Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 19, 2004 23:54:52 GMT 1
Am i the only person in the country who thinks Tony Blair has hit the nail on the head with the governments new idea on tuition fees?
If their plans come into force there are no fees paid while they are at university and the money they do have to pay back is only paid at a rate they can afford in proportion to what they are earning.
As well as this, the 30% of university students from the lowest eraning famalies will get maintanance grants of upto £3,000 while they are at university.
Of course in a perfect world higher education would be free. However there are too many people going to university now for the country to be able to afford that.
|
|
|
Post by kickinpretty on Jan 19, 2004 23:57:33 GMT 1
Agree entirely... ;D
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 19, 2004 23:58:38 GMT 1
Me too.
|
|
|
Post by R6ix on Jan 20, 2004 0:18:14 GMT 1
me too,nothings free in this country (unless your an asylum seeker)
|
|
|
Post by robspaceman1 on Jan 20, 2004 0:18:35 GMT 1
disagree:
there are far too many university courses for the job market, hence the striking need for more funds. i can understand that.
however, the govt harking on about '50% in higher education' as some kind of magic measure of a country's worth is laughable. we dont need that many graduates. try finding a reasonably priced and well trained plumber/electrician/builder/mechanic/etc these days. i reckon it's time the culture of education was changed so that being an apprentice for a non-office based career loses the social stigma of 'not bright enough to do a levels'. maybe if we had more quality in the real people that keep our country running rather than churning out people with 10 a level points and a degree in david beckham's hair, we might find that less trains break down, the police are more professional, child-minders are more trustworthy, nurses more caring, etc etc.
you cannot deny that people are put off going to university by the cost - and that's wrong since university should be for those most able to do well academically, not most able to not worry about debt. i did a lot of work with the widening participation project at bristol university, and it didnt matter how much you spelled out to kids that they didnt have to pay anything upfront, they were still put off from applying to university.
the answer is to have far less universities, make these free for all and reintroduce the grant (except perhaps the VERY rich); while at the same time time making vast improvements to vocational training starting at an earlier age, perhaps 15, so kids arent put off school by thinking 'its not relevant'.
ta-da!
|
|
|
Post by shrewinjapan on Jan 20, 2004 0:34:10 GMT 1
I'm with you Robspaceman. Why do the government continually push for a higher percentage in higher ed when there are not enough graduate level jobs and there is not enough money to fund the Unis? And this is a time when the UK economy is doing relatively well. When I graduated Uni in the early 90's that wasn't the case and subsequently lots of my peers (and myself) were unable to find worthwhile employment, especially those of us with nonjobspecific degrees. University isn't the be-all-end-all it is portrayed. They should try to improve vocational training at 16 and 18 years old and definitely try to get rid of the attitude that those who don't pursue higher education are "thick" or in some way a lower rung of society. Keep Uni free for those who truly want to go and have good reason to go, but enough of those degrees in "Madonna Studies" or "Beckhams Hair Science".
|
|
|
Post by RuytonShrew on Jan 20, 2004 0:39:06 GMT 1
me too,nothings free in this country (unless your an asylum seeker) Any excuse to have a pop at a foreigner eh? The xenophobia of this country astonishes me at times. Don't believe Tory propaganda that all asylum seekers are sucking this country for all it cvan get. Ther vasy majority are decent people being persecuted in their own countries by tyrannical leaderships. As decent people who are all members of the human race, we should be helping. I know it wasn't the point of this thread, but the spiteful, ill thought out reference annoyed me.
|
|
|
Post by BillyH on Jan 20, 2004 0:39:53 GMT 1
I think the major objection is the variable element to it that negates much of the extra financing on offer- thus incentivising those ment to be benefiting to go to a cheaper uni, not exactly challenging the elitism at oxbridge and others - Bristol being the one example of a progressive attitude to it. Especialy when it is considered that this is being introduced because of arbitrary government targets on expanded access which like you said Rob is of questionable merit. That and the fact that all the concessions being made (and down right shamless bribery that is going on) make for such convoluted legislation that the cost of implementing it may as well go on keeping tuition fees down.
|
|
|
Post by ProfessorPatPending on Jan 20, 2004 0:46:23 GMT 1
The vast majority are decent people being persecuted in their own countries by tyrannical leaderships. As decent people who are all members of the human race, we should be helping. Well said Chris, and from a financial perspective a fair proportion are also talented, skilled people who will enhance the country not detract from it. Too many people are too easily taken in by the ridiculous, scare mongering publicity this gets, yes it is a problem but on nothing like the scale that is portrayed by, in particular, the tabloid press
|
|
|
Post by RuytonShrew on Jan 20, 2004 0:52:01 GMT 1
Thanks, PPP, thought I was the only person that thought like that around here!!!
