If I can give my own thoughts and experiences of university and the horrific current system.
I'm a student in my final year of Sixth Form. I got okay GCSE results, but my predicted at A Level would get me into most unis, if I can get them on the day.
So this year has seen the process of deciding whether or not to apply to university for myself and the majority of my peers. I've known some of the brightest in my year, who by all means can be considered top students, admit that they are not going to university because of the immense debt they would be put under.
The Universities coped fine when it was £3000 a year per pupil. The increase of the cap was supposedly to allow the top universities to up their prices in order to reflect their higher quality. However, this simply hasn't been the case, with almost all non-Russell Group universities also upping the price of their degrees to 9k/annum.
Then, beginning this year, universities were allowed to add another £250, and after this year, increase their tuition fees annually by the rate of inflation.
So for me, if I get into my desired 4 year course, I will have around £40,000 of debt on tuition fees alone, without even considering the maintenance loan. In all likelihood, my debt will be around £65,000 by the time I graduate.
This hasn't had the effect of increasing the quality of degrees, or making them worth more in employability. Its main effect has been to intimidate those who are more financially conscious, those from poorer backgrounds, many of whom see no way in which they can fund their degree.
So, without a shadow of a doubt I would support even a lowering of tuition fees. Education shouldn't be a business, and nor should the mindset of 'not for the likes of me' be allowed to return.
Edit: Correcting term to annum and fixing typos in the calculations, apologies for the mistakes.
If 16% are getting firsts whilst less intelligent youth numbers appear to be rising I can only think one of four things may have occurred:
1. The students of the past did not try hard enough 2. The students of today get have an easier scoring system 3. The students of today try a lot harder 4. Less students continue on into University.
Answering myself:
4. I am pretty sure there are more students so we can write this one off. 3. I am certain students of today feel they have more competition, as a result of more people going to University. Whether this = Trying harder or not is difficult to tell. 2. I am unsure about this one, however a bit of googling seems to show exams have increased in difficulty if anything! 1. This is my only option remaining, but I just don't believe it's this one! Surely they tried just as much....
This is why I don't like my brain... it disagrees with itself!
I can only come to the newest option.
5. Students are tutored to pass an exam and to get high scores on an essay(rather than knowing the subject matter inside out)in order to make their universities look better than they are at teaching the subject matter and to make more money out of students paying higher fees.
Students of today can't afford to get shitfaced every night!
Was £1k a year for me which I thought was reasonable.
I tried quite hard to get shitfaced every night, it is possible. Pound a pint Thursdays were my favourite.
If 16% are getting firsts whilst less intelligent youth numbers appear to be rising I can only think one of four things may have occurred:
1. The students of the past did not try hard enough 2. The students of today get have an easier scoring system 3. The students of today try a lot harder 4. Less students continue on into University.
Answering myself:
4. I am pretty sure there are more students so we can write this one off. 3. I am certain students of today feel they have more competition, as a result of more people going to University. Whether this = Trying harder or not is difficult to tell. 2. I am unsure about this one, however a bit of googling seems to show exams have increased in difficulty if anything! 1. This is my only option remaining, but I just don't believe it's this one! Surely they tried just as much....
This is why I don't like my brain... it disagrees with itself!
I can only come to the newest option.
5. Students are tutored to pass an exam and to get high scores on an essay(rather than knowing the subject matter inside out)in order to make their universities look better than they are at teaching the subject matter and to make more money out of students paying higher fees.
are not more of today's exams course work based? Makes it easier surely.
If 16% are getting firsts whilst less intelligent youth numbers appear to be rising I can only think one of four things may have occurred:
1. The students of the past did not try hard enough 2. The students of today get have an easier scoring system 3. The students of today try a lot harder 4. Less students continue on into University.
Answering myself:
4. I am pretty sure there are more students so we can write this one off. 3. I am certain students of today feel they have more competition, as a result of more people going to University. Whether this = Trying harder or not is difficult to tell. 2. I am unsure about this one, however a bit of googling seems to show exams have increased in difficulty if anything! 1. This is my only option remaining, but I just don't believe it's this one! Surely they tried just as much....
This is why I don't like my brain... it disagrees with itself!
I can only come to the newest option.
5. Students are tutored to pass an exam and to get high scores on an essay(rather than knowing the subject matter inside out)in order to make their universities look better than they are at teaching the subject matter and to make more money out of students paying higher fees.
are not more of today's exams course work based? Makes it easier surely.
Course work is generally harder as it is about understanding the subject, exams are about recalling the correct answers.
That's my experience anyway, I always smashed exams and practicals, but struggled on coursework personally.
If 16% are getting firsts whilst less intelligent youth numbers appear to be rising I can only think one of four things may have occurred:
1. The students of the past did not try hard enough 2. The students of today get have an easier scoring system 3. The students of today try a lot harder 4. Less students continue on into University.
Answering myself:
4. I am pretty sure there are more students so we can write this one off. 3. I am certain students of today feel they have more competition, as a result of more people going to University. Whether this = Trying harder or not is difficult to tell. 2. I am unsure about this one, however a bit of googling seems to show exams have increased in difficulty if anything! 1. This is my only option remaining, but I just don't believe it's this one! Surely they tried just as much....
This is why I don't like my brain... it disagrees with itself!
I can only come to the newest option.
5. Students are tutored to pass an exam and to get high scores on an essay(rather than knowing the subject matter inside out)in order to make their universities look better than they are at teaching the subject matter and to make more money out of students paying higher fees.
are not more of today's exams course work based? Makes it easier surely.
Course work is generally harder as it is about understanding the subject, exams are about recalling the correct answers.
