Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

So the coalition has announced that it is going to increase the cap on tuition fees in the UK to £9000. From what i've seen on Dakka theres a relatively broad cross-section of society so was just wandering what everyones opinion on the issue is. Do you support the rise? Do you support/dislike the actions taken by police and students in the protest? Just wandering what everyones general opinion is. Personally (biased as I am a student myself) I'm against the rise, on the basis that education is a right not a privilige. Plus I dont fancy a £40k debt, even with a graduate tax

So, peoples thoughts?

When I graduate I'll be 37K$ in debt and I went to a relatively inexpensive state university. Welcome to my world. I do dislike how thats happening though, higher level education is overly expensive for how important it is to modern western economies.

ShumaGorath wrote:When I graduate I'll be 37K$ in debt and I went to a relatively inexpensive state university. .

From what I understand of the American higher education system aren't tuition fees paid for completely by the individual? Or does the state subsidise some of it? If the former was the case here I would certainly be very disheartened in the education system. However that looks like the direction it seems to be going in.

ShumaGorath wrote:I do dislike how thats happening though, higher level education is overly expensive for how important it is to modern western economies.

Couldn't agree more. The benefits it brings to society far outweigh the costs of the government funding it in my opinion.

I haven't looked into it in too much detail, but i know it starts in 2012, so i only have one year of the expensive price (unless its only for new students? Which wouldn't be exactly fair...) I think £9,000 a year plus living costs is a bit steep, and despite all the comments about students being lazy and fleecing tax payers etc (although i guess mostly in jest....) I don't personally think apply, even with 3k a year fees, its still quite a bit of debt you get into, and i think most people have to seriously think about it, its certainly not something you do to pass three years......(although it is probably a lot easier than working a proper job....)

This is exactly why I'm not going to college until I actually have the money in advance. The debt is just too much. I wouldn't be able to handle it.

My grandfather went to Georgetown university for 500$ a semester in 1972. Now it's something like 18k$

ShumaGorath wrote:When I graduate I'll be 37K$ in debt and I went to a relatively inexpensive state university. Welcome to my world. I do dislike how thats happening though, higher level education is overly expensive for how important it is to modern western economies.

Just a small point... 37k$ is about £23,500.
Does that put into perspective what £40k (lol 40K) debt looks like? its more like 63K USD. Considering currently the cap on tuition fees is just over £3k a year.

Bearing in mind that 9 grand is only a cap, i'd say that people are basing some things off the belief that 9k GBP will become the norm for every single Uni. Sure, Unis will start charging more than than the X grand they already get, but I don't think it's likely to see any apart from the great universities (Oxford; Cambridge; Hull) charging anything near 9k.

I am against the rise, despite not going to Uni (and not planning to), but I think seeing "£9000 cap" and thinking "Every University will charge £9000" is a bit off.

I'm not trying to defend the rise, but I think we need to look at the 9 grand cap as just that, a cap; you wouldn't look at your codex/army book, see a unit that is 0-3 per army and think "Damn, I have to take 3 units!", but that's what a fair few people are doing, and it blows it out of proportion a bit.

Still, the rise is unwarranted, and considering that the majority of University entrants they're affected now will be deciding the fate of future elections, I think it's a very bad move. The Government might save something in the short run, but something like this; where the majority of the country's student populace is in favour of scrapping the rise, will not quickly be forgotten, and will no doubt come back to bite Cameron/Clegg in the arse in two ways:

1) Students affected will be voting!
2) The general public who are unaffected will still see the U-turns that were performed, and will realise that this government cannot be trusted as much as it was first thought.

I'm English but living in Wales. All extra tuition fees are being covered by the Assembly Government for Welsh students. As i've lived in Wales for six years I assume that I count, hoping to go to University when I finish my A levels.

I'd imagine people must be pretty pissed off and you can't blame them.

I think people are getting too fixated on the 9K figure. That will really only apply to Universities that can justify charging that amount i.e. Oxbridge.

Is it fair? Not really, but life isn't fair. Yes, lots of us oldies got their university fees paid for, but this just isn't sustainable any more (not when we've got more important to things to pay for like floating missile platforms that cost billions and never do anything )

As for the coverage of the "student protests", all I'm seeing is a disproportional amount of attention given to a handful of yobs trying to break down the doors to the Treasury. This is typical UK media coverage, focusing on some sideshow instead of the proper story.

