just a thought. 

Careful now; that sort of thing gets you into trouble round here.

[whitelackington]

Cynically,
I wonder if this is a less than subtle plan to tie young people into the capitalist world.
If you fall for the idea that the only way in life is to get a university degree, you are chained for most of your life to terrifying debt, you almost certainly will not be in a position to attempt to purchase a house till you are middle aged, ( longer, if you've bred)
by which time you've had the stuffing knocked out of you.
 Surely, a better option for most would be to train as an apprentice,
you can then start to buy a property in your late twenties.
 Don't play their game, see through this university shroud.

[AndyF]

I came from a pretty working class family and I benefited from no tuition fees/loans though my parents had to pay towards my grant. Chances are I'd not have got to uni had it had the fee system now in place.

However, in my time relatively few people went to uni, (I think it ws 5% or so), now with the aim of 50% or something the costs are vast for the country and I don't think its affordable... So while I sympathise to an extent with people not wanting the prospect of debt at the end of the course  I feel its just an inevitable consequence of the "dole number massageing" of high student numbers under the last government.

Remember of course that the 9K is an upper limit, not a de facto charge for every course!

Its interesting to see the LibDems actions when faced with "real government" rather than calling for this or that impossible promise from the sidelines. They are getting a dose of reality....

[khakipuce]

I came from a pretty working class family

I'm not sure that knowing the attractiveness of your family really moves this debate on 


The problem is that the "expensive" courses will be the ones that students are already being discouraged from - Medicine, Engineering, Chemistry - i.e.  lab based courses. Might as well do English at £3000/year and then get a job as a lawyer or accountant rather than Engineering at £9000/year to earn less.

[whitelackington]

One student who was trungened over his head with such force that he is in hospital after suffering a stroke.
I would have imagined that the police have training in the use of trungens
and that they are told NOT TO HIT PEOPLE OVER THE HEAD
as this could lead to brain damage.

[Slug]

 Well Mick,
 The basic wage for a Met. Police Counstable is about £32,000 p.a., and, if the Met are like my local Counstabulary, the require "No Formal Educational Qualifications", recruits just need to pass a basic Reading, Writing and Counting test..Makes You wonder where this country's priorities realy lie.


( cue the right wing backlash to that comment).

[Bob Smith]

IIRC coppers usually need to have an understanding of the Laws of our realm, this usually means having a formal Law qualification (at least A Level).

Maybe the PCSOs don't  But as far as I know impersonating a police officer is against the law, so perhaps they should all call a proper copper to arrest themselves.

[whitelackington]

My daughter is at university,
I do hope she was intelligent enough not to have attended this event in London.

Quote
Alfie Meadows, 20, developed bleeding on his brain when he was hit as he tried
to leave the kettling area outside Westminster Abbey

The Middlesex University student fell unconscious on the way to Chelsea and Westminster Hospital, where he underwent a three hour operation to save his life.
It is believed that Alfie was hit over the head by a policeman.

[AndyF]

I came from a pretty working class family

I'm not sure that knowing the attractiveness of your family really moves this debate on 


The problem is that the "expensive" courses will be the ones that students are already being discouraged from - Medicine, Engineering, Chemistry - i.e.  lab based courses. Might as well do English at £3000/year and then get a job as a lawyer or accountant rather than Engineering at £9000/year to earn less.

But haven't they said (and I could be up the creek here) that science/engineering/medical courses will be government subsidised and its arts/humanities that will loose funding? So the situation may be just the opposite. I think this is what they are trying to achieve, its what they did in the USA in the wake of Sputnik.

http://www.andyworthington.co.uk/2010/11/22/did-you-miss-this-100-percent-funding-cuts-to-arts-humanities-and-social-sciences-courses-at-uk-universities/

[stu]

But haven't they said (and I could be up the creek here) that science/engineering/medical courses will be government subsidised and its arts/humanities that will loose funding? So the situation may be just the opposite. I think this is what they are trying to achieve, its what they did in the USA in the wake of Sputnik.

http://www.andyworthington.co.uk/2010/11/22/did-you-miss-this-100-percent-funding-cuts-to-arts-humanities-and-social-sciences-courses-at-uk-universities/

From what I saw on Newsnight they're lopping off approx 3k pa off all courses. It apparently needs 15k pa to put a medical student through. The Govt. will subsidies 12k and the rest, well we now know where. A humanities course was something like 2.5k pa so essentially a humanities student will pay all their fees.

