How strikes are affecting students

[Pigsnkids]

Young people are selecting their 2018 university choices now but may not be aware of the impact the current lecturers strike is having on the amount of tuition students are receiving, how access to facilities are restricted and how exams are being disrupted. My elder daughter, an undergraduate, received only one in three of her lectures last term, and my friend's daughter turned up to find her exams had been cancelled and would be reinstated at short notice. While the NUS is asking the students to support the lecturers, many young people are losing valuable tuition which they have paid for. Most of us have felt uneasy at the vast debts they are incurring, which it is estimated will take 30 years to pay off, and now we find they are not receiving what they have paid for and don't seem to have any consumer protection or recompense. The contracts they have signed deem the universities not liable for strike action yet negotiations have been going on for over a year. Whatever your thoughts on the pension issue - ask potential universities what they intend to do to resolve the situation and how they will ensure your child gets the education they are paying for. This is such a shame for our young people starting out on their careers. Alternatively, suggest a gap year.

Although the universities decide how much to charge though don't they?

Errrr no - fees are capped by the Government. If we could decide we'd be charging a lot more than £9250!

Look at the fees charged to international students if you want to know the real price of your kids' university education.

Comparison with fees of US public universities is more appropriate.

Penn State. QS ranking around 100. (About 10 UK universities are in the top 100.) QS ranking is a measure of quality of academics. In state tuition $18k per year/out of state $34k per year.

NYU. QS ranking around 40. (About 5 UK universities are higher.) Tuition around $40k per year.

It is true that you can get some QS top 100 state universities for around $10-15k, in state fees, but out of state fees are higher. It is never clear to me whether the instate or out of state fees are the best comparator - probably somewhere in the middle.

The management at many top UK universities would welcome a move more towards the US system - to create an "Ivy League" hierarchy of the top 10-15 UK universities, with higher fees, competing directly against the US, bidding for academic superstars in the global market.

Interesting that reading weeks are often cited when looking at hours students receive/ don’t receive. Reading weeks are what they say on the tin - not holidays. Students still have access to libraries and other uni facilities. One problem is the leap from A levels to independent study and the different levels of motivation/ ability of students to work on their own.

universities' senior management will have to be more careful than with UK students and consider a PR exercise to compensate for lost teaching time.

Well, the whole point of expanding professional staff while freezing academic staff numbers/academic salaries was that more professional staff were apparently needed for supporting students, widening participation, etc.

This strike has illustrated what a lie it is that extra professional staff were hired to support students: it is clearly the frontline academic staff who in practice deal with most of the students' issues, who make sure that they know about exam arrangements, apply for internships and jobs, give them help for pastoral issues etc. In the weeks when academic staff were striking students were receiving little to no information or support from professional staff - because in reality the professional staff don't do the roles we were told they would do; academics still have to do these on top of all their other work.

the American system where rich parents buy the best degrees for their children and poor families are denied equality of access because they can't afford it?
Hedda - I thought top American universities had large bursary funds thanks to generous alumni donations so that they have a needs blind admissions?
Please correct me if I'm wrong as I don't know much about the university system either here or US.

User - The university I work for (one affected by the strikes) that is definitely not the case. Support staff are the main contact points for all student issues, and academic staff point them in that direction for anything relating to exams, pastoral issues etc.

The main reason support staff didn't communicate more with students during the strikes is because of the poor direction and conflicting information from senior management regarding the information we could relay!

The main reason support staff didn't communicate more with students during the strikes is because of the poor direction and conflicting information from senior management regarding the information we could relay!

Yes, I know this was also the case. The strikes have highlighted how little senior management actually "manage".

I also know that the roles done by support staff vary quite a bit by university. Nonetheless, I would guess that most academics here feel that they are (still) doing at least part of the work that was meant to have been passed to non-academic staff.

In most universities many of the support staff are also in the USS so in some they were also on strike depending on the union that they belong to . At mine for example the library was only open on reduced hours

@titchy

When I said they could charge what they wanted I meant that they could charge less than the highest amount.

Why do they all charge the maximum? They are not all offering the same quality of degree are they?

