Self Study Degree

SeduLOUs

If you're just doing it for 'personal interest' then you take take many of the old OU courses for free on Open Learn.

Unfortunately, if you want an accredited degree you are going to have to fork out a fair bit for it, no matter what route you decide to take. Even if their was a complete study at home package as per OP request, I'd be shocked if you could get it for less than £5k.

Voyager2002

winalot wrote: »

I did an OU degree and found them absolutely dreadful - quality of tuition, materials, non-existent complaints process. I think what you suggest (self study) would be better but don't think it's possible.

Your experience is unusual: the quality of OU modules does vary, but most of them are of a very high standard, while OU degrees are generally very highly regarded.

agrinnall

winalot wrote: »

I did an OU degree and found them absolutely dreadful - quality of tuition, materials, non-existent complaints process. I think what you suggest (self study) would be better but don't think it's possible.

Is this the non-existent complaint process you refer to?

http://www2.open.ac.uk/students/complaints/complaints.php

:rotfl:

pjread

£5k would probably be the upper bounds of what I'd be prepared to pay for an undergrad distance degree from a reputable uk institution (no lectures here, just some canned guidance and marking) or pro-rata for other things - e.g. 2-3k for a masters, the "new" OU costs seem crazy considering the economies of scale they must have working for them.

I use OpenLearn a lot, but it's a shame not being able to benchmark and validate the knowledge gained, and the 'monopoly money' certs on Coursera etc just seem silly.

I feel quite sorry for those younger than me that are racking up the debt for full time study now. Thought I did badly paying £3k a year the first time round.

SeduLOUs

pjread wrote: »

I feel quite sorry for those younger than me that are racking up the debt for full time study now. Thought I did badly paying £3k a year the first time round.

Well, according the the radio this morning* only half of graduates manage to earn enough to have to pay it back anyway.

*I didn't research the accuracy of this statement.

pjread

SeduLOUs wrote: »

Well, according the the radio this morning* only half of graduates manage to earn enough to have to pay it back anyway.

*I didn't research the accuracy of this statement.

Yeah don't know how accurate that is either, but I guess that would mean at least some will earn the optimal amount to pay an effective 9% extra tax for most of their working lives. (unless the numbers have changed)

Mine's paid off now but was definitely a significant hindrance, and these poor sods are getting hit for 3x as much.

SeduLOUs

pjread wrote: »

Yeah don't know how accurate that is either, but I guess that would mean at least some will earn the optimal amount to pay an effective 9% extra tax for most of their working lives. (unless the numbers have changed)

Mine's paid off now but was definitely a significant hindrance, and these poor sods are getting hit for 3x as much.

Well it's only 9% of earnings over the threshold (roughly £17k), so on a salary of £21k you would only pay back £30 a month. If it isn't paid off within 30 years then any remaining balance is wiped.

Therefore, low earners or earners close to threshold will never pay even close to the full amount back, even over the 30 year term.

pjread

Yeah I get the rhetoric, especially on this site. But then, at £27271 (apparently the average salary according to thisismoney.co.uk) would be a bit over 900 a year, or £75 a month. And that'd just hit the 27k over 30 years, ouch. Bear in mind these increase at above inflation, so even at 30-40k you're probably paying +9% tax near enough "for life" at about £100-£150 a month as the debt is likely to increase faster than it's being paid for the first few years.

I guess my big issue with it is that the argument is "they'll earn more". But if that's the argument, isn't that the reason they pay more income tax, and isn't that how it should be recovered...? even though I've "already paid" and don't like tax, I'd think it far fairer to just cover it through general taxation (maybe increase higher rate income tax to compensate, I have a gut feel 1% would more than do it)

SeduLOUs

pjread wrote: »

And that'd just hit the 27k over 30 years, ouch.

So at 'average' salary (which seems high to me, but I'll trust you on it) you'd just about pay back the original tuition fees with no interest, and would fail to repay any maintenance loans taken out.

I've been paying student loan as long as I've been paying tax and NI and I never even finished my degree. It's just another line on the payslip to look at and think "oh well that's rubbish isn't it" but if you don't know any different then I guess it doesn't do any harm.

I got to the point where I'd have cleared my student loan within 12 months, and then had the marvellous idea of starting a part time OU degree because I've always regretted not getting it done. So I've reset my 30 year clock meaning I'll be paying back until close to State Pension Age. I just see it as another form of tax basically, and there's not a lot of point losing sleep over it.