Student fees

[gillymac]

Have just read on the BBC news site about certain universities wanting to charge students 'top up' fees over and above the current capped level of £1100 pa. This should, these universities believe, be paid either by students taking out bigger loans or by so-called better off parents saving for it. As a parent of three, all of whom will probably want to go onto higher education I'm pretty p**d off about this (although living in Scotland we currently don't have to pay student fees at Scottish universities up front) and just wondered if anyone else had any views on this.

isitbedtimeyet, I didn't think we were the 3rd richest country - on a per capita basis more like 16th?? I think we're one of the lowest in the EU. In fact, in the one of the richest countries in the world (the US) the fees are much higher. But the best US universities are also extremely rich and can afford to support the poorest students through grants.

Truth is, this country isn't that rich, and it already spends quite a bit on public services. The universities are terribly underfunded and i can't see why you'd want to be an academic these days on current salaries. But demands on public services will only increase over time as we all get older and the cost of supporting the elderly increases. So (genuine question here) if you had a choice though between more support for the poor, better primary education, better healthcare, more police, etc etc and more money for university students what would you choose???? If the issue is the poor, would people accept more targeted assistance so that the poor got more generous loans/grants and the middle-class got nothing (and faced fees of £10,000+ a year)? I actually think the last system has its problems but the current system may just be untenable if we want world-class universities on 2nd-class incomes.

I am probably over generalising here but there are an awful lot of 'joke' degrees (I speak frankly because I've got one!!) and I hate to think of parents scrimping & saving just to give their child 'a university education' because that's considered the best thing in life. I spent four (!) years doing very, very little academic work - most of the time was drinking, having sex and lazing around (& I'm such a prude these days!!). The maximum lectures/tutorials we had was about five hours a week - I easily combined a part-time job in a night club to supplement my full grant. Yes, I had a great time, but it certainly did not lead to a job or any better opportunities. I don't want to think I shall be subsidising my DS's sex life in the future! His child benefit goes into a pension & he can't get it till he's 60!

Before I get shouted at, I do accept that there are a lot of degrees, particularly medicine & law which do involve a lot of hard work, but, IMO, most of them don't.

When you see mature students going back to study in later life, you can see how much more they get out of a degree course that most 18 year olds.

re not being one of the richest countries in the EU - another quote from the meejah (Guardian Rise section) :

Not that most of those countries are in the EU I don't think but I wonder how they manage this? Higher taxes? Fewer students? Both? It would be interesting to find out.

OOh Janh aren't we mingey when you see statistics like that.Just got time for a quick comment re richest nation.We're in the G8 so we will be at least the 8th richest nation but I have it on good authority (basically from a right know it all )that we are indeed the 3rd.And can find no evidence during a search on google to back it up I'm afraid in case anyone is interested.

isitbedtimeyet, best comparison is on a per capita basis, not total GDP - yes we're in the G8 but that's partly history, partly because we have a lot of people! I had a look on the OECD site, and we were 18th in the OECD in 2000, ranked on per capita GDP (on a PPP basis, better on current exchange rate basis, but still nowhere near 3rd). This leaves out the Middle East, so we'd rank even lower if they were included. In the EU, only France, Spain, Portugal and Greece have lower per capita incomes (France almost equal).

Question is, should we give lots of money to middleclass kids (ie bulk of university population), or more to the poor? Being selfish (mmm, twice I've used that phrase on here tonight), I'd like university education to be free, because I'd like DS to go (a long long way in the future!) And you could argue that more university educated kids means society would be better off in the longer run. But so far, this govt has had a strong bias towards redistributing money to the bottom of the income distribution - more money on WFTC etc, paid for by higher NICs. Admittedly, the govt could do a better job of spending what it gets but interested in people's views on what trade-offs they'd want the govt to make.

Interesting question florenceuk. My immediate reaction is that I think provision of basic needs for the poor is more important than HE spending, I agree with you there. But I'm not sure what I think the trade offs should be. Will ponder and maybe come back on that one.

To all those advocating a graduate tax, think carefully... Its not just high earners that go to university - so do engineers, teachers, nurses, UNIVERSITY LECTURERS etc etc. Can they really afford more tax?? and why the hell should graduates be taxed even more. They are already paying income tax proportional to their earnings, society needs proffessionals to work properly. Its very short-sited to think they should be taxed for choosing a subject that needs a degree.

Just think, the wealthy plumber down the road pays nothing to send his child to uni, because the skint nurse down the road is paying for it!!!

Justify that!

So agree with Lindy. I was bored silly as a student because I had so little to do and spent far too much time drinking, lazing about and staying up all night. I could have covered my entire syllabus (English degree) in 18months - 2years easy, but had three. Reducing course length but making the studying more intensive would dramatically cut the costs and reduce the amount of debt students had. Mind you, I think A levels could be done in one year too, I did two of mine like that and got higher grades than the ones I spent two years slowly losing interest in.

Just like to make a point here. I was a student in 1996 until 1999. I paid my way entirely, my parents never gave me a penny (they simply couldn't afford to). I had to pay rent for my accommodation, often my textbooks were £15-£20 each, I had to eat and yes I had to socialise too. I ended up at a care home working some evenings and nights to pay for uni. Now I don't know what Uni some of you went to, but my degree was bloody hard work! I did English Lit and Law and I had about 3 assignments to do every week, as well a read one or two books in that week and work as well. I was exhausted most of the time! Now 3 years later I am still struggling to pay my student fees.

