Is it "socially unjust" to charge young students for their university education?

[Seagull1989]

Surely the government and banks wouldn't put people in debt intentionally ?
They cant afford a mortgage to get in debt, so we will charge them extortionate education fees!

 

[BigGully]

This premise may be arguable but i would suggest that those attaining a medical/accounting/teaching/veterinary degree are likely to be the type of people with the ability to earn a 'higher lifetime salary' than the average whether or not they attend university. It can be argued that university courses are simply providing the standard of education suited to the individuals ability in the same way that sixth form colleges and streaming in senior schools do.

Your argument still doesn't answer the fundamental question as to why certain occupations require an individual to pay for the training necessary to learn the skills to practice their chosen profession whilst others don't.

As for arguing that a university graduate could avoid repaying their loans by becoming a bus driver - I would argue that in such cases the cost of their education SHOULD become repayable whilst if they carry out an occupation for which their degree was a requirement any loan should be wiped out.

I am guessing it was originally driven by a desire by a political party to make cuts, tuition fee's were identified, so its a tax cut or tax reclaim depending on your circumstances.

Different professions offer a statistically based assumption of lower or higher income families and the requirement to pay seems to then be dictated by this.

The real scandal is how previous generations of poorer families without little chance of progression to higher education themselves helped finance the most privileged families to attend universities for free and perpetuating the cycle of that privilege.

 

[brightn'ove]

Very much agree with you.

I currently do BA (Hons) International Relations. The first year (which counts for nothing in terms of degree classification) was a crash course in politics. Despite me having a B in A level politics, I had to re do it. Its cost me £11,000 (fees + loan) to do a year which counts for nothing and learning stuff I already know about.
I think there could be an option 2/3 years, if you have relevant a levels you can do the 2 year. If you don't, you do 3 years.

I was in lectures which were laid out exactly how the AQA A level politics course was laid out.
1) Constitution
2) Executive
3) Legislature
4) Judiciary

Exactly like that...painful to say the least.

I had something similar except all A level politics stuff in first year was condensed into one module in first term. Instead of knocking a year off of your degree, they should teach you more stuff. But i can see why they do it.

 

[GreersElbow]

I had something similar except all A level politics stuff in first year was condensed into one module in first term. Instead of knocking a year off of your degree, they should teach you more stuff. But i can see why they do it.

They had an extra bit on the role of the intelligence services, but that's only because the Politics Reader is a specialist on intelligence services. If it broadened out, then yeah it'll be much more interesting. I understand why they teach it, there's people on my course where politics was not an option at A level.

 

[Creaky]

The real scandal is how previous generations of poorer families without little chance of progression to higher education themselves helped finance the most privileged families to attend universities for free and perpetuating the cycle of that privilege.

Surely with university tuition free and living costs subsidised for those with the necessary qualifications a university education was far more available to 'poorer' families than it is now

 

[Chinman3000]

Throw away your TV, phone, car and laptop - universities trained the people who designed them, the people that run the companies that manufactured them and the people who designed the service infrastructure that allowed you to purchase it all.

Want nice stuff? Invest in a university infrastructure that produces high quality graduates from ALL walks of life.

Irrelevant point.

Aside from the fact that my phone was built in China, my TV in Korea, my Car in Germany and my laptop in Japan, I have not denounced the need for universities and certain degrees but I don’t believe they should be public funded, on a thread which is discussing whether UK universities should be free.

By you logic why don’t you throw away your house, as it was almost certainly built by someone without a degree? How about your food, does the local farmer, butcher or grocer have a degree?

I’m self-made and successful and have mates with degrees who work in Tesco. No one is owed a higher education.

 

[Gwylan]

The real scandal is how previous generations of poorer families without little chance of progression to higher education themselves helped finance the most privileged families to attend universities for free and perpetuating the cycle of that privilege.

As someone who was the first person in his family to go to university I'm a bit bemused by this. My mum left school at 14 to look after her brothers, my dad left school at 15 to work in a factory. I remember life without car, phone, fridge, TV or washing machine and yet, we were one of the most privileged families in the country. Strange definition

 

[BigGully]

Surely with university tuition free and living costs subsidised for those with the necessary qualifications a university education was far more available to 'poorer' families than it is now

I cannot be sure, but aspiration has changed, university is free today for lower income families cant get much cheaper than free

 

[BigGully]

As someone who was the first person in his family to go to university I'm a bit bemused by this. My mum left school at 14 to look after her brothers, my dad left school at 15 to work in a factory. I remember life without car, phone, fridge, TV or washing machine and yet, we were one of the most privileged families in the country. Strange definition

I am talking perhaps in the context of opportunities given to a few but not to the many, privilege is not love and stability although it is of course a privilege to be given these by our parents, if that what you mean.

 

[The_Viper]

I know this is an extreme example, but when a graduate eventually finds a cure to cancer and s/he's from an English university that s/he's had to pay for himself, you're going to be fine with paying a few thousand for that cure per person right?

After all, he or she didn't get any help from you, why should you get anything for free?

 

[dazzer6666]

Interesting that the Unis in Scotland are absolutely rammed with students who have no real wish to study, but they do because they don't have to pay for it. There are aspects of the setup that need to be re-thought, but at least introducing tuition fees has made a few seriously think about whether it's the right thing to do.

I work in banking, and virtually all new intakes now will be degree educated. Very sad......often the degrees have no relevance to the industry. I wish there was more opportunity for kids to do serious apprenticeship-type programmes from 16 or 18 rather than 'have' to have a degree to get a look in. It's no guarantee of intelligence, and certainly not common sense.

 

[alfredmizen]

Surely with university tuition free and living costs subsidised for those with the necessary qualifications a university education was far more available to 'poorer' families than it is now

Do you fancy answering this ??