That's my experience anyway, I always smashed exams and practicals, but struggled on coursework personally.
Isn't coursework and research easier these days due to internet access?
It could be, personally I always went by the book for my GCSE's, I went straight out to work after that, the exams I have done since then have all been work related! So no idea (really) for Uni stuff!!
Can't believe some of the callous responses re: kids.
In amongst the callous responses, the fairest one of the lot simply said that anyone can have 3, 4 or 5 kids. Nobody is setting those rules. Just don't expect other people to have to finance them.
It's your choice. If you want 3 kids then that's fine.
That's a huge oversimplification of a usually very complex situation.
Really isn't
It is more complicated than that, because as much as most people would agree people shouldn't have kids that they can't afford to raise, people do have kids they can't afford to raise. That is, however, not the kids' fault so, if you are a child born to irresponsible parents, it is morally okay, let alone fair, for you to be to be condemned to a life in poverty because of actions entirely beyond your control?
And would those irresponsible parents (being as they are) utilise these increased benefits you want them to get in a responsible way?
Herein lies one of the differences in voters views I guess. IMO there is a certain level that you have to say isn't the taxpayers responsibility any more.
That is hard to say. Often the answer is no, but that is precisely why it is a difficult issue and not just as simple as blanket ban on benefits for kids over certain number in a family.
I've spoken before on this thread of the things I have witnessed in my in-laws regarding the benefits system, people who are taking advantage of it and have for years, people who are rightful claimants but have had to fight tooth and nail for what they are entitled having worked 7 days a week and paying their dues for 10s of years before becoming sick and disabled, family members who have popped out too many kids because they are a bit of a cash cow for them, people who have had their benefits suddenly stopped for no good reason or on a technicality which has suddenly left them struggling to feed their kids for 2 or 3 weeks forcing them to take out payday loans etc. And many other issues.
I'm not going to pretend these people have always made good choices and that they aren't all at least partly responsible for the situations they have found themselves in, but the reason and the solutions are usually complex.
I am very much in favour of reform to the benefits system - the money needs to be spent more efficiently, i.e. improved measures to make sure it ends up in the pockets of or benefiting the people it is meant to benefit and not in the pockets of benefits cheats. Perhaps measures like some of the child benefit going into state sponsored trust funds for use towards higher education costs, or school supplies or something like that, things designed to help break the kids break out of the poverty cycle.
It's a small sample set but my wife is one of 4 kids and grew up in a very low income family and as outlined above did not always have the best role models in her life. None of that was her fault, but she has, mostly through some god given will to succeed, worked incredibly hard to get a good education and now has a good job on good money. However, her three siblings to more or less of an extent are heading down the same paths as their parents. If we genuinely want to cure some of these ills, we need to improve the odds of kids growing beyond the confines of poverty. Again, the ways to do this are complicated but I am certain that in the short to medium term, to achieve that we need to be spending more not less.
Quite apart from who pays for what with training and university fees I think we have a greater problem in this country. This is one for the strivers and those that have ambition.
Generally there is a compact between the state and the people. If you work hard and study then a decent job will be yours as will all the benefits, like security and home ownership, that follow. Also see the American Dream.
If there is no decent job why bother studying. If not enough people study we don't have the people to do the jobs we need.
I believe the government have broken their side of the bargain.
If I can give my own thoughts and experiences of university and the horrific current system.
I'm a student in my final year of Sixth Form. I got okay GCSE results, but my predicted at A Level would get me into most unis, if I can get them on the day.
So this year has seen the process of deciding whether or not to apply to university for myself and the majority of my peers. I've known some of the brightest in my year, who by all means can be considered top students, admit that they are not going to university because of the immense debt they would be put under.
The Universities coped fine when it was £3000 a term per pupil. The increase of the cap was supposedly to allow the top universities to up their prices in order to reflect their higher quality. However, this simply hasn't been the case, with almost all non-Russell Group universities also upping the price of their degrees to 9k/term.
Then, beginning this year, universities were allowed to add another £250, and after this year, increase their tuition fees annually by the rate of inflation.
So for me, if I get into my desired 4 year course, I will have around £50,000 of debt on tuition fees alone, without even considering the maintenance loan. In all likelihood, my debt will be around £75,000 by the time I graduate.
This hasn't had the effect of increasing the quality of degrees, or making them worth more in employability. Its main effect has been to intimidate those who are more financially conscious, those from poorer backgrounds, many of whom see no way in which they can fund their degree.
So, without a shadow of a doubt I would support even a lowering of tuition fees. Education shouldn't be a business, and nor should the mindset of 'not for the likes of me' be allowed to return.
Are you sure about your £9k per term figure? Sounds wrong...
Quite apart from who pays for what with training and university fees I think we have a greater problem in this country. This is one for the strivers and those that have ambition.
Generally there is a compact between the state and the people. If you work hard and study then a decent job will be yours as will all the benefits, like security and home ownership, that follow. Also see the American Dream.
If there is no decent job why bother studying. If not enough people study we don't have the people to do the jobs we need.
I believe the government have broken their side of the bargain.
As i think I have probably mentioned a few hundred times, I know live in Alberta in Canada. One of the differences, relative to the UK, that I have noticed since moving here is the relative lack of social classes. You obviously have the rich, the middle classes, and the poor, and you have your hard workers and your work shy but the classes are not so rigidly stratified as in the UK, and people's perception of you is not so strongly linked to your background.