On the subject of tuition fees as well, I can't go along with it. We don't need more people doing degrees in this country, there aren't enough graduate jobs to go around. We need the best people, irrespectiveof their background.
Did you see Blair spluttering in that debate on TV tonight when put under pressure by Paxman on data from Australia that showed similar fees over there had cut the number of lower income university students while the number from wealthy backgrounds continued to grow? It was quite revealing that he had no real answer to that point...
|
|
|
Post by R6ix on Jan 20, 2004 0:54:46 GMT 1
the wonderful thing about a free society like ours is that we can choose to belive and voice our own opinions without fear of retribution, i dont buy tory hype but perhaps see the bigger picture, and please dont insult me with the old racism card,you obviously hold a differnt opinion on this issue as i do
|
|
|
Post by RuytonShrew on Jan 20, 2004 0:58:36 GMT 1
I said xenophobe, not racist. There is a difference. You do have your right to your opinion and I have my right to argue against it.
|
|
|
Post by R6ix on Jan 20, 2004 1:02:36 GMT 1
blimey chris i know you said you seldom agreed with anything i said in a previous post, so can we agree its tuesday tommorow and call it quits?
|
|
|
Post by ThrobsBlackHat on Jan 20, 2004 1:04:35 GMT 1
|
|
|
Post by ProfessorPatPending on Jan 20, 2004 1:06:04 GMT 1
I always knew there was something suspect about you TBH
|
|
|
Post by RuytonShrew on Jan 20, 2004 1:07:02 GMT 1
rsix, I've never said that about u as far as I am aware! I'm not conscious of ever having strongly disagreed with you on anything before!!
Anyway, off to bed in a min but feel free to continue the debate on another thread on another day!
|
|
|
Post by pawlo on Jan 20, 2004 9:35:58 GMT 1
Living in Shrewsbury, I obviously dont get to meet many asylum seekers or for that matter ethnic minorities, but having been brought up on the Grange and living in Sundorne I know of plenty of Brits who have never payed a penny in tax, have never had a job, claim thousands in benefits and breed like the only use for a coil is on the suspension of a car. I cant say I believe in tuition fees, but how come just about every university has a very well subsidised bar?
|
|
|
Post by Salop on Jan 20, 2004 9:54:50 GMT 1
Glad some people have the same opinion as me, a view that I think is held by the majority in this country, That there are far too many people going to uni already and not enough kids doing vocational training.
Im currently at uni and was on a work placement at McCain last year (yes the oven chips!), they could get in any old graduate but they couldnt find any skilled fitters to refit gearboxes and maintain the plant.
I know this aint a lovely job but its a far better option than earning a debt of 3,000 quid a year for 3 or 4 years and then finding there arnt any jobs available that you are trained to do. If I was about to finish my A levels I wouldnt consider uni anymore, there are far too many time wasters here who dont want to work and who spend their loan in the first few months and then go home crying to mummy and daddy when things get tough.
As for the old Asylum seeker stuff, as much as you cant say all of them are here to rip off the state, you cant say that we should help each and every one of them. Thats the sad thing as real cases are being sidelined and slowed down by people trying to rip off our benifit system.
I agree though that nothing is made of the far larger matter of those home grown lazy b*****ds who live off the state and dont contribute anything positive to this country.
|
|
|
Post by stuttgartershrew on Jan 20, 2004 10:36:19 GMT 1
Everyone should have the opportunity to further their education, whether or not you believe there are not enough graduate jobs about...if people wish to continue and expand their education then good for them...
The only things I would say is that they really need to start educating students who are looking to go to university about the debt that will be heading there way once they have finished. When I ventured to uni I didn't care less about how much it were going to cost, at that age I don't think you really understand do you? Now I'm paying a fair whack from me wages to cover those days spent at uni...came as a bit of a shock no matter what amount they set as to when you need to pay it back.
