Am I missing something re tuition fees...

[Pheebe]

OK so tuition fees are not repayable until AFTER uni and AFTER you are earning over a certain amount

So why should your families pre-uni economic status be taken into account? Surely support for disadvantaged students should be focused on ensuring they have access and maintenance grants to support their daily living expenses while they are studying. Once they have their degree surely they on an equal footing to all other graduates?

Two students, both in a 40K job, one from a 'poor' background one from a 'professional' background. Who is more disadvantaged at that point by having to pay off 30K worth of debt?

What am I missing?

I agree that communication is a massive problem here. Admissions visits to schools by universities, so pupils can talk directly to people about what university might mean for them, are very valuable IME. A few of my best students only applied because of that kind of intervention. The misconceptions they had previously harboured were very far from the truth.

The flip side of this is telling middle class kids and their parents that they should not consider university to be their pre-ordained destination. Everyone needs to have the information and freedom to make the right choice for them according to their talents and ambitions.

I'm not convinced 'doing your bit' and 'posting on this thread' quite match up!

But I see what you're getting at - trickle-down probably works quite well, and certainly worth a try.

Xenia - I do not agree with the Welsh reduced fees (and I am Welsh). I would put money on it not being sustainable though - if I had any as I can practically hear my job galloping away.

It really isn't until the last year or so that I have really realised I could have done a better paid job. A bit late now but will make sure DC's have that knowledge.

Tis never too late. Plenty of people particularlyl women make a fortune post 50. It's a great period to use as children are older 50 - 70 golden years for women.

Oh...so that's where all the post-50 female academics are!!!
I've been wondering...

There used to be 'aim higher' in our state school but I've heard that this is being scrapped.

That's correct, christmaseve. A real shame.

Hmm - only another 20 odd years to go then...

trying to catch up on this thread. Has this question been answered? "if it is so unlikely to be repaid in full by many due to the shrinking job market and depressed world economy, how doe that work FGS??"

Peppa - if you "pay back 9% of your earnings for that month" (over 21k), no, I don't see how you can plan sensibly and get clear of the debt. What's the interest rate going to be? What are the guarantees the loans won't be sold off to some company charging x times more interest etc etc.

As for whoever said we should be saving for our children's uni fees, I have 3 and only a few years left to save until the first one starts (hopefully). How am I going to save £150K to pay upfront and make it easier for them?

Cristina - my point was not that you would get rid of the debt but that the repayments would be smaller than you presumed. For most (or those who have no other major financial commitments already) the debt will be fairly manageable. You would end up paying about £100 a month for the rest of your working life yes but would supposedly earn more than this by doing a degree.

I think I worked out that if you earned a mean income of 30k or similar you would pay back around 30k over your lifetimes work.

For example
5 years at approx 25k = £2000 paid back
5 years at approx 30k = £4500 paid back
5 years at 35k = £7500 paid back
10 years at 40k = £10,000 paid back
5 years at 45k = £12,500 paid back

So that would cover it and interest. Some graduates will earn more and pay it back quicker. Others will earn less and never repay it all back but their repayments will be smaller, should be more manageable and hopefully not affect them too much. I think they can overpay if they want to but would probably be better off overpaying their mortgage etc as the interest rates on other forms of borrowing would be higher.

The interest rate is low - am not sure what it officially is but is linked to base rate etc and is about 2% I think (note - I think. It is certainly very low compared to other loans anyway).

By the way I do not support this rise at all. Just explaining how it works. I think its terrible that the average graduate will pay back for their whole life but they should earn more than they do without the degree so overall be better off still.

Peppa - I think we agree that £100 pcm should be possible, but I still think it's terrible that it's a debt you have no choice over (unless you cut your nose to spite your face and don't go to Uni). In your calculations you assume quite a quick progression to higher rates of earnings and don't allow for any career breaks, part-time work etc. I know you'll say your payments go down or no payments at all, but the debt is still there, hanging over your head.

As for there being no questions asked at all about the student loan, I had to fill in an emergency tax code form on Friday and there was a question about student loans on it. (I didn't read it carefully as didn't apply.)

And here's one, maybe already old news: Why did Nick Clegg cross the road? because he promised not to.

I worked out on a mean income of 30K then the amount paid back over 30 yrs would be 24K. That's only half of what a degree would cost. If it was a 5 yr degree that would be a third.

Of course more would be paid back if earnings were higher but less if there are career breaks.

I was under the impression that it was all written off after 30 yrs, I might be wrong.

Must admit it doesn't make a lot of sense and I can imagine the repayments % will be quite low, so why are they doing it?

I gave the example of those I think will be worse off really. Earn more / progress quicker and get it paid off, less interest and out of the way.

Earn less - as many will, certainly more woman (stereotypically) through career breaks then you will actually pay a lot less back but it will be hanging over you.

I guess in a way it depends on whether you see it hanging over you or not. I don't see my student loan as doing that (but is less than 27k). Maybe because it has always been there so I have never received a salary without it deducted? It is almost like tax - well is a tax on education I suppose - in the same way that I get no choice over how it is paid, have never considered not paying it so it doesn't hangover me in that way. If I lost my job tomorrow (hey, likely with this!) then I wouldnt have to worry about it in the same way as other things.

So hypothetical situation...

5 years at 25k = £2000 paid back
5 year career break = nothing paid back
5 years working part time = nothing paid back
5 years at 25k (back at square one) = £2000
5 years at 30k (£4500)
5 years at 35k (7500)

So above student has then paid £16,000 for degree really. However the tax payer has then effectively paid 11k plus interest for them but got the least out of them.

If you imagine that many women actually work part time for a longer length than that...I'm not convinced we will actually get more money back overall compared to a system where they pay less but up front?