One of the areas this difference manifests itself is in education and training. There can be a bit of a snobbery in the UK towards people with trades and vocational qualifications that does not really exist here. The attitude here is very much more one of 'you worked hard to get your tickets, you do a job that needs doing, you're going to be paid fairly, and we will respect you for it.' For example, I do the same job here as in the UK working for the same company. I needed a degree for this job back home, here, where I think our quality of work is actually much higher, I could have joined the company with a 2 year diploma obtained from what would be the rough equivalent of a polytechnic. My boss is a technician, the former regional manager was a technician, and I use about 5% of my degree (if that) in this job, the rest was learnt on the job.
Successive governments seem to have created this system in the UK that encourages too many people to go to University, which in turn has devalued vocational qualifications and diplomas, and does not do enough to encourage kids to study areas with skills shortages and realistic career prospects.
That, and as you say, we have lost too much industry and manufacturing - not everyone can be a banker or a TV producer.
If 16% are getting firsts whilst less intelligent youth numbers appear to be rising I can only think one of four things may have occurred:
1. The students of the past did not try hard enough 2. The students of today get have an easier scoring system 3. The students of today try a lot harder 4. Less students continue on into University.
Answering myself:
4. I am pretty sure there are more students so we can write this one off. 3. I am certain students of today feel they have more competition, as a result of more people going to University. Whether this = Trying harder or not is difficult to tell. 2. I am unsure about this one, however a bit of googling seems to show exams have increased in difficulty if anything! 1. This is my only option remaining, but I just don't believe it's this one! Surely they tried just as much....
This is why I don't like my brain... it disagrees with itself!
I can only come to the newest option.
5. Students are tutored to pass an exam and to get high scores on an essay(rather than knowing the subject matter inside out)in order to make their universities look better than they are at teaching the subject matter and to make more money out of students paying higher fees.
are not more of today's exams course work based? Makes it easier surely.
Course work is generally harder as it is about understanding the subject, exams are about recalling the correct answers.
That's my experience anyway, I always smashed exams and practicals, but struggled on coursework personally.
Isn't coursework and research easier these days due to internet access?
I have no idea as I did not go to Uni.
Depends what the coursework is really. My degree was mostly coursework but I did do a Video Production degree so the internet couldn't really help too much when I was knee deep in filming/editing a video for hours upon hours.
If I can give my own thoughts and experiences of university and the horrific current system.
I'm a student in my final year of Sixth Form. I got okay GCSE results, but my predicted at A Level would get me into most unis, if I can get them on the day.
So this year has seen the process of deciding whether or not to apply to university for myself and the majority of my peers. I've known some of the brightest in my year, who by all means can be considered top students, admit that they are not going to university because of the immense debt they would be put under.
The Universities coped fine when it was £3000 a term per pupil. The increase of the cap was supposedly to allow the top universities to up their prices in order to reflect their higher quality. However, this simply hasn't been the case, with almost all non-Russell Group universities also upping the price of their degrees to 9k/term.
Then, beginning this year, universities were allowed to add another £250, and after this year, increase their tuition fees annually by the rate of inflation.
So for me, if I get into my desired 4 year course, I will have around £50,000 of debt on tuition fees alone, without even considering the maintenance loan. In all likelihood, my debt will be around £75,000 by the time I graduate.
This hasn't had the effect of increasing the quality of degrees, or making them worth more in employability. Its main effect has been to intimidate those who are more financially conscious, those from poorer backgrounds, many of whom see no way in which they can fund their degree.
So, without a shadow of a doubt I would support even a lowering of tuition fees. Education shouldn't be a business, and nor should the mindset of 'not for the likes of me' be allowed to return.
Are you sure about your £9k per term figure? Sounds wrong...
to the best of my knowledge it's 9k a year, but it's a very good post @WattsTheMatter
let's err on the side of conservatism. You come out with £30k ish odd debt
What do the top grad schemes pay these days £35k. How hard is it to get one of these, very hard I imagine.
What if you don't get on a grad scheme. Welcome to my world. Telesales. I think we like to bleed graduates in at £18k a year basic with the promise of unlimited riches.
And the best thing is, you definitely don't need a degree to it......
I know this is a very black and white example, but I feel for your generation and how further/higher education will impact your financial future
@newyorkaddick Had meant to write per annum, my apologies, but the point still stands.
In response to @cabbles point, I'm trying to get a Politics degree and graduate schemes are ridiculously hard to get, and even if you incorporate a language in a degree from say Kings, the average salary after 6 months in around the £21,000 region, making it very difficult to repay the loan even reasonably quickly.
If I can give my own thoughts and experiences of university and the horrific current system.
I'm a student in my final year of Sixth Form. I got okay GCSE results, but my predicted at A Level would get me into most unis, if I can get them on the day.
So this year has seen the process of deciding whether or not to apply to university for myself and the majority of my peers. I've known some of the brightest in my year, who by all means can be considered top students, admit that they are not going to university because of the immense debt they would be put under.
The Universities coped fine when it was £3000 a term per pupil. The increase of the cap was supposedly to allow the top universities to up their prices in order to reflect their higher quality. However, this simply hasn't been the case, with almost all non-Russell Group universities also upping the price of their degrees to 9k/term.
Then, beginning this year, universities were allowed to add another £250, and after this year, increase their tuition fees annually by the rate of inflation.
So for me, if I get into my desired 4 year course, I will have around £50,000 of debt on tuition fees alone, without even considering the maintenance loan. In all likelihood, my debt will be around £75,000 by the time I graduate.
This hasn't had the effect of increasing the quality of degrees, or making them worth more in employability. Its main effect has been to intimidate those who are more financially conscious, those from poorer backgrounds, many of whom see no way in which they can fund their degree.
So, without a shadow of a doubt I would support even a lowering of tuition fees. Education shouldn't be a business, and nor should the mindset of 'not for the likes of me' be allowed to return.