Also, the amount earned before you have to replay should be your net income and not gross income...some of us have to pay s**tloads more tax than others!! ;D
|
|
|
Post by True_Shrew on Jan 20, 2004 11:09:04 GMT 1
I agree with Stutty, we are priveliged to have a choice about our education and if people want to go to uni then they should be allowed- no matter what cost. It's a supply and demand world and currently there is a great demand.
Yet, good luck to the young lads and lasses who are doing modern apprenticeships in the because there going to be rich ones...
|
|
|
Post by wiganshrew2 on Jan 20, 2004 11:32:45 GMT 1
I don't really know where I stand on this one. I only know that it should be a meritocracy- and young people should be enabled to fullfil their potential regardless of their parents economic status. All of my education was free, including teacher-training. (I think my parents were expected to pay a very small amount towards maintenance- so I could buy books..etc.. but halls of residence..etc..were free.) I think I probably have paid the country back- and I'm still paying quite a lot of tax in proportion to what I earn. I paid for my M.Ed- and my Post Graduate Certificate in Specific Learning Difficulties. I do agree that's there's other ways to go- and, living where we do, we find that, amongst our neighbours- there's as many prosperous tradespeople as there are professionals. Plumbers earn more than a lot of professionals- and it's frightening to realise that most of them are older men- and there's no decent courses for the young ones to learn. I know of a few young people who've given up on modern apprenticeships because the College were not providing enough work experience- or there were other hitches.50% going to Uni does seem silly- if the students are not provided with useful, marketable degrees. But then, I had the chance- and I wouldn't like anyone elase to be denied the chance if that's what they wanted- or were suited for. Really, though- there should be a change of attitude. All honest work should be equally valued. I know plenty of people who are just as intelligent as I am- if not more so- and haven't had the chance of higher education.
|
|
|
Post by skipwithrob on Jan 20, 2004 12:55:27 GMT 1
Didnt bother to read all of them but,
Disagree middleclass families with a few children are once again the losers in this sorry affair.
|
|
|
Post by welshshrew5 on Jan 20, 2004 13:46:14 GMT 1
Now, unless I'm wrong.........
* TNobody pays fees up front. - Excellent. I've always suggested that was a superb idea. They should be paid back according to income after university....
* Students with financially less well-off parents are exempted from some of these fees - b******s. This is about means testing the student not their families. So how can a system that will see people graduating and moving into jobs that pay about 15-20K, actually having to pay more back than people who get 30K+ jobs. Laughable, and unfair.
* Blair now says that university education is free Yep, free in the sense of buying a £2K sofa and not having to start payments until the next year. How the Government is managing to have a policy of encouraging people to borrow less, and then introducing this policy is incredible!
* The average student initially pays £9K for a three year course Note the word initially. The payments are going to be absolutely massive when combined with student loans. Mark my words, this is the beginning of a slippery slope.
|
|
|
Post by Salop on Jan 20, 2004 14:21:04 GMT 1
Surely people should have to reach so kind of standard, no matter what their financial situation, to get to uni. Letting anyone go who wants to, simply because of a ludicrous 'ball park' 50% figure, is mad. I got poor A-Levels and was rejected by Loughborough, but accepted by Derby.
Is it good that someone who has just failed to get his targeted grades is still allowed to go to uni? no it isnt.
I decided to do foundation studies for a year to get into Loughborough and im glad i did. A engineering degree at Loughborough is worth much more than Derby because of the standards they set initially.
Letting anyone go who wants to simply degrades the whole system.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 20, 2004 14:41:29 GMT 1
Where do you draw the line exactley? Where do you say - no you only got 3 Cs so you're not clever enough to go to University but your mate who got 2Cs and 1B is clever enough.
I agree with Stuttgarter, you should be allowed to go to higher education if you wish. What good does it do for someone's morale if they're told in no uncertain terms they're too thick to continue?
My solution would be to integrate the ideas put forward here. Keep Universities but make some courses far more job orientated at the same time.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 20, 2004 14:53:55 GMT 1
Chris H, where is the nearest asylum area to you???
