to feel sad that 3yo dd might never be able to achieve her potential due to tuition fees?

[bytheMoonlight]

I look at dd, who is due to start nursery in January and wonder what is going to happen if one day she decides she wants a career that means going to university.

I feel so upset that her chances are being blighted before she has even entered education. We could offer her little financial support and the thought of her leaving with all that debt is beyond comprehension and would not qualify for help.

I feel so sad about this.

Angel,

erm rrocks, that bit was c&p.

Explain?

RRocks

Coalition - you can't just tell ALL universities to cut places by 50%. We don't, surely, want our top universities to do that. What we need, is to reverse the trend to create so many universities in the first place. I don't see how any government can do that - we have to wait for nature to take its course.

As for PhDs - I don't think they add a lot in terms of salary to a first degree. That is not why anyone does a PhD. You do it for the lurve and because a research career (which is better than average but doesn't scale the heights, financially) requires it.

I would question whether a research career is 'better' financially than the average graduate career.

Well stop funding some universities all together then, I wasn't attempting to present a detailed plan. It doesn't really matter how you do it. The point is that it is very easy to reduce the number of graduates.

I have close family in the Isle of Man. Over there, until this year they paid fees and had a means tested grant. They have just said students will now have to pay £1000 for final year of 4yr courses only and postgrad courses.

The other really notable difference is that to qualify for funding you have to get the equivalent of 2 Cs at A Level (was 2 Ds). This seems a good way of trying to ensure people are doing the more "worthy" courses as described above, rather than Generic Studies at the Uni of North Nowhere.

She's 3, you have plenty of time to save if you want to fund her going to uni. Thats at least 13 years to find new jobs etc.

She may not want to go or be clever enough to go yet anyway.

Many claim student loans and never pay them back anyway. It would be interesting to know the amount of student loans not paid back and if by enforcing everyone to pay their loans back regardless of income level it would reduce fees for all.

Definitely not better than the average graduate - but better than the average non-graduate. It doesn't add to the salary of a graduate unless you are hell-bent on a research/academic career which requires it.

It's not easy if you can't give a proper plan of action. How EXACTLY would you reduce student numbers. What government would survive cutting funding to whole universities any more than 50% off all universities. I can't see it being quick or easy.

so to all these people who are saying you won't have to pay back this large amount of money - thereby not paying of a debt quickly - what exactly is your justification for the fee rise then? After all if 'we're all in it together' and the fee rise is due to people needing to pay it makes no sense -

oops wait a minute it's an ideological attack on the notion of education for being a right for everyone!

No kate

it's an ideological attack on teh idea of uni being a right for otehr people's children

The poster's own always being in teh top 10%, natch.

Santa,

You might be right about underlying motivation for an opinion there. However, objectively, the fact is that making every individual pay to go to uni will cut the numbers of people going to uni. To many people the idea of taking on a debt of £60k to £80k when they have no idea what job they will get is ludicrous and they won't do it. My guess is that these less confident people are more likely to come from the less well-off who haven't grown up with an expectation of having a well-paid job. They are the ones who will be cut, regardless of their academic ability.

Alternatively, the cut could be based on academic ability, with uni being free for all, then the less well-off get their chance the same as the rest.

Acinonyx - No it IS easy. Universities are already ranked. You say 'right all Universities below [level at which you cut off @50% of students] will no longer receive state funding.

Am not sure that many people on this thread are supporting the rise in fees. They are just saying it will not really be a deterrant if you really want to go to university and to stop worrying about this now!

Kate1956 - Most people will pay all of the money back.

Oh come on she is 3!!!!!!! Apart from anything else there are too many students as it is. If we keep increasing the numbers going through university, by the time your dd is 18 it will mean nothing to have a degree cos everyone will have one.

Both my husband and myself went to university- we both regret it- it hasn't brought the promised (ooohhh work hard at school, go to uni and you will get great jobs- you'll be set for life) benefits. We both wish we had done something else! 15 years is a very long time.

I went out for lunch yesterday (at work) with our tax adviser. She is a partner is a big firm of accountants.

I asked her if she thought that the big accountancy firms might take on more school leavers (contrary to popular opinion you don't need degree to be accountant) as some might be put off uni because of the fees, and with accountancy once you have an accountancy qualification no one looking at your CV is going to worry/care about whether you have a degree.

She said that they would be interested but schools were so intent on pushing the importance of degrees they rarely got good applicants (I am guessing they'd want A's or maybe B's at A-levels) applying right out of school. She said maybe it would change. Interesting.

Doing something else weemee is easier if you have a degree.

I expected to train as a teacher, became unlikely for many reasons. So I am doing an MA, plan to do SW conversion.

Degree still used. Degree from an exceedingly crap uni! Reducing universities doesn't just reduce numbers of students but access- I can assure people I would have much preferred to take up my Brizzle offer ta very much, but I could not afford to live there with the boys.

So I chose to study at el crappo institute and top up with an MA, still in fact cheaper overall.

Nobody much back home goes to uni and I put a lot of that down to the basic absence of a uni in the county. Nowhere easy to commute to, no growing up with students about, no normalisation of the whole HE thing.... just no real awareness. And if your life is complicated by anything that might make you a little bit more vulnerable to under achievement- Sn, carer responsibilities, kids whatever- then it has to be offputting. OK my friend is doing his degree elsewhere with triplegic (is that the word?) CP but heck, he's stupendous and has got the most fab parents ever. Most people aren't quite as fortunate.

actually as someone else pointed out it makes the open university look great value, wonder if they will put their fees up?