I think the university system was expanded too much, too fast, in order to achieve the target of 50% of teenagers going into higher education.

A lot of rubbish courses were invented to make up the numbers. Costs increased because all these extra courses need staff and facilities.

Now there is a funding crisis because of the cuts being imposed by the government owing to the deficit problem.

The fees increase is to paper over the cracks.

The excuse is that graduates benefit from their education, so they should pay.

Good luck collecting the graduate tax when our graduates emigrate to avoid paying it, you spankers! Not that it matters, since apparently society doesn't benefit from graduates.

Anyway, the number of rubbish courses should be cut back. Good quality vocational education should be provided for the people who currently go into Golf Course Management degrees and such. (Society needs golf course managers too.)

Universities should go back to teaching the serious courses.

Funding should be taken from taxation.

If graduates are paid more, they will pay more tax. If they are not, why should they be punished for having a degree.

Avatar 720 wrote:Bearing in mind that 9 grand is only a cap, i'd say that people are basing some things off the belief that 9k GBP will become the norm for every single Uni. Sure, Unis will start charging more than than the X grand they already get, but I don't think it's likely to see any apart from the great universities (Oxford; Cambridge; Hull) charging anything near 9k.

I am against the rise, despite not going to Uni (and not planning to), but I think seeing "£9000 cap" and thinking "Every University will charge £9000" is a bit off.

I'm not trying to defend the rise, but I think we need to look at the 9 grand cap as just that, a cap; you wouldn't look at your codex/army book, see a unit that is 0-3 per army and think "Damn, I have to take 3 units!", but that's what a fair few people are doing, and it blows it out of proportion a bit.

Every uni's charges the maximum they can now, I imagine although they may not all go right to the maximum (3 times what it is currently) there will still be a significant increase across the board. Or even worse I could see it leading to "bargain university" deals, where many people will be put off from wanting to achieve the best for themselves because its 4 grand a year cheaper to go to a rubbish uni. The difference in funds between the best universities and Tesco value universities will have huge impacts on the quality of education and the respective values of the degrees they dish out.

Every uni's charges the maximum they can now, I imagine although they may not all go right to the maximum (3 times what it is currently) there will still be a significant increase across the board.

I never said there wouldn't be an increase, I simply stated that people should not base their thoughts off predicitions that every single Uni will now charge £9000, because they won't.

Flashman wrote:I think people are getting too fixated on the 9K figure. That will really only apply to Universities that can justify charging that amount i.e. Oxbridge.

Is it fair? Not really, but life isn't fair. Yes, lots of us oldies got their university fees paid for, but this just isn't sustainable any more (not when we've got more important to things to pay for like floating missile platforms that cost billions and never do anything )

As for the coverage of the "student protests", all I'm seeing is a disproportional amount of attention given to a handful of yobs trying to break down the doors to the Treasury. This is typical UK media coverage, focusing on some sideshow instead of the proper story.

The best and most factual argument I have seen on here so far.

The £9K rise, is NOT a £9K rise as such. That is the maximum a Uni can charge in exceptional circumstances only. Which is what, surprisingly for "educated" kids, was totally missed by representatives from the student unions. The kids from poorer backgrounds will be subsidised to a certain extent and the maximum threshold was raised to £21K earnings before repayments started.

The protests could have been handled better by the students. Does taking snooker balls, fencing, knives and tins of paint equal a peacful protest? And what if they had broken the cordon and got in the Houses of parliament? Would they have just stood there and begain shouting "I don't want to pay £9K"?

Why should you get educated for free when elsewhere in the world you also have to pay? Yes, there are some countries where they pay for it but they're not in as much debt as the scorched earth policy that Labour left the UK in. You get educated for free up to sixth form, it is your choice to go to Uni and get the degree, so why should that be state funded when you have a choice to go or not?

Q: Why did Nick Clegg cross the road?

A: Because he said that he wouldn't.

You can probably tell how I feel about this from my age, and the fact that I posted that joke.

I spoke to a few protesters on their way to London yesterday morning.

I am concerned about our system of education, a couple of guys I spoke with knew exactly what they they were doing in life, taking degrees appropriate to their life choices, they made some sense and were rightly angry about fee increases

Some other rabid rabble rousers seemed only to be studying for fun with no real thought behind their choice of education. Asking what they wanted out of their education I got a lot of shrugged shoulders, apparently, as a tax payer, I should pay for them to have a job at the end of their education, whatever that job may be?

