Paying for children at university

onlyroz

indiepanda wrote: »

I agree. There are very few courses you can only choose to study in London. Most young people would love to live in London if they could afford it, but if one child had been sensible and thought they'd choose a cheaper place to live and the other went for the London option for the excitement of being in the capital without it being necessary to do so for their degree, then it seems a little unfair for the sensible child to just get less financial support.

London has some of the best universities in the world. People don't choose to go there just for the "excitement" - they go there for the teaching excellence, and for the prestige.

Jagraf

The universities in London don't rank any more highly than in other parts of the country. In fact, there are only two london unis ranked in the top ten this year.

onlyroz

Jagraf wrote: »

The universities in London don't rank any more highly than in other parts of the country. In fact, there are only two london unis ranked in the top ten this year.

So 20% of the top ten unis are in London then.

mumps

Just thinking about the time required to become a doctor, after the initial 5 years at uni the young doctors will be being paid so I don't see that it is any worse finance wise than most kids. I am pretty sure there is a bursary for maintenance and fees for some of the five years. For example my DD did a 4 year degree then a PGCE so not any better really and not as well paid when qualified so helping them through a med degree isn't a bad investment.d

Jagraf

onlyroz wrote: »

So 20% of the top ten unis are in London then.

Yes, which means that you can go to virtually any part of the country for excellent teaching.

Not sure what you mean by prestige - I live and worked with 40 mins commute of London and the prestige of a London uni doesn't strike with me any more than excellent universities in other parts of the country. Some people like to say they work / study in London though, so I get your point. Maybe it sounds good. I did my post grad in London as it was the closest.

Andypandyboy

Jagraf wrote: »

Yes, which means that you can go to virtually any part of the country for excellent teaching.

Not sure what you mean by prestige - I live and worked with 40 mins commute of London and the prestige of a London uni doesn't strike with me any more than excellent universities in other parts of the country. Some people like to say they work / study in London though, so I get your point. Maybe it sounds good. I did my post grad in London as it was the closest.

Some Universities do have more prestige than others, some excel at teaching certain subjects and their graduates benefit from that in the job market.

Perhaps some degree courses could be condensed, but the ones leading to defined career paths are quite rigorous and require a lot of independent study. For example, Architecture students have huge workloads, as do the medical and dental students. I have a child who is doing an MChemEng and has exams in January, and is averaging 12 hour days revising whilst home on the Christmas break. I don't think that any of these courses could be shortened.

missbiggles1

adindas wrote: »

True.
But the list is indicating where there are not enough skills to fulfill the job in these areas in the UK so the UK employers will need to find people from overseas to fill the gap.

There are some skill job on that list acquired not from formal high education but from other factors. The good examples are like you said top ballet dancers. Not to mention footballers in the premier leagues, Olympic athletes, Super models, a handful number of super rich businessman. These people who reach into the top are the people who are extremely talented, hard workers with some degrees of luck. In the society they are the exception rather than the norm.

But many jobs on that list are acquired through formal education at the degree level. Of course you will not find enough senior nuclear scientists, geologists here in the UK immediately. But the step stone is that through higher education. The youngster will start from junior position as a graduate engineers in this field and then job experience in the work place to make them a senior engineer / scientists. You will not be able to train people to become an engineer, a doctor, a dentist if they choose to study sport management (e.g. David Beckham degree)

UK Students here in England could get a student loan to pay their tuition fee. It is a non-income assessed loan to meet the cost of tuition fee, So it does not matter whether your parent are rich, your parent have enough saving you could always get student loan to pay the tuition fee and pay it back only after you exceed a certain income threshold. So if after finishing their degrees they get a low paid job which does not need degree at all, it will be a complete waste of taxpayers’ money as the tuition fee of vast majority of peoples in full time education here in the UK are funded by the taxpayer's money via student loan. If they just get a low paid job, the loan will never be paid back.

I was nodding in agreement with you until I got to this part - I don't think education's ever a waste of money.

missbiggles1

Jagraf wrote: »

Yes, which means that you can go to virtually any part of the country for excellent teaching.

Not sure what you mean by prestige - I live and worked with 40 mins commute of London and the prestige of a London uni doesn't strike with me any more than excellent universities in other parts of the country. Some people like to say they work / study in London though, so I get your point. Maybe it sounds good. I did my post grad in London as it was the closest.

Excellent teaching is never a bad thing and is essential in some subjects but HE is about learning rather than teaching.

Studying in London is no more "prestigious" than studying elsewhere - there are !!!! universities there just as there are elsewhere. Equally, there are renowned institutions in London just as there are elsewhere.

Prestige isn't about geography.

adindas

missbiggles1 wrote: »

I was nodding in agreement with you until I got to this part - I don't think education's ever a waste of money.

Well, I fully believe the people in Taxpayers alliance, the people affected by flood in the UK will disagree with your statement.

What about the people who have wasted about £30,000 of taxpayer’s money doing mickey mouse degree such as Sport Management (e.g. David Beckham degree). Finishing degree they are working stacking items on the shelves because there are not any job in this areas whihc need a degree but work experience.

If they started their career much earlier by not doing higher education they might be have become a supervisor and even the manager in the big supermarkets. No taxpayers money are wasted.

There are a lot types of education not only higher education at university. It could be education from the job places, apprentices, short training, etc.

Homeownertobe

adindas wrote: »

Well, I fully believe the people in Taxpayers alliance, the people affected by flood in the UK will disagree with your statement.

What about the people who have wasted about £30,000 of taxpayer’s money doing mickey mouse degree such as Sport Management (e.g. David Beckham degree). Finishing degree they are working stacking items on the shelves because there are not any job in this areas whihc need a degree but work experience.

If they started their career much earlier by not doing higher education they might be have become a supervisor and even the manager in the big supermarkets. No taxpayers money are wasted.

There are a lot types of education not only higher education at university. It could be education from the job places, apprentices, short training, etc.

Is this in English?