Cost of a Master Degree

BEEJJ_2

Oldernotwiser wrote: »

This, I'm afraid, is absolutely wrong. Nobody would take out a business loan for a masters and no bank would give you one. The appropriate finance is a PCDL, whose repayments need to start within two months of finishing the course (not immediately) and it's often possible to delay the start of repayments if the borrower is unemployed.

Ok the name of the loan we ACTUALLY TOOK OUT is a PCDL - the point I am making is that it is a loan along the lines of a business loan i.e the interest rate and repayment structure is a 'business' one and nothing like the repayment structure of a student loan.

Two months after finishing to a post-graduate student is 'like immediately' and it is VERY difficult to delay repayments without jeopardising your future credit worthiness etc which is not what a postgraduate student wants to do. WE ( his parents) are paying back the loan at £ 300.

katsu

BEEJJ wrote: »

Ok the name of the loan we ACTUALLY TOOK OUT is a PCDL - the point I am making is that it is a loan along the lines of a business loan i.e the interest rate and repayment structure is a 'business' one and nothing like the repayment structure of a student loan.

Two months after finishing to a post-graduate student is 'like immediately' and it is VERY difficult to delay repayments without jeopardising your future credit worthiness etc which is not what a postgraduate student wants to do. WE ( his parents) are paying back the loan at £ 300.

Yes, PCDLs are not like Student Loans. However, they are better than ordinary bank loans as the borrower does not get charged interest during the course. Ordinary bank loans would charge interest from day 1. I think PCDLs are a great help for all of us looking at post-grad education - as long as you consider how to pay it back.

I took out a PCDL and saved up the money to pay it off during the interest free period. I was able to do that because I am working full-time and have studied part time as a mature student. I am not criticising your son, or your generous decision to pay it off for him. I am just explaining that PCDLs are not as bad as you are suggesting. In my case I was able to start my masters earlier than I would have otherwise done, thanks to the interest free period of the PCDL.

The_One_Who

BEEJJ wrote: »

Have a maximum number of years funding available to students- . But adjust the rules slightly DEPENDING on what level of degree they actually get, so that maybe you pay back at a higher rate once you earn a higher salary.

There already is a maximum number of years funding. It is the number of years of your course plus one, to take into account false starts or other circumstances.

An undergraduate degree is an undergraduate degree. A BSc (Hons) is the same level as a BA (Hons), the only difference (generally) is the subject that has been taken. Those who go on to earn more (not always related to their degree course taken...) do pay back more, at least in terms of what comes out of their salary. They may not pay back as much over the longer term though.

Why should those who earn more be taxed even more than they already are?

So in this way you will be able to get funding for some POSTGRADUATE study. This way would also have the added effect of stopping students wasting years by not working hard enough as they would effectively 'use up ' a year of funding when they had to repeat a year.

The LAST thing this country needs is yet more masters students. It would get to the stage where a masters degree is pretty much expected. The difference between a masters degree and an undergraduate degree is huge, the entire ethos of it is completely different.

Instead of 'wasting' a year during the course (which few students do) it would be transferred to 'wasting' a year at the end of the course. I know a lot of students who did a masters degree as a way to put off trying to get a job in the current market.

The application process for a masters is more rigorous than for undergraduate study anyway so I don't think you will get that many time-wasters

I found the application process for a masters course much less faff than that of the UCAS system. It was a case of telling my grades, a little bit of stuff on what my thesis would possibly be on and a couple of references. That was it. Accepted.

It is well known that some universities are using masters students as cash-cows, and it is always said that getting on a masters course is the easy part. The thing that trips up most is the funding aspect.

For those who do want to do a masters degree, there is always the option of self-funding. Take a year or two out and then go back to it if you still want to. Universities will always be there.

melancholly

BEEJJ wrote: »

And if you don't get student loan funding you have to take a business loan which you have to pay back IMMEDIATELY when you finish regardless of whther you are in employment or not!!!!!

completely - which is why it's very important to make sure the masters will lead to something. it's also why a lot of people (me included) took time out between an undergrad degree and a masters to save up to pay for it rather than going with a commercial loan (plus i worked during the masters as well).

it's important that anyone deciding to undertake postgraduate courses knows what the financial implications are...... needing parents to pay the loan back clearly isn't an ideal solution. but my decision in the same situation was to wait until i could afford it. fine i got the qualification a year later, but i weighed the pros and cons of each option. the choice made in your family is different; but it's the choice your son made. remember that there were other options.

andymg

The_One_Who wrote: »

For those who do want to do a masters degree, there is always the option of self-funding. Take a year or two out and then go back to it if you still want to. Universities will always be there.

Just to add, there is another option which is to do the Masters course on Part time basis. It is hard work doing a job and Masters at the same time but it is possible with some dedication.

I just completed my Masters on part time basis in 1.5 years time, in theory I could have taken 2-3 years to complete the couse. For obvious reasons I did not want to drag it for long time, its better to finish the course when the momemtum and motivation is there.

