Student fees

I'm just so grateful to my mum and dad who believed that education was something that was never wasted no matter what someone chose to do afterwards. If someone with a Phd is a bin man and is happy being a bin man that doesn't mean their years at university were wasted. Education isn't just a means to an end but should be valued for itself.
And student loans are the biggest con trick in politics. They will probably cost more in the long run than grants. Haven't done what they were intended to do. (Which was give the government a nice lump sum when they were sold off to debt companies) and will probably have to be written off eventually.

Well, as you all think degrees are not worth the paper they are written on, having been dumbed down, I assume none of you are going to encourage your grandchildren to go to university.
Where does that leave the schools which have to encourage 50% of their pupils to go to university?

Seems like a lot of sour grapes on here.

Well said Nemosmum.

I did an Open University degree when I was 32 as I couldn't afford to not work (husband, baby and mortgage). It took 6 years, studying evenings and weekends, whilst working full time. The fees at that time were about £400 pa, which I paid monthly. I ended up with a respected degree (employers know what determination it takes) and no debt. It was a hard slog - I have posted essays written on holiday - but worth it. I worry for my grandkids when they get older.

As Lilyflower pointed out in her excellent post, when degree courses where 'dumbed down' and tech colleges and art colleges started to be called Universities a standard degree became devalued. I understand that nowadays a Masters degree is considered the required standard for entry for many jobs which often requires a further 2 or more years serious study.
Surely there needs to be a complete review of standards of degree, of time required to reach them and a greater encouragement and appreciation of apprenticeships.

Not.

No it is not fair, but that is depending on the degrees being taken and the family fortunes that should be taken into account. My darling granddaughter worked her socks off to meet the grades required to train to be a midwife but has to take a 3-year Adult Nursing degree first and then undertake the required training. There is no dispute over this, it's fine, but to then to have to hand-over her fees when she finally starts work for the hard-pressed NHS and they benefit is a little difficult to swallow.

Not everyone had the opportunity to go to university when there were no fees, most university places were taken by those whose parents were able to subsidise them (I accept not all). No-one from my school went to university We lived on a poor working class council estate, my father was injured in an industrial accident (before the days of compensation) and my brother and I had to leave school at 16 in order to contribute to the household budget. I think that many employers today do not take a degree very seriously as they are deemed to be "easy" or "Micky Mouse" degrees. I believe we should have more vocational colleges teaching those skills which we are currently having to import.

As a former university lecturer, I would like to point out that "study time" is to a certain extent necessary, as any university degree should and does depend on the student being able to work independently to a great degree. It has however in the last 30 years or so provide a wonderful excuse for governments all over Europe to cut back on the number of tutors, lecturers and professors they employ in the universities. This in turn creates more and more study time.

Here in Denmark, students receive a grant that does not cover living costs, and due to the unemployment rate many are forced to take out loans in order to survive while studying. As there is little chance of getting any other kind of job than manual, unskilled labour unless one has either gone to college or to university, it is Hobson's choice.

It would be nice for young people if all education whether primary, secondary or vocational was free of charge and their grants covered living and book costs, but if this is to happen, those of us who work are going to have to pay even more income tax. As in Denmark income tax is for the lowest bracket around 54% of ones income no-one really wants to pay more, so students do take out loans, many believing that education is actually more important than buying your own property.

Excellent post Lilyflower, you are right on every point you have made.

When my mother left my father she earned so little that my teaching degree (no fees then) came with a full grant of £1000 a year.

At the time only about the top 10 per cent of sixth form students went on to do degrees and there were, as I say, no fees.

When my own children were going through the education system the New Labour argued that poorer people were subsidising the rich to attend university free. They wished to extend university attendance to the top 50 per cent of the school cohort and argued that a graduate would earn £400,000 more over a lifetime than a non graduate.

I have watched the results of the introduction of £1000 and £3000 fees per annum by Labour and the raising of the top limit to just over £9000 for the 'best' universities by the Conservatives with interest.