In my day a University was regarded as a good wheeze for clever kids leaving home for the first time enjoying their first taste of freedom and access to debauchery. It was an extension of 6th form larking about fuelled by alcohol and generally pissing about before getting a proper job and doing some work. It was not for the likes of me.
Never even dreamed about going to Uni, a sarf east London accent would rule you out at interview stage anyway for the professional jobs that graduates walked into in those days, so like all my mates, got a job at the bottom of the ladder. We's already done debauchery and pissing about in the fourth year anyway, so didn't see we were missing anything.
It's now a World away from those days and a degree is just like A levels were in my day, a mark of reasonable academic ability that shows you have perseverance to do some work. My impression is that today, unless you have an exceptional degree that gives immediate value to employers in industries with skills shortages, a degree does not mean your value to an employer is greater than a non graduate with work experience. In fact, more likely the opposite.
Recruitment experts would know, but I don't see why an employer should be discriminating between recruits who are graduates and non-graduates in the basic assessment of aptitude and potential. It ought to be obvious that a recruit with A levels adequate for entry to Uni could be as valuable, even more valuable, than a graduate on the assumption that there is little correlation between the qualifications of either and the specific required job skills.
Sad to say I think the University degree has been devalued. If it doesn't guarantee a fast track passage along a career path, as used to be the case, is it something that's worth putting yourself through.
Personally, i would look at where i want to be career wise and find out the means of getting there and is it possible with or without a degree. Speak to career advisers and contact potential employers and find out in advance what your prospects are. Doing a degree without a clear career path in mind is probably much more risky than it ever used to be.
I agree that debt shouldn't be the reason for not going to Uni, but I could be controversial and say that's a red herring. If you knew you would have a super salary that could repay the debt it would not be a reasonable excuse. The problem surely is not the debt, it's the fact that you are taking an unrewarded risk and are not guaranteed a career commensurate with the effort put in towards getting a degree and forsaking income in the meantime that might never be replaced.
These days i think you need to work out how to make yourself stand out from the crowd, because a degree doesn't guarantee you do any more.
If I can give my own thoughts and experiences of university and the horrific current system.
I'm a student in my final year of Sixth Form. I got okay GCSE results, but my predicted at A Level would get me into most unis, if I can get them on the day.
So this year has seen the process of deciding whether or not to apply to university for myself and the majority of my peers. I've known some of the brightest in my year, who by all means can be considered top students, admit that they are not going to university because of the immense debt they would be put under.
The Universities coped fine when it was £3000 a year per pupil. The increase of the cap was supposedly to allow the top universities to up their prices in order to reflect their higher quality. However, this simply hasn't been the case, with almost all non-Russell Group universities also upping the price of their degrees to 9k/annum.
Then, beginning this year, universities were allowed to add another £250, and after this year, increase their tuition fees annually by the rate of inflation.
So for me, if I get into my desired 4 year course, I will have around £50,000 of debt on tuition fees alone, without even considering the maintenance loan. In all likelihood, my debt will be around £75,000 by the time I graduate.
This hasn't had the effect of increasing the quality of degrees, or making them worth more in employability. Its main effect has been to intimidate those who are more financially conscious, those from poorer backgrounds, many of whom see no way in which they can fund their degree.
So, without a shadow of a doubt I would support even a lowering of tuition fees. Education shouldn't be a business, and nor should the mindset of 'not for the likes of me' be allowed to return.
Edit: Correcting term to annum, apologies for the mistake.
Please can you explain these figures, because I don't understand the jump from 9k x 4 =36, plus 250 x 4 =1 = £37K.
How does the £37K jump to £50k and then end up doubling to £75K ?
If I can give my own thoughts and experiences of university and the horrific current system.
I'm a student in my final year of Sixth Form. I got okay GCSE results, but my predicted at A Level would get me into most unis, if I can get them on the day.
So this year has seen the process of deciding whether or not to apply to university for myself and the majority of my peers. I've known some of the brightest in my year, who by all means can be considered top students, admit that they are not going to university because of the immense debt they would be put under.
The Universities coped fine when it was £3000 a year per pupil. The increase of the cap was supposedly to allow the top universities to up their prices in order to reflect their higher quality. However, this simply hasn't been the case, with almost all non-Russell Group universities also upping the price of their degrees to 9k/annum.
Then, beginning this year, universities were allowed to add another £250, and after this year, increase their tuition fees annually by the rate of inflation.
So for me, if I get into my desired 4 year course, I will have around £50,000 of debt on tuition fees alone, without even considering the maintenance loan. In all likelihood, my debt will be around £75,000 by the time I graduate.
This hasn't had the effect of increasing the quality of degrees, or making them worth more in employability. Its main effect has been to intimidate those who are more financially conscious, those from poorer backgrounds, many of whom see no way in which they can fund their degree.
So, without a shadow of a doubt I would support even a lowering of tuition fees. Education shouldn't be a business, and nor should the mindset of 'not for the likes of me' be allowed to return.
Edit: Correcting term to annum, apologies for the mistake.
Please can you explain these figures, because I don't understand the jump from 9k x 4 =36, plus 250 x 4 =1 = £37K.
How does the £37K jump to £50k and then end up doubling to £75K ?
Genuine question, I'm not disbelieving you.
I don't see how anyone from a 'normal' background can ever go to Uni if there is a 75k debt at the end!
If I can give my own thoughts and experiences of university and the horrific current system.
I'm a student in my final year of Sixth Form. I got okay GCSE results, but my predicted at A Level would get me into most unis, if I can get them on the day.