Hmmmm I am wondering about it being an elitist trick to stop the poor going...

We need a finance expert / economist to tell us whether we will actually get more money back this way.

I wonder how it will impact on numbers allowed at uni. At present our numbers are capped because we are told that we are only allowed so much funding for each one. If they are effectively paying themselves will more be allowed in (even if they borrow it?). Where is this money to borrow coming from?

They seem to have taken on board the Browne report and he must have had an informed insight as to how it will work.

The treasury will give over the funding per students and once the money starts to be repaid that will be future funding. What could be worrying is as no-one has a crystal ball and if the economy doesn't pick up in 5 yrs, the repayments wont be rolling in so will they just slash funding. I expect in 5 yrs there will be a change of government.

I don't know enough about it all really.

Yes...I am going to try and find out whether there is a cap on the number of students they will lend the money to? There must be. Otherwise Joe Bloggs with 3 E's at A level decides he will do a course, drink his way through it and never get a particuarly fantastic job and pay anything back. University of surf studies will take him as they get the money for him.

Hmmm...

Personally I would like to revert to a system where the most academic go to university and others are fully support in other choices

the ifs calculated that the new scheme might actually cost more than the current one - it's a difficult thing to determine as it's so sensitive to average graduate incomes in the future which no one really knows - apparently the government estimates were rather optimistic on this...

peppa it would be interesting to know if there will be a cap on numbers - if everyone decided to embark on a low paid career like art or music (or indeed just decided not to declare half their income) then obviously the new scheme will cost much more. I'm really not convinced that people will think harder about so-called mickey mouse degrees. It seems to me that plenty of 17 year olds choose eg forensic science because it looks fun on csi with no thought whatsoever that there are scarcely any jobs and those that there are require degrees in Chem/Bio instead. A change to the fees won't alter this much imo.

Because the payback from these degrees is so much less, they will be the ones most heavily subsidised by the new system and effectively the taxpayers, medics and lawyers will be subsidising the forensic scientists, musicians, artists and media studies students. Now maybe that's not altogether a bad thing, but it would be nice to know there is some control on the amount of the subsidy (by limiting the numbers).

"On sunday afternoon, with three DC's home - and I'm supposed to be on mat leave! But if I don't write and get something I won't have a job to come back to"

Hear hear peppa (again!) -- where's the academic mothers' support thread when we need it?

I found out I'd got a big ERC grant the week after my DS was born in July, and I really resented the fact that I couldn't even have two weeks with my firstborn without having to do bloody grant negotiation because they'd set a really short deadline. The rest of my maternity leave has been spent in a state of anxiety with me doing as many hours as I can around babycare in order to make sure my postdocs have jobs in the new year.

Those of you who think academia is a cushy number. . .

I liked the letter in today's Times from an employer..

They are serious considering paying English graduates more than Scottish and Welsh ones because the Welsh pay £3290 maximum, Scots none and English will pay up to £9k. It woud be amusing if many employers followed suits and Scots charged down South to English universities if they would have them to pay higher fees to get higher wages.

I don't see how the WAG can sustain it I really don't.

Now that is fair but ... what if rich parents pay upfront ... their child has another advantage.

But hang on wouldnt a welsh or scottish degree then be seen as better because they would pay them less?

Is all a nice big mess

I believe Vince Cable has said if someone wants to work for 5 years on building sites to earn the fees in advance and then pay upfront when they go then they should be allowed to do that. Simiarly if someone inherits from their granny to use it for fees or indeed if parents pay or loan the children the money that will be allowed. You cannot even out all differences. Some children are good looking. others are nice. Others are bright. Others are happy. There will always be genetic and enivironmental differences unless and until we all become clones.

Theres something very wrong in Britain today when paid thugs beat 15 year olds.

It doesnt matter whether the fees have to be paid later on or never after graduating.
The pressure of knowing that their education is costing so much and the distraction of thinkign about a career, perhaps 3 years later doesnt make a succesful and motivated student.
Less students will apply under these conditions.
Instead of universities and cultural places of activity for the youth we have funds for shopping centres and military. This is a terrible situation and hope people start to realise soon that something is afoot here.

As to schools and careers advice.
I remember growing up quite abruptly, at the age of 15 in a games lesson at my comprehensive (ex grammar school). This was when the Head (ex grammar teacher) was showing the Chair of Governors around (whose daughter walked on water, top in every subject & sport she did). The simple statement I overhead the head laughingly say to the chair ...'we can't all be managers.'
This was many many many years ago. I have always and still do wonder how prevalent this attitude is to life in this country.

Currently working in an Ofsted outstanding Secondary,(in a support only role, as I was never allowed, by cultural attitude and life circumstance to attain the elusive degree), I see what a school is capable of. What can be done to ensure students achieve and have high aspirations. Having also worked in a failing secondary, I still wonder at that statement I overheard so very many years ago. (And the teachers in both worked damned hard.)

By mentally (the burden of such horrendous debt) putting a degree out of so many peoples reach. Allowing the well off to pay the fees, from the off, therby these children will have no life term (30yrs) debt allows the gap between those managers and the workers to widen further.
Sadly for the parents whose hopes that their children would do better in life, have been thwarted by an Extremely clever government.

As has been stated already if the fees will never get fully paid in a vast majority of cases, how does it help the deficit? or the purpose of Brownes report... that Uni's will secure a sustainable future to allow for increase in demand they have had and will have?

Enough will pay the fees to make it all work but what you we need is schools to explain (it's very simple with a calculator) what the debt amounts are and what the repaymetns are so that the poor whom most people seem to be assuming are too stupid go do the math as it were..... can see how silly they would be to let that level of debt put them off.