What happened:-

-The £9000 limit became the default minimum immediately. The least well performing universities charged the same as Oxford and Cambridge. There was, in effect, no market at all as was intended.
-A degree which, when 10 per cent of the cohort held it, was worthwhile, became devalued when half of the students had one. Many of these students were not academic at all and courses and standards had to be dumbed down to accommodate them further devaluing a degree.
-Steep divisions between the value of different institutions and different degrees became apparent although all the students were paying the same for their tuition. This made maths from Cambridge much more worth having than media studies from the Iniversity of West London, for example.
-With the new influx of huge amounts of money universities hiked the salaries of their very senior staff and started huge building projects on borrowed money. Neither really much improved the experience or standards of education for the students.
-At the same time much teaching work was hived off to unpaid graduates, again, to the detriment of students.
-Many arts and humanities course were run with minimal teaching hours. My child had six hours a week of English degree teaching for her £9000 which was clearly inadequate.
-The latest drawback of the new system is that,in order for universities to secure their £9000 without having to put too much effort into teaching the students, they are n ow making unconditional offers to the clever, well educated children of the middle classes.

There are many other points that could be made about this higher education feeding frenzy but it is clear that the whole system is now a mess and almost more unfair to the students that the situation when only the academic children attended university.

Interestingly, my child, who had a first from a top university, and her partner, who has a masters in physics, say that they will not send their children to university but will guide them towards professional apprenticeships and pay for prep schools to give them a good start.

Looking at the full facts regarding the proposed new system, which scraps the tuition fee grant ALL students from Wales will be worse off under the new system, even those from the poorest families. It's smoke and mirrors.

But he still didn't have to go.

There must be an awful lot of failing schools, then, if they all have to get 50% of 18 year olds to university.

I have to disagree with the comment that no one makes anyone go to university. The schools are under pressure from Ofsted to get at least 50% of school leavers in to university and, if they fall short of this target, I have been told by a teacher that they could be given a lower rating at their next inspection. A neighbour's son was being pushed into applying to university even though he had been working Saturdays for a building society who had already offered him a full time job from the end of year.
I totally agree that universities need to cut back on their rubbish subjects that don't help our young people into worthwhile careers and concentrate on those that do and make them available for all right across society.

jaymbee36. I too have a granddaughter in the U.S, having taking her masters now going for phd. She has student accommodation but during university holidays, and internships being necessary, has to find her own way.Being too far from her home state she works to cover her living expenses. Student fees will have to be met but there are rewards for those prepared to work hard and opportunities in the U.S, a country one GN comment refers to as 'primitive' , far exceed that of the U.K.

What silverlining and nemosmum said.
My ds1 and ds2 worked after sixth form in various field, saved up and went travelling, also working along the way. Both went to uni in their mid twenties and appreciated the reasons for being there. They both worked in garden centres, call centres, builders merchants, whatever they could get, at weekends and holidays. They did leave with some debt but with great appreciation for what they’d gained by their own effort and sacrifice.
Nothing worth having comes without hard work.
Ds2 went straight to work at 16. Went to nightschool and now has a trade, earning more than his big brothers and ds4 messed about at school, worked on all sorts of menial jobs until he found what suited him and worked his way up now to second in command of a large company.
University should be for academics, free for the poorest who qualify. Technical colleges for the manually gifted again free when necessary and apprenticeships should be valued again.

Lots on here I totally agree with, and on a few points I disagree. My husband and I were lucky enough to enter higher education and graduate when there were no fees, just living expenses; we both received grants and parental contributions to cover these.
Two of our children managed to scrape through without fees in the last year of free higher education, and one of our children had to pay £1000 a year (which we paid for her). They all attended reputable universities, and are now professionals. We paid their living expenses, but I’m fully aware that not all parents can afford to do this. In fact with the £9000 per year fees, I should think very few parents can afford to pay for these and living expenses, especially if more than one child is at university at a time.

Perhaps we should be looking at more quality in degrees. When my daughter was at medical school she was in lectures or in the hospital every day, five days a week, 9.00 till 5.00. She was living in a house one year with another student at the same university who had eight hours of teaching a week (doing geography), and therefore she had a lot of spare time. I guess this student should have been studying during this spare time, but apparently she rarely was, and in fact graduated after three years, just as my daughter graduated (after six years.)

