Its worse than we thought: tuition fees to rise to £9,000

[Harry Guerrilla]

A few yes but not enough for a significant chunk of the population to do. I live in what was once a thriving industrial city where the last factory closed down a couple of years ago. There is really very little left and what there is doesn't have much a chance. Even if you take the industrial aspect out of it you still have to bear in mind that most of the money in the economy originated from the city of London's status as a financial center. Now that it has become clear that people lending money they didn't have to people who couldn't repay it was not a clever thing to base our economy on we are in need of something to actually DO.

That's certainly daunting, not really sure what can be done to fix it though. :?

But I guess regarding you,re latter point we,re going to have to talk examples.

You certainly have a point RE the scholarships etc. you have in America, my department has a grand total of five scholarships available for masters students.

I'm not trying to be a jerk, but merely stating what I've said about my country and college education.
To me it seems, that we are continuing to extend childhood using education, to give the illusion of full employment.

 

[William Rea]

The Liberal Democrats campaigned on a platform of "Scrapping university tuition fees during first degrees" (LD 2010 Manifesto Online).
The Conservatives campaigned on a platform of "We will promote fair access to universities, the professions, and good jobs for young people from all backgrounds." (Con 2010 Manifesto Online).
They are now involved in a coalition that is raising the current fees.

 

[Infinite Chaos]

Not a particularly high rate of pay; £22,000 a year and your expected to start paying back debts.

Firstly, you currently have to start paying back at £15,000 so raising it to £22,000 is pretty fair. I'd also add that a debt is a debt - the interest rate on paying back is currently 1.5%. A normal bank loan is currently around 8%.

And also the interest rate has increased so i'm not too sure what we are looking at here.

Currently increased from 0% to 1.5% - but still a whole lot less than 8%. One of the proposals is that the more you earn, the closer to real interest rates you pay - which I think is fair.

-- Its beside the point either way. Living costs for students alone are very expensive. To go on and ask students for additional money to go to University is a crime. These students will leave university inheriting large debts and its going to affect there ability to obtain loans - assuming they dont obtain any just to get by on day to day expenses.

However, on average a graduate will go on to earn £100,000 more than someone who doesn't go to university. It's fair they share some of the burden of their own education.

 

[William Rea]

Firstly, you currently have to start paying back at £15,000 so raising it to £22,000 is pretty fair. I'd also add that a debt is a debt - the interest rate on paying back is currently 1.5%. A normal bank loan is currently around 8%.

Currently increased from 0% to 1.5% - but still a whole lot less than 8%. One of the proposals is that the more you earn, the closer to real interest rates you pay - which I think is fair.

However, on average a graduate will go on to earn £100,000 more than someone who doesn't go to university. It's fair they share some of the burden of their own education.

In our current economic system how much more on average will that graduate contribute towards growth by being better trained and able to have ideas and innovate or inspire?

Our current education system has been reshaped by conservative forces that were driven by dogma. They despised the University system that they considered to be a breeding ground for leftist intellectuals and used our economic recession in the early 80s to turn the University system into a machine for industry. The vocation led Polytechnics were upgraded to create a market system that the existing Universities had to operate in and guess how they have to operate to compete in that pool?

To me, a University is a place for independent enquiry free from the pressure to add a value that can be placed on a balance sheet. Vocational training should not be a function of a University.

 

[kaya'08]

Firstly, you currently have to start paying back at £15,000 so raising it to £22,000 is pretty fair. I'd also add that a debt is a debt - the interest rate on paying back is currently 1.5%. A normal bank loan is currently around 8%.

But are we taking into account the likelihood of lower class students obtaining loans for living fee's? 1.6 million jobs will be lost in the coming decade and its going to leave many parents unemployed and unable to sustain their children. Benefits will not be enough. And most families have more than one child to send to university (or at least will do). It's going to add to their total financial burden. Also with the rising costs of living in the UK i still think a move from £15,000 to £22,000 will not make much difference.

However, on average a graduate will go on to earn £100,000 more than someone who doesn't go to university. It's fair they share some of the burden of their own education

.

Actually i think its unfair we pay all these taxes and the government withdraws its major financial life-line to universities while Trident costs billions annually.

 

[PeteEU]

That's totally false. What about these kids?



Also, read the book The Beautiful Tree by James Tooley.

So a few are lucky.. I am talking about everyone, not a few token lucky ones.

 

[Mensch]

So a few are lucky.. I am talking about everyone, not a few token lucky ones.

Who said anything about a FEW lucky ones?

