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

WISHIWASRICH_2

bobajob_1966 wrote: »

Am I the only one that immediately discounts the opinion of anyone whose username is in block capitals, or contains text speak?

and did anyone ever tell you that sarcasm is the very lowest form of wit dearie?

2sides2everystory

arsenalbarnie wrote: »

Where did you see or hear this? I was not aware of it. I may be walking around with my head in the clouds mind.:o

Which bit do you mean? The (up to) £3,000 a year cashback perhaps? I think it is becoming de rigueur for many universities' 2012 offerings - most heavily for Maths, Engineering and Science undergraduates and because I think many of the universities are embarassed at how easily they have tapped the system and got the full £9K with so little real commitment. Or maybe you indeed meant the Buy 4 get 1 free part i.e. 20% of the new £9K income the universities receive which they are obliged to feed back as easy access subsidies/bursaries for the poorer applicants. That one came straight from a senior uni administrator's mouth.

My ds 3 is 17 next year, he is going to have a gap year or two, has a job at the same supermarket as his brother, is saving like mad to go off travelling after A levels and then make his mind up when he gets back. Things might have settled down a bit by then, or he may go abroad. Mind you, what you want at 17 can be a lot different by the time you are 19 or 20. Does your ds know what course he wants to do?

My DS1 is in much the same position and general deferred plan so maybe he'll start in 2013. Yes he does have quite a strong idea of the type of Engineering course he wants to do. And a Masters course, naturally, because 3 year batchelors courses are now talked about by the universities themselves with as much dismissiveness as ordinary degrees were (i.e. no honours) when I were a lad

Char_pdc

2sides2everystory wrote: »

The variables include

• the relative quality of state education versus private education before starting at a uni which offers cashback or not
• the amount of undergraduate time a student necessarily spends working to pay his or her way through university versus studying or other educationally useful activity
• the funding available to a student to broaden their horizons in travelling and engaging in more expensive leisure pursuits which provide a richer environment and experience upon which to found their studies
• the funding available to a student to surround themselves with the correct books and others too
• the funding available to a student to enable them to eat well and live in healthy accommodation and to socialise fully
• the proportion of students actually put off applying to university due to affordability concerns generally
• the perceived probability that a graduate will find a job on graduating which may in turn depend on the student's social background and the networking ability of their parents or sponsors
• the availability of funding for up to 5 years of university education for a non-medical degree versus a simple 3 year batchelor honours course.

(to list a few ... )

I can understand why people would be put off attending uni, it's a lot of debt to have hanging over your head. Some of your reasons above I don't agree with. Just for the record though, I come from a science background, so my comments about course content probably aren't applicable to those from a humanities background.

All the courses I looked at covered a very broad first year, to allow them to integrate students from different backgrounds with different knowledge bases to bring them all "up to speed". For example, I found one module very easy, because I had covered most of the content in my A Level syllabus, but I had to work much harder in other units because I didn't have the background so I had to play catch up. I didn't notice any difference between private vs. state school.

I worked during my degree and still came out with a good classification. With regards to getting employment after graduation, I think it can be useful to work, as there are skills you gain there which you wouldn't gain just studying for the degree course.

You can't study 24-7, it's just not possible. You need some time away from the course. How you choose to spend the time is up to you. People I spoke to at uni didn't find cost a barrier to participating in society events. Last year I ran a student society and have held two committee positions on another society. We actively try to make costs as cheap as possible and uni is a great way to get involved in activities for a fraction of the cost. I pay a certain sum, say £30 a year to play a sport, while a friend of mine who plays the same sport privately pays £30 every 6 weeks (there are then the same added costs on top of this e.g. transport, food/drink after etc if you choose to pay them). I don't think costs are/should be a barrier to get involved at uni (altho some activites, eg winter sports will be more expensive than others, eg cross-country running).

Learning resources are available cheaply/in the library/online if you shop around. So you may not be able to work where you want to, but you can still get the work done. In my second year we couldn't afford a phone line, so didn't have internet - I just worked at uni when I needed the internet.

