Student Tuition Fees Increase for 18/19 to £9585/year

[bromleygirl]

If we didn't think it was bad enough the cap being lifted from £9k/year for 17/18, I have found out that for the 18/19 year, fees are set to rise for Gold and Silver uni's under the new TEF to £9585/year and then 3% each year after - subject to parliamentary approval of course. I know the uni's try to spin it by saying think of it as a graduate tax but the 30 year debt will still go against our children as they start to apply for mortgages. It makes me really upset English kids stuck paying outrageous amounts of tuition to fund the greedy uni VC's when Wales and NI are paying £3k/year and Scotland are paying nothing at all.

This is only half true. The link between TEF and tuition fees was sidelined after the House of Lords voted against it - it may come in in the future but not now. As things stand, all universities will be able to put the fees up in increments every year to keep up with inflation/costs etc. Fees went up this year, but were frozen before that since 2012, so have declined in real term value - so there's an element of catch-up here.

I dislike fees and I dislike high VC pay, but I don't agree with the current push to link the two. If VCs were all paid the same as me, you'd not be able to reduce tuition fees. Students are not funding VCs - they are funding the entire costs of running the university. They are paying not only for their direct experience of their education (contact hours etc) but also for the upkeep of buildings (heating, light, cleaning and repairs) all the technology upgrades that are needed, all the administrative staff as well as academic staff - whether teaching focused or not. The way to challenge fees is not to argue for reduced VC pay - it is to argue that the state, and thus the taxpayer, should have to pay for at least some of what it costs to run a complex institution like a university.

What is a gold or silver uni

Is the increase not across the board

Fucks sake this makes me so angry

Though i do agree with gannet re the VC

They've been colour coded recently - sort of Ofsteady? My DDs Uni was Silver.

Means nothing IMO. Her course was Gold if you ask me. I'm sure there are others that will say they feel there's was bronze, or aluminium, or whatever the lower descriptions are.

Aluminum

Its not funny

Ds1 uni is a silver...apparently

I almost wish it was Ofstedy - at least then they wouldn't be claiming to judge teaching quality without at any point evaluating any teaching.
This is a good explainer: www.theguardian.com/higher-education-network/2017/jun/19/why-should-i-care-about-the-teaching-excellence-framework-explainer

But TEF outcomes, as I say, are not currently linked to fees - the government wanted to, but there was a massive student protest, the House of Lords rejected it and the government decided not to push the point in the Commons prior to the election.

It makes me really upset English kids stuck paying outrageous amounts of tuition to fund the greedy uni VC's.

No, the fees pay for staff salaries to increase with inflation, rather than salaries being frozen. Freezing fees at 9k has meant substantial pay cuts in real terms for university staff.

University VCs would get double or triple their salaries as CEOs in industry or business. They aren't actually overpaid when you take into account that they are CEOs of organisations with thousands of employees.

As pp wrote, it is a political choice to pass the burden for paying for universities onto the next generation, rather than asking current tax payers to fund more of the costs. It is a choice that will rapidly come and bite us back, when the next generation are crippled with their debt and can't pay more tax for the costs of care for older people etc.

Abso-fucking-lutley user

And nobody should be under any illusions: the current wave of stories about high VC salaries and criticising universities in general is about neutering the influence of VCs and universities on Brexit policy. So when academics warn that it's going to be disaster, and give you evidence that it is a disaster, you won't listen to us.

"the 30 year debt will still go against our children as they start to apply for mortgages"

No it wont make the slightest bit of difference to mortgage applications. It's highly unlikely your dc will pay off the whole of their loan. Whether they owe £50k or £55k for example if they only ever pay of say £29k it's irrelevant.

And nobody should be under any illusions: the current wave of stories about high VC salaries and criticising universities in general is about neutering the influence of VCs and universities on Brexit policy. So when academics warn that it's going to be disaster, and give you evidence that it is a disaster, you won't listen to us.

^^ this

and Adonis' bitterness at not getting the OfS job

Agree with titchy and user. The university trade unions have been kicking off for years about VCs getting massive pay hikes whilst we are told we have to be grateful for 1% a year, and more and more people are given insecure and hourly paid contracts. Nobody, in government or out, took a blind bit of notice of us.
Opposing tuition fees has suddenly become politically popular, and it's easier to argue that universities could be run much more cheaply than it is to accept that abolishing tuition fees is incredibly expensive and will have to be paid for. Equally, it's harder for universities to argue that Brexit is going to be massively damaging to usfinancially (as well as in other ways) we're being accused of being overpaid and lazy.