So this year has seen the process of deciding whether or not to apply to university for myself and the majority of my peers. I've known some of the brightest in my year, who by all means can be considered top students, admit that they are not going to university because of the immense debt they would be put under.
The Universities coped fine when it was £3000 a term per pupil. The increase of the cap was supposedly to allow the top universities to up their prices in order to reflect their higher quality. However, this simply hasn't been the case, with almost all non-Russell Group universities also upping the price of their degrees to 9k/term.
Then, beginning this year, universities were allowed to add another £250, and after this year, increase their tuition fees annually by the rate of inflation.
So for me, if I get into my desired 4 year course, I will have around £50,000 of debt on tuition fees alone, without even considering the maintenance loan. In all likelihood, my debt will be around £75,000 by the time I graduate.
This hasn't had the effect of increasing the quality of degrees, or making them worth more in employability. Its main effect has been to intimidate those who are more financially conscious, those from poorer backgrounds, many of whom see no way in which they can fund their degree.
So, without a shadow of a doubt I would support even a lowering of tuition fees. Education shouldn't be a business, and nor should the mindset of 'not for the likes of me' be allowed to return.
In my day a University was regarded as a good wheeze for clever kids leaving home for the first time enjoying their first taste of freedom and access to debauchery. It was an extension of 6th form larking about fuelled by alcohol and generally pissing about before getting a proper job and doing some work. It was not for the likes of me.
Never even dreamed about going to Uni, a sarf east London accent would rule you out at interview stage anyway for the professional jobs that graduates walked into in those days, so like all my mates, got a job at the bottom of the ladder. We's already done debauchery and pissing about in the fourth year anyway, so didn't see we were missing anything.
It's now a World away from those days and a degree is just like A levels were in my day, a mark of reasonable academic ability that shows you have perseverance to do some work. My impression is that today, unless you have an exceptional degree that gives immediate value to employers in industries with skills shortages, a degree does not mean your value to an employer is greater than a non graduate with work experience. In fact, more likely the opposite.
Recruitment experts would know, but I don't see why an employer should be discriminating between recruits who are graduates and non-graduates in the basic assessment of aptitude and potential. It ought to be obvious that a recruit with A levels adequate for entry to Uni could be as valuable, even more valuable, than a graduate on the assumption that there is little correlation between the qualifications of either and the specific required job skills.
Sad to say I think the University degree has been devalued. If it doesn't guarantee a fast track passage along a career path, as used to be the case, is it something that's worth putting yourself through.
Personally, i would look at where i want to be career wise and find out the means of getting there and is it possible with or without a degree. Speak to career advisers and contact potential employers and find out in advance what your prospects are. Doing a degree without a clear career path in mind is probably much more risky than it ever used to be.
This is a very important consideration. I did politics and law. The law bit of my degree pushed me toward a vocation, but I couldn't get a training contract. There are number of reasons for this, which I won't bore you all with. However the politics part was neither here nor there. I'm not saying it wasn't interesting, nor was it challenging, but it just reinforces a level of competency at an academic level (don't let me put you off applying for it @WattsTheMatter). My point is, to a grad recruiter with 100s of applications of grads who have 2:1 in English, politics, history etc, how are they going to differentiate, and how can you differentiate yourself. It's bloody hard to.
As Malcolm says, we need to have a real think about how we tackle the world of work and what is communicated to yours, and future generations.
I bought the whole, go to Uni, get a degree and that's all you need to do. You learn quickly that it's a bit more than that once you get up and out there, but it's not a sustainable way of thinking anymore imo.
I'm not convinced the apprenticeship levy is the way forward either
My impression is that today, unless you have an exceptional degree that gives immediate value to employers in industries with skills shortages, a degree does not mean your value to an employer is greater than a non graduate with work experience. In fact, more likely the opposite.
Sad to say I think the University degree has been devalued. If it doesn't guarantee a fast track passage along a career path, as used to be the case, is it something that's worth putting yourself through.
These days i think you need to work out how to make yourself stand out from the crowd, because a degree doesn't guarantee you do any more.
I agree entirely about standing out. Now, even with a good degree, they want people who have been active in a number of societies and roles, and have experience in the workplace. Quite like @Cordoban Addick, I feel it is problems with the wider employment sector that have compounded these issues.
In many career paths, you still need a degree, and it is people wanting these careers that are being hit hardest.
I agree @Exiled_Addick I think there was a very laudable aim to increased the amount of people getting a university education. Unfortunately this meant that a lot of people who were not suitable for university chose this option as other options were seen as a failure.
A lot of unneeded degrees became prevalent (media studies and business studies come to mind) whilst more useful and needed degrees (engineering?) seemed to attract less students. At the same time clever people who would have previously learnt a trade (and been respected for that) were encouraged into university education.
I would blame the Thatcher (well I obviously blame her for everything) government for the closing of tech colleges and the move away from teaching trades. I also blame the Blair government for pushing academic qualifications over trade qualifications.
My solution is that we stop trying to fit round pegs into square holes and respect individual skills and choices as all being valid. I think we would have a happier, wealthier and more productive workforce if we did.
If I can give my own thoughts and experiences of university and the horrific current system.
I'm a student in my final year of Sixth Form. I got okay GCSE results, but my predicted at A Level would get me into most unis, if I can get them on the day.
So this year has seen the process of deciding whether or not to apply to university for myself and the majority of my peers. I've known some of the brightest in my year, who by all means can be considered top students, admit that they are not going to university because of the immense debt they would be put under.
The Universities coped fine when it was £3000 a year per pupil. The increase of the cap was supposedly to allow the top universities to up their prices in order to reflect their higher quality. However, this simply hasn't been the case, with almost all non-Russell Group universities also upping the price of their degrees to 9k/annum.
