Excellent blog and petition on tuition fees

[Kesteven]

I agree about the horse and the cat, but I'm puzzled as to how you are collecting fees for students who have not yet applied.

We already have numerous applications for 2012. Not all applicants have to go through UCAS, remember. EU applications, for example (all of whom pay Home fees), have been coming in for months.

[Looking for help]

Thank you for the link, Marylou, I will pass it on.

LFH

[Marylou]

Thank you for the link, Marylou, I will pass it on.

LFH

Thank you LFH!

Thanks also xyzzy for explaining how the financials will all pan out in the future - but it does beg the question as to why a policy with such long-term implications should have been rushed through in a matter of weeks leaving us with a shambles of a system that could end up costing more than it saves, when a bit more planning and foresight could have resulted in an arrangement which, whilst still not necessarily being popular, might actually have worked. It's clear that the government is still making it up as they go along, as indicated by today's headline: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/un ... qus_thread" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Looking for help]

- but it does beg the question as to why a policy with such long-term implications should have been rushed through in a matter of weeks leaving us with a shambles of a system that could end up costing more than it save

And that is why we should sign the petition.....we have no idea where this will end, and if universities are auctioning off places, what does this mean to those who get the places through offers/results day? The whole thing is a shambles, if you ask me. I understand that there is a limited pot of money for this sort of thing, and that there is a cost for it, but should the cost be bourne by the student when society as a whole is the beneficiary - if we decide as a society we need 500 doctors, should those 500 medical students foot the bill, or should society pay a little bit ?

[mystery]

I'm really behind on this one. Don't fees for medicine, nursing, speech therapy etc get covered by some kind of bursary etc from the NHS?

[T12ACY]

mystery - I have to say I really do know very little about uni and fees, however from friends of DS's there is a girl who wants to be an OT starting Sept 2012 and a boy studying to become a physiotherapist just going into his 2nd year - both funded by the NHS. The cost of getting the second of them qualified to the NHS will rise sharply due to the increases in fees so will probably also become a problem there in no time at all!

[hermanmunster]

some NHS training is covered by bursaries:

http://www.nhsbsa.nhs.uk/Students/3253.aspx" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

medics get some help later into the course ie after the first 3 years I think.

I feel the fee increase is inevitable in England and Scotland will not be far behind as their HE budget has a vast deficit. I have a DS applying this year and he sees the fees as just one of those things....

I suppose I can't grumble as I was fortunate as I did get the ultimate free education - fees paid by LEA to Direct Grant School, full grant to University for six years ... however since then I feel I have been taxed ridiculously to make up for it!

[Kesteven]

And that is why we should sign the petition.....we have no idea where this will end, and if universities are auctioning off places, what does this mean to those who get the places through offers/results day? The whole thing is a shambles, if you ask me. I understand that there is a limited pot of money for this sort of thing, and that there is a cost for it, but should the cost be bourne by the student when society as a whole is the beneficiary - if we decide as a society we need 500 doctors, should those 500 medical students foot the bill, or should society pay a little bit ?

1. Universities are not 'auctioning off places'.
2. The vast majority of courses at universities are non vocational. Society has not decided it needs 40,000 media studies graduates each year.
3. Students themselves are the prime beneficiaries of their degree courses; that's why they should cover the lion's share of the costs.
4. The legislation was not 'rushed through in a matter of weeks'.
5. Petitions never changed anything; least of all issues which are already dead in the water.

[Looking for help]

1.I read something yesterday, and now can't find it about universities dropping their fees for good students....maybe it's rubbish, I don't know.
2. Just because a student takes a non vocational course does not mean society as a whole does not benefit. I am not advocating media studies here.
3. Possibly, but the tax system of this country is supposed to divide the cost of running the country across all those who work. If I live and die without ever setting foot in a hospital or never have need to call the fire brigade, does that mean I don't need to pay soemthing towards the cost of the NHS or Fire Service ?
4. I think the legislation was rushed through very quickly with 0.5 of the coalition govt not particularly happy with the plan.
5. But that doesn't mean they're not worthwhile. Public opinion has often caused governments to make U turns, or have you forgotten the poll tax ? I don't think this is dead in the water, at least I hope it isn't. There are a lot of very worried prospective students and parents out there

[Marylou]

Kesteven,

1. Yesterday's news would suggest that the government is effectively auctioning off places to universities willing to drop their fees (after all, it was such a surprise when so many of them decided to charge top whack, wasn't it?)

2. No, but just because some people take courses that have no use to society in general shouldn't mean penalizing those that do. Students on veterinary courses receive no support whatsoever, (5 x 9,000 plus all the rest), and - despite general opinion - do not earn nearly as much as doctors, despite being essential to society to help deal with crises such as foot and mouth, avian flu, etc. etc. etc. (I should emphasize here that I'm all in favour of the NHS support for medics as it's a long course and the NHS should pay its share - of course there is no NHS for animals but you would have thought the Department of Agriculture would at least chip in something for vet students!)

3. So presumably those who finally pay back the full amount because they earn enough to do so won't end up with a double whammy by also being taxed at the higher rate.

4. I seem to remember the initial proposals coming out in September/October and the Commons vote taking place in early December. The Lords were never going to rock the boat on this one, imo.

5. Public opinion is very important on this issue - opposition to and concern about the policy is probably one of the reasons why the government is scrabbling around trying to patch up the holes as they appear. It's trying to increase participation in HE, but since when did tripling the price of something make it more attractive, however you dress it up? And penalizing those for wishing to settle their debts early is sheer madness (yet something else which wasn't known about at the beginning when the vote was made and the details of which are still not available to 2012 applicants).