When I was at Uni I would envy those students whose parents visited them every week with food, and to take their washing away. I literally had to struggle alone, in a new town. It's the little things that add up, such as bus money, clothes, washing, and (in my case) bills. It's also a very lonely world if you don't socialise. Your student years are supposed to be the best in your life. Yes students should work to pay their way, but not to the point of exhaustion! Most of these kids have come straight from school, into college, into University and then after University they (hopefully) will go straight into a job. University is their last bid for independence and freedom. I don't mind paying out of my taxes for students to go to Uni, especially the ones who do not get help from their families. I think they should have means-tested grants. And after about £3000 a year, the grant should become a fee, payable like it is now, once they gain employment.

Here's my theory to how to fund it - all kids who want to go to university after A-Levels should take a compulsory year out, and spend that year doing some sort of community service - possibly related to their chosen degree/profession - e.g. would-be doctors could work in hospitals, would-be teachers could help out as classroom assistants. Then the money that is saved by them doing this work (and living at home) could pay the university fees. I also think there would be a lower drop-out rate, because they would be that more mature, and have worked for the privilege of going to university.

Musica - very good suggestion, I agree totally.

University of London. No parental cash whatsoever. worked at the Little Chef (NEVER eat there, especially the prawns...). Bored silly.

I like musica's idea too but you couldn't expect them to do it for nothing - they have to live!

I wonder if this is symptomatic of how university course have changed though. Rhubarb you studied fairly recently and I wonder if the idea that studies should be a kind of leisurely pursuit has gone.

I was student in the early-mid 80's but because of being a lazy cow (and probably thicker than I like to think) I flunked my A levels (more or less) and ended up doing an HND rather than a degree. However, HND's are supposed to be more vocational and work orientated and I noticed that I had a significantly heavier workload than most of the degree students. I wonder if many degree courses are following this trend, maybe?

I do think too many people are going to university who would be better off training in other more vocational ways. For example, a newspaper traineeship of a year is a million times more helpful to a would-be journalist than a dozen media studies degrees. The trouble with universal degrees (the Blair dream) is that they then become an entry-level qualification for everything so people who are gagging to get to work have to 'waste' three years studying something they could learn in a fraction of the time actually doing the job - but can't get a job to learn on because employers won't take anyone without a degree. If I had my time again, I wouldn't bother with university. I would have tried to get a traineeship somewhere and got into work sooner and had a three year head start over my contemporaries. I did more reading before and after university than I ever did while I was there - apart from useless Old English, which was a complete waste of my time. Am I really alone in thinking like this?

No you're not Aloha.I think we have a mania about degrees.(they certainly do here in Greece)Soon a degree will count for nothing and you will have to have a masters or PhD to qualify for many jobs.My job(physio.) had to entail some basic training but even so I only really started to "learn" when I started working.My husband has often said that he wishes he had just started working in a company and worked his way up learning on the job.We both feel that our kids may be better off learning a trade or learning "on the job"

For any one interested in the subject of costs I have to say the figures quoted yesterday by Janh and Florenceuk are a classic example of how statistics can be manipulated to say what you want and how one should always find out all facts before making a judgement!
The system in Greece is that university education is free.And the state produced text books are also provided free.(I imagine they do have to buy other text books too)So yes the 3% quoted for private expenditure on HE is probably correct.But incomes are low, accomodation costs astronomical(very few furnished flats so a lot of extra expense to buy furniture and appliances) and due to these 2 factors most students have to apply for a place at their local uni and live at home.So if you don't get a local place private expenditure is high for accomodation.
The biggest "hidden" expenditure here though is the fact that there are not many universities(and therefore places) so the entrance exams are EXTREMELY competitive with the consequence that most parents have crippling private tuition bills for at least the last 2 years of school.Standards in state schools aren't always great so if you don't "do" these lessons you are very unlikely to get the marks necessary for a place-however clever you are.My kids aren't at this stage yet but from what I hear from friends I think 300-500 GBP is about what you might expect to pay per month, depending on whether your child goes to tutorial classes or has private tuition at home.

Agree with you both. Minimum qualification for my job is now an MBA and a professional qualification yet when I started, you didn't even need a degree. Ashamed to say my University years were also like Aloha's and Lindy's. I rarely got up before midday and rarely saw the inside of a lecture hall.

Thanks, GRMUM - I was hoping you might be able to fill us in - there's always something they don't tell us! Now we need to hear from Austria, Finland and Switzerland how they organise things - anybody on mumsnet from there?

Obviously, I don't think University is a waste for everyone. This is a personal view based on my course, my career and the time I did it in. However, I don't think anything can replace hands on experience.

My uni life was similar to rhubarbs (graduated 94). I worked to fund it (too much), had too many lectures and too much work. It certainly wasn't the doss that those who read some subjects seem to describe and every second of the 3 years was needed. Science degrees must be different.

I was at uni in the 80's. Little continuas assessment, most of the big exams at the end of the three years. So easy to pootle along in years one and two - moving into top gear in the third year.

I get the impression that nowadays, continuous assessment and exams are spread throughout the three years of a uni course. If so, I'm sure that leads to a different mind set, making malingering more difficult.

I think musica's idea is a great one - the community service system is already established and used for those convicted of crime, so why not extend it to students? Those that buckle at the suggestion, why not give students a choice? say 300 hours of community service in your gap year in exchange for reduced fees?

My DS is currently studying Psychology and he is snowed under with work. But he is pretty competitive and wants to do beter than anyone else, so I guess he has lots of motivation. He says he'll be carrying out psychological testing on our 6yr old when we go home at Xmas - yikes!

Did anybody else see this in the Guardian Letters page today?

Will Straw gets all his best ideas from me y'know.