I'm not arguing about independent study - what I am saying is that universities should provide whatever they promised when they were asking students to enrol with them. I don't care if it's 1 hour or 40 hours a week but be transparent. Tell students what they will get, how much it will cost and then provide it.

Don't tell them one thing and then do another.

And surely the whole point is that you are studying under the direction of academics? If you are advocating students are entirely independent then what is the point of teaching staff? Reading weeks are great to develop ideas and subjects introduced during term time surely?

Why do they all charge the maximum? They are not all offering the same quality of degree are they?

A difference in quality doesn't always equate to a difference in costs.

How do they arrive at the fee then?

In this thread posters have described how Harvard, MIT etc charge more than other universities. Presumably that means the more prestigious universities can charge more?

If the government removed the fee cap would an ex poly be charging as much as Oxbridge?

I find this whole situation bizarre. Students are enticed into a university based on a promised level of service. Once there that provision dwindles and yet they shouldn't complain because they should consider it a privilege to be there in the first place.

What are the fees for? If I buy a plane ticket and then the pilots go on strike I don't just accept the loss of my money do I? The airline doesn't tell its passengers that they should think themselves lucky to have been able to go on a plane. The airline compensates the passenger, either by re arranging the flight or refunding the ticket and then they suffer the loss. Why is the same not happening? The students have paid to attend 14 day's worth of lectures/seminars. They didn't happen. Why is there not at least a refund for these lost days and why is no one considering the implications for students of this missed time?

Sweetie, if you look at LSE taught Masters you will see that the home fees charged for, effectively 10 month, programmes vary between £10,000 and £34,000.

Stand alone Masters fees are not capped, so it presumably fees are set at a level where they can cover costs, help cross-subsidise UIG programmes, and still attract good staff and students.

Even for the more expensive courses it is still probably cheaper to study at the LSE than at a similarly ranked US University.

Why do they all charge the maximum?

Because that's the amount of government funding that was withdrawn.

If the government removed the fee cap would an ex poly be charging as much as Oxbridge?

No of course not! But it wouldn't be the ex-poly reducing its fees; it would be Oxbridge, Imperial, Durham etc doubling or trebling their fees. As I said - check the international fees - they represent the true cost.

To give a bit more information about costs of colleges in US
(rather than cherry picking fees to say how much more UK universities could charge) the first link is the average 'across different sectors from the college board site.
trends.collegeboard.org/college-pricing/figures-tables/average-published-undergraduate-charges-sector-2017-18

However as Dapplegrey pointed out the published or 'sticker' fees do not represent what students are actually paying because of grants, including from top private colleges.

Below link gives more information for that
www.usnews.com/best-colleges/rankings/national-universities/best-value
There is no way that the average UK universities run as 'businesses' as user suggested could provide that level of financial aid. They would also have to transform themselves to provide the same sort of teaching package and facilities that these top private colleges provide.

For those above quoting non EU international undergraduate fees at UK universities as 'real' costs that is a bit disingenuous

New College of Humanites in London as a recently set up university is an interesting comparator for the cost of a liberal arts / humanities degree with Oxbridge style teaching (some one to one tutorials) but without the Oxbridge brand. They charge ~£14,000 fees to non EU students.

(rather than cherry picking fees to say how much more UK universities could charge)

Comparing universities with similar QS rankings is a fair benchmark, given the previous comment about UK academics not being comparable to academics at top US academics.

There is no way that the average UK universities run as 'businesses' as user suggested could provide that level of financial aid. They would also have to transform themselves to provide the same sort of teaching package and facilities that these top private colleges provide.

But this is precisely the point - and relates to the strikes.

UK higher education is in an unstable equilibrium at the moment, poised midway between the business model in the US and the publicly funded models of Europe.

The management of the top UK universities wants to move further towards the US model: less money spent on academic staff, less staff on permanent contracts, more money spent on facilities to attract students, more money spent on packages to attract students (including possible fee subsidies). They want to be able to take out big bonds (look at what Oxford did...) to fund their plans, and they want to change the staff pensions to improve their bottom lines and get better rates for bonds. It is not an accident that Oxbridge colleges were one of the biggest supporters of lower risk for the USS pension fund.

