Want your children to be able to go to uni?

[GreatAuntLoretta]

I am really feeling the urge to join the NUS protest against tuition fees on Thursday 9th December. Although my children are both under five, I am really really upset and annoyed to think that if they want to go to university in the future we will be very unlikely to be able to afford to send them. Who knows what the fees will be by then?! Also when my children are a little older I would really like to have the opportunity to retrain and do a degree. That would be completely off the cards. (angry)

Is anyone else with young children thinking of attending? It would be good to stick together with some other parents. A large group of parents will probably be a lot safer than a random woman with a buggy and a toddler in a mass crowd.

Who is with me?

Is there already a family protest group out there?

Not sure what you mean by my children getting it free. My DS, who is already at university, has taken out a loan for fees. We do not consider loans to be free, but something that needs to be paid back. Given that he is doing a lucrative degree, that is not a worry for him.

jackstarbright - you confuse equality of outcome with equality of opportunity.

We currently have (approximate) equality of opportunity ie everyone has the same opportunity to apply and go to university - it is not dependent on parental wealth or social class. (And yes, I realise it is not perfect, but at least parental wealth need not be the primary deciding factor, as would be the case once the new fees were introduced.)

We do not have equality of outcome ie not everyone who applies gets in, as not everyone has equal ability or works equally hard - but surely even the most ardent left-winger, let alone right-winger, would not claim that meritocracy is inherently wrong?

Surely you cannot be arguing that selection based on ability is wrong?

The fee changes would remove equality of opportunity - how well our children do when/if they go to university, obviously, is down to them.

Thing is the amount borrowed will exceed the proposed 27K for tution fees as this does not come close to the amount a student would need to live at uni (which back in the loden days was what I used my student loan for.

There will be debts above and beyond this.

GAL you are not the only one concerned about your KS1 child I too am concerned have 3 dd's and can not see how they would cope with the implications of such debt.

I am a nurse did my degree but would have struggled for many many years to pay back a debt this size, and for those who say you wouldn't have to pay it back until you earn x amount what about the interest acruing? I'm not sure what rate is proposed (6%??)

I would never have been able to clear my debt and therefore not have been able to buy my own property...

This proposal does unfairly penalise those who wish to enter careers where a degree is required and prospects of high salaries are limited or in the distant future of career progression.

(Oh and as a side issue we are saddling English students with this debt but Scottish and Welsh students will incurr nothing of the sort (Scotaland nothing/ wales remain capped at current rate)

oh AND UNIVERSITY STUDENTS FROM OVERSEAS WILL PAY A LOWER RATE THAN ENGLISH STUDENTS... That surely is a fucked up system!!!!

amerryscot - you conveniently forgot to answer my point about bursaries...

The reason that people are concerned for their small children, as I am with mine (although they're not that small)is that it tends to be the case that once hard-won rights have gone they are difficult to get back. No-one wants their children to start their working life with massive debts - and education benefits society as a whole not just the person who undertakes it.

There are already bursaries.

But stop that mentality and work out a way to either provide for your children, or have them do courses that will pay back.]

The only worries are when you want to do a mickey mouse degreet that you can't afford to fund yourself.

granted - but in reality our education is extremely socially polarised.

A school leaver is dependant on their A'levels grades to get into University. Do you think all pupils have the same quality of education? Where a child goes to school is very dependant on their parents income.

The best schools offer 3 sciences at GCSE, choice of foreign language and even Latin. Whilst the most deprived schools often don't have qualified science teachers and may only a few language teachers.

According to Sutton Trust research (based on the current fee level) if a school leaver from a poor home gets reasonable A-levels - then they are very likely to go on to University. It's the fact that too small a percentage get as far as their A levels which is the biggest barrier.

So, no I'm not confusing 'equality of opportunity' with 'equality of outcome'.

merryscot what a shortsighted view- you're proposing students should only do a degree that will result in a career with a real prospect of wealth.

How do you propose to do to educate the teachers, social workers, nurses, physiotherapists, OT's of the future as I'm sure that wages in these professions wouldn't meet your demanding requirements. When would it be a problem for you ... when you need to access these services and they're are either too few qualified staff to meet the need or the service falls woefully short due to the lack of education, in those brought in on the cheap to do the job.

As for 'providing for' a university education for my children that is EXACTLY what I am so upset about my parents strauggled to help me through uni, but there is now way I will be able to do the same for my DC's.

loads of typo's sorry it's been a long day...

Who knows they may even start charging for school education one day. There'll probably be a basic voucher for an academy and if you want extra or better than a basic education, you'll probably have to top it up with another loan.

jackstarbright, I agree that it is harder for kids from worse schools to get into university, and I agree that situation neds to be rectified.