READ the study. 70% of urban youth and 30% of rural youth attend some sort of private school in most of Ghana, despite the existance of a completely tuition-free public school system. People making a dollar a day are paying roughly $6-10 a month in order to send their child to a better school. Imagine that! Poor people educating and standing up for themselves!

 

[FederalRepublic]

And so what? The basis of comparison is not equal.

For the Denmark, the 49% tax rate, includes free education up to and including university level and free healthcare for all. It is especially the healthcare bit that is critical.

So to have any remotely accurate comparison to the "burden" of a citizen, then you have to add to the 28.2% tax rate of the US, the cost of a similar healthcare plan (with no deductibles, and no maximum) plus the cost of a similar education level. When you do that then I would wager that the average American has a higher burden than the average Dane, despite Danes paying more in taxes.

I spend about $5,000/year on health insurance (not subsidized by my employer) for a family of four. I borrowed $30,000 to get a degree in mechanical engineering, which I have 30 years @ around 3% interest to pay back. In order for you to win your wager, my salary would be around $21,000/year.

 

[PeteEU]

I spend about $5,000/year on health insurance (not subsidized by my employer) for a family of four.

What kind of coverage? Is there a limit? How about you having to pay the first X amount yourself?

I borrowed $30,000 to get a degree in mechanical engineering, which I have 30 years @ around 3% interest to pay back.

So you worked your way through college... congrats.

In order for you to win your wager, my salary would be around $21,000/year.

No because the medical coverage has to be the same... My wager is your 4k a year for your family has tons of strings attached, strings that my coverage in Denmark do not have. So to even be remotely comparable, you coverage has to match mine, and that cost would be considerably more than 4k a year for your family. As for your education, you dont mention how much your education cost. That you took out a loan over 30 years, means nothing, since your education did not cost 30k in total did it now?

 

[PeteEU]

Who said anything about a FEW lucky ones?

READ the study. 70% of urban youth and 30% of rural youth attend some sort of private school in most of Ghana, despite the existance of a completely tuition-free public school system. People making a dollar a day are paying roughly $6-10 a month in order to send their child to a better school. Imagine that! Poor people educating and standing up for themselves!

And what does Ghana have to do with the US?

 

[Infinite Chaos]

-- The vocation led Polytechnics were upgraded to create a market system that the existing Universities had to operate in and guess how they have to operate to compete in that pool?

My guess is that once higher fees come in, students will become so much more discerning about their classes. I also think at some point in the future the current vogue for getting students to "teach themselves" will mean fewer will go to University and instead do online or distance courses.

Animation is a good example, studios used to hire university grads but over the years there's been a greater number of self-trained animators (usually using online animation forums for critique and advice) who can wipe the floor clean with B.A. (hons) Animation students.

-- a University is a place for independent enquiry free from the pressure to add a value that can be placed on a balance sheet. Vocational training should not be a function of a University.

Completely agree - I'd prefer to see fewer Universities and more vocational centres of excellence. The trouble with a lot of vocational courses is that there's a greater expectation of university style "teaching yourself" as opposed to training.

But are we taking into account the likelihood of lower class students obtaining loans for living fee's?

Being from a poor background should mean it's easier to get a loan - not the other way around.

-- most families have more than one child to send to university (or at least will do). It's going to add to their total financial burden. Also with the rising costs of living in the UK i still think a move from £15,000 to £22,000 will not make much difference.

You only pay the loan back if your salary is over £15,000 currently - £22,000 in future. If a poor family sends 5 kids off to university they should all get loans. If they all get high paid jobs, they pay their loans back and if they don't get high paid jobs - they don't have to.

Same with a middle income family - if the graduates get high paid jobs, they pay their loans back. I don't see a problem. Of course it's not the same as full grants such as I had - but those days went long ago.

--Actually i think its unfair we pay all these taxes and the government withdraws its major financial life-line to universities while Trident costs billions annually.

The two don't equate - Trident is one thing and University is another.

What you also have to remember is that the vice chancellors of the universities were the ones who asked for fees. This was during the Labour Govt - it wasn't a Labour or Conservative or even a Liberal political drive; the universities asked for fees.

It was Ron dearing's report in 1997 that paved the way for fees. Even then though - the universities themselves were begging for fees. My mistake in dates was using the day fees went from £1000 to £3000 a year.

Timeline

 

[other]

Congrats you got some programs. So again, what are the chances that a young black man from a inner city environment will go to college?