Then, beginning this year, universities were allowed to add another £250, and after this year, increase their tuition fees annually by the rate of inflation.
So for me, if I get into my desired 4 year course, I will have around £50,000 of debt on tuition fees alone, without even considering the maintenance loan. In all likelihood, my debt will be around £75,000 by the time I graduate.
This hasn't had the effect of increasing the quality of degrees, or making them worth more in employability. Its main effect has been to intimidate those who are more financially conscious, those from poorer backgrounds, many of whom see no way in which they can fund their degree.
So, without a shadow of a doubt I would support even a lowering of tuition fees. Education shouldn't be a business, and nor should the mindset of 'not for the likes of me' be allowed to return.
Edit: Correcting term to annum, apologies for the mistake.
Please can you explain these figures, because I don't understand the jump from 9k x 4 =36, plus 250 x 4 =1 = £37K.
How does the £37K jump to £50k and then end up doubling to £75K ?
Genuine question, I'm not disbelieving you.
I don't see how anyone from a 'normal' background can ever go to Uni if there is a 75k debt at the end!
Surely must be wrong?
Yet another typo on my part I'm afraid, honestly so sorry about all this- exams and illness have hit me quite hard lately, really need to proof read.
Had meant to put 65k- in reality with the inflationary rises to the tuition fees, by the time I've finished my degree, tuition fees would have cost me all in all 40k. The maintenance loan for books and accomodation at around 8-9k a year would work out at around 65k-68k overall in combination with tuition fees.
Again, I sincerely apologise, I really need to proof read next time.
Unis will charge as much as they can for as long as they can.
As soon as students stop being charged exorbitant fees (ie when tuition is made free) then maybe they'll stop taking the mick and have to think about what courses they offer and how many students they accept.
Then maybe we'd stop seeing kids coming out with 40k of debt, with a job that pays 15k.
If I can give my own thoughts and experiences of university and the horrific current system.
I'm a student in my final year of Sixth Form. I got okay GCSE results, but my predicted at A Level would get me into most unis, if I can get them on the day.
So this year has seen the process of deciding whether or not to apply to university for myself and the majority of my peers. I've known some of the brightest in my year, who by all means can be considered top students, admit that they are not going to university because of the immense debt they would be put under.
The Universities coped fine when it was £3000 a year per pupil. The increase of the cap was supposedly to allow the top universities to up their prices in order to reflect their higher quality. However, this simply hasn't been the case, with almost all non-Russell Group universities also upping the price of their degrees to 9k/annum.
Then, beginning this year, universities were allowed to add another £250, and after this year, increase their tuition fees annually by the rate of inflation.
So for me, if I get into my desired 4 year course, I will have around £50,000 of debt on tuition fees alone, without even considering the maintenance loan. In all likelihood, my debt will be around £75,000 by the time I graduate.
This hasn't had the effect of increasing the quality of degrees, or making them worth more in employability. Its main effect has been to intimidate those who are more financially conscious, those from poorer backgrounds, many of whom see no way in which they can fund their degree.
So, without a shadow of a doubt I would support even a lowering of tuition fees. Education shouldn't be a business, and nor should the mindset of 'not for the likes of me' be allowed to return.
Edit: Correcting term to annum, apologies for the mistake.
Please can you explain these figures, because I don't understand the jump from 9k x 4 =36, plus 250 x 4 =1 = £37K.
How does the £37K jump to £50k and then end up doubling to £75K ?
Genuine question, I'm not disbelieving you.
I'm guessing he's added 4 years worth of maintenance loans to cover living costs? That would come out at about that sort of figure I think.
What I don't know is whether the repayment regime is the same for the maintenance loans as for the tutorial fees.
Sad to say I think the University degree has been devalued. If it doesn't guarantee a fast track passage along a career path, as used to be the case, is it something that's worth putting yourself through.
These days i think you need to work out how to make yourself stand out from the crowd, because a degree doesn't guarantee you do any more.
It's not as easy as that, nowadays you'll stand out if you don't have a degree, for the wrong reasons.
You have to take on the debt to keep up. It's not about getting ahead any more.
If I can give my own thoughts and experiences of university and the horrific current system.
I'm a student in my final year of Sixth Form. I got okay GCSE results, but my predicted at A Level would get me into most unis, if I can get them on the day.
So this year has seen the process of deciding whether or not to apply to university for myself and the majority of my peers. I've known some of the brightest in my year, who by all means can be considered top students, admit that they are not going to university because of the immense debt they would be put under.
The Universities coped fine when it was £3000 a term per pupil. The increase of the cap was supposedly to allow the top universities to up their prices in order to reflect their higher quality. However, this simply hasn't been the case, with almost all non-Russell Group universities also upping the price of their degrees to 9k/term.
Then, beginning this year, universities were allowed to add another £250, and after this year, increase their tuition fees annually by the rate of inflation.
So for me, if I get into my desired 4 year course, I will have around £50,000 of debt on tuition fees alone, without even considering the maintenance loan. In all likelihood, my debt will be around £75,000 by the time I graduate.
This hasn't had the effect of increasing the quality of degrees, or making them worth more in employability. Its main effect has been to intimidate those who are more financially conscious, those from poorer backgrounds, many of whom see no way in which they can fund their degree.
So, without a shadow of a doubt I would support even a lowering of tuition fees. Education shouldn't be a business, and nor should the mindset of 'not for the likes of me' be allowed to return.
