Some universities will go bust thread 2

[GinForBreakfast]

Continuing as thread 1 has filled up.

I’m supposed to be working right now.

But I had a quick skim. Is the idea that the more money students make when they graduate, the higher interest rate they will pay? And no one is allowed to pay off early?

yikes

Compare to the HEPI one - everyone pays at least £10 a week, wiped after 20 years, employers pay an extra 1% NI. Funds a £2k increase in funding per student, and maintenance grants.

https://www.hepi.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/Undergraduate-fees-revisited.pdf

It's out there, but worth a debate.

I haven't read the Hepi one but on the headlines it seems quite complicated and "tinkering at the edges".

I suspect the issue with Beds might be too many local students stay local and don’t get great jobs. It’s near the bottom of other tables too.

I do know how much everything costs. As we’ve seen, many unis do have cheaper accommodation and the possibility of bursaries. You often find it’s parents who are supposed to contribute who don’t and these dc add worse off. Most students can work in the summer but I accept some will find that difficult.

We need as many students as possible to make the highest salaries they can. Our economic growth depends on it. Interesting stats on Radio 5 this morning - a business grad from Bournemouth makes more than an English grad from Oxford. I’m all for English but we don’t need 100 unis offering it. The whole uni sector won’t accept they need to cull what’s offered and now want employers to pay. So says a former civil servant who has never employed anyone!

The unintended consequences are obvious. He thinks all employers are PWC and hugely successful city solicitors. I’ve got news! Most grads don’t work for major employers. Lots of smaller employers take a grad or two but, in truth, don’t really need them. They already might pay the apprentice levy. Many won’t pay up even more so jobs will go for grads. School leavers will become more attractive. Or salaries will stall. This is a hopeless suggestion. Plus what about education and the NHS?? Oh yes! We pay out even more as tax payers. It’s not a great idea.

Also the employer levy penalizes those employers who need grads. Many service industry’s don’t and pay less. This would be even less in future. It’s also making the false assumption employers can afford it. Many simply cannot. What would a local theatre do for example? Or a small start up?

It's far from tinkering around the edges - it's proper left (right...) field stuff. Fiscally neutral which may make it (or aspects) appealing to the Treasury.

Offsetting against the ridiculous apprenticeship levy would work though....

And he does acknowledge that demand for grads might decrease - which I thought you were all for tizer?

Front page of the Times today.

Tuition fees to rise - but grants return too

with a slightly cryptic by-line

Labour wants annual cap up 13.5% to £10500

all written as very definitive, whereas in reality it isn’t.

Sorry no link however general gist from the paper copy - all just relating to England of course.

• undergrad fees to potentially rise over the next five years to reach £10,500 at the end of that five year period
• potential reintroduction of maintenance grant element
• Labour looking to make announcement before April 2025
• ”Live” discussions, but nothing agreed by HMT.

There’s then a bit about the UUK Blueprint for the Future due out next week. a bit about international students and overall fee income with this combining both undergrad and postgrad. So the curbing of international student numbers is about as vague as it gets, especially since % wise there is a wide distribution of international student numbers across universities and very significant differences at some between their undergrad and postgrad %s. Not that anyone would discern that from the article.

includes a random BP quote that “we will deliver improvements on the system by the end of the parliament….,,it’s highly complex”

usual RG hype thrown in, although York’s reported deficit seems a lower figure than I thought I had seen elsewhere.

three institutions on the brink of bankruptcy…….still

serious talk about mergers…..again. University of Newcastle-Durham 😀. That’s obviously not in the article

The article at least concludes with a bit of common sense from Paul Johnson. Or a simple statement of the obvious as someone more cynical might conclude.

The question I want answerèd is why does it cost more per head to educate an undergraduate student in the UK than almost any other country in the OECD. Why are we the third most expensive country out of the OECD countries? Why do we have more staff per head of student than almost any other country? And why are students receiving so little tuition at the same time?
Students in the UK are getting very expensive degrees already and they are about to pay even more for it if the government raises tuition fees.

I've been watching this thread although I don't have much to say! But that particular merger would be interesting as Newcastle was a college of Durham University until 1963!

It doesn't. Other countries support HE through general taxation, not through student fees. The "costs" are comparable, the funding sources are different.

😄 yes it was a rather tongue in cheek suggestion. I put Newcastle first as its financial position is somewhat better than its Wearside neighbour. I suppose such a merger could become the University of Tyne and Wear. A name that shouldn’t put noses out of joint too much at Northumbria or Sunderland unis.

