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?

Great post WilfShelf. (I am also an academic.) On the whole I feel a bit less negative about the changes than you do, but I agree with lots that you say. I think that the higher level skills you describe will increasingly be moved into post-graduate work - in line with the widening of the curriculum at A-level (and perhaps at undergraduate level too, over time). But how post-grad funding/demand is going to be affected by these changes is one of the big points about which the govt has been pretty silent so far.

well, to whoever said that you get a degree and earn 40k. I have a PhD from a respected university in a very non Mickey Mouse subject. I am one of only about 20 specialists in my particular field in Europe.

I earn(ed) well under 30 k. (made redundant 3 weeks ago). Okay, I was working for a charity, but so will alot of graduates.

That said... I actually support the changes broadly.... but not getting into that argument.

Riven, you mostly speak a great deal of sense and with compassion. But you really ought to know this given you're her mother...

Your daughter may "only" get 5 contact hours a week, but the amount of reading and essay writing she will have to do in preparation for those hours is fiendish if she's doing the Cambridge English tripos, and her lecturers' preparation hours will be considerably more.

I'm no longer teaching at Oxbridge, but I work at minimum a 60 hour week, about 50 weeks of the year because I rarely take my statutory 6 weeks' holiday entitlement. The pressure of everything we have to do is relentless.

Yes, arts academics do research. Why don't you ask your daughter what she reads for her course? Apart from novels and poetry, everything else will be the fruit of academics' research labours (as will some of those novels and poems!)

And as several other people have pointed out, the fees students pay do not just pay their lecturers' salaries. Think how much it costs just to pay the electricity bill on a lecture theatre, let alone pay for a legal deposit library, Grade I listed buildings, etc.

BTW the break-even point for Cambridge is more like 12K because of the college fee, and noone is talking about it -- there is a very significant chance that the Oxbridge collegiate system could collapse entirely come 2012.

Wilfshelf WELL DONE!!!!

I can see it becoming the case that lecturers have to spend more hours lecturing.

Ok in theory.

However there is only so much time in a week. To lecture you need to prepare. If we are allowing lecturers to 'only' work their usual 60 hour week then a new lecturer could do, ooh, 12 hours of roughly prepared lectures a week.

And absolutely nothing else.

A lecturer who does not research. Fine in theory. But where do you think they are getting their knowledge from? Where is their passion? Their experience? Their own personal contribution to the subject?

When I was at university I was always in awe of the lecturer who pulled out their own studies and research to illustrate a point. Showed us how the work took place, what they found, what the issues were...got us to think critically.

University is not simply about being taught. It is called reading a subject for a reason. We teach students to explore, criticise, evaluate their own subject. They should be indepdendent learners. Lectures should be inspirational, thought provoking...to raise ideas and questions which they should then go off and explore themselves!

More and more students are demanding we give them all the information they need in the lecture and sit there teaching it to them until they understand. Just makes it an extended a level really. What employer wants that from a graduate

I'm sure there are many excellent lecturers who spend hours preparing. I can remember a few outstanding ones whose lectures were always interesting. These, however, were a minority where I studied.

A number of our lectures involved the lecturer standing up the front and reading from a textbook, in a lecture hall containing over a 100 students. Such was the level of interest, the motion activated lights used to go out fairly frequently! I'm sure for a lot, research was their passion, but it was pretty clear teaching wasn't.

I am horrified at that!!

I have never ever seen or heard of anyone do similar?!

Takes me a good 3 hours to prepare an hours lecture even for my in depth subject knowledge...less in depth it can easily take twice as long!

The point is that people are having to pay at all! The same generation who benefited from free tuition/ grants etc. are the same ones now saying that graduates must pay (whilst also refusing to pay for elderly care, pensions etc.)

IMO the solution is to make each university have some kind of entrance examination which assesses general aptitudes/ intelligence (because the school exam system does not do this- I know many who were private schooled who had great grades and fudged university) and also to reduce the number of university students and institutions. I think that degrees are now losing their value because so many have them.

That said I don't have a problem with students having to make some financial contribution to their education tho I think the proposed charges are a bit OTT. I am getting very fed up hearing medical students and medical student wannabees moaning about how much it will cost for a medical degree (wont be too hard when earning in excess of £100K year I wouldn't think).

Oh and my BIL has a maths degree and doesn't earn 40K!

No graduate will be in a job earning 17k.

Graduates earn 50% more than normal people when they start out. >>>

Where are you getting your figures from? I'm not very up-to-date as we're not living in the UK currently but the last time I checked the average graduate starting salary was not much over that and it was substantially under that for a large minority. Also, non-graduates in their early 20s were earning significantly more than graduates as they had more work experience and had had time to start climbing the ladder (although graduates overtook them in time).

