Unis request to raise fees to insane levels

[FlakeSnow]

Fees for 2023 and 2024 are agreed to be £9250. Article below appears to be calling for increase in fees to circa £24k ie on par with overseas students.

Do anyone think this is a remote chance this will happen? My initial reaction is one of horror. (Not read beyond the paywall).

Times uni fees article

Funny how most other European countries manage to do it isn’t it!
my DN is doing his degree in the Netherlands ( European passport) and is paying a third of the cost he would be paying here!

That doesn't mean it costs less to run their degrees, it just means their HE system is funded differently.

Yea you're probably right - for some odd reason quite a lot of people think that a salary of £90k is plenty to run a half billion pound global enterprise. In fact their cousin Dave could probably do a better job with his experience of running a building company. 🤷‍♀️

This made me chuckle. It's so true.

Funny how most other European countries manage to do it isn’t it!

my DN is doing his degree in the Netherlands ( European passport) and is paying a third of the cost he would be paying here!

Dutch taxpayers are paying for his degree.

Yes, indeed it is! Funded differently, and much more importantly, more efficiently!

Here’s the thing in case you don’t t understand. He is a European citizen, (duel, as am I) so Dutch taxpayers will pay for his degree, French taxpayers will pay for Spanish students or danish students, and the traffic flows the other way.

That’s the beauty of being in the EU.
The fact that idiots in this country voted to deliberately exclude themselves from that is nothing short of tragic!!

Unusually, DH and I read the Times yesterday and saw the linked article. It is highly disingenuous.

There does need to be some fee rise and/or further reliance on overseas fees, because human and physical front line resources are suffering badly. In another year it is likely to be at least 10% worse because of inflation, predicted to peak around 13-14% in Jan before declining.

But this is partly the fault of uni mismanagement. What is the first thing my place did after fees were imposed? Invested in lots of shiny buildings and extra layers of management. Meanwhile I myself would not have considered living in any of the few halls I’ve seen, the Counselling Service is not fit for purpose, academic departments are vulnerable, there is a move to hiring downgraded staff, etc. All this at a high level Russell Group Uni featuring regularly on the Higher Ed board, and typical of the sector.

Yes, indeed it is! Funded differently, and much more importantly, more efficiently!

I don't understand how you can assert more efficiently unless you know how much funding the Dutch Gov gives his uni? UK He is not inefficient - that really is not the problem with it at all. Perhaps read the thread to see what the issues are?

That’s the beauty of being in the EU.
The fact that idiots in this country voted to deliberately exclude themselves from that is nothing short of tragic!!

Entirely agree with that!

To PPs who have asked about comparisons with the Continental HE sector:

Except for attendance at elite national universities, it is often the norm for students to live at home. The elite unis often offer their own (brutal) entrance exams and these are sometimes (eg in France) the sole basis for deciding admission.

Otherwise admissions standards can be pretty relaxed in some countries. But mostly there is very little in the way of pastoral or even tutorial support. Attrition after Year 1 can easily be 50%.

It is much more economical to run a university this way. But is this what we want?

@Tiamariaa Referring to people as idiots is exactly why the Brexiters won. Instead of banging on about Brexit, get over it and move on.

If the remainers had presented all this at the time then maybe there would have been a different result but it is what it is. We need to rethink the ways or more importantly the government need to work with universities to sort out funding, which is beneficial for students and tax payers.

Only, without derailing the thread - anyone who knew about Europe DID present all this at the time. Port delays, labour issues, university issues, shortage of goods…. and were told it was Project Fear. Now we are told to Get Over It.

While I would not call those who believed Brexiteer politicians as idiots - they were misinformed, and the media and opposition did very little to hold those spreading misinformation to account - I think it is entirely reasonable to point out that some issues are of our own creation through the choices we have nade.

They did though. Unfortunately it was on the back of Michael Gove saying we don't need experts, project fear and general global unrest - which saw the rise of the far right in European Parliaments and beyond and is why Trump got in. Social media suddenly giving the disenfranchised a platform and belief that their conspiracy theory was right. Bigly bad...

If the remainers had presented all this at the time then maybe there would have been a different result but it is what it is.

The remainers did present all this at the time. Their voices were drowned out by the overwhelmingly leave-supporting media. People chose to believe the word of right-wing media (nearly all media outlets are right-wing), predominantly owned by tax-avoiders (Viscount Rothermere, Frederick Barclay, Rupert Murdoch) with a large financial interest in undermining regulation and public services.

Whenever you hear the phrase "project fear" or the word "scaremongering", the person saying it wants you not to know something. And if they want you not to know it, there will definitely be a reason why you absolutely need to know it. There are people on here still saying reports of 80% increases in gas & electricity bills are "scaremongering", and there are still people who believe them.

