Are UK Universities a drag on our economy?

Pennywise

misskool wrote: »

Try the other way.

Heating for lecture hall to seat 100 people, let's say £10k pa.
Maintenance (say new microphone, new computer, new projector) = £3k pa.
Tutorial rooms for each time they have work to discuss = £10k
Minimum 3 administrative staff for 60 students, one to organise students, one to sort out lectures, one to compile the marks and get the lecturers to return stuff on time (that's just the basic arts course, without lab technicians, equipment etc), £24k x 3 = 96k
Journal subscription (let's say 4 journals to read by each student, a university typically have hundreds, good ones have over a thousand based on subject, but let's be subject specific) £10k
Computers and free printing (say about 100 sheets/term, 300 sheets/student/year) with a cheapie Dell. £1.5k x 60 = 80k

And so forth and so forth. Student union rates are subsidised by the university, catering at a university is often subsidised. and it's not likely that all 60 students will pay full fees as some will be subsidised based on (I hope!!) merit and need.

But the lecture hall will be used for several hundred spanning many courses - 64 people won't be occupying it full time will they? More like a few hours a week tops.

3 staff to administer just 64 students - you must be joking - one part timer tops for just 64 people. I run an accountancy practice and single handedly deal with accounts and tax returns for 75 business clients each taking many hours per year of my time and I still have to deal with all the practice administration etc. If there were 3 of us, sharing admin burden, I reckon we could cope with about 400-500 clients. And why on earth is it costing £24k per administrator - you can get a competent basic administrator for half that.

£1.5k per year for a computer and printing for each student - you must be joking again.

If those costs are typical of real costs, then it's no surprise that we've run out of money.

shortchanged_2

setmefree2 wrote: »

Look what I just found!

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-11990787

God, could I be right for once in my life. :rotfl:

jennikitten

Heating for lecture hall to seat 100 people, let's say £10k pa.

Would heating really be 10k per annum??

Maintenance (say new microphone, new computer, new projector) = £3k pa.

There aren't new ones every year though. I've been hanging around my uni for around 5 yrs and they've not replaced any I've seen once. The computers in lecture rooms are running XP still.

Tutorial rooms for each time they have work to discuss = £10k

The cost of what? Building the rooms?!

Minimum 3 administrative staff for 60 students, one to organise students, one to sort out lectures, one to compile the marks and get the lecturers to return stuff on time (that's just the basic arts course, without lab technicians, equipment etc), £24k x 3 = 96k

The way it worked on my course was about 20 lecturers & X number of postgrads (saving money right there) plus 3-4 admin/School staff for approx. 1500 people? Rough figures...

Journal subscription (let's say 4 journals to read by each student, a university typically have hundreds, good ones have over a thousand based on subject, but let's be subject specific) £10k

No idea on this one, but would assume research staff would need them as well so aren't completely funded by students?

Computers and free printing (say about 100 sheets/term, 300 sheets/student/year) with a cheapie Dell. £1.5k x 60 = 80k

Free printing?! Didn't have that at all. Cost about the same as a library would charge, so break even at very least.

setmefree2

alipops1986 wrote: »

Due to the means testing, my parents were classed as able enough financially to pay for me. Fortunately, they did pay my tuition fees but i think it's wrong to assume that just because parents may ,according to a system, have money to pay for their children, they should.

I think they should. I think it's very, very hard on the student if they don't. I don't understand why parents think this is optional?

setmefree2

misskool wrote: »

Let's look at public schools in England then (which are comparable for facilities and in the same sector). Each student at a top public school would pay more than £10k a year (which is less than what a university would demand) and that's without the uniform, the meals, the bus fares, the school trips etc (some of which are included in your university fees)

Schools need smaller class sizes. Under grads can be in very large groups most of the time.

setmefree2

mustrum_ridcully wrote: »

Why?

For your imaginary 60 students I can easily imagine 10 lecturers being required just to do the teaching and assessment. Let's say they earn an average of £40k.

It cannot take 10 people full time to teach 60 students! That is a ratio of 6 students to every lecturer!!!!

setmefree2

jennikitten wrote: »

heating for lecture hall to seat 100 people, let's say £10k pa.

Would heating really be 10k per annum?? no :d and a room only needs heating for 5 months of the year and students get very long holidays.... And it only costs me £500 pa to heat my whole house and heat the water and oh yes to cook too:d

:d:d:d:d:d:d:d

jennikitten

misskool wrote: »

Let's look at public schools in England then (which are comparable for facilities and in the same sector). Each student at a top public school would pay more than £10k a year (which is less than what a university would demand) and that's without the uniform, the meals, the bus fares, the school trips etc (some of which are included in your university fees)

I don't think they are comparable at all, they have completely different purposes, expenditures and sources of income, have different effects on the economy and operate on extremely different scales.

It's like saying that a school nativity play is comparable to a Broadway show.

alipops1986

setmefree2 wrote: »

I think they should. I think it's very, very hard on the student if they don't. I don't understand why parents think this is optional?

I don't understand why it's upto the government to make this decision. If a person wants to go to university, they should either afford it or don't go. It's fairly simple really.
If my parents had no money to afford to help me out, i wouldn't have gone. I wouldn't have expected the government to bail me out on what is my personal decision/choice.

There comes a point where the people who look after themselves - through hard-work, saving etc end up less fortunate than those who perhaps, in SOME cases, don't. How is that sending out the right message?

I think the government are yet again sending out the message:
- If you can't afford it, we'll help you. This is not feesible in this current economic climate and this is part of the reason we have people who are so comfortable/well off on benefits compared to working.

lostinrates

jennikitten wrote: »

I don't think they are comparable at all, they have completely different purposes, expenditures and sources of income, have different effects on the economy and operate on extremely different scales.

It's like saying that a school nativity play is comparable to a Broadway show.

At some private schools it is! Niece's school has a theatre and a Hollywood dad guest directed!