Really shocked at myself for thinking this (tuition fees)

[Concordia]

I don't really want my kids to be paying back debt their whole lives.
I want them to be able to buy a home of their own.
If they want to do a longer course or a course at a more prestigiuous uni i don't want them to go for a less good option because they are scared of debt. i want them to achieve the best they are capable.
was at myself when i found myself wondering if we would inherit any money in the next 15 years which would enable them to avoid this.
feeling
it's rough that teachers and social workers will end up paying so much more for their degrees than investment bankers who can pay off quickly.
this government really doesn't give a sh*t about those in the £18, 000 to £35, 000 bracket. after all we must be pretty feckless to be that poor and our education isnt' important at all now, is it.

True MrManager. It doesn't mean that we should expect it either.

I personally don't have a problem with contributing towards vocational degrees. I do have a problem forking out for 'madonna studies' - we're not talking about history of art either; or similar degrees that don't help you get a job at the end.

i don't think that the idea of having a first class degree will get you a good job because it shows you work well is good enough anymore. it has to be a RELEVANT degree too.

i also don't think that all professions need to have a degree. nursing didn't used to be a degree course. why is it now?

'teachers and social workers will end up paying so much more for their degrees than investment bankers who can pay off quickly. '

I don't think this is right, is it? I thought you would be penalised if you paid off early? Not that I think that's very fair, either.

I think it's hard to prove whether a degree is always going to get you a job. My English degree from a very good and competitive university showed employers I was able to think independently and analyse complex texts. Is that good enough?

firstly if you choose a degree that will open up highly paid job prospects why should you be penalized for that? it's your CHOICE.

likewise if you choose a degree that will open up poorly paid job prospects that's your CHOICE.

that teachers / nurses etc. are poorly paid is a travesty is a different debate. we all know the reality when we choose our career path and remuneration should be considered.

secondly, i think it increasingly not the case that because you have a brilliant degree in english from a top university you can get a good job. it's increasingly competitive out there and that may have been the case in the past but i don't think it's the case any more.

it's not inconceivable that an employer may get two applications for a job: one brilliant degree in english and one brilliant degree in a relevant topic. which candidate would you choose?

So because that person chose to go to university, Mr, the taxpayer should foot the bill for all who make that decision? Shall we then force them to sign a binding contract saying they must all work for teh NHS and never leave the country since our tax monies paid for their training?

Strangely enough, in countries where people have to pay for or contribute to their university education, it hasn't stopped people in their tracks from becoming doctors or social workers or teachers.

Life seems to march on.

Cuts have to be made.

Everyone (except, it appears, pensioners) have to take a hit.

The party's over because no one can pay the bill anymore.

That's life.

Agreeing with everything expat says.

So are you happy to take a cut in your benefits, expat?

To help out, y'know.

What benefits would those be, granted?

I realise fully that I'll never see a penny I've (or Dh has) paid into NI in our old age.

We believe there will be no pension for us.

' one brilliant degree in english and one brilliant degree in a relevant topic. which candidate would you choose?'

If you were applying, say, to do journalism on a graduate scheme at the BBC, you'd have more chance with a brilliant degree in English or History from Durham or Oxbridge than with a brilliant Media Relations degree from a lesser university.

My nephew with a degree in Japanese from Oxford walked straight into a job in the civil service (not a foreign office job, and one not requiring his language skills).

My nephew with a design degree from a new university is still working on freelance contracts with small earnings and no benefits, aged 28. On paper, he has a 'relevant' degree.

'We believe there will be no pension for us.'

Sadly, I believe you may be right, expat. But that's OK; we'll be working until the day of our funerals, anyway.

I think what I'm starting to believe is that, if you want to study arts or humanities, you need to do it at one of probably a dozen or 15 highly-regarded universities. Save your money if you don't get into one of these.

Why should a degree have to be about job prospects? Shouldn't we let young people pursue study of an area that interests them?

because it's fucking expensive mrmanager, that's why.

i'm not prepared to fund someone's degree in 18th century french poetry so that they can go and work in macdonalds and not put back into the system what they took out. they're welcome to do it, but they can pay for the luxury themselves.

Graduates are a 'better class of people', to put it patronisingly, because they mixed with people of all backgrounds for 3 of the most formative years of their lives. The degree or course is a sideshow, the real benefit is the skills and the impact on your personality.

No, that doesn't mean that you have to go to university to be a nice person, or that university cures people of being arseholes, but it helps.

I'd love to live in a nation where the McDonalds till girl has a degree in French poetry, and the shelf-stacker has a degree in Geography, as long as they were interested in it, and found it worthwhile.

