University Fees

[JaneEyreLaughing]

Just reading that the universities have floated the idea of students paying £12,500. FFS.

My working class mum and dad went to university in 1978 and 1980 and they didn't pay any fees. They say only 10% of people went to university then and so it was more affordable for local authorities to fund-now so many young people go, that it simply isn't practical for the state to fund it.

This must have a detrimental effect on working class kids who just can't afford to go without burdening themselves with massive debt.

AIBU to say that we need to get back to this-just the top 10% and your fees paid, whether your dad is a duke or a dustbin man. Everyone is equal-you just need to get into the top 10%-your background doesn't matter-just your ability as reflected in your grades.

Even saying the top 20% will be funded would be better.

But they will be able to get a loan for whatever amount is charged.
For the majority of graduates the amount they "borrow" makes no difference to the amount that they will pay once they are earning.
Universities need more income. Fees have been frozen for years but staff have had pay increases...
Martin Lewis: 'Why with student loans what you borrow is mostly irrelevant...' (moneysavingexpert.com)

I agree we need a different funding model but if only the top 10% can go this will still disproportionately affect the ‘working’ class as they will have less access to better education (typically associated with private schools, private tutoring or housing prices near excellent state schools).

The great thing about expanding higher education opportunities is that more people have the option to go and therefore follow well paid career paths.

I wholeheartedly agree with apprenticeships but I wouldn’t want access to higher education to only belong to the elite, that feels very depressing.

Do you really think there was equal access to uni then?? How cute.

Firstly, if you look at the stats, private school pupils were the majority. Is that your ideal?

Secondly, take any university town - thousands of great jobs. You want all those people on the dole?

Thirdly, do you want to make the UK significantly weaker than its competitor nations by reducing the education level of the population?

It's not 1974, it's 2024. Yes we need to look at funding, but going back to the past is not the answer. So yes, YABU.

That amount is way too much of a burden to place on young people. They need to save for their homes and afford to have children while they are young enough, as well as sorting out their career.
Education should be almost free.
Homes should be obtainable.

It would belong to the elite-the educational elite that scored top grades. What's wrong with that?

I think you will find working class kids are just as bright as middle classes or are you saying that they are thicker and would be unable to get grades.

That didn't used to be the case in the 80s. What's changed?

Well how’s that gonna work OP?
back in the day ….you didn’t need a degree to be a teacher…..or a nurse…..or an nhs therapist ……and many other professions which are degreee entry only now……so straight away you are going to create a massive shortage of public sector workers….. have you thought this through?

im a nurse but I wasn’t supernumerary when I trained…..I was on the payroll….paying into my pension…..I mean I now have a degree and a masters …..but lots of nurses my age don’t…….it was very different back in The 80s ….many of the unis that are now were polys back in the day …..different ball game altogether……kids with parents on benefits will be able to borrow whether its 9k or 20k

But you don’t need to be super super bright to be many professional public sector roles…..,bright enough to get a degree yes….but other qualities far more important

I agree we need less people going to university from school (open access otherwise). We are quickly heading towards the disgustingly high fees seen in America.

Because it’s not as simple as that. We don’t live in a meritocracy. Privilege yields more positive educational outcomes, therefore in your system those already advantaged educationally will be more likely to go to uni thus increasing inequality.

Universities have been underfunded for years. The amount they receive per student needs to increase. It sucks that this has to come from the students though.

It’s a wild one isn’t it, I worked in higher education for close to 30 years and so has DH who is about to retire. Fees have not risen for a decade, something has to happen. A few Universities may face closure, there is a list and almost all of them are having restructuring packages with severance, DH is taking one. In theory you should earn a lot more over a lifetime with a degree in practice it is now impossible as there are just not enough graduate level jobs. There were spaces in clearing this year at my last institution and they were taking students with grade C in some subjects, unheard of until recently. Overseas student numbers are way down. They pay huge amounts compared to UK students.

Issue is if you look at how children develop children from better off families for a myriad of reason overtake their peers. From the tragedy of children not eating enough so they are hungry which affects learning to kids whose parents can afford experiences and tutors. The wealthy can always buy advantage. It happens now and will always be like this.

Most secondary school teachers had a degree in the early 80s.

Maybe it will entail a re-looking at why so many jobs need a degree nowadays-that wouldn't be a bad thing.

Maybe it is to support the bloated higher education industry-someone has already put forward the fact that university jobs rely on filling those places.

It just seems crazy that so many go to "Yooni" almost as a rite of passage, instead of a few who are educationally up to it and going for free or vastly reduced fees.

