Fee-free (Scotland) or higher ranking (England)

[Pantsnomore]

DS currently has a mix of conditional and unconditional offers for Economics in England and Scotland. He is currently leaning to Bath over an easier offer which is tuition fee-free from Glasgow.

It is obviously his decision but I’d like to make sure that he’s aware of all the considerations. This is where we are at so far:

Bath (3 years)
Pros
Better ranked
Employment prospects
Prefers the aesthetics & thinks it’s more his vibe (rugby & pubs over clubs)

Cons
Fees
Distance from home / associated costs
His age (he will leave school at 17 and so I think would be bonkers to go this year - not yet sure if Bath would accept a deferred place
Terms of the condition are aspirational

Glasgow (4 years)
Pros
Fees
4 Years
Flexibility if he decides he doesn’t like Econ at Uni
Easy to achieve offer

Cons
Sees it as less prestigious
Too close to home
Thinks it’s more of a clubbing based social scene.

Are we missing anything? Is he mad to consider either a gap year for econ, or to go to England at 17? Anyone know anything about econ at Glasgow and/ or whether there is a more sports / pub based scene there.

Glasgow 100%

I am an academic working for a U.K.-based university. From this point of view, I must share that English departments being very dependent on student intake face enormous pressures which affect teaching/research quality. This is even more serious for social and political sciences and humanities. There is nothing like the experience of studying at a free university where without a market logic limiting and trivialising learning as a free-standing value.

Yes! Three years is too short a period.

Completely agree. Glasgow had a better reputation than Bath locally and globally.

Agree with pp about housing prices in Bath. no idea what Glasgow is like but I would imagine that rents in Bath are eye-wateringly expensive compared to Glasgow, so just another consideration. I would also say that Glasgow is a FAR more ‘fun’ and cosmopolitan city than Bath. But each to their own.

Dd1 has found herself at a uni which is closer to home than her first choice however it’s been an absolute blessing having her relatively nearby. She can pop home for reading weeks and the odd weekend so easily. The city she’s in provides everything she wants and she’s made it her own - geographically its proximity has made no difference as it’s a ‘new’ city to her and she’s made loads of new friends. Don’t underestimate the inconvenience (and expense) of long distances!

@HermioneLou Someone pays for the university! Scottish students are paid for by the taxpayer. They are not some ivory tower of learning superior to everywhere else. Glasgow is not that highly ranked but is, of course, a very good university. There are big problems at Edinburgh where Scottish students find it difficult to access courses. They need international and fee paying students. No uni is not a business. They all need fee income and Scottish unis are no different.

Re the fees, bear in mind that some of that would be offset by an extra year earning due to being a shorter course.

No. The longer Scottish course is completely free. Your argument only works for an English student comparing an English and Scottish degree.

Are the pubs in Bath really worth £30k? He can always move there when he graduates if he's that keen on the scene there!

This is an absolute no brainer. Bath and Glasgow are equally good universities, but Glasgow will have much more going on (Bath also great - I've had student nights there so I'm not knocking it). Save the money and stay in Scotland.

Universities are not businesses. Universities, even in England with few exceptions, are public non-profit making institutions. Fees do not change this. Fees simply allow for self-administration and are arguably not the best way of governance. Kids end up with debt, uni departments depend on student intake, leading to historical departments closing down like Philosophy at Kent. This impacts society as a whole and the country's global reputation. What universities need is state and societal support, yes obviously through the taxpayer. Our kids deserve a better system. The Scottish (and most Europeans) one is certainly better than the English, to my view.

@HermioneLou I think you will find most commentators and nearly everyone else thinks they are businesses. When the uni sector greatly expanded in the 90s they became businesses. The state could not afford the expansion without fees. Vastly more people go to university and they changed beyond recognition. So loans are given to enable this education to be available to 40% of young people. In 1970, around 8% went to university. Loans are underwritten by the state. Us. Universities are multi billion pound businesses and the taxpayer makes a massive input via loans. To date, 50% of them are not paid off so the input is bigger than intended.

If Kent doesn’t attract students for its courses, so be it. Ditto any other uni. I’m in the camp that the sector should shrink to enhance quality. To enable this to happen, apprenticeships should be greatly increased with day release at a college. Many unis were set up to support employment so going back to this and losing Philosophy at Kent is no big deal.

For tuition fees you’re of course right, but there are 4 years of SAAS (student loans) plus what ever contributions parents can make.

As kids in Scotland only get 13 years of school education (7 in primary and 6 in secondary), I think a 4 year degree helps balance the education books.

Sure. That poster to whom I was replying referred specifically to fees though.

I did a 4 year degree even though it was in England (modern languages). I agree that it would have felt too short otherwise.

Actually I was referring to the fact that they would join the workforce a year earlier, so could potentially be earning for an extra year in their life. Eg a teacher earning over. 30 years vs one earning over 31 years - you would expect that 31st year to be one of the highest income that the teacher would bring in.

But one year of graduate earning isn’t equivalent to 3 years of fees?

I’ve been thinking about this side of things quite a lot as my dc didn’t get on the vocation course she wanted, so is having to an associated course folllowed by a 2 year conversion, bringing her uni education to 6 years, whereas if she’d wanted to go further from home she could probably have done the course in England over 3 years, and had 3 years earning which would have more than offset the fees.

Which is why I said “some of that would be offset”

And their final salary may well be equivalent

Thank you. I am aware of this as I work at university sector for 15 year and have worked in another two European countries. You are absolutely right and this is a great point but there is one thing that is not true.

Universities are not businesses. This is the law unless registered as private institutions (these are very few). A business is a profit making body. Universities are not. This is the law and this is according to the universities' (with very few exceptions) constitutions. They rely on loans, issued by banks rather than the taxpayer or directly the student. They do not make profit though and staff are significantly underpaid compared to staff at European universities. It is crucial they are not seen as business as market logic doesn't fit in education.

Losing philosophy and humanities at historical places (and not those that create degrees just to attract students) has a serious societal impact beyond the point of degree production.

The options are not only what was happening in the U.K. before the reform and after. There are other national systems to borrow governance principles from that seem to gain ground.

@HermioneLou Lsst post! Let’s agree on a business model then! So not a legal business. They can certainly make a loss like a business! Courses are not needed so they fold. I’m not entirely happy about a collapse in humanities but DC struggle to see the point of some of them and employers aren’t fussed either. Earnings talk and many humanities subjects lurk at the foot of earnings tables. Dc find MFLs hard but some subjects are just going out of favour. Probably wrongly.

If DC went to Bath and got a highly paying job in London, the fee issue pretty much disappears. So career preference might matter.

Yes true. I think our views are not mutually exclusive. Something needs to change it seems..

Re repayment, it is 9% of (marginal) income over the £27 660 pa threshold- SAAS loans are Plan 4.

https://www.gov.uk/repaying-your-student-loan/what-you-pay

Thanks. I’ve been looking for an actual monthly example. That is super helpful.

But English kids get 13 years in school too? 6 years in primary and 7 in secondary.

The Scottish 4 year degree has always offered more breadth and flexibility than the 3 year degrees offered in the rest of the UK.

I know some Scottish students leave at the end of S5 after Highers (so effectively have 12 years in school education), but in my DC’s year everyone did extra Highers and AHs and went to uni after S6.

No, English kids get 7 years in primary- Reception plus years 1 to 6 inclusive.