Good luck to the former, being saddled with debt is not a good thing but you seem to be on the way to not having to care about it. maybe education for you should be subsidised?

To the latter, I hope you enjoy the stink of cooking burgers you arrogant work shy freeloaders!

Elmodiddly wrote: That is the maximum a Uni can charge in exceptional circumstances only.

You'd be amazed at how weak the the "exceptional circumstances" clause is looking like it is going to be however.

The current thought amongst the Council of Uni. VCs' is that this will, quickly, become the norm anyway and will, of course, be subject to further rises.

But at least the decision is made nwo and Unis can begin to actually plan a budget for the future. This year’s annual letter from the "Secretary of State for the Department of Business, Innovation & Skills" to the Chair of HEFCE, concerning the Department’s top level policy for HE and giving details of HEFCE’s funding for 2011/2012, is expected to be published before Christmas but this may be not until 23rd December (last year Lord Mandelson’s letter was dated 22/12/2009 ). The allocation of research funding to the UK research councils and to HEFCE for research is expected to be known the week after next. Hopefully. It seems/the hope is that the Secretary of State will be writing to OFFA (Office for Fair Access (to HE)) with guidance about access under the new arrangements before Christmas.

I'm glad I went into an apprenticeship.
Srsly, I went into mine at the same time as my friend. By the time he's finished, he'll be around £30k in debt, and I'll be earning that in a year.

brickhouse wrote:Personally (biased as I am a student myself) I'm against the rise, on the basis that education is a right not a privilige. Plus I dont fancy a £40k debt, even with a graduate tax

So, peoples thoughts?

Education, to the level provided by the state as a minimum requirement ('O' levels in UK isn't it?) is your right.

Tertiary education is a privelege.
One that you work to get into and pay for as it is a priveledge, not a right.

Here in Oz we have Higher Education Loans Plan (HELP) where the govt pays my fees as a very low interest loan and I pay the govt back from a percentage of my wages.
My 4 year medical degree was $22000US (It is higher than that now).

Perhaps this rise will force students to pull their collective fingers out, work harder to get better marks, in areas where they are likely to get a job (i.e. not a Bachelor of Arts majorining in Women's Studies and the rise of gender bias in modern western culture'

A privilege (literally private law) is a benefit reserved for a few.

It doesn't mean something you pay for. It doesn't matter how much money your parents have got, they shouldn't be able to buy your way into Cambridge if you are thick.

Tertiary education can be state funded and still remain a privilege reserved for those with the capability to take advantage.

I believe it is in societies interest to educate everyone as well and appropriately as can be afforded.

O levels don't cut it in the modern economy. People need a further level of education, whether it be vocational, academic or technical, to be of any value.

My degree cost about £20000 (£3k fees + £3k living per year) it will not be worth the money in a lot of cases, if the fees are £27 for 3 years + livingfor 3 years = ~£40000, while 40K is a magic number for some of us, its not if you're a student. It would take you a LONG time to make it worth it. Unless you're a doctor or something but that's different...

You can make it worth it a lot sooner by emigrating as soon as you graduate to get higher paid job in a country where you won't be penalised extra for the crime of being a graduate.

Tertiary education is a privelege

.

There is no natural law that says that tertiary education is a privilege.
It is a matter of political opinion.

This is indicitive of an unecessary privileged in education:


don't ask me why they have red numbered balls.
Some stupid public school tradition like buggery I'll wager.

Depends what sort of job you get and what it pays I suppose. I went to Uni (only for 1 year) and had a couple of grands worth of debt. The repayments were taken out of my pay while I was in the forces (I was on £18k a year at the time I think) and it amounted to ~£60 a month out of my pay packet. I never noticed it.

A lot of people who I work with who have degrees are thick as pig muck. Just because you have a degree does not turn you into someone who is a valuable asset to the community.

Some leave with a degree and go, "Coool, now I can be a holiday rep and party again just like I did at Uni".

Some people talk as if being a graduate is the end of the long road and all will be roses and the world now owes them a favour. It isn't. You have studied and passed an exam. That's all it is in the big wide world.