Just a few facts........Portland......small place just outside waymouth, 6x increase in muggings, violent theft and robbery sice the asylum centre opened??? god these locals have fitted them up nicely. sorry mate having been and worked in bosnia, kosavo, macedonia i have seen first hand how these people work, they all want to come to britain cos we are an easy touch, and because we are a country of do gooders we let them fleece money from local governments. hence why this country has such a poor record in NHS, public transport. let the few who are persecuted in, tell the rest of the scroungers (my personal estimate of about 90%) to p**s off back and let the british taxpayers money go on british interests first.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 20, 2004 14:59:18 GMT 1
;DOh and while i am on my bandwagon, why should some wet behind the ears work shy student decide he would rather go to school than to work, if he wants to further his/her education great, but do not expect me to pay for it. Tuition Fees, totally agree, in fact make em pay a little more cos the cheap beer they get.
|
|
|
Post by BrummieBoy on Jan 20, 2004 15:05:32 GMT 1
As someone who works in a university, I found this whole thread really interesting. Some good points and some thoughtful analysis - fair play the Blue and Amber board is a very interesting read. I obviously see things from a slightly different perspective, although I don't think my take on it is much different from that of, say, LoyalShrew or Ant. I could comment on the whole moral and ethical issue of student tuition fees (I am for them, as it happens, but that is not the point I want to make really) but I just wanted to post something on the whole 'higher education debate' just to clear one or two things up (or clear them up as I see them, anyway). The whole higher education sector is, and has been for an awful long time, chronically underfunded. This is not simply a reflection of Labour's policy of university expansion, it is a long-term outcome of systematic neglect. The move to effectively abolish polytechnics meant, on the one hand, that more emphasis has been placed on 'academic' disciplines and, on the other hand, polytechnics (or new universities, in the current jargon) are forced to try and be something they are not. A polytechnic education had many strengths, preparing graduates for different types of jobs than those who pursued a more academic line in 'traditional' (much as I hate the term) universities. This dividng line is now more fuzzy and as a consequence the value of a polytechnic education has inevitably suffered - hence the demand for places at red brick universities has gone up as they are seen very much as being the 'ones to be at'. This might well be worth of heavy criticism, but it is - for the medium term anyway- the way that it now is. Now, as far as funding goes, these universities are now having to compete in an increasingly cut-throat environment to maintain their position within this hierarchy. If you don't score high in the various assessment exercises that we all go through, you are in trouble. Research funding is cut and whole departments are placed under the threat of being wiped out. You might argue 'so be it', if you're not competitive enough, then you die. I have my own opinions on that that aren't relevant here (although if anybody here is doing politics at Nottingham Trent, for example, they should ask some of their staff members what they make of it - they have been downgraded from a high class research/teaching department to a teaching department only - meaning that they have much, much less money than they did, say, five years ago, bringing with it all the costcutting measures that obviously come with that) - the point I wanted to make is that universities are understandably desperate to impress the assessors - and to do this each department needs to generate money, to enable academics to do research, to teach students and to offer the very best facilities. It is a circle that needs to be closed as the money simply won't reach at the moment. And this is where tuition fees come in. They are - put simply and perhaps a touch too polemically - needed to keep the higher education sector afloat. Once again, some of you may say 'shut down some of the departments', but that has an effect on all of us. Universities don't exist in a vacuum. Remember, Shropshire doesn't have a university (sorry, I am not counting campus' in Telford and Shrewsbury, they are not the same thing) and won't see how important universities can be for the communities they live in. They provide jobs and, more importantly, they produce products (knowledge, skills, training) that are of societal benefit. Britain has some genuinely world class departments (and they aren't, despite what people claim, always in Oxbridge) and they are massively important to the future well-being of society as a whole. If they can't generate their own funds, they'll be in trouble though and, eventually, we will all suffer as a result ... ... so there you go (sorry if this post on rant-like proportions, it wasn't meant to!).
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 20, 2004 15:14:14 GMT 1
Good post Danny, I think judging by that post we can all see why you lecture in politics......
|
|
|
Post by BrummieBoy on Jan 20, 2004 15:16:38 GMT 1
Paul,
So just who is going to operate on you when you need a new hip? Or who is going to negotiate for you when you (as a soldier) are serving our country miles away from home?
I think you see the type of people I'm getting at ...
I have to be honest, I have been to Bosnia and the Balkans too, and it is still a question of intepretation. Don't misunderstood desperation for skulduggery. These people are DESPERATE and Britain is seen as being a land of HOPE and DECENCY. Or, when you spoke to them in Serbo-Croat or Macedonian (as I presume you have from your last post) and listened to their reasons for wanting to leave the region, did they actually tell you "I want to fleece the system". If they did, I take it all back ...
|
|