@titchy Yes I do think the uni sector should rationalise its offering. I do think we need more apprenticeships. I do also understand unis find these difficult to set up so simplifying that should be possible and maybe employers could be less demanding? There is going to be even more resentment of fees if students just look at on line lecturers though and don’t see it as value for money. We do need to wake up to the fact that for lots of dc it’s not value for money. So it’s not fees that are really the issue, it’s too many grads for the jobs we have.

Yes, we, the taxpayer, provides the loans.£20 billion every year!

@GinForBreakfast
Internet search found that in 2020 the higher education spend per student was the third highest in out of OECD countries and that our spending as a percentage of GDP is higher than the OECD average.

OECD report "Expenditure per student at tertiary level in the United Kingdom is higher than at other levels of education, and it is the third highest among OECD countries."

The OECD says this is a problem that needs to be addressed.

Government report says, "Another structural difference between the UK and most other OECD countries lies in the diversity of higher education provider type. No country in the OECD has just one type of higher education provider. Each system has a range of providers offering courses of different lengths, with some specialising in particular subject areas and others offering different types and levels of qualifications."

UCU says it is "unacceptable that the student to staff ratio (SSR) in UK higher education is above the international average."

Guardian article "Currently the student-to-staff ratio in the UK is significantly lower than the OECD average. In 2020, the UK had an average of 13 students per member of teaching staff, compared to 21 in Italy, 19 in Belgium and 17 in France. There must be some scope for this to increase while protecting teaching quality and improving the student experience."

@Runemum I would have to look at the report. The quick search I looked at showed UK at the lower end of public spending on tertiary education.

With student/staff ratios, I wonder what the methodology was? Different countries have very different amounts of overlap between "teaching staff" and "research staff." In the UK it is very likely that an academic will do both in varying amounts (although there is increasingly more separation between the roles, which might be a good or a bad thing). I hope that this is factored into the data, but...

@Runemum I think I have found it although I'm trying to read small text on my phone. I think what the OECD report is showing is that individuals' spending on education in the UK is relatively high, while public sector funding is low. I don't think it says anything about total cost comparison.

Remember that different countries have different HE systems. For example, France has low entrance requirements for most universities and a high attrition rate after the first year. Something that would not be acceptable in the UK.

Perhaps this might be helpful

https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-9840/

Higher education around the world: Comparing international approaches and performance with the UK Published April 30th 2024

@boys3 thanks, really interesting. From page 22:

We lifted the cap on student numbers 10 years ago and have had funding issues ever since. It was a mistake to do this. We needed to strengthen the HE sector via a much more diverse course structure. So part time (part time degrees are declining) and day release and apprenticeships. Accept some vocations are not degree level but can be learnt in a different way. When looking at costs and value for money, we know we have some shortages in the labour force but pour money into courses we don’t need. I want a great selection of arts and humanities degrees, just fewer of them. Lots of employment following these degrees could have been done at 18.

For example, France has low entrance requirements for most universities and a high attrition rate after the first year. Something that would not be acceptable in the UK

True for many other countries too - young people don't tend to move away from home- they go to their local uni - also which means far less support systems needed.

Remember that different countries have different HE systems. For example, France has low entrance requirements for most universities and a high attrition rate after the first year. Something that would not be acceptable in the UK.

Indeed @GinForBreakfast From my knowledge of the French & German HE systems (working in them; family as students in them) many UK students and their parents would be outraged at the treatment of students, the SSR, the quality of individual teaching that most French & German university students get.

It's a VERY different system, and very much sink or swim. In the German system, there are a few requirements for entry eg. entry to medical schools generally needs a minimum Abi score of 1.0 and engineering in the best places for engineering requires around 1.5 to 2.0 (at the bottom end). And if you fail courses more than a fixed number of times, you're out. Seminars are minimum 50 students, and one to one tutorials are unicorns ...

Fees may be cheaper, but students might take up to 7 years for a Bachelor's degree. It's quite inefficient, and not great for German productivity.

An annual PISA survey from a few years ago put the wind up the Germans - it showed just how much familial support, income and parents who'd gone to university mapped onto success for pupils at Gymnasium. That is, class/income was a determining factor for educational success.

Indeed. And there's huge amounts spent by universities on student support, extracurricular, careers, placements etc. I wonder how much is spent on that by European universities?

The collapse of mental health services for young people has also put pressure on universities. I remember one call from the local police force warning my university that if students had a mental health crisis at the weekend which warranted police intervention the health trust would simply leave them in police cells until Monday morning because they were short staffed. Thank goodness that doesn't happen anymore.

I don’t see why young people who need a lot of support cannot stay nearer to home providing that uni is the right one for their educational needs. I don’t want any student to be aiming far below what they could achieve but staying safe is also a concern. Did unis have all these departments 50 years ago? Again going part time and working might be a lot better model for some young people.