In my day a University was regarded as a good wheeze for clever kids leaving home for the first time enjoying their first taste of freedom and access to debauchery. It was an extension of 6th form larking about fuelled by alcohol and generally pissing about before getting a proper job and doing some work. It was not for the likes of me.
Never even dreamed about going to Uni, a sarf east London accent would rule you out at interview stage anyway for the professional jobs that graduates walked into in those days, so like all my mates, got a job at the bottom of the ladder. We's already done debauchery and pissing about in the fourth year anyway, so didn't see we were missing anything.
It's now a World away from those days and a degree is just like A levels were in my day, a mark of reasonable academic ability that shows you have perseverance to do some work. My impression is that today, unless you have an exceptional degree that gives immediate value to employers in industries with skills shortages, a degree does not mean your value to an employer is greater than a non graduate with work experience. In fact, more likely the opposite.
Recruitment experts would know, but I don't see why an employer should be discriminating between recruits who are graduates and non-graduates in the basic assessment of aptitude and potential. It ought to be obvious that a recruit with A levels adequate for entry to Uni could be as valuable, even more valuable, than a graduate on the assumption that there is little correlation between the qualifications of either and the specific required job skills.
Sad to say I think the University degree has been devalued. If it doesn't guarantee a fast track passage along a career path, as used to be the case, is it something that's worth putting yourself through.
Personally, i would look at where i want to be career wise and find out the means of getting there and is it possible with or without a degree. Speak to career advisers and contact potential employers and find out in advance what your prospects are. Doing a degree without a clear career path in mind is probably much more risky than it ever used to be.
I agree that debt shouldn't be the reason for not going to Uni, but I could be controversial and say that's a red herring. If you knew you would have a super salary that could repay the debt it would not be a reasonable excuse. The problem surely is not the debt, it's the fact that you are taking an unrewarded risk and are not guaranteed a career commensurate with the effort put in towards getting a degree and forsaking income in the meantime that might never be replaced.
These days i think you need to work out how to make yourself stand out from the crowd, because a degree doesn't guarantee you do any more.
Comments
I'm a student in my final year of Sixth Form. I got okay GCSE results, but my predicted at A Level would get me into most unis, if I can get them on the day.
So this year has seen the process of deciding whether or not to apply to university for myself and the majority of my peers. I've known some of the brightest in my year, who by all means can be considered top students, admit that they are not going to university because of the immense debt they would be put under.
The Universities coped fine when it was £3000 a year per pupil. The increase of the cap was supposedly to allow the top universities to up their prices in order to reflect their higher quality. However, this simply hasn't been the case, with almost all non-Russell Group universities also upping the price of their degrees to 9k/annum.
Then, beginning this year, universities were allowed to add another £250, and after this year, increase their tuition fees annually by the rate of inflation.
So for me, if I get into my desired 4 year course, I will have around £40,000 of debt on tuition fees alone, without even considering the maintenance loan. In all likelihood, my debt will be around £65,000 by the time I graduate.
This hasn't had the effect of increasing the quality of degrees, or making them worth more in employability. Its main effect has been to intimidate those who are more financially conscious, those from poorer backgrounds, many of whom see no way in which they can fund their degree.
So, without a shadow of a doubt I would support even a lowering of tuition fees. Education shouldn't be a business, and nor should the mindset of 'not for the likes of me' be allowed to return.
Edit: Correcting term to annum and fixing typos in the calculations, apologies for the mistakes.
That's my experience anyway, I always smashed exams and practicals, but struggled on coursework personally.
I have no idea as I did not go to Uni.
I've spoken before on this thread of the things I have witnessed in my in-laws regarding the benefits system, people who are taking advantage of it and have for years, people who are rightful claimants but have had to fight tooth and nail for what they are entitled having worked 7 days a week and paying their dues for 10s of years before becoming sick and disabled, family members who have popped out too many kids because they are a bit of a cash cow for them, people who have had their benefits suddenly stopped for no good reason or on a technicality which has suddenly left them struggling to feed their kids for 2 or 3 weeks forcing them to take out payday loans etc. And many other issues.
I'm not going to pretend these people have always made good choices and that they aren't all at least partly responsible for the situations they have found themselves in, but the reason and the solutions are usually complex.
I am very much in favour of reform to the benefits system - the money needs to be spent more efficiently, i.e. improved measures to make sure it ends up in the pockets of or benefiting the people it is meant to benefit and not in the pockets of benefits cheats. Perhaps measures like some of the child benefit going into state sponsored trust funds for use towards higher education costs, or school supplies or something like that, things designed to help break the kids break out of the poverty cycle.
It's a small sample set but my wife is one of 4 kids and grew up in a very low income family and as outlined above did not always have the best role models in her life. None of that was her fault, but she has, mostly through some god given will to succeed, worked incredibly hard to get a good education and now has a good job on good money. However, her three siblings to more or less of an extent are heading down the same paths as their parents. If we genuinely want to cure some of these ills, we need to improve the odds of kids growing beyond the confines of poverty. Again, the ways to do this are complicated but I am certain that in the short to medium term, to achieve that we need to be spending more not less.
Generally there is a compact between the state and the people. If you work hard and study then a decent job will be yours as will all the benefits, like security and home ownership, that follow. Also see the American Dream.
If there is no decent job why bother studying. If not enough people study we don't have the people to do the jobs we need.
I believe the government have broken their side of the bargain.
One of the areas this difference manifests itself is in education and training. There can be a bit of a snobbery in the UK towards people with trades and vocational qualifications that does not really exist here. The attitude here is very much more one of 'you worked hard to get your tickets, you do a job that needs doing, you're going to be paid fairly, and we will respect you for it.' For example, I do the same job here as in the UK working for the same company. I needed a degree for this job back home, here, where I think our quality of work is actually much higher, I could have joined the company with a 2 year diploma obtained from what would be the rough equivalent of a polytechnic. My boss is a technician, the former regional manager was a technician, and I use about 5% of my degree (if that) in this job, the rest was learnt on the job.
