Wednesday, November 03, 2010

Tuition Fees

So it looks like University fees are going to rise to £9000 a year. Add say £3500 for rent each year and £4500 to live on, then after a three year degree students are going to leave owing about £50 000.

This is a frightening prospect for the ones who are doing a sensible subject, but for those on a Mickey Mouse course, it is utter madness. No school will tell them this beforehand however, because it is not in their interest. They know perfectly well that their Ofsted report will contain a simple percentage figure of pupils going into Higher education.


11 comments:

Lord Blagger said...

They are going to owe it one way or another.

It's all borrowed cash.

Either the government borrows it, or the student borrows it.

Personally, it should be the student and not the check out girl at Tescos who has to pay for the borrowing.

rippon (aka 'limpet') said...

It isn’t “borrowed cash” at all, in the case of the government. It is taxes used to fund education.

Frank Chalk has it right: send a sensible number of people to university to do sensible courses.

Then their tuition can be paid out of taxes – no borrowing needed by anyone. (In fact, that’s exactly the way it used to work until quite recently.)

And the checkout girl +should+ be paying her taxes to educate others (e.g. doctors) because she will need the services that those educated people provide.

oldgirlatuni said...

Couldn't agree more. Let's see more courses that educate people, either for a specific career, or how to think.

Let's go back to the days when vocational training was just that - it was honourable and worthwhile and a degree in 'equine psychology' or 'popular music' is just laughable.

But, please let us not fall into the trap of dismissing subjects such as history, english lit, classics, mathematics - subjects that if taught properly introduce intellectual rigour.

Stephen Beynon said...

It seems to me that the people administering student loans have both salary data, and information about course studied at university.

Publishing average salary for each course at each University 1, 3, and 5 years after graduation should make it much simpler for people to decide what courses are worth it.

Anonymous said...

Just a minor point but you don't get 3,500 for rent and 4,500 to live on - you get around 3,700 for rent and to live on (this gives me about 200 a year to live on after rent) - I work but the little extra money I get from a Saturday job doesn't actually stretch very far.

It's not just about the debt from fees and loans - its also about how students find enough money to pay bills etc. In the past parents would have been more than happy to help out - but now they're helping out with my tuition fees instead so I don't have massive debts, doesn't really seem fair to ask them for even more.

Just because it's a proper degree doesn't make the debt any less scary. I study maths and physics at a top university predicted 2.1 and very much doubt I will get a graduate level job at the end of the year.

Salary publishing is a good idea - the publish percentage employed within 6 months but from the people who graduated last year most are working in ikea bars etc. probably not what they wanted when they did engineering, chemistry i.e. proper degrees.

Anonymous said...

Rippon, you are right, it is not borrowed, it is stolen under threat of force by the government.

That said, the check out girl already pays for the "health service" whether she uses it or not, via taxes. Not quite sure why she should have to pay someone to get educated to become a doctor.

The Defence Brief said...

I want to know what will happen if the student gets his degree but never uses it. For example, a friend of mine has a degree in law. He now works for Tesco managing their stores in Eastern Europe. His law degree has nothing whatsoever to do with his work.

If he graduated under the new scheme would he pay back the money as a high earner as if his degree had contributed to his success?

Also, my nephew failed his degree. If he were to go on and get a high paying job would he be expected to pay back more even though he never got the degree?

Lilyofthefield said...

The check-out girl should contribute her tax towards the training of doctors. Those doctors should then be required to work in the NHS for a lot of years to repay that investments, dentists even more so. Most of the dentists I know took the national training and then promptly left the NHS in favour of lucrative teeth-whitening.

The check-out girl should not be funding anyone's degree in Surf Science or Football Culture.

SMAC said...

If we don't send our young people on to further education then we are going to have to find them jobs instead. Since this is unlikely we will have to fall back on a tried and tested recipe, death in a foreign field. I guess we will have to invade Iran pronto then?

English Pensioner said...

Clearly the desire by schools to send pupils to University to collect "brownie points" is presumably why, some 15 years back, when my daughter wanted to go to the sixth form classes at our local girls high school (her previous school only went to GCSE), the headmistress wasn't very keen to have her once she declared her ambition was to get her "A" levels and then get a job. She was even less enthusiastic when she discovered my daughter's chosen subjects were Maths, French & German (which she subsequently passed elsewhere)!

Anonymous said...

The checkout girl pays for the training of plumbers, gas fitters and plasterers. She pays them directly when she needs those jobs doing, and she pays them after they've had their training.

If you'd prefer a situation where you pay a doctor his hourly rate for your care when you need it, sufficient to cover his training costs plus interest, some people are going to get a shock, and some people who haven't got a lot of money would simply die.

It is indisputable that the economy requires a steady supply of doctors, dentists, teachers, engineers, accountants, lawyers, scientists and skilled managers. Degrees leading to these careers should be entirely free and living expenses for their students grant-supported.

It is questionable whether the economy requires English or history graduates in the kind of numbers we produce. These degrees should attract no grant and basic fees.

It is certain the economy does not require degrees in media studies. These degrees should be charged at full rates and attract no grant.