Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

To think scrapping uni fees for first generation applicants is wide open to fraud and ambiguity

32 replies

bamboozelle · 27/02/2020 09:02

An influential think tank has recommended that universities should scrap the first year of fees for applicants whose parents didn't go to uni (see [[BBC News - Uni admissions could scrap use of predicted grades
www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-51645826 BBC article]]).

Surely this is wide open to fraud? It would completely rely on people being honest about their parents' backgrounds because there is no systematic, scalable way to prove the absence of a university education.

Even if people don't deliberately lie there are all kinds of ways to bend the truth depending on how the question is worded. e.g. If your parents went to a polytechnic, HE college etc, do you answer yes or no? If you had a non-uni-educated biological parent for half your life and a uni-educated step parent for the other half, do you answer yes or no? What if your parent went to uni but dropped out before they got their degree? I'm sure there are dozens of other ambiguous scenarios too.

I know universities and some sixth forms (e.g. this one) already use the first generation criteria to prioritise applicants, but this proposal takes things to a new level. Large sums of money are involved so the temptations to lie, or favourably interpret the truth, are much higher.

And of course everyone else will end up paying higher fees as a result.

OP posts:
user1494050295 · 27/02/2020 09:07

I call bs too. It’s open to abuse and cannot be 100% verified. I work for a uni and this can be mentioned on an application whether for undergrad or wp programmes. However it is not the be all and end all when making an assessment of the application.

WalkingDeadTrainee · 27/02/2020 09:12

I don't think university should be free. I also don't think it should cost 9k a year.

Yanbu. It's way too open to abuse.

Original poster
bamboozelle · 27/02/2020 09:16

The original link to the BBC article is broken, so here it is again: www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-51645826

OP posts:
Newkitchen123 · 27/02/2020 09:27

I went to uni
First year of my course didn't count towards my grade. You just needed to pass it to progress to year 2 then your grade was decided on years 2 and 3.This was pretty standard. I'm not sure if it is now. What a waste of money that is.
Scrap that idea and make years 2 and 3 a bit harder maybe to weed out the ones who can't cope.
My final year I did something like 16 hours a week. If the course was more hours the course could be shorter. Yes I also had to do a dissertation and am fully aware of all the self study that has to be done but I help down two part time jobs and did a 60 mile round trip as I lived at home for part of the time.
The amount of debt that students leave with these days is shocking. I don't blame anyone for not going to uni. 30 years ago I was the first in my family to go to uni and therefore in the family I was considered super clever... I'm not! Well I don't think so. One or two people on my course got a first. That's it. Everyone else got 2 1 /2 2 and the odd third. None of my yeargroup who went to different unis at the same time as me got firsts. Young relative just left uni with a first. Also held down an almost full time job and has a child. I know of a few of my friends and acquaintances with kids who got firsts. Not taking anything away from their hard work but are they all more intelligent than the vast majority of people I went to uni with?
The whole system needs a major over haul

woodchuck99 · 27/02/2020 09:47

I don't think there's much chance that this will happen. It would be open to a certain amount of fraud but that I think the fact that some universities are offering lower grades to people whose parents didn't go to university is probably a bigger reason to lie.

HeddaGarbled · 27/02/2020 09:58

I think it’s a suggestion that merits proper consideration and exploration rather than a knee-jerk “that will never work”.

Of all the ideas for equalising access, I do think the move to application after results rather than using predicted grades is probably the most sensible.

enjoyingSun · 27/02/2020 10:02

My dad got his degree through OU and had to pay quite a bit towards it and finished just before I started A-levels. I don’t think that’s particularly unusual as I’ve known quite a few people get past 30 and be told they need a degree to progress their careers. Seems a bit harsh to penalise such people who often spend years studying around family commitments.

I do wish they’d move to actual grades though and look again at the funding model.

Mummyshark2018 · 27/02/2020 10:29

Rubbish idea. Lots of celebs and other millionaires will not have gone to uni but will be in the best position to pay for their children to go.

Stuckfornow · 27/02/2020 15:56

@Newkitchen123 I’m currently a 2nd year BSc Hons student, as of next year (so this September’s intake graduating 2023), only the work from 3rd year will count towards their degree classification with the requirement to pass 1st and 2nd year to progress.

Newkitchen123 · 27/02/2020 16:29

@stuckfornow that's even worse!

meredithgrey1 · 27/02/2020 16:48

It would need careful consideration of what was and wasn't included. For example both my mum's parents went to uni but my mum didn't (until much later in life, after I started uni). Therefore I wasn't the first generation to go, but could honestly answer that my mum did not attend university. But it would be even harder to verify whether grandparents had a degree. And is it done on a sliding scale? One fee for just one grandparent having a degree, another for all four?