You're assuming that people from various backgrounds all want to go to college. Many inner city kids don't see the value in going to a university or even completing high school--that's not because they are somehow unfairly barred because of economic purposes; it is largely because they don't necessarily place as high a value on education as other communities. The opportunity for affordable or subsidized education is certainly available for black men from the inner city, moreso than any other demographic, i'd wager....except maybe women from the inner city.

That certain communities don't place as high a value in becoming a lawyer or a marketing exec as opposed to a pop star or pro athlete is not a problem with availability of funding; it's an issue of perceived value within the community itself. You need to realize that not everyone values an education the same way you do... for better or for worse.

 

[Mensch]

Right wing thinking at work.. class warfare at its worst. The UK is turning more and more like the US and a 3rd world country where higher education is only for the rich.

Did you forget what you wrote?

 

[FederalRepublic]

What kind of coverage? Is there a limit? How about you having to pay the first X amount yourself?

I have the coverage I need, not more. Why in hell would you want to pay for more insurance coverage than you need?

No because the medical coverage has to be the same... My wager is your 4k a year for your family has tons of strings attached, strings that my coverage in Denmark do not have. So to even be remotely comparable, you coverage has to match mine, and that cost would be considerably more than 4k a year for your family. As for your education, you dont mention how much your education cost. That you took out a loan over 30 years, means nothing, since your education did not cost 30k in total did it now?

If you can argue that your medical care is superior to the medical care that my family gets, I'll accept your premise. Otherwise, you're missing the forest for the trees.

I don't remember exactly how much tuition was, but it doesn't really matter. I didn't have a trust fund to pay for it. Between $30,000 worth of loans and working 10-20 hours a week I was able to afford it pretty easily. How in the world can I complain about having to make an investement in my future that costs less than $40-50k if it allows me to increase my income by more than 10x?

 

[Infinite Chaos]

-- it is largely because they don't necessarily place as high a value on education as other communities

I think there's a vicious cycle in some areas, educationalists don't place expectation on some minority groups to succeed or excel and thus the students don't engage. Equally, some of these kids feel there's no outlet and although some minority groups do really well at primary school, by the time they are ready to move to secondary level education many have become disenchanted or lack of aspirational motivation at home has stopped the push to succeed.

--That certain communities don't place as high a value in becoming a lawyer or a marketing exec as opposed to a pop star or pro athlete is not a problem with availability of funding; it's an issue of perceived value within the community itself. You need to realize that not everyone values an education the same way you do... for better or for worse.

Sad but probably true: however there's probably a recognition in some communities that even getting the qualifications to become a lawyer or business exec doesn't mean they have a chance of getting a foot in the door. This possibly means that a "cultural decision" to target effort at opportunities where skin colour means less hindrance is totally understandable.

 

[bub]

I understand the sensitivities regarding University funding in this age of austerity, but it seems that our worse nightmares have already materialized and are much worse than initially feared (a £7,000 rise). Rather than cutting down on Trident citizens will have to pay for government deficit by compromising the lives of their children and the lives of many generations of Britons to come.
This policy is a major shortfall in the coalition government and highlights a weakness in the Lib dem leadership.

BBC News - Students face tuition fees rising to £9,000

It's true that 9,000£ is quite a lot and I totally agree with you on that.

However, I've experienced Belgian universities where the fees are 800€/year (that must be around 500£). Good point is that everyone can go there, in theory. Bad point is that everyone tries to go there, even unfit people who fail 2 or 3 time (and thus waste 2 or 3 years of their lives - or more, and it doesn't just cost 800€/year, you have to add the housing, the food and the revenues they would have gotten if they had started working directly) and then work at McDonalds because their parents don't want to pay for another (non universitary) degree that would fit them and allow them to get a decent job.

In theory, free or cheap education looks good, but in practice higher education costs a lot of money (real cost is around 15 or 17,000€ I think, paid by the community) and it benefits only to the middle or higher class: only educated people value education and send their kids to university. Even in Belgium where university is nearly free, you don't have so many people from the lower classes attending it. When I studied law, half of my class was composed of people whose daddies where judges or advocates, there was at least a third of noble people, and the rest where at least from the middle class. Sure, there were some minorities and poor people, but they never made it to the second year.

Now I'm at a private university, whose fees are around 20,000€ a year. My parents are not especially rich, but they value education and they paid for that. And in my class, there are some people whose parents are not very rich neither. And if you're poor and can't afford it, you can get a voucher if you're smart.

So my point is not that you should pay a lot to go to university, it's that subsidies for higher education mostly benefit to people who can afford paying the full fees anyways. It doesn't help the poors, it helps the rich people.