"No it wont make the slightest bit of difference to mortgage applications. It's highly unlikely your dc will pay off the whole of their loan. Whether they owe £50k or £55k for example if they only ever pay of say £29k it's irrelevant."

Actually, AldiAisleOfCrap, you are wrong. While, student tuition debt will not pull on a credit report, the debt will be factored in for the affordability test when applying for a mortgage as ultimately, our children will have less disposable income spare - read Martin Lewis full report on the impact of student tuition fees.

Any while I'm about it, while the government has seen fit to freeze the threshold at which students start to pay back their tuition debt at 21k (and it won't rise again til 2020), the government is fine with the universities raising the tuition fees year on year as from this year.

If the argument is that the rise in costs of over 9k approaching 10k/year is needed to fund universities then a better way of funding universities in England is needed otherwise it will cripple our children unlike those in Wales, NI and Scotland.

"University VCs would get double or triple their salaries as CEOs in industry or business. They aren't actually overpaid when you take into account that they are CEOs of organisations with thousands of employees."

Since when did we start comparing universities with businesses?Educational institutions should not be looking to profit from burdening students with debt - and they wonder why applications were down this year, and no it wasn't all down to Brexit!

They're not profiting from fees at all Not actually allowed to have profits as it happens. The fees have replaced government funding. Which dropped off the cliff in 2012. Incidentally the few high cost subjects that still get government funding (medicine for example) haven't had their unit of resource changed in ten years!

Applications were down from EU applicants 100% due to Brexit. The drop in home applications (quite small as it goes) is due to declining numbers of 18 year olds.

Universities don't - and shouldn't -- profit from students. But they should provide a top class service, because that's what students deserve, and in some areas of university activity, principles of service providing businesses are a decent starting point. (Things like registration and administration, the management of timetabling and assessment, careers advice and support, to cite those which are of direct relevance to most students). You need competent, experienced and expert people - and for that you need to pay, because as a sector we need to compete with high paid private sector roles for the best people.
For the record, I do think that VCs are overpaid comparative to the rest of their staff because the success of an institution depends on all of us, not just a few senior management. But across the board if you don't pay people decent salaries and don't give them good working conditions, you don't get a professional level of service because the best people, academics and administrators, leave and go elsewhere.

As I said, the way funding for English students has been set up is unfair - no wonder students voted for Corbyn when they thought there was a chance the fees issue would be dealt with.

Student fees are a major issue hence why it was a huge talking point during the election. I wonder how we all would feel if we now had to pay for our university education that was once free!

I think the level of student debt could be eased if universities did some degree courses over 2 years instead of 3. My DS went to our local Uni to save him having too much student debt and I was astonished at how little contact/lectures etc he had each week. It amounted to only a few hours. Doing degrees over 2 years is, I understand, happening at some universities but I think it could be rolled out more widely.

While, student tuition debt will not pull on a credit report, the debt will be factored in for the affordability test when applying for a mortgage

Yes but it's irrelevant how much your dc owes they still pay back the same amount of money each month. Thus the interest amount is meaningless for mortgage affordability.

It's not the debt that's factored in it's the monthly repayment amount.

OP, I understand your point tuition fees are a huge issue but at the moment universities do not have a cap on student numbers. If tuition fees were paid for by tax payers they would have to go back to putting a number cap on and a lot of students would be unable to then go to university. I think this has happened to a certain extent in Scotland.

I do agree that they can't keep rising though.

When I said debt, I meant the monthly payment students are re-paying which will increase as their incomes increase and will impact their level of affordability. Together with the housing crisis in this country and this, the whole situation is unfair on young people in England just setting out in life. As I said, how would you have like it if you had graduated with 50k plus in debt...

I didn't graduate with £50K debt, but, when I graduated, everybody was paying FAR more in tax. We lost 30% of gross income before it hit our bank accounts. Tax was FAR higher, and personal allowance was tiny. Now, no-one pays tax on the first £11K (ish) and then tax is only 22%. If you are fortunate to get a well paid job because you have a degree, then only those people pay the extra tax with the current system, which does seem a lot fairer to me.