My brother has a maths degree, and is currently unemployed. Previous to that he was earning less than me (I do not have a degree, and am nowhere near 40k per annum).

I'm not sure where you got your information from!!

@ classydiva

Get your facts right.

Both myself and my husband are graduates, both with postgrad degrees, me with a masters, his a PhD. Neither from Mickey Mouse Uni's.

My starting wage.......£17K (along with all my colleagues with similar qualifications.

Husband slightly above but both of us are on the average wage. I could earn more as a bus driver.

classydiva

"Statistically graduates earn in excess of 40% more than the average joe who has not been to university. I can't vouch for those who take stupid degrees. But if you take a Maths degree yep I could personally guarantee you wont be in a job paying less than 40k."

My DP has a good degree in Pure Mathematics from a Russell Group uni. He graduated several year ago and still doesn't earn that, even though he's in a promoted position

And I'm an English graduate, also Russell Group, and am nowhere near that. In fact, just over half of that and I graduated three years ago

Repaying medical degree fees probably wouldn't be too hard on £100k+ a year. Very few doctors earn that much no matter what rubbish headline the daily mail prints.

I was a doctor in the UK for over ten years and I didn't earn anything like £100k.

Riven, 5 hours contact time is not unusual. That's the way university works. Your daughter will be provided with a lot of very expensive resources to do her own independent study. My own course was designed in line with European conventions on full-time working.

And yes, English lecturers do research. What do you think they do?

No graduate will be earning £17,000 a year?

I graduated in 1995 and have a student loan which i have never paid off cos I have never earned more than £20,000 a year. I am a teacher by the way. Worked abroad for a few years and then came back to the UK and may never earn more than the £24,000 i need to to start paying it off. It is very small ,a couple of thousand i think.

I think it depends on the match between the degree and the job as well.

I very recently completed my phd as I wanted to be an academic. A clear and obvious link - qualification was needed. I earn in the mid 30's now, six months after graduation. I would hope to be earning 50k in 10 years time. I have always had excellent academic qualifications e.g. I was suited to university.

You can do an excellent on paper degree from an excellent place but if it is generic or does not match it then you are not going to get up the pay scales.

So we are back to the point of whether students actually need a degree. The majority do not. Perhaps a figure of 20% do. Others should have vocational schemes, learn trades, set up their own companies etc etc.

The other really important thing is work experience - and relevant work experience. If a student gains this during their degree they are usually very employable. Many do not or work in the local pub when they want to be a lawyer or something rather than gaining experience in law somehow.

@ Technokitten

Would like to point out I do not read the toilet paper that is the Daily Mail. I am an NHS worker so I know well the earnings and spread of earnings within the medical profession (and the much lower earnings of the other workers within the NHS). I appreciate that not ALL docs earn >100K.

That said- I also know of many who do, one who in fact earned my ANNUAL INCOME for 1 days work per week!!

Oh yes and when I graduated in 2003 my first job paid 10k a year!!

The other point is...on a roll now...that a graduate job is often more about salary.

If someone wants to be a midwife or a social worker I would hope that they are not simply doing this to make money. They are doing the degree (and paying the money - although these courses are funded arent they bad example) because they want the 'luxury' (for want of a better word)of doing a job that they enjoy. That stimulates them. That challenges and progresses them.

Graduate jobs tend to be better in terms of pensions, rights, sickness pay and so on. I know I have much more flexibility in terms of hours than someone working in a call centre.

Compare all that to your average minimum wage job.

I also think I calculated on another thread that your average teacher would probably end up paying about 30k back at most - this is if they work for 40 years and pay the interest too - and progress up to senior level. That is £1000 a year, £80 ish a month to do a vocation they supposedly love. I know I would rather do what I want to do than an unskilled job.

Just thought I'd throw this into the thread.
My sons girlfriend (of 5.5 years, and a graduate) is 8 months into a 16 month course training to be a commercial airline pilot.
The cost--£80,000.
It has been her dream for years and she has gone for it and will spend the next heaven knows how many years paying it back.
Heres hoping she gets a job next August!

How did she find the money?

Outstanding post, Wilf.

I find it all mind boggling. I thought it was all paid back after uni so why all the protests and shit. They saying students wont be able to go to uni from disadvantaged backgrounds etc etc.

One of our family friends son has just started uni this year to become a doctor/surgeon but when hes finished he will owr £70k worth of debt!!!

Yes he'll be able to afford it but when he first went to uni - he went on the fees he thought he would be paying back so now the governemtn has fucked him over.