It seems that some normally reasonable posters have pushed the buttons of other normally reasonable posters by decrying what they deem to be unfair eg high uni pay and costs, graduate income tax viewed as debt, a binary leave/remain position.

Most unis especially the ones of good standing do not rip off students, they have been keeping the wolf from the gate for literally decades and creatively so from necessity, and the graduate tax is effectively paying for future students well after you were funded by other tax payers, all at competitive rates. Unless you can extend your mortgage, nobody can get much better unsecured loan terms, and you'd have to repay commercial loans at these higher interest rates even if you're not earning. The nuts and bolts of how we engage with our European neighbours has always been the real issue rather than whether we have membership (even if that manipulative sound bite served to deliver an extreme 80 seat majority), and we will always have opportunities to improve the terms of our engagement.

May I ask why spelling out the real cost of a course would be so dreadful? It does not mean students are suddenly more "indebted" in the current system which is a future income tax deduction; it would show them exactly how much the taxpayer is paying for them. If and when they pay income tax, they will be aware of their own contribution to the country's future. That way we avoid pretending we're being charged for something that was free when it was never free and is not free anywhere in the world. At least in the UK we do not pretend to allow anyone onto courses only to eject them a year later because they cannot manage. Nor are we a net exporter of students on courses that have limits due to their heavy taxpayer funding requirements. I am agnostic about doctors etc migrating systematically because even in the 70s when income tax was up to 98% (a stupidly extremist policy that gifted the country to Thatcher) and easily worth avoiding, people still managed to stay in the UK for up to 182 days a year. People do migrate, but for relatively well qualified UK workers it won't be just for a little more pay.

Even today there are hundreds of courses in clearing. So some uni courses are less desirable than others. Will those be cheaper? Will the unis charge dif fees like say private schools?

Will uk students then want to study online or overseas?

raising fees is not an easy solution.

When uni fees were originally mooted, I recall that there was meant to be some element of the free market - some courses would market themselves as cheap-but-fine, others would hold themselves to be elite and charge the maximum allowed.

In the event, the university sector very largely hung together as a bloc and all charged the same, and that has remained the same as the maximum allowed has gradually increased.

Yes - I wonder if that will hold though

the unis will want to be full so i imagine all sorts of deals and special offers going on

Clearing I believe has evolved from a largely excess supply list to a tool used to ensure entry standards for some quite desirable courses. While it's an excess supply list for some, this does not mean a Clearing course is low standard, it's like all shopping where there can be exceptional "bargains" to be found especially where entry requirements are robust and the uni is sound.

Different courses use different resources, so why not be explicit? Hiring a self-drive car is different from buying a private jet, why should they cost the same? Unis have come a long way from when fees were first introduced, perhaps a more nuanced and longer lasting approach would serve everyone better?

Even today there are hundreds of courses in clearing. So some uni courses are less desirable than others. Will those be cheaper? Will the unis charge dif fees like say private schools?

The university sector as whole rejected this as a concept.
Differential fees did not make a difference with regards student choice, lower fees were not more desirable - they were viewed as 'cheap' and low quality.
No course or university wants that reputation!

Clearing has definitely evolved. It's part of the mainstream university application process - lots of highly desirable courses with high entry requirements enter clearing every year now.

I guess we will see what happens

Would some kind of "grouping" of fee blocks be more workable. Eg lab based, paper and pencil based, various %s of industry placement based etc This would avoid individual unis being higher or lower charging, but acknowledge differing resource levels.

Would some kind of "grouping" of fee blocks be more workable. Eg lab based, paper and pencil based, various %s of industry placement based etc This would avoid individual unis being higher or lower charging, but acknowledge differing resource levels.

I see a couple of issues with this approach. Firstly, would that mean charging the 'true' cost for running a degree programme? That would see some courses charging significantly more than the current fee level. Secondly, what impact would this have on widening access and social mobility? Would students from lower socioeconomic backgrounds not choose the higher cost courses?
I would hate to see a system where student were forced to choose a degree course or career based on the cost of tuition. We already have issues with some groups of students not being able to afford to move away and we see lots of students disadvantaged in certain sectors due to unpaid placements and internships. This would make it worse I think.

It seems that we need to be explicit about current taxpayers paying for current students, who are future taxpayers paying for future students. The graduate income tax deduction is the same whether you choose a lower or higher resource course, so the "nominal" cost of the course is irrelevant to the future income tax deduction (as is the case now). This means regardless of your background and the course fees, your future income tax deduction is the same. It may result in people who have no strong course preference opting for more "expensive" courses as they would be "better value"!

So some uni courses are less desirable than others. Will those be cheaper?

Interesting question. There's no doubt that a degree from a very competitive course is likely to confer more benefits than another course at a lower ranking Uni.

Some degrees are probably not worth even the 9k per year!