tuition fees - cap raised to £9k

jonnyd281

Davesnave wrote: »

That was pretty sweeping too, wasn't it?

When your scientists and engineers have created this new product, I suppose it will be so self-evidently good that they won't need anyone to give it an aesthetically pleasing shape, or to market it effectively? No, it will probably sell itself, especially in a world with so little external competition.

Not really, a suggested solution that gives us degrees that are (in my opinion) most useful to the economy first and foremost. And given that a lot of universities are closing down their science departments in favour of the likes of media studies and such we need to do something.

The university I went to has stopped doing engineering degrees, whilst I was there the physics department closed and I have heard that they have shut down their chemestry department.

Davesnave

jonnyd281 wrote: »

Not really, a suggested solution that gives us degrees that are (in my opinion) most useful to the economy first and foremost. And given that a lot of universities are closing down their science departments in favour of the likes of media studies and such we need to do something.

The university I went to has stopped doing engineering degrees, whilst I was there the physics department closed and I have heard that they have shut down their chemestry department.

No university shuts down successsful courses. Perhaps they just weren't cutting it with potentially good science students. If there aren't enough applicants generally, then I'm all for incentives too, if the demand from industry is there.

I wasn't advocating more media studies, or whatever, just challenging the narrow view that arts subjects aren't useful, or good generators of income. I think there is ample evidence that they can be.

jonnyd281

People don't take them because they are hard and they have to work at them. Get rid of the likes of media studies and drama (and I don't include history, business and languages in the same group), perhaps more people who want to go to university will do these subjects. Unfortunately we need engineers, scientists and such, do we need anymore wannabe pop stars or movie stars?

As for politics, anyone doing a degree in politics should be banned for going anywhere near government in any form (except of course the polling station to vote) lol.

Out,_Vile_Jelly

I work at a top university and vote LibDem, so this issue is doubly pertinent to me.

Basically, the genie was let out of the bottle with the introduction of tuition fees. This has already changed students' expectations towards learning, as they are now consumers of a product (eg they demand handouts of every lecture; in my day we had to listen and make our own notes). The top British universities are desperate to charge as much as their American counterparts, but are not providing the same service (American students rate their lecturers routinely; here it's extremely hard to sack an academic for being a rubbish teacher). A legacy from Blair's ridiculous target is that it's now assumed that if you're 18 and breathing you have a "right" to a university place. As has been discussed, there are an awful lot of "universities" that are not worthy of the name offering "degrees" that are not of sufficent academic rigour. It's an awful mess to try and sort out.

Bluntly, I believe that the state should fund higher education BUT on a lesser scale than currently. Only our brightest and best youngsters should be obtaining degrees. And of course there is a place for Arts subjects in a civilised society. Distance learning such as the OU (where I got my second degree) should be subsidised and promoted, as it offers a valuable option to those who wish to work and study.

It is easy for me to type "there are too many rubbish so-called universities and useless degrees in this country". Politically, it would mean forcing large scale closures of institutions, many job losses and loss of income in towns dependent upon student spending.

The LibDems are going to haemorrhage voters on this, however, it's not like Labour are going to campaign for the scrapping of fees, is it? What's their policy on this?

lemonjelly

Out,_Vile_Jelly wrote: »

I work at a top university and vote LibDem, so this issue is doubly pertinent to me.

Basically, the genie was let out of the bottle with the introduction of tuition fees. This has already changed students' expectations towards learning, as they are now consumers of a product (eg they demand handouts of every lecture; in my day we had to listen and make our own notes). The top British universities are desperate to charge as much as their American counterparts, but are not providing the same service (American students rate their lecturers routinely; here it's extremely hard to sack an academic for being a rubbish teacher). A legacy from Blair's ridiculous target is that it's now assumed that if you're 18 and breathing you have a "right" to a university place. As has been discussed, there are an awful lot of "universities" that are not worthy of the name offering "degrees" that are not of sufficent academic rigour. It's an awful mess to try and sort out.

I agree wholeheartedly with this.