Parents should be opposed to these changes, because if we move to the US system higher education is going to become more expensive and less accessible.

Right now, people complain that you don't get the same value for 9k from all universities. But you also don't have to pay 9k - you pay back according to your income, so if your degree doesn't lead to a well paid job you actually pay back much less. If we move further towards the US system, the very top UK universities will form a super league and charge much more (*). They would almost certainly have to introduce more "student aid", underwriting student loans for poorer students, but loans directly from universities would not be on the same terms as current student loans - they would have to be paid back in full, regardless of future income.

(*) It is pointless to fight about whether much more will be 12k, 15k or 20k and how much places like UCL, Warwick, Durham etc could get away with charging. The point is that it would be more, and that students would have to pay more back because it would be done via loans rather than graduate tax.

New College of Humanites in London as a recently set up university is an interesting comparator for the cost of a liberal arts / humanities degree with Oxbridge style teaching (some one to one tutorials) but without the Oxbridge brand. They charge ~£14,000 fees to non EU students.

It isn't, though, because (i) their model is not scalable and (ii) they (by definition) do not have the same reputation of the long established private colleges in the US.

User (if you are the same as previous user)
I am losing what the thread of your argument is now.

However to clear up a minor point New College of Humanities was not meant as a comparator to US colleges. The fees provides (arguably) a more accurate estimate of the cost of a humanities degree in the UK with more small group teaching but without an Oxbridge research track record.

My point is simply (following from your first post which used Harvard as a model)
that a standard UK university cannot simply claim the right to charge full US IvyLeague fees without upping their teaching service and facilities and providing the means tested aid plus having the research brand that is equivalent to the Ivy Leagues and equivalent.

Actually I think user....18 has explained very well the driver behind this strike something that has been missed by many. The main proponents of moving the scheme to defined contribution are the more prestigious universities. Defined contribution schemes are ‘ off balance sheet’ because it is no longer the employer that bears the cost of the payable benefits. At the moment the universities have a massive liability sitting on their balance e sheet which stops then bejng able to gear up in the way that many US universities can.

YellowPrimula the reasons (and rights and wrongs) for the strike are a different point.

The financial reasons for why standard UK universities cannot compete 'or gear up' to top private US universities is not solely due to deficit in pensions.

I feel very nervous now that some universities, their academics and courses are excellent but the majority are not

That's just not true. The UK has an excellent HE system, although successive governments are trying to destroy it.

I am not against the lecturers receiving a better financial package

The strike was NOT about a "better" financial package.

Pension schemes are salary foregone: they are funded by the employee and her employer, and are part of the total "financial package."

The UUK proposal was to cut pensions ie to maintain the level of income foregone now, but CUT income in the future. For which we have already paid.

It was an outright salary cut, not a "better" salary etc.

Just to be clear about that.

Our higher education sector is now the most expensive in the world

Where on earth do you get this nonfact? Ask any American about the level of tuition fees here in the UK, and they'll laugh! Indeed, I have US students because even paying the non-EU fee in the UK is cheaper than the equivalent tuition fee for the equivalent degree in the USA.

But I teach at the top department for my discipline in the country.

Students are enticed into a university based on a promised level of service

and What are the fees for?

Students are not "enticed" - presumably they make a reasonably rational decision that they wish to take up the opportunity of studying for an advanced qualification.

Tuition fees partially replace public funding that attached to each full time equivalent (FTE) undergraduate. Although the level of fee doesn't quite. I teach in what was deemed, in the days of publicly-funded universities , a "partial laboratory" discipline, which meant we got the standard rate plus a percentage, to cover our need to teach intensively in some areas of the degree programme. That has not been replaced.

The extra costs are mostly covered by academic staff working 10-20 hours unpaid overtime most weeks during the teaching terms.

A University education is NOT a "service." It is an educational opportunity to study for an advanced qualification. It is the opportunity. NOT the qualification itself.

If you don't like the situation, use your vote to change it.

students are enticed into a university based on a promised level of service
If they are then they really shouldn't be there.