My point is that some courses could very easily be shortened, and therefore would not be so expensive. I wonder why the universities don’t want to shorten these courses?!?

I believe that many senior staff in the universities have received way over inflation pay rises over the last few years, I wonder why?!?

Finally, it is blatantly unfair that English, Scottish, and Welsh students are treated so differently re student fees/grants. We are all members of the UK. How is it in any way fair that (at the moment) EU students can study for free in Scotland, but English students pay £9000 a year. How exactly is that allowed to happen? It’s nothing short of disgraceful.

Definitely not. These poor souls start their lives owing more than most of us who bought our houses.

Nobody makes anybody go to university. They go because they want to learn, not because they want to get out of going to work.
Lots of graduates earn less than the base amount; if they didn't they would all be paying off their loans straight away.
Working class kids go to university as well as middle class kids. That's why there are so many at university.
50% of kids are not middle class, are they?

Well said, NemosMum.

The current student loan is really a graduate tax in all but name. It is not regarded as a debt; it is not payable until the student is earning over £21,000 per annum (soon to be £25,000 per annum); you do not pay it all all if you do not earn the base amount for 30 years; it is progressive, according to income. It is the best 'loan' one could ever take! When I left VI form, only 10% had grants for university or teacher training (yes, I was one of those, and they were means-tested). Now it is almost £50%. How could the country afford that? What is more, it is the kids who are going and getting jobs and working in relatively lowly-paid jobs who are subsidising the students. What is more, many of the 'degree' courses are of questionable value: 'Early Childhood Studies' with no exams, but coursework consisting of glorified scrapbooks; 'Sports journalism' where not a single graduate secured a job in journalism after graduating etc. etc. The kids and their parents are being conned that they will all get management and professional jobs. It is a nonsense to think that the market can accommodate this. Inevitably, many of them will remain in low-paid jobs (and not be repaying their loans for 3 years of extended dependency). Furthermore, the students are living in luxurious accommodation with double beds (!) free wifi, walk-in showers etc. and we are subsidising this. By the way, the buy-to-let landlords and big property companies are lining their pockets with all this money which passes through students' bank accounts and straight out as rent. By all means bring back grants or bursaries, but only for the genuine academic or vocational bent and let the rest get on with learning the ropes and earning some money of their own. Apprenticeships and sponsored learning are the way forward for most. Please let's get away from this middle-class entitlement culture. It's the hard-working working-class kids who are paying for it!

A couple of years ago the Guardian was alerted by a graduate to the fact that the Student Loans organisation had started -quietly - selling on details of students and the amounts they owed to private debt collection agencies.

This particular graduate found out because commercial debt collectors are not bound by any enforceable code of ethics and can essentially hound and harass graduates via phone, letters, threats of court action, threats of bailiffs, etc. and can just not only move the goalposts but chuck them away altogether!

The Guardian found out that this practice was becoming rife as the Student Loans body found it to be very lucrative for them......

And now the lecturers are on strike, do the students get a refund for missing part of their syllabus.

The government is talking about reducing student fees in England to £6000, obviously thinking this will get thousands of students to vote for them.

As it is no longer the minority going to university it would not be possible to fund the student population.
30/40 years ago it was a great accolade to go to university, now it’s a right of passage that I don’t feel the state should fund.
There are some great opportunities to work and gain relevant qualifications bypassing the universities and associated debt.
Schools and colleges need to work harder to find alternative career paths for their students.
One of my 3 children opted to study abroad, he got a really good degree in Prague Czech Republic, all lectures are in English, we funded him but it was a lot cheaper and greater quality than the UK.
He lived in a beautiful flat in Central Prague for £250 pcm with bills, his tuition fees were a fraction of the UK.
He went straight into a good job in Prague and loves his life there.
Young people need to think outside the box, for our son who is not very academic this was a great option.
We were lucky to be able to afford to support him and I appreciate not everyone is in that position but I would highly recommend looking abroad if it’s an option.