Going to Uni is a choice. You want a degree then you will have to pay. Although people are hanging on this £9K thing with a pessimistic attitude that all will be charged that amount.
The agreement is that it is for exceptional circumstances only. If they start to include most subjects then I am sure that another round of riots will ensue at the guilty Uni and soon hit the headlines.

Blah blah blah University of Life blah blah.

Ok, reading into this its clearly obvious that most the people complaining about the situation have no actually bothered to sit down for 20 minutes and read clearly and concisely what the proposition is.

The poorest students will have 2 years paid for. The fees are only paid back once the graduate is earning decent money.

What is so bad about it?!

Should I have to pay for YOUR education?

I dont give a gak if your ugly fethed up kids go to uni. YOU should pay for it, or they should. Either way, the person that benefits the most should pay the most. And if you leave and get a nicely paid job, you can pay back your loan.

The thing i hate most is that its people like me that Students love to turn their noses up at, cos i dont have a degree. They want people like me to pay for their degree with MY income tax though.

Pay for your own goddamn education, and i will pay for my own stuff. Seems fair to me. 30 grand isnt that big a debt over a lifetime of work, and somebody has to pay for it.

I really hate all these lackwitted pinko students with their Che T-Shirts and their staggering ignorance. Go ask a student in the street about the legislation and see how much the little gakker knows about it. Chances are its almost nothing, but he loves to get pissed and throw a brick through a police car window.

And the most laughable of it all is that they smashed up the Royals car and then all started blaming the police!

Its the perpetrators fault, and nobody elses! If i was in charge we would have them hung drawn and quarted! Why back when i was .. rant rant rant gibber shriek KILL KILL KILL etc etc etc

Chibi Bodge-Battle wrote:Blah blah blah University of Life blah blah.

Thanks for adding to the discussion in such a positive and engaging way.

Wow Matty hates pinkos confession
who'da thought it.

This thread was about the tution fees.
You started well then went off topic. Would be good if the riots were kept out of this thread as it is a seprate issue.

I don't turn my nose up at you for not having a degree.
95% + of the people I know don't have one but I think none the worse of them for that Matty.
Of all the people I know with degrees, none of them are snooty towards people without one.
It sounds like it is more of an issue for you

Chibi Bodge-Battle wrote: Wow Matty hates pinkos confession
who'da thought it.

This thread was about the tution fees.
You started well then went off topic. Would be good if the riots were kept out of this thread as it is a seprate issue.

I don't turn my nose up at you for not having a degree.
95% + of the people I know don't have one but I think none the worse of them for that Matty.
Of all the people I know with degrees, none of them are snooty towards people without one.
It sounds like it is more of an issue for you

Of course it is an issue, they are WRECKING things! And then saying "ok so now you lot can get back to paying for our education"

NO.

I will not be held to ransom.

Its great to get a good education. You deserve to earn more than me if you studied hard and got a good solid qualification. I will respect your intellect and your qualifications, and you will earn more than me for your whole life and then you can pay your loan back. Whats the big deal?!

I earn 19k a year. I could easily afford a few hundred quid a month to pay back a loan. Go do it.

Why should hard working people like me have to pay for other people?

I dont ask student to buy me beer, or pay my council tax, or send me 50 quid for a Christmas present.

Why should i pay for their education? It will BENEFIT them. Not me.

brickhouse wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:When I graduate I'll be 37K$ in debt and I went to a relatively inexpensive state university. .

From what I understand of the American higher education system aren't tuition fees paid for completely by the individual? Or does the state subsidise some of it?

That is the subsidy. ShumGorath goes to a public university that received some funding from the state in order to help them lower the cost of tuition. I'm thinking that the $37k doesn't represent the sum of what was spent, btw, just what ShumaGorath couldn't cover out of pocket and was forced to borrow to make up.

Now, if you're dirt poor you might qualify for a grant. If you have some sort of special achievement you can angle for a scholarship but reading that the cap on a full year of U their in the UK is 9000 pounds makes most of us here in the states shrug. It does suck that your tax burden is higher and it's not as if this particular measure will cause your government to cut taxes any.

And I also sympathize with those folks who didn't have to opportunity to go to college or had no desire to that are required to pay any significant amount for that institution but look at it this way: those @ssholes that you're puting through school, they could be on the streets right now instead of at school. Think about that. You've spent money on worse things haven't you?