Tuition fees 2012 on - Buy 4 Get 1 free ...

Helix

brummierebel wrote: »

I think you are wrong to direct your anger at the poorest students. When tuition fees were introduced in 1998, the richest third paid the full £1000 fee, a third paid a proportion and the poorest third paid none at all. When the fee regime changed around 2005, everyone paid £3000 but the poorest (I think household income around £25k) got a grant and bursary to the same value. The value of the grant did not keep up with inflation, so they are now paying effectively a couple of hundred quid a year but in my mind the biggest scandal about the new system is that for the first time the poorest households are paying significant tuition fees for the first time, and they have to borrow money at interest to do so. The grants and bursaries, unlike previously, come nowhere close to covering the fees, and that is ignoring the living costs.

Some statistics a few years ago indicated that 9/10 children from middle class families went to University, but only 1/10 from working class background do (not totally sure how they defined each but I am guessing based on household income). If £25k is the average salary what about a) households with no breadwinner and b) households where both parents have a job?

The threshold for full grants was £15,000 in 2006 and 2007. It didn't rise to £25,000 until 2008 and then it only applied to those starting in 2008 onwards not existing students.

The grants are called maintenance grants, intended to help with living costs not fees. It would be difficult, if not impossible to pay for the fees using the grant upfront, due to when they get paid. You would have to take a tuition fee loan each year and then pay it back straight away with the grant, but you would still gather some interest on the loans.

Oldernotwiser

2sides2everystory wrote: »

So for the sake of round numbers and acknowledging that for various reasons the average undergraduate study period is likely to be edging towards 4 years now, rather than three, shall we estimate say 460,000 per annual intake ?

Well common sense doesn't tell me the same thing without further investigation. Afterall, some say £25,000 is the approximate average (gross?) annual salary and whilst the distribution of salaries fro the lowest to the poorest may not be Gaussian, common sense does suggest that a fair base assumption might be that 50% of salary-earners will be below average salary (and 50% above it).

You're missing the fact that students are assessed on household income which will normally be that of 2 people rather than one person on the national average salary.

2sides2everystory

Oldernotwiser wrote: »

You're missing the fact that students are assessed on household income which will normally be that of 2 people rather than one person on the national average salary.

No I am not missing the point. I will admit to considering it, but I am not convinced it is fair to suggest that an average family has two adults working. You may be of the other opinion, ONW. But since when has the average family with teenage children in the UK even contained 2 adults ?

You must admit that since we are discussing mere factors of 2 now in our estimate of the adequacy of the apparent 20% I learned was typically to be set aside from 2012 tuition fee income by universities for needy students, then something in that new scheme of things definitely does not add up in favour of students from households with below average incomes.

brummierbel you may be interested to note that I am highlighting these things because I feel that fair access is NOT being achieved by the new arrangements - far from it in fact.

Taiko

But still, you've not provided a credible alternative. We all know the systems aren't perfect, but no system will ever be.

Oldernotwiser

2sides2everystory wrote: »

No I am not missing the point. I will admit to considering it, but I am not convinced it is fair to suggest that an average family has two adults working. You may be of the other opinion, ONW. But since when has the average family with teenage children in the UK even contained 2 adults ?
.

I think that the average household of teenagers has two working adults, even if they are not both the teenagers' parents.

Lokolo

2sides2everystory wrote: »

No I am not missing the point. I will admit to considering it, but I am not convinced it is fair to suggest that an average family has two adults working. You may be of the other opinion, ONW. But since when has the average family with teenage children in the UK even contained 2 adults ?

You must admit that since we are discussing mere factors of 2 now in our estimate of the adequacy of the apparent 20% I learned was typically to be set aside from 2012 tuition fee income by universities for needy students, then something in that new scheme of things definitely does not add up in favour of students from households with below average incomes.

brummierbel you may be interested to note that I am highlighting these things because I feel that fair access is NOT being achieved by the new arrangements - far from it in fact.

I think it is pretty common. Step parents are included as its based on household income.

My parents divorced when I was 4, but mum remarried and so my step dads income would have counted towards the income assessment.

I think it's more common that parents remarry rather than stay single nowadays.

2sides2everystory

Lokolo wrote: »

I think it is pretty common. Step parents are included as its based on household income.

My parents divorced when I was 4, but mum remarried and so my step dads income would have counted towards the income assessment.

I think it's more common that parents remarry rather than stay single nowadays.

Aren't we in danger of looking at the notional institution of marriage as a done UK thing in a somewhat "fluffy" way bearing in mind that the numbers getting married in the UK roughly halved between 1970 and 1993 for example, and that trend continues?

And why does poor old stepdad's income get taken into account? Whilst we are are in fluffyland, surely most kids are brought up by both their original parents whether they are divorced or not? So why are not both original parents incomes combined to come up with a notional "household" income when it comes to calculating which undergraduates deserve bursaries and extra grants? I am sure the CSA could work something out

Lokolo

2sides2everystory wrote: »

Aren't we in danger of looking at the notional institution of marriage as a done UK thing in a somewhat "fluffy" way bearing in mind that the numbers getting married in the UK roughly halved between 1970 and 1993 for example, and that trend continues?

And why does poor old stepdad's income get taken into account? Whilst we are are in fluffyland, surely most kids are brought up by both their original parents whether they are divorced or not? So why are not both original parents incomes combined to come up with a notional "household" income when it comes to calculating which undergraduates deserve bursaries and extra grants? I am sure the CSA could work something out

Why? No idea i dont make the rules.

Oldernotwiser

2sides2everystory wrote: »

Aren't we in danger of looking at the notional institution of marriage as a done UK thing in a somewhat "fluffy" way bearing in mind that the numbers getting married in the UK roughly halved between 1970 and 1993 for example, and that trend continues?

And why does poor old stepdad's income get taken into account? Whilst we are are in fluffyland, surely most kids are brought up by both their original parents whether they are divorced or not? So why are not both original parents incomes combined to come up with a notional "household" income when it comes to calculating which undergraduates deserve bursaries and extra grants? I am sure the CSA could work something out

Most benefits are based on household income and, in the case of student finance, this is regardless of whether the resident parent is married or living with a partner.

I don't see where the CSA would come into it either as payments from the student's non resident parent would stop at this point anyway.

2sides2everystory

CSA stops enforcing maintenance payments for children before they go to university? Is that a fact ? Who decided that was right ?

If so, we are in a worse mess than I thought.