Successive governments seem to have created this system in the UK that encourages too many people to go to University, which in turn has devalued vocational qualifications and diplomas, and does not do enough to encourage kids to study areas with skills shortages and realistic career prospects.
That, and as you say, we have lost too much industry and manufacturing - not everyone can be a banker or a TV producer.
let's err on the side of conservatism. You come out with £30k ish odd debt
What do the top grad schemes pay these days £35k. How hard is it to get one of these, very hard I imagine.
What if you don't get on a grad scheme. Welcome to my world. Telesales. I think we like to bleed graduates in at £18k a year basic with the promise of unlimited riches.
And the best thing is, you definitely don't need a degree to it......
I know this is a very black and white example, but I feel for your generation and how further/higher education will impact your financial future
In response to @cabbles point, I'm trying to get a Politics degree and graduate schemes are ridiculously hard to get, and even if you incorporate a language in a degree from say Kings, the average salary after 6 months in around the £21,000 region, making it very difficult to repay the loan even reasonably quickly.
Never even dreamed about going to Uni, a sarf east London accent would rule you out at interview stage anyway for the professional jobs that graduates walked into in those days, so like all my mates, got a job at the bottom of the ladder. We's already done debauchery and pissing about in the fourth year anyway, so didn't see we were missing anything.
It's now a World away from those days and a degree is just like A levels were in my day, a mark of reasonable academic ability that shows you have perseverance to do some work. My impression is that today, unless you have an exceptional degree that gives immediate value to employers in industries with skills shortages, a degree does not mean your value to an employer is greater than a non graduate with work experience. In fact, more likely the opposite.
Recruitment experts would know, but I don't see why an employer should be discriminating between recruits who are graduates and non-graduates in the basic assessment of aptitude and potential. It ought to be obvious that a recruit with A levels adequate for entry to Uni could be as valuable, even more valuable, than a graduate on the assumption that there is little correlation between the qualifications of either and the specific required job skills.
Sad to say I think the University degree has been devalued. If it doesn't guarantee a fast track passage along a career path, as used to be the case, is it something that's worth putting yourself through.
Personally, i would look at where i want to be career wise and find out the means of getting there and is it possible with or without a degree. Speak to career advisers and contact potential employers and find out in advance what your prospects are. Doing a degree without a clear career path in mind is probably much more risky than it ever used to be.
I agree that debt shouldn't be the reason for not going to Uni, but I could be controversial and say that's a red herring. If you knew you would have a super salary that could repay the debt it would not be a reasonable excuse. The problem surely is not the debt, it's the fact that you are taking an unrewarded risk and are not guaranteed a career commensurate with the effort put in towards getting a degree and forsaking income in the meantime that might never be replaced.
These days i think you need to work out how to make yourself stand out from the crowd, because a degree doesn't guarantee you do any more.
How does the £37K jump to £50k and then end up doubling to £75K ?
Genuine question, I'm not disbelieving you.
Surely must be wrong?
This is a very important consideration. I did politics and law. The law bit of my degree pushed me toward a vocation, but I couldn't get a training contract. There are number of reasons for this, which I won't bore you all with. However the politics part was neither here nor there. I'm not saying it wasn't interesting, nor was it challenging, but it just reinforces a level of competency at an academic level (don't let me put you off applying for it @WattsTheMatter). My point is, to a grad recruiter with 100s of applications of grads who have 2:1 in English, politics, history etc, how are they going to differentiate, and how can you differentiate yourself. It's bloody hard to.
As Malcolm says, we need to have a real think about how we tackle the world of work and what is communicated to yours, and future generations.
I bought the whole, go to Uni, get a degree and that's all you need to do. You learn quickly that it's a bit more than that once you get up and out there, but it's not a sustainable way of thinking anymore imo.
I'm not convinced the apprenticeship levy is the way forward either
In many career paths, you still need a degree, and it is people wanting these careers that are being hit hardest.
A lot of unneeded degrees became prevalent (media studies and business studies come to mind) whilst more useful and needed degrees (engineering?) seemed to attract less students. At the same time clever people who would have previously learnt a trade (and been respected for that) were encouraged into university education.
I would blame the Thatcher (well I obviously blame her for everything) government for the closing of tech colleges and the move away from teaching trades. I also blame the Blair government for pushing academic qualifications over trade qualifications.
My solution is that we stop trying to fit round pegs into square holes and respect individual skills and choices as all being valid. I think we would have a happier, wealthier and more productive workforce if we did.
Had meant to put 65k- in reality with the inflationary rises to the tuition fees, by the time I've finished my degree, tuition fees would have cost me all in all 40k. The maintenance loan for books and accomodation at around 8-9k a year would work out at around 65k-68k overall in combination with tuition fees.
Again, I sincerely apologise, I really need to proof read next time.
As soon as students stop being charged exorbitant fees (ie when tuition is made free) then maybe they'll stop taking the mick and have to think about what courses they offer and how many students they accept.
Then maybe we'd stop seeing kids coming out with 40k of debt, with a job that pays 15k.
What I don't know is whether the repayment regime is the same for the maintenance loans as for the tutorial fees.
You have to take on the debt to keep up. It's not about getting ahead any more.
F**k me. I agree with Dipenhall on something.
When you consider the respective moans on 'Evil Tories' or 'Comrade Corbyn' - its nothing on Trump!