A student from a wealthy background may find it easier than a student from a less wealthy background, because they can pay for things when they want them without worrying about it/having to make a budget. But I think that's something that happens in life generally, and isn't just restricted to university.

2sides2everystory

I offered them as variables not as surefire reasons, Char_pdc, but I take your points about too much work and no play (too much study and no getting out to work) and about first year courses being soft enough to permit differences to be ironed out - but I am sure you might appreciate that pandering to the lowest common denominator is not necessarily a sign of a well designed course, and of course for those receiving £3000 cash for their superior A level results very soon after they arrive, there is an immediate financial advantage to those who went to the best schools as well as an academic advantage.

There will be always be those (whether originally from the state or private sector schools) who will consider it truly frustrating to have to wait for various others to catch up and they too have a point. You say you didn't notice any difference between state and private but then as private are in the minority and the majority of those will be at Oxbridge or others of the more select universities, then perhaps your observation or lack of one is no surprise ?

melancholly

2sides2everystory wrote: »

What are you trying to suggest here ? That I a parent of an about to be bamboozled 17 year old need to provide you, a fan of the new system, a fully costed alternative to the totaly incredible 2012 Tuition Fees fiasco ? And you, in all your assumed splendour, dare to tell me I have no right to complain until I have done so ?

Sling your hook if you please, Sir or Madam.

i think the issue is that being frustrated at the increase in fees is one thing. complaining that it's so bad that people shouldn't bother going to uni is another. essentially, for most people student loans are the only option. ranting for months and months about how awful it all is isn't going to make an alternative source of funding appear. the situation isn't great, but it isn't a disaster. right now, to help a bamboozled 17 year old, imo it makes sense to make the best of the situation everyone has been put in by the new policies. essentially, if there isn't an alternative, what can students/parents do other than understand the new system? making out that the costs of uni are prohibitive isn't fair, or anything that is particularly productive at this point in the process.

i'm mad as hell that Tory MPs only decided to go against the party line for a referendum on Europe after happily going along with everything that will do damage to HE and the NHS...... but what can i do at this point? scream and scream until i pass out? will that help? (although it certainly would have helped if more 'grown ups' rather than students voiced concerns last December but that ship has long sailed!) i've registered my concern with my MP, signed petitions and now am trying to explain the facts as they are. i'm not going to agree with every government decision (that's some understatement with the coalition!), but it's a done deal for HE in this parliamentary cycle.

2sides2everystory

Watch your language please melancholly

You have no right to brandish words like "rant" purely because you are the sort who prefers to go quietly with the prevailing wind merely leaving a little marker that says "Pardon me but I would just like to remind people that I did say I was against it at the time but we moved on".

I even noticed that Martin presented himself as a troll detective in a post I saw this week: "I know you're not a troll" he said to Errata, another journalist. In recent months we even have seen the same word improperly used by a judge to describe someone who was making truly obnoxious posts on the internet.

Words like troll, aggressive, rude, rant are used quite wrongly by the few who believe they are God's gift as offensive codewords designed to ostracise. I am sure not you, Martin or the judge fall into that category, eh? At best those types of words are used by people who go with the prevailing wind without too much thought for why they are using the word, and at worst they are used to deliberately exaggerate offence taken. It is all pretty puerile.

In Sweden trolls look out for you, for example.

... the situation isn't great, but it isn't a disaster. right now, to help a bamboozled 17 year old, imo it makes sense to make the best of the situation everyone has been put in by the new policies. essentially, if there isn't an alternative, what can students/parents do other than understand the new system? making out that the costs of uni are prohibitive isn't fair, or anything that is particularly productive at this point in the process.

Yes, but that is simply your opinion and other than saying we have to like it and lump it you are not saying why it is unfair to suggest that the costs of uni are prohibitive. The fact is that a significant proportion of young people who wanted to go to university do seem to be claiming that they feel that the costs of uni are prohibitive and moreover, if it doesn't deter them and they actually do test the new system, they might find that lip-service only has been paid to helping people who will stuggle in it and in fact there is an now an element of robbing 4 Peters to pay one Paul.