That being said, poorer people who can't afford paying large ammounts of money should be helped, but not via low fees, because it's a huge waste of ressource. I think vouchers (money you get if you pass a test and show that you're smart enough to succeed) is a good way to help them.

 

[other]

I think there's a vicious cycle in some areas, educationalists don't place expectation on some minority groups to succeed or excel and thus the students don't engage. Equally, some of these kids feel there's no outlet and although some minority groups do really well at primary school, by the time they are ready to move to secondary level education many have become disenchanted or lack of aspirational motivation at home has stopped the push to succeed.

I agree. I think some people tend to put too much weight behind financial factors, which are clearly not a hindrance to such students, and overlook the actual motivational factors, which are the primary factors driving people's decisions in our society.

Sad but probably true: however there's probably a recognition in some communities that even getting the qualifications to become a lawyer or business exec doesn't mean they have a chance of getting a foot in the door. This possibly means that a "cultural decision" to target effort at opportunities where skin colour means less hindrance is totally understandable.

Such a recognition is outdated IMO. If anything, because of government mandates, actual qualification has taken second seat to many other non-meritorious factors based on racial/gender based quotas, etc. to give minorities an advantage.

In the end, the true determinant of success lies in cultural values or other personal motivating factors. There is plenty of money out there for education for those willing to work for it, regardless of race, sex, or background-- Many simply don't even take the time to look though.

 

[Fiddytree]

Yea if your white and have money.. then you doing just fine. Class warfare is ripe in the US but most white American's are blind to it or/and in denial.

I'm white, but I didn't have much money, nor the best grades. My family could help some, but not much considering our unique circumstances (of which you will not be privy to, even should you ask). Guess what I did? Financial aid, grants, scholarships, and self-financing. I'm going on my 7th year to get my undergraduate in history, with separate teacher's certification training program, and two minors. I'm even likely going to graduate school.

 

[PeteEU]

I'm white, but I didn't have much money, nor the best grades. My family could help some, but not much considering our unique circumstances (of which you will not be privy to, even should you ask). Guess what I did? Financial aid, grants, scholarships, and self-financing. I'm going on my 7th year to get my undergraduate in history, with separate teacher's certification training program, and two minors. I'm even likely going to graduate school.

Congrats.

But you dont get my point. The entrance barrier is far far higher in the US than it is in Denmark, and that will discourage people. By entrance barrier, I mean especially the cost element and social economic elements.

 

[Andalublue]

I pay like $21,000 a year just in tuition to go to school. I wish I could be like the Brits.

British people would not put up with that level. I'd guess university applications would fall by 50% if those kinds of fee levels were charged. I guess you could make the analogy of US gas prices. You guys would simply not stand for it if the government forced you to pay what Europeans pay for their petrol. Cultural divide at work, I reckon.

 

[FederalRepublic]

Congrats.

But you dont get my point. The entrance barrier is far far higher in the US than it is in Denmark, and that will discourage people. By entrance barrier, I mean especially the cost element and social economic elements.

People who are discouraged by the "entrance barrier" that exists in the states probably won't be able to complete their first year anyway. I'm still not sure what your point is.

 

[PeteEU]

People who are discouraged by the "entrance barrier" that exists in the states probably won't be able to complete their first year anyway. I'm still not sure what your point is.

And that means they should not have the chance in the first place?

By putting an "entrance barrier", where it is economical or social, you discourage the least well off in even attempting to better themselves. The only real entrance barrier that should be is academical, not financial. Else a higher education is only for the rich even though there may be token programs to help the less well off get a higher education. Point is it is not defacto open for all regardless of financial situation.

 

[Red_Dave]

It's true that 9,000£ is quite a lot and I totally agree with you on that.

However, I've experienced Belgian universities where the fees are 800€/year (that must be around 500£). .

Are Belgian universities much more expensive for foreign students? It sounds quite tempting.

 

[kaya'08]

Red Dave! :mrgreen:

Are Belgian universities much more expensive for foreign students? It sounds quite tempting.

I imagine they would be the same since the UK does not discriminate between native students and European Union students as far as uni's are concerned (and i assume this is due to EU legislation) - although of course international (non-EU students) are treated seperately in regards to finance.

 

[Andalublue]

Are Belgian universities much more expensive for foreign students? It sounds quite tempting.

I'd give it a look. The language requirement might be tricky for many Brits, but there are quite a few European unis that use English as their teaching language, I know several Scandinavian unis do.