So uni fees are going to increase?

[nearlylovemyusername]

University sector calls on Labour to raise tuition fees to ‘stabilise the ship’ (ft.com)

Given paywall, the essence it this:

"One former university vice-chancellor said the fact that Labour had acknowledged the sector was “in crisis” indicated that Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer and Phillipson, who have not ruled out a tuition fee increase, were likely to act.

“The short-term pain of putting up fees could be blamed on the Tory inheritance . . . and then traded against a transition to a better deal for young people, which Labour can deliver before next general election,” he said."

So it won't be limited by VAT on PS, uni fees will be up, potentially significantly and repayments for higher earning grads will go up much more - this is what artical says.

I don't know if its a mixed bag.

Many RG unis have a large over representation of private school students, then grammars and what MN calls "leafy comps".

A lot of students come from London and the Home Counties, in comparison with post '92 unis and this skews the data a lot.

Schools use it as a metric because parents use it as a metric, almost like they think it's the UK Ivy League ( it's not, and there are great unis not in the IL or RG).

Hear hear

I don't know if its a mixed bag.

In which case I'd recommend www.hesa.ac.uk - although I sense you are likely already quite familiar with that. 😀

Whilst I do take your general point I'd also observe that Cardiff is not Cambridge; QMUL and Durham have limited commonality within their student body; Queen's not really a Home Counties favourite. But think of the emissions saving if Durham could be relocated into some large green space in London - Richmond Park perhaps.

If I was being harsh I'd say 5 world class and 19 hangers on. But that would be harsh.

The "RG plus" nonsense which has crept into HE threads over the past few years leaves me thinking that I've wandered into a remake of Keeping up Appearances.

I'm really not mellowing with age.

5 world class universities is still good. We are still leaders in Europe.

it will be interesting to see the rise of Chinese universities. That will come if not already.

sorry @bombastix . We are lucky enough to have several dozen really excellent unis in the UK, which would include the 24 in the RG.

I was being a bit tongue in cheek about the RG - although as marketing goes hard to beat what they have achieved in terms of public perception.

Can you point me to an RG university in the top 10 that doesn't have an over representation of private school students? I've used that data before but it doesn't quite show this.

What I can see is the chart that shows commencement having left a state school provider after 50 days and there are very few RG universities that have a representative amount. People often also confuse the fact that whilst Private schools educate 18% of all those studying A levels, this does not include vocational courses that give access to HE.

From what I can see of the RG there are only Southampton, Sheffield, Birmingham, Manchester and Warwick which have about 20% of students from private schools. After that it drops off quite quickly.

Yes there are more students in RG unis from ordinary backgrounds now, but it still isn't representative and therefore any data on the success of the students from there is impacted by other socio-economic factors which may be greater.

There are some that are very harsh and say that QMUL wouldn't be anywhere near an RG university if it didn't have such a prestigious medical school. I'd go further and say the RG stuff is nonsense, the provision on many courses is so varied and standards of entry to each very different.

Want to got to the LSE? Apply to Sociology, 50% of students who do get an offer.

UCL? Apply to the courses at their SEES.

@Aladdinzane you are largely preaching to the converted.

Last time I looked at private school % at RGs - and this may be a year out of date but likely has not changed much - it was as attached.

I'm not in disagreement you. I just interpret the range of datasets as showing that within the RG there is a mix.

@boys3

I'm not sure what the red line across the middle is - an average?

If so then the average would be around 21% which doesn't seem that far off the 17% percent of all pupils who go private for sixth form .

I it really sure what this chart is showing?

Why so anti private school students?

@1dayatatime The Red line shows the private school rate for the combined RG unis, and the black line the figure for non-RGs. The Blue columns show the individual universities RG percentages. The graph demonstrates the range of privately educated at the 24 RG universities - 38% at Durham and at the other end of the scale Queen's with 2%. So really just a sorted table in graph form.

The graph simply is an example to show the RG is not a homogenous entity. The choice of content - in this instance percentage of privately educated students - is not a criticism of private school pupils or schools. It was just something readily to hand. The Ethnicity data shows a similar wide range of values across the RGs.

Just to remind people of three facts.

1. Student finance is constructed as a loan rather than a tax so that graduates who emigrate and thus do not pay UK tax still owe repayments on their loan. However, the repayments for those who remain in the UK do operate like a tax.

2. If there are no further changes to the loan scheme, increasing tuition fees and loans to match would not affect the less wealthy graduates, as they will never earn enough to repay their loans. Only wealthier graduates would end up repaying more.

3. The changes introduced for the 2023/2024 year have had a much bigger effect already than small increases in tuition fees ever will, especially increasing the repayment term from 30 to 40 years before outstanding debts are written off.

When I went to uni in the early 1990s about 10% of young people went to university. Now it's 50%.
Tuition fully paid and because both my parents were out of work at the time I got a full grant too so was literally paid to be there.
The rhetoric was always 'only the best get to go to university'. I worked to e year before to afford it and also worked PT all the way through

As there were so few attending it was paid for by the government.

@alladinzane “What you mean is, the US will continue to let you buy rather than earn your privileges, the UK won't“

Except if you are an international student in the UK. Then you can absolutely buy your privilege here? And recruitment drive is only increasing?

@boys3 - do the universities also track the type of school international students went to? (State funded vs independent?) And if not, why not?

