Page 2 | Richest students to pay for extra places at UK's best universities

breadandbutterfly · 2011-05-09T21:02:20+00:00

The bastards. [[http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2011/may/09/universities-extra-places-richest-students?commentpage=last#end-of-comments]]

snorkie · 12/05/2011 22:12

The problem only arises if the Singaporean has a different entry threshold to the Brit. If they do, and it's lower, then maybe a Brit should also be allowed to pay or better, the Singaporean should be denied access. If however, as I think most institutions would like us to believe, the Singaporean has to be at least as good as the Brit in order to gain a place, then any Brit also meeting the entry criteria should have have access to the same amount of government support/loans for the course (with extra support for poorer students).

I know some universities rely quite heavily on foreign students to boost their coffers, but I don't think any of them admit to having lower entry thresholds for them. Of course, due to foreigners having different education systems this is difficult to prove.

Bonsoir · 12/05/2011 18:53

I cannot see what the problem is - on the contrary, if a Singaporean (for example) can pay for a place to read medicine at a top British university, why on earth should a British student be prevented from doing so?

Chil1234 · 12/05/2011 18:51

I genuinely think that some of these proposals look good on paper... like the forestry one... but, if the reaction is particularly emotional, it's a cue for some of the less important ones to be quietly smothered or sent back to the drawing board. I've not been disappointed with the Tories so far because they've done pretty much what I've expected (and the local election results suggest that I'm not on my own in that assessment). The LDs I never rated because they were only ever a protest party - all wind and piss. I don't expect absolute truth from any government because times change and plans have to change with them. But if the coalition is big enough to admit they've got it wrong occasionally and shelve a poor idea, then I don't see the problem

Original poster

breadandbutterfly · 12/05/2011 18:42

Or was it?

Because everything the Tories say is true isn't it? (Not touch the NHS, no cuts to frontline staff, blah de blah). To say nothing of the Lib Dems (don't even need to spell this one out, do I).

What they say they're going to not do and what they do are only so slightly related. The main relationship is what they say they're not going to do gives us a little window into what they'd really like to do, but aren't sure if they'll ge away with easily, or if they'll have to wear us down first...

OP posts:

Chil1234 · 12/05/2011 09:58

Everyone does realise that the idea was shelved, don't they? It was a 'The Thick of It' style semi-announcement of a policy which, after the fuss generated, was dispensed with smartish. Sort of focus group via Today Prog.... :)

Gooseberrybushes · 12/05/2011 09:44

yes yes, rich parents idiot spawn, yawn yawn

HHLimbo · 11/05/2011 22:51

So they are cutting 10,000 university places so that the rich can buy them.

I understand. No longer will the likes of Kate and Wills, who are very rich but slightly less intelligent, have to go to the less prestigious universities. They'll be able to buy themselves an oxbridge place directly.

I feel sorry for the lecturers. They might be the brightest in the land with years of hard but brilliant work, and long but highly motivated hours pushing the frontiers of knowledge (and decades of state investment to allow them to work there) being sold off to teach "rich parents' idiot spawn" (as the daily mash succinctly puts it.

Gooseberrybushes · 11/05/2011 21:27

There's much I agree with here: but I still think the problems start with the ludicrous aspiration to get half of 18-year olds to university - and so it's rather disinigenuous to blame the higher ed fiasco on the Tories. It seems another case of spend now, pay later, during the Labour years: on something which is basically a waste of money as it has devalued its subject.

Original poster

breadandbutterfly · 11/05/2011 21:15

Interesting, scaryteacher. Still, slightly different import in a situation where overall fees where much lower and the number of places much higher - when everyone could afford to go, there was less objection to the rich paying more to go too.

By the way, to all those who suggested Oxford is currently swamped with sub-standard international students, this article gave the lie to that:

"At Oxford, the number of foreign students has risen from 386 to 582 in the last five years" - out of an undergraduate population of c 12,000. so a tiny number.

Whereas the Tory proposals would have resulted in places being sought many, many times that number, vastly reducing the overall standards.

OP posts:

scaryteacher · 11/05/2011 12:12

This was actually mooted by a vice chancellor back in Feb 2010 according to this article, so the idea is hardly new and was being floated (unless I am mistaken) under a Labour government.

www.telegraph.co.uk/education/educationnews/7264728/Rich-students-should-pay-international-level-fees-to-guarantee-university-place.html

newwave · 10/05/2011 22:38

Mask slipping! hardly a mask at all, nasty fuckers to the core of their beings.

Still, lets be thankful that the NHS is safe in their hands.

Bennifer · 10/05/2011 20:27

The mask is slipping a little with the nasty party. Although they've back-pedalled, this really shows their nature

CateOfCateHall · 10/05/2011 20:07

Well, here's another U-turn, a quick one at that: www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-13343824.

I really think this Government are making it up as they go along.

lionheart · 10/05/2011 14:52

I think you may be right, Bramshott.

