Are degrees in the UK value for money?

preciousillusions

Arleen wrote: »

Of course even if you will make the smart choice in terms of school stuff may not go as planned, that is nature of life and why we have strong benefits system where paying for that education will then be delayed. But I wager that those cases are rare given how popular arts history courses are, although I would love some comprehensive statistics on that subject.

Sorry I might be dumb but don't quite understand this point? What has the benefits system got to do with art history courses??

Also, did you seriously refer to disabled people as cripples? Wow.

Arleen

preciousillusions wrote: »

Sorry I might be dumb but don't quite understand this point? What has the benefits system got to do with art history courses??

Quite a lot, as there is a difference if you do arts history major for yourself on someone else's money (which is what you are doing when you fund it with benefits, as the whole country winds up paying for your degree), or within your means. When you do the latter, no one cares as it's your money you are spending. When you do it on gov ran loans then you better have a solid way to repay the debt.
I don't think that people realize that, right now, there is just short of 77 billion quid locked in student loans. Growth by 75 billion in 20 years since 1996 where it stood at 1.9b, and it's been spiraling out of control since.

adindas

Arleen wrote: »

Quite a lot, as there is a difference if you do arts history major for yourself on someone else's money (which is what you are doing when you fund it with benefits, as the whole country winds up paying for your degree), or within your means. When you do the latter, no one cares as it's your money you are spending. When you do it on gov ran loans then you better have a solid way to repay the debt.
I don't think that people realize that, right now, there is just short of 77 billion quid locked in student loans. Growth by 75 billion in 20 years since 1996 where it stood at 1.9b, and it's been spiraling out of control since.

It has been historically proven that majority of the students do not pay their student debts off.

In the future, "Two-thirds of UK students ‘will never pay off debt’
https://www.ft.com/content/55f4a6f6-3eab-11e6-9f2c-36b487ebd80a

This is what will happen if the people are allowed to study for fun whatever they want using taxpayer's money.

gfplux

Surely the Government and Universities should recognise that Britain and the World is a changed place.
Despite Globalisation I imagine the majority of young people coming into the work force are only mobile within the UK.
Britain has needs. Those needs are people in the correct numbers with the correct skills to work in Britain.
Where is the Government when it comes to pressure to organise "courses" in the broadest sense. If Britain needs X number of plumbers/nurses/accountants/lawyers etc etc in X years time surely it is not beyond the whit of man or Government to organise this.
I do not imagine a long time horizon so this can be modified year by year.
I am not suggesting some totalitarian society but just some long term planning linked to common sense.
Some might object to this as social engineering but what is wrong with that, it's happening all the time.

Cakeguts

I think the reason why some of them do it for fun is because they have been told to study A levels that they enjoy by their teachers. They then think that it is only worth studying something that they enjoy. They also tend to think that a degree will get them a "graduate" job. It is the same as A levels getting them a university place. Most of them don't seem to realise that you can only get a graduate level job if the subject you are studying leads to jobs that need a degree. There are a lot of university "graduates" who don't understand that not all jobs need someone to have a degree to do them so they won't get graduate employment. They also won't get it because the university they went to doesn't offer degrees that employers think of as being "graduate" level. So then we get to the three years wasted doing something that they enjoy at a university that is easy to get into, in a subject that they could have studied by reading books in their local library while doing an apprenticeship. All because of all the vested interests. It is time for the staff of the bad universities to get off this gravy train..

I think that as well as returning the polytechnics to their original names the old technical colleges, arts colleges and all the other useless universities that used to be something else need to go back to being what they were and offer alternative courses keeping just the top few universities that supply the country with the 8% of people that the country needs to have a degree.

CLAPTON

gfplux wrote: »

Surely the Government and Universities should recognise that Britain and the World is a changed place.
Despite Globalisation I imagine the majority of young people coming into the work force are only mobile within the UK.
Britain has needs. Those needs are people in the correct numbers with the correct skills to work in Britain.
Where is the Government when it comes to pressure to organise "courses" in the broadest sense. If Britain needs X number of plumbers/nurses/accountants/lawyers etc etc in X years time surely it is not beyond the whit of man or Government to organise this.
I do not imagine a long time horizon so this can be modified year by year.
I am not suggesting some totalitarian society but just some long term planning linked to common sense.
Some might object to this as social engineering but what is wrong with that, it's happening all the time.

very soviet union

better to let the market decide how many plumbers we need and simply let the government ensure unbiased information is available and responses to the the demand for training places.

there is an argument that Doctors/nurse need to be planned for as the government funds the places : so far government planning is about as succesful as one would expect.

michaels

CLAPTON wrote: »

very soviet union

better to let the market decide how many plumbers we need and simply let the government ensure unbiased information is available and responses to the the demand for training places.

there is an argument that Doctors/nurse need to be planned for as the government funds the places : so far government planning is about as succesful as one would expect.

Isn't the govt badly skewing the market by allowing everyone the same loan on the same terms? The market would certainly not offer the same loan to an undergraduate studing medicine at a Russel Group uni to one studying media at a former poly....

Arleen

michaels wrote: »

Isn't the govt badly skewing the market by allowing everyone the same loan on the same terms? The market would certainly not offer the same loan to an undergraduate studing medicine at a Russel Group uni to one studying media at a former poly....

Indeed it is, and it's everyone else paying for it. It's also skewing general population indirectly, as it causes schools to grow quickly in order to try to take that many students in. And the bigger the organizaiton gets, the higher its overhaeds and overal cost of education keeps going up, while the quality goes down as there are only that many quality lecturers on the market.

armchaireconomist

No they are not, by large. I went to school with people who stayed at sixth form for 2 extra years to get 3x C's to go do a pointless criminology degree, leave, then work in B&Q.


Meanwhile I left for an apprenticeship, got vilified for it as I was "too smart not to go", so now I earn enough to have bought my own house with 0 help at 21, and pay my own way through University with no loans whilst working 9-5.


A complete waste of time and taxpayers money. If you're doing something academic, i.e. English, Maths, Sciences it's excellent. A tutor once told me 95% of his photography University class will still be unemployed 12 months after graduation.

GreatApe

Arleen wrote: »

Quite a lot, as there is a difference if you do arts history major for yourself on someone else's money (which is what you are doing when you fund it with benefits, as the whole country winds up paying for your degree), or within your means. When you do the latter, no one cares as it's your money you are spending. When you do it on gov ran loans then you better have a solid way to repay the debt.
I don't think that people realize that, right now, there is just short of 77 billion quid locked in student loans. Growth by 75 billion in 20 years since 1996 where it stood at 1.9b, and it's been spiraling out of control since.

wow if you think of it in the long run if 40% go to university at a cost of £40k a head and the UK goes towards 70 million people, if half pay it off over 30 years and half do not, then the student loan book is going to go towards £1 trillion