The universities can effectively charge up to 6k; and 9k under some circumstances and to some students (that was never elaborated on). The universities could charge more for humanities type courses than they do now - as I guess, they may have dwindling numbers on these courses bt still have departments to run.

Interesting to hear one university principal talking about how we view university:  is it somewhere just to get a job qualification or should it be somewhere to nurture thought, creativity, original concept, technology etc. Maybe that's a luxury but the concept of a utilitarian society doesn't appeal much.

[khakipuce]

Andy,

you could be right, there are certainly some words around protecting STEM subjects but as always the devil is in the detail. Some people are suggesting that non-STEM students will end up subsidising STEM students but let's face it, some universities were dropping lab based courses before this round of cuts because even with subsidy they cost too much.

There are a lot of universities out there that have built huge amounts of accommodation - one might think that the temptation to keep the halls full and the rent coming in will trump a desire to turn out high quality Scientists and Engineers. If dropping STEM courses means you can charge non-STEM students less it is going to look attractive.

[kay]

However, in my time relatively few people went to uni, (I think it ws 5% or so), now with the aim of 50% or something the costs are vast for the country and I don't think its affordable...

I was going to make the same point, but on reflection I don't think it's quite so clear cut. 'University' now refers to all tertiary education. At the time when only 5% went to university, a considerable number went to teacher training college and the like. My memory was that teacher training, although not resulting in a degree, was a 3 year course and also attracted a grant. Similarly for training as a State Registered Nurse. I just don't know what the proportion was then of people attending institutions which would nowadays be classed as universities, but I'd guess it was more like 20% than 5%.

[paul]

Interesting to hear one university principal talking about how we view university:  is it somewhere just to get a job qualification or should it be somewhere to nurture thought, creativity, original concept, technology etc. Maybe that's a luxury but the concept of a utilitarian society doesn't appeal much.

Once there was a time when a university education wasn't just seen as a means to get a job qualifiaction...

[graham]

Was at the University of Bristol Court meeting today, the V-C confirmed that this university was not purely a training shop for employers. He also pointed out that the two degree courses that were most likely to lead to employment were music and classics. Neither of them are STEM subjects.

[kay]

Interesting to hear one university principal talking about how we view university:  is it somewhere just to get a job qualification or should it be somewhere to nurture thought, creativity, original concept, technology etc. Maybe that's a luxury but the concept of a utilitarian society doesn't appeal much.

Once there was a time when a university education wasn't just seen as a means to get a job qualifiaction...

When I was at school, we had no " careers information" We did O levels in 4 core subjects plus a science then anything else we fancied, we did A levels in our best and most enjoyable subjects, then went to university to study the subject of our choice in more depth..

Nowadays, kids of about 12 get are asked to choose their future career, they base their GCSE subjects in that choice, then their A level subjects.  Then somewhere in the 6th form they realise that whatever it was they wanted at do at 12 certainly isn't what they want to do now. I have lost count of the number of young people I know who have given up after a year of sixth form and started again in a completely new direction.

If you're going to leave school at 16, it makes sense to have some idea of what you're going to do, and choose your GCSE subjects accordingly. But I'm not at all sure it's sensible to choose your career that early if you  are aiming for university - more sense, I think, to simply take a wide range of subjects and keep your options open. And I was gobsmacked when one lad, who still doesn't know what he wants to do career-wise, asked me ""but will I be able to get a job with a maths degree?" - such was the emphasis at his school on vocational degree options.

[owd git]

        _{asked me ""but will I be able to get a job with a maths degree?"}
Will he? Who's employing at the present time, (not the putrid burger / chicken outlets!!!)
O. G.

[Goydenman]

You are so right Kay very few young people know what they want to do and unlikley till they experience life a bit and discover their strengths and passion. How many people here on this forum and amongst the people we know ended up in a job they chose as a young person - very few I would imagine. The job I do now I did not know even existed. I remember the career people coming round at school and everyone dashed into the library to look up a job they could ask about. I asked about being a underwater biologist or something. My mate though found out that the career people saw through this and were asking 'what does your father do' (well it was many years ago!). I guess they thought 'if ya dad's a miner then youd be a miner etc'. Anyway he went into the career interview and they asked him what he wanted to do. He said he did not know, so they said 'well what does your dad do?' So quick as lightening he answered 'he was a serieal killer!'