People with money pay for a private education. People with money pay for tutoring to get into grammar school. People with money buy houses in catchment of good schools. People with less ultimately get what's left. So people with money start ahead of those without. Expectations and ambition are higher to start with.

It has always been the case.

I don't want to fund the sons and daughters of the insanely wealthy to go to university. I'm sure Rishi Sunak is more than capable of paying his daughters' fees without my help.

I would introduce scholarships for the top 10% but I would means test these.

Realistically university undergraduate fees have risen £250 in over a decade, which is ridiculous. Overseas students (a major earner for them) are in decline for a number of reasons (Covid, massive universities in China, successive UK governments being vicious to them). What would you have universities do?

Head too far towards the market and the courses that close will be Humanities and Engineering.

so you want to dumb down jobs such as nursing?

Universities are in crisis, many are on the verge of bankruptcy and 1000s of teaching staff have been made redundant in the last couple of years. There has been no increase in fees since the COL. Thanks to Brexit, international student numbers are down and so is the funding available for research (which people conveniently forget is a huge part of what universities do). Add to this the hostility that the former government had to any non STEM degree, and recruitment for Humanities and Arts students has been decimated. There is no bail-out plan from the government, so what are universities to do except raise fees? Most are a major employer or have small businesses reliant on their existence. If they all disappeared, it would be pretty devastating for the economy. We need a skilled, trained, educated workforce. That costs money.

Were nurses dumb in the past then?

It’s the kids in the middle just above the cut off who are going to suffer most as their parents may not be able to top up their fees- especially if they have a sibling.

There needs to be a re-think but saddling students with more debt isn’t the answer since many don’t pay back their loan already because their wages are too low.

Closing some universities isn't a bad idea. There are too many students and too many poor institutions offering poor quality learning for a lot of money churning out poor quality graduates who aren't real world ready.

We’re already way past that. American grads on average owe less than English grads yet earn far more.

Besides, US fees are actually about the same as English ones. The huge fees are for private universities like Harvard, if you go to your local state college (like UCLA or Berkeley!) fees are about £10k a year and are repaid via federal loans which are similar to ours.

Not one kid from my school went to uni in the 80s …..doubt they were all thick….it was a school on a rough council estate …..most peoples parents were either on the dole or worked at the local factory….no posh kids went to our school….and nothing much has changed….it’s still a rough as fuck school in an area of extreme deprivation…..and Very few kids go on to higher education….Ibut i mean some do….there’s a bit more opportunity than there was…..but If those that do wanted to , then had to be part of your 10% they would be competing against kids who had been in private schooling for years….kids who have had tutors……all you are going to do is widen the gap between rich and poor

OP ... for want of a better word, you're being really dumb about this.

Of course working class children can achieve the same grades as the middle class, but their ambition and potential is hindered by socio-economic routes to privilege.

Your 'grand plan' will only equate to a far greater ratio of privately educated white children.

Why does a nurse need a degree? You can still be trained, just not in a university. My MIL was a nurse and midwife for 50 years and trained at the Royal Free in London. Had an excellent career.

No, but the training and qualification procedure was completely different.

Nursing and teaching both became professions which required degrees - so that added a lot to the proportion of young people taking degrees. Before that, there was still high-quality training and qualifications to be secured, but these were delivered in colleges that were not then called universities. They became parts of universities in 1992. Nursing became degree-only in 2013 {EDITED TO ADD: or at least that's what google told me, I'd thought it was about a decade before that} I'm not sure of the year for teaching becoming normally graduates only, but some non-graduate routes still exist.

1992 was when polys became universities too, and instead of offering a range of diplomas (including the highly respected HND) started moving towards degrees

So within the general increase in the numbers going to university, those two structural changes made quite a difference in themselves to the proportion of young people who have degrees.

OP, I agree, in principle. I don't know what the % should be, but Tony Blair's idea of 50% going to university has so many holes in it. We have trades with shortages we can't fill because kids have been told they need to go to uni and get a degree in media studies.

Where I work, all job ads used to have a university degree listed in the 'essential' column. When HR reviewed this, they realised there was no reason for this and it's not required at all for people to apply for a role. Degrees have become a default position for employers when often they aren't needed (or another qualification would suffice).

some were yes!
some still are….as are many other professionals who get degrees these days
but if you make nursing non academic then you are dumbing it down….we used to learn how to make beds and give meds out and give injections and do dressings…….we didn’t ask why …..we just did…..nursing now is a completely different role these days….at uni you learn about research, leadership, theories that underpin practice.

can you see the point I’m making? Or you just wanting to take the piss 🙄