A friend is a University lecturer. We have discussed how people attending university have ceased to be students. Now they are consumers. As you state, they expect handouts (& use this as an excuse to be facebooking all lectures whilst on their blackberries/iphones). They complain regulary if the lecturers do not meet their expectations as to what they feel they should be entitled to. Students now see it as something they are paying for, therefore they should get all sorts of add ons to the course, & some even feel that paying for it should guarantee the qualification.

Davesnave

jonnyd281 wrote: »

People don't take them because they are hard and they have to work at them. Get rid of the likes of media studies and drama (and I don't include history, business and languages in the same group), perhaps more people who want to go to university will do these subjects. Unfortunately we need engineers, scientists and such, do we need anymore wannabe pop stars or movie stars?

As for politics, anyone doing a degree in politics should be banned for going anywhere near government in any form (except of course the polling station to vote) lol.

What do you know of drama, I wonder? My DD1 works with difficult & vulnerable youngsters in a tough city environment and, although her degree isn't in drama, she studied it at A level and in a 'hobby' context for six or seven years. She finds it one of the more useful tools in her armoury; certainly more valuable than the more academic degree she holds.

My other daughter is studying fine art. She would be most amused to learn that her course is relatively easy, compared with a science degree. Who knows, maybe it is, but how is this to be measured?There is a requirement not only to attend on every day and be seen working, but also to build ones own links with business and, as she puts it, 'Get off your !!!!, decide what it is you are doing and follow through.' Far from mooning about, having artistic thoughts, as many imagine, she intends to forge a place for herself in the business community long before she leaves. She chose that particular college because of its excellent track record of achieving those vital links between the students and the world of work.

It seems patently obvious to me that without the designers and creative souls, GB Plc isn't going anywhere. There again, if most people think of drama as something that just leads to a career in acting, or fine art to a job as an art teacher, then perhaps a bit more education is needed all round.

Lol indeed!

ILW

I would suggest that soem of the greatest artists and designers the world has ever known, did not have art degrees.

ninky_2

Really2 wrote: »

That's been done for years, its called private education. They loan it from their future inheritance.

Is merit a reason for a degree? if so do the people who do a degree for merit not hold a value to it, or is a degree for merit OK if someone else pays?

yes but there is at least a state education system that has steadily been gaining ground on private education.

yes merit is a reason to get a degree - at least it should be. i've benefitted from a state education and also a degree that had no tuition fees. there is no way i could have taken on the levels of debt suggested by these new rules and gone into the career i have now which is very low paying and erratic in the early years.

Radiantsoul

lemonjelly wrote: »

I agree wholeheartedly with this.

A friend is a University lecturer. We have discussed how people attending university have ceased to be students. Now they are consumers. As you state, they expect handouts (& use this as an excuse to be facebooking all lectures whilst on their blackberries/iphones). They complain regulary if the lecturers do not meet their expectations as to what they feel they should be entitled to. Students now see it as something they are paying for, therefore they should get all sorts of add ons to the course, & some even feel that paying for it should guarantee the qualification.

I think that if you are paying £9k for a course you should expect quite a bit from a degree.

My experience over a decade ago was that university lecturers were often more interested in research than teaching. Some even seemed to holiday during term time which is extraordinary when you have a only two twelve week terms to teach too!

Lecturers are incentivised to produce great research, probably financially but also for reason of peer recognition. I regard the fact that students will pay and therefore demand higher standards as a positive feature of charging.

Out,_Vile_Jelly

Radiantsoul wrote: »

I think that if you are paying £9k for a course you should expect quite a bit from a degree.

My experience over a decade ago was that university lecturers were often more interested in research than teaching. Some even seemed to holiday during term time which is extraordinary when you have a only two twelve week terms to teach too!

Lecturers are incentivised to produce great research, probably financially but also for reason of peer recognition. I regard the fact that students will pay and therefore demand higher standards as a positive feature of charging.

Academics only get promoted on the basis of their research output, not their teaching duties. It's a fine balance, as students (certainly in science/engineering) want to study at the research intensive universities which have the best lab facilities and the most interesting work going on around them.

Some students don't pass their exams (we had someone scoring 2% recently- a new record). But at 9k a year, are they going to swallow that, or sue for not receiving a quality product?