' How am I benefiting from someone doing a degree in travel and tourism,theatre production or film studies ? The first two are courses that could and should be learnt on the job with maybe a day release at the local tech,and a degree in film studies is ridiculous, and i know of people that have done a degree in all 3 of these subject, as well as someone who did a degree in sports centre management. '

 

[Creaky]

Do you fancy answering this ??

' How am I benefiting from someone doing a degree in travel and tourism,theatre production or film studies ? The first two are courses that could and should be learnt on the job with maybe a day release at the local tech,and a degree in film studies is ridiculous, and i know of people that have done a degree in all 3 of these subject, as well as someone who did a degree in sports centre management. '

I'm not arguing that ALL courses should be subsidised, quite the opposite. On the other hand do you not believe that there are courses which are necessary for students to carry out their chosen profession and which are also necessary for the well being of the nation.

We need doctors, nurses, teachers, lawyers etc. and yet as a country we charge those who want to work in those areas for learning the required skills. Yes we equally need bricklayers, plumbers and other skilled trades as well as many others - the difference is we don't in general impose a charge on those wanting to learn those trades.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

Interesting that the Unis in Scotland are absolutely rammed with students who have no real wish to study, but they do because they don't have to pay for it. There are aspects of the setup that need to be re-thought, but at least introducing tuition fees has made a few seriously think about whether it's the right thing to do.

I work in banking, and virtually all new intakes now will be degree educated. Very sad......often the degrees have no relevance to the industry. I wish there was more opportunity for kids to do serious apprenticeship-type programmes from 16 or 18 rather than 'have' to have a degree to get a look in. It's no guarantee of intelligence, and certainly not common sense.

I agree with this. I retired last year from a civil service job, where I had just O levels, leaving school at 16. The new staff taken on were youngsters with degrees, doing exactly the same job as I did. They didn't need degrees, so, in effect, wasted the years in education when they could have been earning and paying income tax, but now saddled with debt.

I think that some university courses should be subsidised, mainly being the sciences, medicine, and engineering.
Firms should sponsor courses and train their own workers with recognised qualifications within their own fields. The best training for any job is 'on the job.'

 

[Phat Baz 68]

If Mama & Papaaaaa !!
Are on shed loads of wonga and you come from a rich and over privileged background then yes they should pay or rather Mater and Pater should.
If you come from a poor background but are hard working, Mum and Dad are hardworking but cant afford Uni fees or to even help you, and you want to make a difference in your life then NO !!!

 

[alfredmizen]

I'm not arguing that ALL courses should be subsidised, quite the opposite. On the other hand do you not believe that there are courses which are necessary for students to carry out their chosen profession and which are also necessary for the well being of the nation.

We need doctors, nurses, teachers, lawyers etc. and yet as a country we charge those who want to work in those areas for learning the required skills. Yes we equally need bricklayers, plumbers and other skilled trades as well as many others - the difference is we don't in general impose a charge on those wanting to learn those trades.

fair enough, you didnt make this view clear in your original post , i agree with you, id make lawyers pay though !!

 

[Mellor 3 Ward 4]

Blair wanted 50% of young people to go to University - big mistake. A truly crazy policy. Nothing wrong with Education, but sometimes it's more about skills than knowledge.

Old style Polytechnics then became Universities - another big mistake.

What happened was that instead of young people going to learn a trade at the local poly, we have the situation where loads of kids are attending second string Universities, miles away from where they live, (thus pushing up the house rental market) and doing courses which will in all likelihood not help them further their careers, and having 40k plus of debt that the Country won't get back.

Add to that because of the lack of young people learning a trade, the Labour Party then actively encouraged Eastern Europeans to come here and work - without having any idea as to the numbers who would come, thus making the housing situation worse, and at the same time forcing UK Tradesman's wages down.

 

[father_and_son]

If a degree is something which ...
a) is relatively difficult to get and so only the most capable (regardless of background) will obtain one
b) leads to a higher average wage over your lifetime

..then it should be free but in the sure and certain knowledge that the costs will be recovered from the graduate later in the form of higher income tax receipts. So we, in effect, borrow from future tax revenues to pay for education today.

Unfortunately, as with most qualifications in this country, the UK degree has lost an awful lot of its value and now too many people have them and they are no longer the guarantee of an increased salary and so future tax revenues from graduates won't have the differential that would recover the money spent. A common theme among recruiters now is that a first degree is relatively worthless and you look for a Masters when choosing the best candidates.

Therefore, although I believe that, in principle, higher education should be free, when 50% of school leavers start one, then it does not meet the basic criteria laid out above and the state shouldn't be funding it because, frankly, it doesn't justify the outlay.

Personally, I'd rather we re-thought the whole of further education, returned degrees to being something that 10-20% of people had and create viable, meaningful employment options to those who don't really need a degree for what they will do as a career so that they can work and earn.

 

[dazzer6666]

Most medical degrees (nursing for example) are already fee-free, and students also get a bursary towards living costs (they get much more in Scotland, naturally) - as a result demand is huge

 

[dazzer6666]

Blair wanted 50% of young people to go to University - big mistake. A truly crazy policy. Nothing wrong with Education, but sometimes it's more about skills than knowledge.

Old style Polytechnics then became Universities - another big mistake.

What happened was that instead of young people going to learn a trade at the local poly, we have the situation where loads of kids are attending second string Universities, miles away from where they live, (thus pushing up the house rental market) and doing courses which will in all likelihood not help them further their careers, and having 40k plus of debt that the Country won't get back.

Add to that because of the lack of young people learning a trade, the Labour Party then actively encouraged Eastern Europeans to come here and work - without having any idea as to the numbers who would come, thus making the housing situation worse, and at the same time forcing UK Tradesman's wages down.

Nail on head