Where do you draw the line on how much education is 'worthwhile' to pay for? A-Levels? You don't really need anything you learn there, it's just learning basic skills for university - why should we pay for that? GCSEs? Apart from Maths, what will you actually need? Who will need basic literature criticism? Why do I have to pay for that?

spending £30000 or so on someone's french 18th cent lit course so they can stack shelves you think is worthwhile is it?

and do you think they'll feel fulfilled because at least they've done their degree, doesn't matter that they'll earn min wage for rest of their life.

i can find much better uses for that money.

Frankly if someone was studying that degree, Warthog, it would suggest to me that they were very intelligent and would be doing far more than a noddy job.

That's another point about some of these degrees: they are all about analysis and high level use of skills. So if you are very good at french 18th century literature you are bright. You have a trained mind. You will be very good at any kind of job requiring analysis and observation. You would be able to work for government, teach. You'd obviously be good at the language side, too.

I wouldn't mind paying someone to study this at a very good university. I'd be paying for them to THINK. Very important.

mrmanger - i agree that there is now an argument to make people pay for 'a' levels. when i was at school we were led to believe that the main objective of these was to prepare people for uni. having a broad education (ie GCSE level) is obviously important for everyone but to specialise in 3 subjects if you are not going to uni? I can't see that this benefits the country - just the person doing it - ie same arguements apply as uni ones

The country needs a cadre of people who are good at thinking and analysis. It doesn't matter if it's Latin or French or History or English: if they're studied at a high level, in a rigorous environment, these subjects teach you these skills in a way that vocational degrees don't necessarily do. If you have a strong humanities degree from a very good university you will be able to read things such as the chancellor's budget statement and pick it apart. Or your local council's proposals to build a new road and see if the arguments stack up. You will be using high-level analytical skills.

Thirty years ago people who went to study History, say, at Durham and got a good degree were recognised as being bright, trained, minds. They were snapped up and there was no talk of them being non-beneficial to the country. This debate seems, incidentally, to have been ignited at the time people stopped talking about 'university' and it became 'uni'.

abr1de, it's not enough to be able to THINK - competition is too high. gone are the days when that attitude is enough.

if you have a job available and two candidates, one with french lit and one with a relevant degree, both first class degrees you're more likely to choose the one who already knows the field.

apart from all this, i still fail to see why the tax payer should foot all the burden. the student should contribute SOMETHING or they don't take it as seriously. they should invest in their own future.

i worked through uni. no contribution from the government at all. why do people in the uk think differently?

we expect our healthcare, education, pension etc. to be provided, just like very expensive, unaffordable children. when are we going to grow up and start providing these things for ourselves? time to take responsibility.

warthog - i don't totally disagree with students paying something towards their degrees - in fact many have been doing this for some time - 3k tuition fees and living costs. What i do disagree with is the increase of 6k a year to 9k which will leave children around 50k in debt when they leave uni. if you also take into account lost earnings thats around 85+k.

yes i know this country has to do something to improve its finances - but this is an awful lot of financial burden for students - and who else is taking on this sort of pain in our country at the moment to solve the economic problems?

Most people are able to THINK and do high-level analysis without ever stepping foot in a university as a student.

I've seen illiterate people playing dominoes and chess who can out-think and analyse people with degrees.

Education doesn't just include university. Many are enriched just as much by other experiences, such as travel.

Shall we pay for that, too?

If you let it be, all of life is an enriching education.

I don't get what you are saying about a degree being "relevant". Unless you are training to be a doctor or a lawyer perhaps, no degree is on-the-job-training. You will find that a person with an economics degree and a person with a media degree would often have done a lot of the same courses.

I work in investment banking which is mentioned here as a highly paid profession. When I recruit for my team which is highly specialised, I look for graduated from good universities, but I am just as likely to recruit someone with a degree in history as economics or maths which might sound more "relevant". The fact is no degree is really "relevant" and I have to train them anyway if I take on a graduate. I just need to know that they can be trained and that they can fit into the team. MrManager is so right in his post from last night that graduates are just a better "class of people". It does sound patronising, but that is how employers think.

Most of the people in my team are not English. I already find that people from Eastern European or Asian countries are more highly educated that British and they now fill many jobs in the City. I find it suprising that a lot of British people and the media don't see this coming....

Expat, of course you don't have to go to university to play chess. A degree is still a very good filter if you are recruiting. I don't play chess with the people I interview and with all the candidates available I don't have the time. Most of the time I find I can pretty accurately pick out the person who has been to university and the person who has not. Its normally fairly obvious.It might be patronising to say so, but I think its just as patronising to say degrees are worthless and you might as well travel the world. I cannot quite beleive this is said by someone who have been to university.

'but I think its just as patronising to say degrees are worthless and you might as well travel the world. I cannot quite beleive this is said by someone who have been to university.'

And I don't believe it was said at all.

Because it wasn't. At least not by me.