Personally my thoughts are to do a Masters after getting some experience in the real world, it helps immensely! I took up Masters course after 12 years of work experience. My experience helped me a lot during the essays, assignments and dissertation etc. It wasn't easy but I would not have done it any other way.

Other benefit is that the fee is split in to two years (usually 10% added on top for part time course) so its lot easier to self-fund. Also one does not need to take time off work, which I think is important in current economic conditions. I think employers will also like the fact that one is not afraid to take on additional challenge in the middle (or later) part of life.

southoftheriver

BEEJJ wrote: »

The application process for a masters is more rigorous than for undergraduate study anyway so I don't think you will get that many time-wasters

Erm...What are you basing this on?

I did a masters in the middle of my undergrad degree (long story my undergrad was 6 years long) and applying for the masters was a doddle in comparison to going through the UCAS palaver. Personal statement, references, short interview (not really much of an interview), informal offer.

That has been the case for many of my friends doing masters. Because they are almost always self funding the applications are less strict and the ethos is completely different to undergraduate education.

melancholly

southoftheriver wrote: »

Because they are almost always self funding the applications are less strict and the ethos is completely different to undergraduate education.

yeah.... it's one of the few ways that unis make money. masters in general, and masters for international students paying massive amounts in particular, are often less strict than undergrad admissions. (supply versus demand!).

however, it's still hard to get good marks and often the pass mark is at a 2:2 level. so once you're in, a good grade still counts.

actually, thinking about this, there is a situation where one lot of funding gets two qualifications, and that's medics who do an intercalated BSc. but i'm not sure 6 years of loans are a great thing to have to have, particularly those with loans from 1998-2005 where they don't get wiped out until you're 65..... doctors also get the highest employment rates and pretty good salaries..... maybe we should all get up in arms about medical students

everyone can look at someone else in HE and feel hard done-by. successive governments have ignored the student lobby and done whatever they wanted (election pledges in HE mean nothing!). as i've already said, looking around and feeling upset isn't going to change anything and isn't a particularly healthy way to approach this.

BEEJJ_2

The_One_Who wrote: »

There already is a maximum number of years funding. It is the number of years of your course plus one, to take into account false starts or other circumstances.

My suggestion is in the light of the 'current inequality' of the number of years 'accross years of study' You have missed the initial point of the discussion. We know it is currently undergraduate study.



QUOTE
An undergraduate degree is an undergraduate degree. A BSc (Hons) is the same level as a BA (Hons), the only difference (generally) is the subject that has been taken. Those who go on to earn more (not always related to their degree course taken...) do pay back more, at least in terms of what comes out of their salary. They may not pay back as much over the longer term though.

Why should those who earn more be taxed even more than they already are? QUOTE


This is a different argument. I was building into the system the loan for postgraduate study and how it would be paid back.



QUOTE
The LAST thing this country needs is yet more masters students. It would get to the stage where a masters degree is pretty much expected. The difference between a masters degree and an undergraduate degree is huge, the entire ethos of it is completely different. QUOTE

Actually I think that decently educated people who can argue logically is exactly what this country needs.

Why would it- So the current way of only people who can afford it do one is fair?

QUOTE
Instead of 'wasting' a year during the course (which few students do) it would be transferred to 'wasting' a year at the end of the course. I know a lot of students who did a masters degree as a way to put off trying to get a job in the current market. QUOTE


Actually a great number of students flunk first year especially those courses where the first year doesn't count.


QUOTE
I found the application process for a masters course much less faff than that of the UCAS system. It was a case of telling my grades, a little bit of stuff on what my thesis would possibly be on and a couple of references. That was it. Accepted. That may have been the University you chose.

It is well known that some universities are using masters students as cash-cows, and it is always said that getting on a masters course is the easy part. The thing that trips up most is the funding aspect. You have to have a minimum of a 2-1.

For those who do want to do a masters degree, there is always the option of self-funding. Take a year or two out and then go back to it if you still want to. Universities will always be there.

There are few jobs at the moment- You need to add some value to your cv if you 'take a year out' . We are talking about £9000 which is a lot to save by taking a year out. Decent 'loans' within the system should be available.

antonia1

BEEJJ wrote: »

There are few jobs at the moment- You need to add some value to your cv if you 'take a year out' . We are talking about £9000 which is a lot to save by taking a year out. Decent 'loans' within the system should be available.

Totally disagree! Government funds education up to 18, government aids education up to first undergrad degree, anything over and above that should be fully paid for by the person wanting more education. The government (ie taxpayer) cannot subsidise everything. I'd love to do a part-time second degree in Spanish as it would help me get a better paid job, but I will save to do it myself as I think that I have received enough help in funding for my first (engineering) degree.

BEEJJ_2

southoftheriver wrote: »

Erm...What are you basing this on?

On the basis that for 'most' masters you have to have an Upper Second class honours degree and you can't just do any subject. For an awful lot of undergraduate degrees you have to have 'a' levels but the standard for some is very low and the undergraduate course often completely unrelated to the 'a' levels. There are always going to be pointless undergraduate degrees and pointless masters but if we stick to the Russell group.