Bramshott · 10/05/2011 14:34

I think the idea is that the non-subsidised places currently offered to foreign students (however many that is) will also be open to UK students if they're prepared to pay the full (£17k-ish) fees. They'll be competing with the foreign students I presume. I think the proposal is also for these student to be prohibited from applying for a maintenance loan, so they will be entirely self-funded.

Sounds like a very divisive idea to me. Surely there's a reason why the govt contributes to UK-based students (err, because they're the UK govt) and not to overseas students. This sounds to me like the first step on the road to loans and subsidised fees being considered the exception, for those on low-incomes, rather than the norm.

slug · 10/05/2011 14:24

Says it all really

MoreBeta · 10/05/2011 11:23

gramercy - yet another ample of the general trend to crushing the life out of the middle class. It did happen just a little bit when I was at university in the 1980s.

My best friend got the highest overall score ever recorded in his Finals at Oxford and without merited a full scholarship as one of the UK's brightest academic talents. He had a tiny scolarship from college and a hardship grant but was always desperatly hand to mouth wth money as he had the misfortune of having parents with just enough income to exclude him from getting a maintenece grant (though he got his fees paid). He worked as a roofer during the holidays in order to be abe to eat during the term time.

Meanwhile my parents had their own business so had little apparent cash income but a lot of assets and I had a fully funded place and grants. My DW came from a slightly lower income background and got a fully funded place and grants too. Nontheless we all got a place on merit and none of use was excluded or included on the course because of the wealth of our parents.

gramercy · 10/05/2011 11:06

I agree wholeheartedly, MoreBeta.

I just can't understand how things are going to work now. The well off will be able to go to university, no problems. And the children of poor families won't pay fees and will receive bursaries.

And just where does that leave those with a brain but the misfortune to have parents with a mid-ranking job?

Future university graduates will either be leaving Durham with a History of Art degree or the University of Justfoundedlastweek with a degree in media studies.

Gifted linguist? Brilliant physicist? Nah - you're no use. Let's charge you top whack to discourage you from any further education.

MoreBeta · 10/05/2011 10:54

breadandbutter - yes I agree. The model was sustainable even up into the 1980s when I was at university. It becamse unsustainable when a target of 50% of children going to university was adopted by New Labour.

We can control the price of education as long as we limit the numbers by setting a high quality standard and funding it properly. New Labour made the mistake of believing you could control price and increase quantity without lowering quality standards. The Coalition are about to make the mistake of reducing quantity by raising the price but still allowing quality to continue to plummet.

Original poster

breadandbutterfly · 10/05/2011 10:41

MoreBeta -

I disagree with your statement that "Then full student grants came in in the 1960s so it became much more meritocratic but the true cost and lack of sustainability of that model has now been exposed" - no, there was no problem funding the numbers of students we had in the 60's. arguably, there is not even a problem now - it is a matter of priorities where we cut the deficit, and you could argue, for example, that bankers could afford to be taxed just a leetle more highly etc etc. But certainly, if student numbers were at similar levels to the 60's, we would have no problems funding them - possibly the solution is to reduce student numbers, rather than dilute student quality as this proposal would do.

OP posts:

Original poster

breadandbutterfly · 10/05/2011 10:35

There is a huge difference between undergraduate and postgraduate courses - as many have said, it is standard for these (largely unfunded) postgrad courses to go to the few, of whatever nationality, that can afford them. Rich students who wanted to take a postgrad course have always been able to buy advantage to some degree over better qualified candidates who simply couldn't afford the fees.

But we are talking about UNDERGRADUATE courses here - it is nonsense to suggest that Oxbridge undergrads are composed primarily of rich but less bright foreigners. There are some international undergrads, certainly, but as the previous poster with experience of admissions panels has said, they are no less bright, probably brighter. Undergraduate courses have been funded for a reason - to enable us to have a workforce and populace comprised of the best and brightest and not just those with rich parents.

Anyone who thinks you can just magically 'create' thousands of extra places at Oxbridge has not the faintest idea of how the universities work. They are organised on a collegiate system, which are extremely limited in terms of space (few undergrads live in college for all their course). You cannot just create loads of extra huge modern college buildings in central Oxford or Cambridge - there is no room and planning permission would not be granted. Whatever the Tories claim, the reality is that either (a) the dons would refuse to admit the richies or (b) poorer but brighter students would miss out on places so that the one whose parents could afford to pay more got the place.

OP posts:

MoreBeta · 10/05/2011 10:32

slug - that story did make me and little too.

slug · 10/05/2011 09:35

It still goes on MoreBeta. I did a Masters 4 years ago. At one point, while trying to get our heads around data modelling, we asked a lecturer to stop using such specifically English examples as there was a cultural gap in our understanding. The lecturer looked up at the full lecture theatre (200 or so) and asked who was British. A single hand was raised.

lionheart · 10/05/2011 09:28

They can't magic up more space, they will reduce the numbers of students who take the normal entrance route. Or cram, cram them all in so that everyone loses out.

jgbmum · 10/05/2011 09:16

What about other issues around taking on more students, eg accomodation, overcrowding in lectures, lack of "hands-on" time in practical labs etc.

Surely this could adversely affect all the students