What I don't get is why you think that making students pay more for their education is going to make it fairer or easier for poor students; it's just going to add another, insurmountable barrier to those already there.

Surely it is better to look at how to improve schools, and how to ensure that no-one is disadvantaged by their background?

Well said, Doris,I'm a teacher, and whilst I'm not very well paid, I regard my work as socially useful.

By your reckoning, that was irresponsible, and I had a moral duty to earn as much as possible.

Extending this logic, are you happy for your kids to be taught only by the dregs, the ones too stupid to get a proper job earning a 'good' wage?

Sorry - 'your' referred to amerryscot, not Doris!

Sorry for having a point of view, Doris.

But I am very convicted to the notion that you should only study for something that will pay back, if you are expecting public funds. You will have a very hard time convincing me otherwise.

I am a teacher, but worked for many years in industry beforehand. I think this is a win-win, from both the funding point of view and experience.

However, it would be pretty easy for government to waive the fees or pay off loans of future public employees.

"What I don't get is why you think that making students pay more for their education is going to make it fairer or easier for poor students"

granted I never said that. I'm just pointing out that those who tend to gain from a University are, in the main, middle and upperclass kids.

And getting more students from poorer homes into University is about so much more than the fees.

So presumably, amerryscot, all studies that don't lead to an immediate high salary are wrong. So no-one should study the arts at all - sod culture, if you can't turn it into instant cash, then it has no value.

You come across as someone who knows the price of everything and the value of nothing.

Or maybe I'm being unfair?

Agree with your first part, jackstarbright, but don't really understand "getting more students from poorer homes into University is about so much more than the fees."

Certainly, there's more than money to it, but that doesn't change the fact that money is one of the factors, I'd argue the biggest factor, the sine qua non, for poor students.

If they can't afford it, they're not even going to bother trying to get the grades needed, and if they do get them, it will be irrelevant.

Granted-I throughly agree.

Ameryscot- you don't need to apologise for your point of view just admit it is wrong

I agree that degreees that will benefit the public sector could have fees waived without too much difficulty, (I would support this). However THE GOVERNMENT ARE NOT PROPOSING TO DO THIS!!!

However degrees in the arts or humanities, will not have the same earning power and therefore under your reasoning would disappear.

These degrees need not disappear, but they could be recognised as a luxury, and let the buyer beware.

Under the current system, the degrees that are disappearing and the ones that would pay back quite easily (eg Physics-based degrees).

And there is a big gulf between traditional arts and humanities degrees and the mickey mouse ones that have popped up in the last 10 - 15 years.

How are bright children of low income families supposed to get on in life?

As a concerned mum of 2 teenagers, I am going to join the protest in London on Thurs Dec 9th - 12pm, ULU, Malet Street (near Euston) and would urge others to come to

also i think it will stop dead these nonsense courses, people will think twice when choosing to do these silly courses and choose something more contrastive like law, or medicine.

if a student wants to do "media studies then they must pay i quite happy to help with young people who want to do things that benefit the country but i will be dammed if i will pay for some crusty wanting to study art let them pay for it and when they complete their non degree and cannot get a job then it will be a lesson to their parents and younger children that should have guided their youngster to make a better choice

BTW my bil has completed a art degree before anyone starts can he get a job no because not many jobs out their that require an art degree and now he is doing what on the dole,

we are currently trying to get him to take up the PGE so he can become an art teacher an actually get a job but to be honest i very much doubt if he new he would be saddled with 9k of debut he would of chosen art and just went into law

Hertsmum,

If these poor children possess both intelligence and common sense, they will choose a lucrative course and see it as an investment in their future.

granted -

No doubt the increase in fees will be a disincentive to attending university for some poorer school leavers. But this should help. Poorer Students get Tuition Feed Paid For up to 2 Years.

Just to say that I send a pic of ds holding a "I'm a baby not a cash cow" poster in solidarity to the UCL students and got a nice message back: "Thank you so much for the lovely pictures. Still requesting and collecting pictures from parents so we can send a true message of solidarity! Email pics to [email protected]"

love this one here Did any of us mumsnetters send it? So cute!

They are proposing discerimination against not in favour of the rich. the poor child whose parents might even help him financially will pay less or very little in 1 or 2 of the years. The rich child whose parents pay not a penny will have to take out loans for the full sum. They are proposing to visit the sins of the parent on the child as it were in a very discriminatory way never mnid the race discrimination. If you're Welsh or Scottish you pay nothing but as ever England subsidises all that and if you're English you pay.