[Brillopad]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

Thisnis what really confuses me; the fact that all courses have basically the same (the maximum) fee when the actual content obviously doesn't have the same cost? For example, I've studied a (ridiculous) tonne of things at University. English language and literature, philosophy, psychology, politics, economics, computer science... And many of the courses just aren't comparable if they were to be taken to degree level. For example, philosophy and English literature are VERY light on class time for obvious reasons; a lot of the course is reading, writing essays, and self driven study and that's how it should be and the only way it can be. On the flip side, Computer Science involves dozens of hours of lab time per week, lots of tutorial and face time with staff, access to expensive equipment and software, etc. Psychology, economics, politics fall somewhere in the middle. It doesn't really make sense that a year's tuition for a self driven study course like Philosophy, and a year's tuition for a heavy technical course like CompSci, have the same tuition fee.

It is ridiculous that courses with different earning potentials and different levels of content and related expense cost the same. We agree on that at least. I see no valid reason why different types of courses should all cost the same and any government in charge should exercise common sense and look into that.

No doubt some will say the government do so deliberately for monatory gain, maybe so, but to me with the other issues in this country, that would not be on my list of priorities personally, although to others that would not be the case. I do not however agree that free education at that level should be free for all. It is a priviledge not a right.

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by jet

Well, the thinking is if you get the higher education you also get a well paid job at the end of it which is the whole point of paying for that privilege. Then you pay it back gradually when you are employed and can afford to. Sounds fair enough to me. Student loans also include accommodation, food and utility bills - nobody can expect to get all that for free.
Too many students are accepted for and take degrees in subjects which have no specific demand in the workplace/too many after just one job.
These days, uni's accept people they wouldn't have years ago and it's not fair on the students; entry levels should be much higher and fees reduced - imo only the very brightest and those who will be most in demand to fill certain jobs should be accepted.
Not saying your daughter isn't in that category of course!

Then the thinking is flawed, the lecturers delivering the courses do not get these fees, when tuition was trebled their salary didn't multiply.. Tutors were protesting alongside students in 2010 they knew the changes were only to line the pockets of private interest.

I'm referring specifically to tuition fees. Food and accommodation have always been extra.

All unis have entry criteria, they haven't lowered standards, if it's an AAA course then 3 A grade ( or modern equivalent) A levels are required still. ( my daughter filled this criteria)

I have no issue to be fair with charging for some degrees if I'm honest, it's the vocational such as nursing or engineering, or subjects like maths, English or the sciences that should be free for all.