Universities Minister Davis Willets trumpets a 'necessary and progressive way forward for our higher education system' whilst his Opposition counterpart Gareth Thomas sees a 'tragedy for a whole generation of young people'. For potential university students who are pondering the pros and cons of entering higher education this shake up of the university tuition fees system is just another factor to consider regarding their future. It’s an unpleasant one at that, in light of the record number of graduates who find themselves unemployed at the end of their already expensive course. In increasing the burden upon graduates, where does responsibility lie - with universities or with the Government? Is the new system necessarily disadvantageous?
Student Fees - the Mechanics of Debt and Repayment
Under the old system, fees were capped at �3,290 a year, entailing a charge of �9,870 for the average three-year course. The new arrangement sets the ceiling �9,000 a year - an increase of 173% - meaning an extra �17,130 for a three-year course, or roughly the cost of a 10% deposit on the averagely-priced house. Currently, students can borrow the funds from the Student Loans Company then begin repaying in the April after graduating only if they earn �15,000 or more. The repayment is around 9% of earnings above this figure. Under the new system this 'trigger point' figure has been raised considerably to �21,000, which in theory means they only begin repaying once they have secured aspirational' employment commensurate with their educational achievements.Hence, despite the significantly increased level of debt, the repayment burden is less immediately onerous. Other imponderables, such as how the amount of debt students are carrying affects their access to other forms of credit, complicate the picture still further and remain to be played out.
Understandably, student protest against the fees increase has been fierce (and often bitter).
The NUS trenchantly opposes the increase, arguing instead for a 'graduate tax' as a more equitable means of financing Higher Education.
Why are Universities Charging More?
Historically, the cost of a higher education has been subsidised by government. Since the Government’s spending review in 2010 left university support slashed, the higher education establishments have had no choice but to charge their students more to cover this subsidy cut. Despite the Government stressing that �9,000 was very much a 'ceiling' and around �6,000 would be a reasonable figure, few were surprised that universities rushed, almost invariably, to hike prices to the new maximum. It could be argued that this is greed or it could be argued that the universities are now, more than ever, selling a product – a product that could have its cachet harmed if sold ‘cheaply’. So naturally, Oxbridge opted for the full amounts and the majority of their Redbrick competitors followed suit.
Facebook Poll on University Fees - December 2011
A Facebook poll conducted by the Brighton School of Business and Management this month has so far received over 800 replies regarding feelings concerning the university fee increases.
Thus far, 21% have reported that they will be put off going to university in the UK, suggesting a diminution of key foreign earnings from UK institutions Foreign students won’t pay any more than they do now as their fees aren’t affected by our government’s reduction in support for home students. Despite this, it seems clear that confusion and brouhaha surrounding the changes is forcing many foreign students to rethink their plans. In addition, there must be a concern that British youth will seek to exploit a highly competitive global market, depriving the country of talent, particularly in the vital STEM (Science, Technology, Maths, Engineering and Maths) disciplines.
The Government’s plans to encourage all young people to aim for a university place seems to be at odds with their reversal of subsidies to these institutions. On one hand they’re expecting 50% of students to progress onto higher education – a laudable aim – while simultaneously making the proposition more unattractive: If more degrees are being awarded then a degree must ultimately be worth less, and yet it is set to cost far, far more.
Is there a Different Way?
Colleges offering online degree courses report a massive increase both in enquiries and in uptake of their distance learning options. The great flexibility and convenience of this type of learning has seldom been so enticing. Online learning environments support instant exchange of coursework and allow tutors to offer constant and attentive guidance.
Expensive? Until this upcoming academic year the pros and cons weren’t so different but now the financial gulf is much more significant. The Brighton School of Business and Management’s study fees are �2,695 (plus �213.12 Edexcel Registration Fee).
What Now for Universities?
At this early stage it remains uncertain how the changes will impact on the long-term fortunes of universities. Staggering future debt levels, dwindling opportunity for graduate employment and a newly suspicious attitude towards 'greedy' universities is certain to make the online learning option a more appealing than it was previously.11% of poll respondents now look upon online study more favourably. 7% say the lower cost of online courses makes them preferable to campus-based study. Graduates like myself who went through the system prior to the changes, naturally feel sorry for those facing the tough decision of whether or not to do so now.
5% of respondents share this sentiment, and 18% support student protest against the fees increase. It won’t stop 6% of respondents going to university although they do agree that the fees and subsequent debt will make them worry. According to a Guardian report there has been a 15% decrease in university applications this year
The Guardian has reported a 15% reduction in university applicants this year but this follows an increase last year of 11% – a rise ascribed to students getting on a course to beat the upcoming price rise. It's difficult to say whether the overall drop of 4% can be put down to the increase, or to other factors. The decision taken by a number of universities in November to slightly reduce their fees may have resulted from criticism from OFFA (Office of Fair Access) the independent body charged with ensuring an equitable demographic spread among the university intake.
Criticism from OFFA (Office of Fair Access) the body responsible for ensuring academic ability is the prime determinant driving admissions, may have contributed to the decision some universities took in November to slightly lower fees.
OFFA Director Martin Harris was said to be still concerned about the ongoing imbalance in admissions between students from different ends of the social scale: only 12.6% of Cambridge students came from homes with an annual income below �25,000. In what appears to be a case of ‘shutting the stable door after the horse has bolted’, the government is intending to pass legislation to give OFFA the power to fine universities that make insufficient progress in improving access, and even the right to demand a reduction in fees.’ Whatever happens in the years to come, it is the economy and the education of the UK that are at stake.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment