Tuition fees

[stoatsrevenge]

So we are to expect a massive increase in university tuition fees, as well as increasing interest ib student loans...

Here is the 6 year plan from the LibDem manifesto:

1
Scrap fees for final year full-time students

2
Begin regulating part-time fees

3
Part time fees become regulated and fee loans become available to part time students

4
Expand free tuition to all full-time students apart from first year undergraduates

5
Expand free tuition to all part-time students apart from first year undergraduates

6
Scrap tuition fees for all first degree students

How are they going to square this one?

I just worry it is becoming a luxury.

we had hoped that by saving hard for years our children wouldn't come out of uni with vast debts - what a way to start your working life! i don't know what to say to them whether to encourage them to go to uni or just not bother. how will they ever get a mortgage/start a family. we have all really screwed up for them. OAPs will not get much sympathy from me - leaving this nightmare for their granchildren.

"the poor are taking part in this mortgage debt. But on the whole, they're not, and they are still entitled to want their kids to go to university."

But those whose parents have an income of under £25K are entitled to maintenance grants, and (under Browne's proposals) those earning under £21K won't have to repay anything. So there is provision for the poor for maintenance grants that are if anything more generous than in the past (people whose parents earned the national average wage sure as hell weren't getting full grants in the 1980s) and there is provision so that if you worry about what happens to the debt if you don't get a good job at the end of the process, you don't need to worry.

Ah dreaming that is a whole other point too. Obviously there will be whole other tranches of indebtedness down the line of life to which this must be added. So much money and will it even be enough I wonder?

Manchester, Liverpool, Leeds and Sheffield have all increased their grade requirements this year, so we shall see what happens. On the one hand the recession is probably attracting people to courses that result in an NHS career because that has been unaffected so far, but once the axe starts to fall and the debt is to be increased it'll be interesting to see what happens to the grade requirements.
I know a local dentist who got in with 2 CC's purely because there was a shortage at the time. Less applicants could result in requirements dropping instead of standards rising as universities struggle to fill places.

Oh Vince Cable - Why have you agreed with this?

Yes, right again Tokyo!!!

Actually, it is the middle income earners who will be hit the most in that their children will have to take out a loan which they may be uncomfortable with.

Not the rich,who find university fees far cheaper than the private school fees they have been shelling out for and who will prob pay the fees upfront (OR get the loan and put in an account to get the interest on it etc etc, although thankfully now there's not much interest to be gained, but I know several parents who have done this just to 'play the system' and you wonder how the rich get richer!!!).

So anyone who is concerned that the fee hike will hit the poor harder needn't worry. The only thing that will affect them is the worrying about getting into debt, which isn't really a worry.

'How many EU students are there in the typical UK university?' Well, if I were to split hairs, then loads as all UK students are EU students too. There will be several, as I understand that the Germans and the Dutch like to study in the UK.

I got around the mature student rule in the 80s (which was actually 24, not 25) by getting married. The rules changed after I was 21, and so for the last 2 years of my degree the grant was assessed on dh, not my Dad. As dh was junior to my Dad, I got more money.

I had a loan at the turn of this century for my PGCE. It was paid back according to salary levels, and it was a PITA, as when the level at which one started repaying rose, my payment dropped and they wouldn't keep the payment at the previous level; I would have had to sort out a standing order. Given that I had to shout to get them to start taking the loan (sloped shoulders between student loan company and HMRC) and to stop taking money and refund me when it finished (same sloped shoulders), I foresee an admin nightmare.

I can't see the Govt lending the sort of money outlined in the Browne report without some sort of parental guarantee, and whilst say £21k in fees is less than a good boarding school will cost for a year, for many it is still out of reach.

But there were 100000 or so more applicants than places this year, so I'm not sure about standards dropping because places may become harder to fill. The Browne report also recommended removing the numbers cap as well as the fees cap so I suspect we will see - if it becomes policy - a rapidly changing field.

Here's my interested amateur's prediction:

Oxbridge will charge the maximum they can get away with, and will suck up the levy, because their endowments and research fundings will provide a safety net.

The Russell Group university will charge just over or at the 7k threshold, depending on their own financial position.

The medium ranking universities (inc my own, though it's low down the table ) will be fools not to raise their fees a bit- but they won't raise them too much because they will want to catch the good students who can't afford get in to a RG university.

And the post-92 universities will charge at - or less than the current rate: they will now be able to, because lifting the numbers cap means they can revert to what saved them before: a 'bums-on-seats' policy.

And some universities will - inevitably - go to the wall or merge.

But why won't a poor student be able to afford a RG university????

I think the medium ranking universities are more likely to attract the rich but thick students actually.

Wilfshelf, in my highly rated department, Professors get half the sum you quoted. I think I'll move.

I was quoting rates including on costs, and over-estimating because they always seem to negotiate their salaries personally at prof level. But yes, actual gross salaries are half of that figure here too...

"The medium ranking universities (inc my own, though it's low down the table ) will be fools not to raise their fees a bit"

They'll have to do more than that, given the HEFCE block grant will be going away.

"And the post-92 universities will charge at - or less than the current rate: they will now be able to, because lifting the numbers cap means they can revert to what saved them before: a 'bums-on-seats' policy."

That's assuming there's a pool of yet more people willing to pay £25K (fees and living expenses) to get a degree from a post-92 university. What evidence is there that there are any more willing punters?

I've had a quick read of the report and it is basically just increasing the costs of tuition fees to at least double the current level. On top of that it is giving a similar grant as now and a maintenance loan.

So all in all very bad news.

It is still allowing unis to give bursaries to students from low income families but has taken away the requirement to do so. Again very bad news.

Will just have to wait and see what individual uni's are going to charge and how much they are going to give in bursaries. Havent a clue who DD will apply to now and still not sure whether the current yr 12's will be affected.

Repayments will start at earnings over £21,000 so they seem quite minimul looking at the tables illustrated.

Can anyone tell me how they means test these things at present. Is it reviewed each year or once it has been awarded is that it for the full 3 yrs (Or 4 in our case, even worse).

Also from what I can gather they will all have to raise their fees because the government is targetting them in their spending review. So the funding will be treated as a loan to the unis and a debtor on the balance sheet with no way of knowing how much of that debt will be paid back or when. Strange accounting indeed.

"It is still allowing unis to give bursaries to students from low income families but has taken away the requirement to do so."

The main source of funding for low income families is government grants, not university bursaries. That's unlikely to change.

I do still think we just need to change our mindset, for some reason people are obsessed with buying houses. I would far rather get into debt to pay for an education which will enable me to support my family for life, broaden my horizons, bring meaning to my life and enable me to do social good than allow me to purchase bricks and mortar which will never be a real home but an investment decision.

The housing market has become an evil in society, much of what is wrong is linked to the inflated cost of housing. At least if people are busy paying off student debt they may not be pushing property prices even higher and creating further problems for society.

dreamingofsun too true! I am just about to leave the forces and was considering studying law. I will not now, because even with veteran's grants etc I will be paying (literally as I'm in my 40s and already have enough bills)the debt off until I die or am too old to work! My DD - who's five, will probably give up on the idea in her teens when she discovers how much debt she'l be saddled with (maybe £100000 or more by the time she's a grad)and that sort of aspiration strangling makes me mad !!!!!!!
I don't even begin to know where to start on a govt that seems intent on stamping on women from every angle - child benefit - married tax breaks - injunctions against violent men , VAT and all the other things they LIED about to get elected!

OK --- rant over, but isnt't it ironic how none of them will have paid a penny in tuition fees themselves, and can afford to subsidise their kids?

And no - Mr Cammeron - you and the fragrant Sam are not "middle class" - those of us who are (and work bloody hard earning £30000) are sick of being patronised.(sorry, maybe rant for a diferent thread?)( I dont rant that much , honest)

Where has anyone mentioned 100K? This is a debt that would be paid off over a lifetime. Why is a 25 year debt to buy bricks and mortar acceptable or even desirable but a debt to buy an education is horrific.

"At least if people are busy paying off student debt they may not be pushing property prices even higher and creating further problems for society."

True but a hell of a lot of people are banking on their property to be their pension - is it wrong to snigger ?

vaspasian my DD is five and it looks as though fees could go up in the next couple of years to 10k a year or more. Now factor that in for when she's twenty, add living costs and other essentials, and -hey presto-a sum of 100k seems not beyond immagining! But hey - I've only got one A level - in economics (betting this is the one A level neither Cable or Osborne have) so what would I know?

Put simply , the "opportunity cost" of higher education has now just become too steep for possibly millions of potential doctors , teachers, lawyers (that'l be me then) nurses etc ---- esp if they also ( how bourjoir and parochial of them)harbour ideas of a roof over their heads!

( can anyone else hear E Bevin spinning in his grave or is it just me)

Thunderchild - do you not get a gratuity and pension when you leave the Forces? I know dh will.

scaryteacher I am only a JNCO, so it will not be much more than I currently pay in childcare, nor will my gratuity be large.(contrary to what the Murdoch press would have people beleive, pensions like mine will not have people like me "set up for life")

So although my salary may be similar to yours, like yours its calculated as a sum based on an avarage salary for rank over time served. As an avarage military career (given that most of us in the forces are a bit frayed by 40)is 20 - 22yrs, as oppposed to a teaching career of maybe as much as 40yrs ( both my parents were teachers) my eventual pension will be less.

Now-I was considering training to be a teacher myself (if not the law), but on top of already having bills to pay (as do we all) a potential debt of 30K (at least)would cripple me as I'm already 40. And, due to paperwork going "missing" in the 90s, it turns out I may well not be entitled to the learning credits which could have solved the fee problem (ask DH - I bet he knows plenty like me)

I didnt get the chance at uni when I was a teenager, but thats not why I'm spitting tacks - I'm angry for our children!

" But hey - I've only got one A level - in economics (betting this is the one A level neither Cable or Osborne have) so what would I know? "

Vince Cable has a PhD in Economics from Glasgow, which he followed by being a lecturer at the LSE. So you lose your bet.

The report is here hereview.independent.gov.uk/hereview/report/

I couldn't find what I was looking for which was more precise details but I think they just haven't worked them out and of course this is just his report - no reason it will be exactly as in here when it's all worked out by next year.

If the fees are £7k, say, that is double what they are now, just about. But I suppose we don't know the levels yet. Still less than full time day school (about £10k) but add on rent if the child lives at the university and is a bit more.