The whole system is a bit sick, isn't it ? - linking our young people's names to huge house purchase sized debts instead of truly using our nation's power to give them a proper and equal start to life, and the suggestion that it means nothing other than the teensiest pr|ck of a 9% tax might be said to be even more sick or at least misguided.

We put people on the moon over 40 years ago. Arthur C Clarke and Gene Roddenberry opened our minds even before that to the notion of what could be achieved through equality of races and teamwork in academic and engineering pursuits. Yet what did those in power do with these notions? They decided that equality was a bit too boring for them as it meant that people couldn't get super-rich quick. Then they realised that by using the rocket scientists to derive a myriad of taps into wealth streams they could enable the few to suck dry the many. They called it financial services (sic).

And now it has gone t|ts up they talk about global war as a way to raise it all to a level where they can start doing it again.

7 billion people, of whom at least one in 20,000 are potential MSE contributors including our Prime Minister, yet all those in power can talk about is "saving financial services companies which are vital to our interests". I think we all need a serious rethink. Financial Services companies are crooked to the core. Just this week I am again dealing with those who are attempting to steal thousands of pounds of my money using crooked devices. Most MSE readers are oblivious to the siphoning noises occurring all around them 24/7. I am not. Remember that 'orrible snake thing in the Garbage Compactor in the Star Wars Death Star ? Well it isn't healthy to constantly create and maintain places where those things feel comfortable.

Banksters should be ostracised and indeed many locked up in the Garbage Compactor, and universities should be free of tuition fees for all those old, middle-aged and young that commit to learning.

Then the rest of us might go about our business and lives boldly, not masquerading meekly into next week or next year

PS This is not a rant

The_One_Who

2sides2everystory wrote: »

Yes, but that is simply your opinion and other than saying we have to like it and lump it you are not saying why it is unfair to suggest that the costs of uni are prohibitive. The fact is that a significant proportion of young people who wanted to go to university do seem to be claiming that they feel that the costs of uni are prohibitive and moreover, if it doesn't deter them and they actually do test the new system, they might find that lip-service only has been paid to helping people who will stuggle in it and in fact there is an now an element of robbing 4 Peters to pay one Paul.

How does your argument that the costs of university are prohibitive explain that Scottish student applications to Scottish universities (where there are no fees) are down by over 10%? I think it's fairly obvious why Scottish applications to universities down south are down by over 15%.

I think it's maybe closer to say that there is something more going on here than just fees. Are people looking to other options? Maybe thinking that university may not be the best option for them right now/ever? It can't just be the fees, although of course that will no doubt play a part in it.

Oldernotwiser

2sides2everystory wrote: »

Interesting example arsenalbarnie - and I would tend to agree that 12.5 hours a week is probably not going to do any harm to the studies - especially if you are serious about the scarcity of his required attendance at the university each week - but surely you are not serious about that ??

Students studying practical subjects and sciences may have more contact time but 12.5 hours is probably more hours than many humanities and social science students have to attend. University is mainly about independent study rather than being taught in a classroom.

arsenalbarnie

Oldernotwiser wrote: »

Students studying practical subjects and sciences may have more contact time but 12.5 hours is probably more hours than many humanities and social science students have to attend. University is mainly about independent study rather than being taught in a classroom.

And most of those hours are optional! I didn't go to uni, did nursing the old fashioned way back in the 80's. My oh went though and he assures me that lectures were always optional, the only things that were compulsory were the tutorials.

The_One_Who

arsenalbarnie wrote: »

And most of those hours are optional! I didn't go to uni, did nursing the old fashioned way back in the 80's. My oh went though and he assures me that lectures were always optional, the only things that were compulsory were the tutorials.

Not in every university and not in every department, some are more strict on lecture attendance than others. In a lot of cases lecture attendance can make up a very small part of your final degree classification.

Also, you're taking a risk not going to a lecture. I've been asked exam questions on more than one occasion (and the questions were written by different people for different classes) where they related to what could only be described as an aside within the lecture material. It never showed up in the lecture notes that were available online for those who didn't make it/didn't take their own notes.