Also all these comments from @alladinzane about private schools losing their hold over Oxbridge. Does it not work both ways? What if Oxford and Cambridge are losing their hold in turn, over losing out on the very best applications from the top students at fee paying schools in the UK? Could this even theoretically be possible? Why has Cambridge slipped down the league tables to Number 5?

I do not really care either way and am pro social mobility for all. But we do need to make sure that the best and the most talented across all sectors, not just medicine, want to stay here. Kids born here and doing well should always be incentivised to stay here. It is a huge loss to society if they are starting to emigrate.
DS has a friend from state grammar who won a top Sixth Form private school place and is very, very clever. He tried to get into Cambridge, but did not get in. He got into Imperial instead. Now suddenly Imperial is top of the league tables? Obvious this is pure anecdote, but if this happening en masse, then what are the long term consequences? If the better independent students end up at Russell Group unis instead, then surely those unis just really do get better and suddenly they become the aspiration for the typical high achieving private school student?

@Araminta1003 I think it's good that universities are getting a shake up some have been sitting on their laurels for centuries.

Friends son , clever and gifted couldn't get in to Oxford from a state school with a nice middle class background behind him. He went to LSE, won a place at Stanford.

DS went to university did Sciences, American companies would visit annually to woo the top students away.

We are a global village so searching for talent is big now

And I also think we have to be honest on the social mobility front. Social mobility has decreased due to austerity, cuts in real terms to state schools, teacher shortages, then the big one Covid (where those with educated driven parents were at a huge advantage especially younger ones) and now cost of living crisis.

There is no way somewhere like Cambridge uni can make up for those factors, nor should they have to, it’s far too late by uni level to deal with all of that. We should lay off the elite unis and let them just recruit the best students whatever their educational background. Or else what will happen is very predictable - they will slip down the league tables further and that won’t help us as a country. It helps us to have the few elite unis up there as a marketing and reputational tool for a whole higher education sector. If we start losing the top slots, then the weaker unis will struggle even more to recruit international students.
What I think we do need in all state schools is good careers and uni selection advice and I don’t see why this kind of thing cannot be provided online and more centrally rather than by individual schools.

It isn 18% of students that go private, it's 18% of those who take A levels. This doesn't include BTECs or T levels so that bit of data is skewed. Quite a lot of RG unis now take Btecs so this will increase the pool of available students, and decrease the % of private students "in 6th form" .

50% of young people do not go to university

By age 35, the higher education participation figure is about 43% ( I believe) but this does not mean that they have been to university or got a degree, it means that they have at some point taken part in a course that would be HE level. This can be at FE college ( which is about 7% of students), technical qualifications rather than degrees (10% and often on day release from work), plus part time.

It's about 37.5% of school/college leavers that go to university within a year or two of leaving school. So not 50%.

Even then if you went in the 80s to "university" the data didn't include those studying for degrees at polytechnics/OU, so again was skewed.

"Except if you are an international student in the UK. Then you can absolutely buy your privilege here? And recruitment drive is only increasing?"

This is as untrue as it is in the US. International students don't get lower offers from the top unis here, they have so much competition for places they can select the best ones. Funding/scholarship opportunities are very rare.

"Does it not work both ways? What if Oxford and Cambridge are losing their hold in turn, over losing out on the very best applications from the top students at fee paying schools in the UK"

No, the top students from private schools in the UK still get places and they are still significantly over represented at Oxbridge.

What Oxbridge have got a lot better at is looking beyond the polish provided by private schools to their candidates. So the recruitment process is much more stringent and based on a range of different things rather than just personal statement, reference and interview. Aptitude testing both prior to and on the day of the interview is undertaken and students may sit more than one interview. This makes it a lot harder for someone who has been very well prepped, but doesn't have the "x factor" to get through.

The competition for places is now way higher than it was in the 90s early 2000s, , numbers applying have nearly trebled and they have only provided an extra 300 places (across both universities).

Cambridge has "slipped down the list" but Imperial is higher and 3 out of the top 5 are UK, which is a massive over representation considering population size and funding. Positions in the top 10 change regularly, I'd put it down to brexit more than fewer private school children getting places, under grads don't actually get you that much international recognition.

Why has Cambridge slipped down the league tables to Number 5?

All the league tables need to be taken with a pinch of salt, and I'd suggest reading their methodology statements @Araminta1003 ; ideally before jumping to any conclusions. Something journalists might be well advised to do as well before writing their higher education articles.

The QS which I presume you are referring to, has added a whole new measurement category in its latest release. Which has benefitted Imperial moreso than Oxford or Cambridge.

The devil is as ever in the detail. See the last QS category column.

The attached shows all the UK unis in the latest QS table top 100.

"Except if you are an international student in the UK. Then you can absolutely buy your privilege here? And recruitment drive is only increasing?"

This is as untrue as it is in the US. International students don't get lower offers from the top unis here, they have so much competition for places they can select the best ones. Funding/scholarship opportunities are very rare.

@Alladinzane - international fees for most courses in the UK are 40k plus per year so only the richest international students can come and so they are definitely buying those places.

@boys3 - so it is the old buildings aka Sustainability holding them back? For Oxford and Cambridge?

- do the universities also track the type of school international students went to? (State funded vs independent?) And if not, why not?

@Araminta1003 that's probably for a whole specific widening participation thread on the Higher Ed board. 😀

For English Unis one starting point might be that its not an OfS requirement. Alongside plenty of other starting points.

based on how the QS scoring works it would seem to be "yes". Shall I post the methodology detail for that metric area or can find that for yourself?