The thing about the OU is that you are unlikely to be taught by top academics (of course there will be exceptions). Tends to be post grads, early career, those topping up earnings. Profs, Readers, SL's are not going to do that. They are less likely to be involved in research.

With OU you have less contact time with lecturers, less with other students.

Am not saying this is bad .... but it is different. It is not 'academia' in th same way you would get from a russell group.

Some employers will care where you got your degree from, some won't. There are also a limited amount of degree courses you can do with them.

They also have fewer overheads so will be cheaper.

I am not saying this is not a valid choice - just different. I would be very sad to see all of Higher Education and Academia go this way. It is a great option in certain circumstances and for certain subjects though

OU have already restricted funding haven't they?

I did a year with the OU before cottoning on I could actually go back and do education formally again. It was as good- but yes different. My grades interrstingly were pretty much equivalent but there was obviously much mroe of a need to self guide though i found that shared with far better pastoral support as well.

It seems to me that a lot a lot can be done to shake it up quite easily. One of the reasons IMO that people go for a degree above other courses is the very simple factor of funding- my year at college pre- uni was a financial nightmare. there are access funds thre but they run out in weeks of term starting.

maybe if the state offered some support to people training for work after 19 even if at lower than HE level more people would feel able to choose the very many trades and careers that can be catered for in FE colleges? It depends on the uni but mine had a 47% adult intake, most of whome were either taking their first steps after having children or retraining following a life change. in fact IME these people (and yes I was one) did eprform better anyway but had ther been other funded options some people, somewhere, might have a choice beyond degree / dole queue / job that doesn't cover the bills. If they want- I do remember in 2004 stats from one uni giving me stats to the effect that adults were quite a bit more liekly to get a first.

But as long as the only post 18 alternative for funding is uni it seems silly to think people will in general have many other options. Apprenticeships are a great thing but will by nature have limited impact for adult career changers; FE is largely unfunded, part time courses cost the earth and actually thre are quite tight limits on who can get funded these days....

See OU is perfect in your situation Santa - because adults going back to university are usually really motivated, used to organising their time, understand self directed studies.

18 year olds (really generalising here by the way!) often struggle with that. If I say 'go find a book on this in the library and explore a topic' I am treated with blank faces. If they are not told to be at a lecture they won't be.

I would worry that your average 18 year old would struggle with self directed study mainly because it is so different to how they are taught at A level.

But yes there is room for everything. Personally I think students need to really consider whether uni is for them and there should be less emphasis on needing it. More emphasis on training, trades etc

peppa - I teach with the OU and most of my colleagues teaching level 2-3 are either still in research or have been. There are women who have had kids and gone part-time (like me!) and some men who have taken early retirement.

I also tutor at Cambridge (have a Cam PhD and may go back as a postdoc), I took over from a Cam postdoc and my mentor was another Cam postdoc (they are now both relatively senior, tenured academics). Senior academics with tenure don't teach at the OU - but they don't tutor much either - its the postgrads and postdocs/junior staff who do the bulk of the undergrad teaching anyway so it seems to me that the OU actually attract pretty good quality staff (because it's convenient and, I am reliably informed, looks good on your CV when you go for a lectureship). People who would be extremely reluctant to teach at some, er, newer Universities are perfectly happy to teach with the OU.

Lack of contact hours is an issue - more for some than others. I would prefer teaching face to face. But when it goes properly online, i.e. with proper virtual tuition (being rolled out as we speak) that will help a lot.

And so endeth my OU-rallying speech...

I know though, that they have also been hit by funding cuts and there is some 'reorganisation' going on to absorb the damage.

I didn't mean that it was always the case. Was typing whilst breastfeeding DS2 so not very coheren. Sorry if I offended you there. Typically here though it tends to be the early career people or those more tuned towards teaching (from the people I know who do it)...all good...but I always loved as a student when the eccentric rambling student hating professor turned up and confused us all but somehow inspired us as well? We are not a particularly high up uni where I work but our profs still do lectures?

Of course the OU staff are qualified and some doing research - I meant it more that it would be a real shame to see traditional universities disappear and that whole academic way of life.

I think OU is a really good option for some, especially for mature students who might not have a good local option. Just would be awful to see students not going to university for money reasons like this.

OU is in my mind a possibility for asd ds3 (DH says I am delusional: I rather like my delusions so might hang on to them ), he won;t ever leave home.

But generally I agree about OU being better suited to adults, although not that adults are necessarily better suited to the OU: I loved the academic (ish) atmosphere at uni.

Oh I agree - the OU is better for 'proper' adults and people who, for whatever reason, would struggle to go to a traditional university. Good also for those who want to do another degree or other courses too. Just putting my twopenny worth in

Otherwise, I would prefer dd to do a traditional degree - it's a whole life-style and philosophy that I would like her to experience.

The profs in my dept do still do lectures - but they palm them off on other staff whenever possible. Some of them are, er, SO eccentric, that you really wonder about the trade-off between brilliance and communication skills

The two certainly are very different and I completely agree that I would not want to see the demise of the traditional university. I also think it's a shame that so many students opt, understandably, to live at home
(although no doubt I will be and on tranquillisers if dd moves into a student house at 18-19).

coalition "Most people will pay all of the money back."

No! It's only the very highest earning graduates (top decile) and those with reduced debt (by virtue of the scholarship scheme) that will pay off their debts. You really have to view this as a graduate tax for 30 years for most ordinary people. And it does raise the marginal tax rate for middle income earners to over 40% (including NI and 'normal' tax) which is a rather scary prospect. All graduates earning above the 30th decile will pay hugely much more with the new system than the current one.

this report is an interesting read.