Martin Lewis changing tack on HE finance considerations

[shuggarushed]

Until recently, ML consistently encouraged all young people considering uni to not worry about finance on the grounds that if they didn't get a highly paid job then they would never have to pay back the debt/tax (he prefers to call it a tax). While true, that was an unaffordable reality for the taxpayer. Inevitably, the system was changed in 2023 and graduates of the new scheme are much more likely to pay back their debt/tax. Cue lots of discussion here on Mnet and elsewhere about whether the high cost of a degree is worth it and, now, ML is starting to weave this narrative into his journalism. Given his influence (i.e. most UK students and parents are familiar with his narratives on student finance), it'll be interesting to see what impact it has and how it evolves over coming years. For now, he's collecting stories, and treading carefully as it's obviously an emotive subject.

Example: His most recent podcast covers it in the last 10 minutes from about 1h:02m in the recording: https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/p0m92f0w

I think university degrees should be for those who truly need them, otherwise they feel like massive scam schemes. And if university is the only option, make an effort to minimize costs as much as possible.

The so-called "university social experiences"—like drinking, taking drugs, partying, making questionable choices, dealing with stressful situations caused by disrespectful people, and feeling pressured into things you don’t want to do because of friends—along with all the other negatives of living far from home under the pretense of maturing and learning not to make poor decisions, just don’t seem financially sensible. It feels more like something for those who have money to spare.

Does it not widen the mind though?

Indeed. I am not against an university education and there are many worthwhile courses which will be value for money.

But the move away from recommending uni for all is important. So many courses, in fact whole universities are a waste of time.

@FightingInAVatOfJellyBabies In what world was university recommended for all? We are around 37% of 18 year olds going. It’s partly a problem of huge university expansion that’s not matched by graduate work. Firms pretend work is of a graduate level of course, but lots of it would have been done by school leavers 40 years ago with on the job training and day release to college. Now the part time study has mostly gone and too few apprenticeships exist to make a dent in undergrad numbers who are full time.

Studying at university was never wall to wall lectures. Self study, reading and research were always a major part for many arts and humanities subjects. Contact time was never 2 days a week years ago! Only for stem. If wasn’t replicating school with talk and chalk.

University never has been recommended for all and it never will be.

And what is considered a ‘worthwhile’ course is always up for debate and very much depends on what your view is on the purpose of higher education and education more broadly.

My DD’s doing Maths. She’s in ‘wall to wall’ lecture every day except Wednesday.

@ArseInTheCoOpWindow My mistake. I meant for stem it would be more than 2 days a week. DH did engineering and they did every day too. Humanities needs a lot more reading and self study though.

I actually still have my university timetable for lent term in my second year at Uni (so this was 1993). It's stuck inside an old diary. This was for law at a university which is ranked top 10. I had 2 hours of lectures each day apart from Thursday when I had three hours and then three seminars a week. So about 14 hours contact time. On top of that there was an awful lot of reading/prep.

One of my DCs is at the same university studying the same subject. He has on average about 11 hours of contact time a week depending on how his seminars fall (and an awful lot of reading and prep). It isn't significantly different.

The biggest difference is there were no tuition fees and I received a full grant which covered my rent so it cost me/my parents very little. Student loans were a thing though. They were introduced in 1990. DH had one.

@HasaDiga My DHs parents had to pay towards his maintenance but didn’t always cough up. Dad was a toolmaker and mum a part time accounts assistant. I cannot remember how grants and awards were calculated now but possibly owning their house didn’t help. The problem is numbers of students now and the vast increase in degree courses. Once the university sector expanded post 1992, there was no chance that the low paid farm worker would be taxed more highly to pay for your education. Those who got the salary uplift were made responsible.

There doesn't seem to have been a significant change in contact hours since the 90s. I did a humanities degree at Leicester between 1994 and 1997 and had 12 hours in year 1, reducing to 8 in year 3. My ds has just started a similar subject at an RG and has 14 hours this year. Bear in mind that most sixth forms provide 5 contact hours per subject per week, so this is almost exactly the same. Sixth forms make it clear that for every hour's lesson, they should be putting in an hour's personal study. The same principle applies at university level (although the personal study required is probably higher).