I think you're right that there are too many differing factors that make it hard to judge exactly who does and doesn't qualify. My sister for example, started uni while my mother was still studying. So she wouldn't have been able to say her mum did not attend uni, so would her fee have been higher than mine? Despite having a parent actively studying and therefore on a lower income than when I went.

Original poster
bamboozelle · 27/02/2020 17:05

Good points @meredithgrey1. It would be unfortunate if parents were put off doing degrees later in life because they were worried about the impact on their children's future fees.

OP posts:
RetreatingWeasels · 27/02/2020 17:11

I had a similar issue at my DS's school. They were offering a summer school to clever children (it was effectively a secondary modern) but it was only available if your parents hadn't been to university.

DH and I both left school at 16. I went on to do other courses on day release and night school and ended up going to university at the age of 30. I couldn't honestly say I didn't go, but I didn't go at the normal time, so it really isn't the same.

Blackandgreenteas · 27/02/2020 17:13

What if you have a nrp dad that contributed nothing to the child but went to uni, and a Mum who raised the child alone and didn’t? Would you still have to pay fees? For example.

Blackandgreenteas · 27/02/2020 17:15

Saying “no charge if you went to a non-fee paying school for most of your secondary education (day, 4/5 out of seven years) seems fairer. And would encourage middle class parents to use the state system to the benefit of all!

Original poster
bamboozelle · 27/02/2020 17:16

That sixth form admissions example I linked to in the original post is affiliated to King's College London, and they say in the document that they just rely on honesty - they do no checks at all to verify whether information is accurate. It's hard to see what checks can be done. Even if a system was somehow put in place to verify that parents didn't have a UK degree (which would mean somehow scrutinising identity documents and cross referencing with uni records), it would be impossible to check whether they had a degree from abroad.

Frankly, I'm amazed universities are able to use this to prioritize applicants at all, because it isn't objective, but linking it to funding just ups the stakes even more.

OP posts:
FieldOfFlameAndHeather · 27/02/2020 17:18

It’s completely ridiculous. They should be judged as adults investing in their own future. Parents incomes and backgrounds should have absolutely nothing to do with it. Students from very low Income backgrounds will already be receiving bursaries and grants and having their fees paid for them in many cases anyway.

InfiniteSheldon · 27/02/2020 17:20

Grossly unfair on second sibling.

FieldOfFlameAndHeather · 27/02/2020 17:24

What if you have a nrp dad that contributed nothing to the child but went to uni, and a Mum who raised the child alone and didn’t? Would you still have to pay fees? For example.

I know a family where the parents got divorced when the children were teenagers. My children were good friends with their children and my DC went to uni the same year as her DC. The mother was a nurse and the father has a good job in electrical engineering, I’m guessing he would have earned around 100k at least.

He lived locally and saw the children very regularly but when it came to applying for uni it was based on the mother’s income only as she was the RP. This child got concessions that my child didn’t, purely because my child was unlucky enough to have a father who still lived at the same address as the rest of us. To say that pissed me off is an understatement. The system absolutely sucks.

Lordfrontpaw · 27/02/2020 17:27

So what happens in the case of divorce or step parents?

drivingtofrance · 27/02/2020 17:30

I voted against.

I didn't go to University, neither did DS' dad. My DH did though, DS' step father. How would that work? The school that DS attended was a state grammar from which most pupils went to University. They were guided through the process. Some pupils were from disadvantaged/lower income backgrounds. Does that mean that they'd get it for free and some others would not?

Maybe make the tuition fees a little lower for all, and reinstate grants for maintenance - not based on parental income.

I think there must be a better way to benefit all potential students but making it free for some isn't the answer.

Original poster
bamboozelle · 27/02/2020 17:38

A lot of parents with degrees have relatively low paid jobs in teaching, nursing, social care etc. It's ridiculous that they should end up paying more than parents with a higher income but no degree.

OP posts:
Charlottejbt · 27/02/2020 17:45

I think extra bursaries should be available for the offspring of parents with really unmarketable degrees which are less desirable to employers than having no degree!

Well, not really... it should be free for everyone, like back in the day. If "Uni" gets too popular and grants get too expensive, just close down the ex-polys.

historyrocks · 27/02/2020 17:50

Scotland did have special funding for students from the most disadvantaged 40 postcodes. I think that’s a better way of doing it. (But the funding was quietly scrapped by the SNP after a few years. )

Doobigetta · 27/02/2020 18:08

Saying “no charge if you went to a non-fee paying school for most of your secondary education (day, 4/5 out of seven years) seems fairer. And would encourage middle class parents to use the state system to the benefit of all!

That is absolutely genius in its simple perfection. Why haven’t we done this?
Clarification- the rules would have to cover the last two years being included in the state school portion, or people would just go state for years 7-9 and then switch to private for GCSEs and sixth form and hope the kid caught up.