Harriet Jean Evans takes a look at the social commentary of the past, and explains why she believes it just doesn't matter.
Our anonymous blogger reflects on her attempts to have a student Christmas... and how she came to the conclusion that home-made is always best.
Gillian Love urges you to vote 'No' to the motion to replace Women's Committee with a 'Gender Equality Committee'.
The latest university application figures are out and dominating education supplements in the national press. As you’ve probably heard, there has been a 9% drop already in university applications nationwide for next year. And guess what? The greatest drop has been in the poorest parts of the country.
Applications in the North East of England are down a staggering 14.7%. Here in Yorkshire, 17.3% fewer young people are applying for higher education courses than they were last year. In the South, however, the drop in applications has been almost minimal. We should be worried.
At a time of global financial crisis, it seems that a trebling in university tuition fees is convincing many people that the higher education experience isn’t worth £27,000. This is a great danger.
As a student, I can certainly understand that universities need to be offering more to those people who will be paying many thousands of pounds for their degrees. Three or four contact hours per week simply is not enough to merit years of debt. However, we are seeing that university boards are very seriously attempting to adapt themselves to a more demanding market, and students are intently looking at what kind of education they will be getting for their money. This is all a very good thing.
Let’s look deeper at the causes of this slump here in Yorkshire. Despite being very economically varied, the average income here is significantly lower than in London or the South East of England. It appears that young people from the most financially disadvantaged backgrounds are not applying to university in anywhere near the same numbers as they were last year. Certainly, the current financial crisis does not help matters. At a time such as this, figures as high as £9000 per year are bound to be intimidating.
However, all is not lost. In fact, there is a great deal of help available to students from poorer backgrounds as a result of the change in the way that education is funded. A young person whose household income totals less than £42,600 is entitled to a government grant, which will not need to be repaid. If you are liable for your fees in the future, they only need to be paid back when a graduate is earning in excess of £21,000 a year, and, even then, they will be repaid in relatively small instalments. Many young people seem unsure about the bursaries and financial aid that they are entitled to. While deploring the increase in fees, several commentators have made the point that the rise has given a helping hand to the poorest in our society as more grants have become available.
The information is out there. At the touch of a button, it is possible to find details on the facts and figures of pursuing a higher education degree. Schools need to be particularly proactive about disseminating this information so that nobody is put off for the wrong reasons. A good degree should be based on intelligence, application and potential - not on bank balance.
But there may be yet another reason for the enormous disparity in applications per region in this country. The economic crisis has affected us all, but here in the North, there are fewer jobs than down South. Young people thinking about their future would be right to be disturbed by the rise in unemployment and the lack of opportunities currently available to them in the world of work. Under these circumstances, many would be forgiven for wondering whether a degree is really worth it. After all, if there aren’t any jobs at the end of it, is there any point in being saddled with massive debt and little career prospects?
I do believe that eventually, the economy will get better. In the meantime, what matters is that absolutely everybody who wishes to go to university has the chance to do so. As more and more bad news rolls in, it is hard to see light at the end of the tunnel. But misinformation, panic and cynicism cannot be allowed to discourage the brightest and best from getting to the top of our society. Otherwise, when the financial dust settles, we will all regret it.
Exactly, and the key thing is, you only pay your fees and loans when you can afford to. On the richest (those earning over £35k on average every year of their life) will actually pay the whole £9k fees.
What's more, with the job market being so poor, now is the time to go to University, paid for by a debt which is only repaid when you are earning a decent amount of money. Certainly beats the £56 a week you get on JSA, and you don't come out of that with a qualification.
You seriously think £35k/year is "wealthy" Alan? Try bringing up a family of four on that. Try paying mortgage, bills, food costs, car costs, clothes, miscellaneous school fees, taxes on four people at £35k/year. My mother, after ten years of teaching, makes £30k/year. By no means are we a poor family, but I certainly wouldn't term us wealthy. £35k may be fine for one person, but rarely is that actually the case. By the time you're earning that much, even with a degree, you're often settled down with children. Having to pay exorbitant fees on top of it is just another burden...
A salary of £35k puts you in the top 25% of earners. I simply cannot understand why students whose degree helps them to get into the top 25% of earners expect the bottom 25% of earners to subsidise that degree.
The new system means that if your degree helps you earn £1,000 more than you would without a degree, you are guaranteed to be better off, regardless of any other permutations. On average, graduates earn £12,000 per year more than than non-graduates, so they will be significantly better off.
I'm not suggesting £35k makes you a millionaire, but it certainly makes life a lot more comfortable than majority of hard working people in this country. Even post-tax and tuition fees you are receiving more than £20,000 more than someone on JSA.
Good. Far too many people think they should go to university anyway. There needs to be less people wasting their time on degrees in media studies from the university of arse end of nowhere.
Yes, but then try to support a family on that. Assume there is no tax or tuition fees, that one takes home the full £35k. Divide that between four people. £8,750/each. To last a year. Again, this is assuming tax, fees etc are out of the equation. So too are rent, mortgage. It's not a lot. And yet a single person earning £18k as a bus driver (as First's buses handily inform us) would have a full £18k to themselves. No qualification needed.
This isn't even touching on the unfairness of the age divide. Purely because people were born after September 1st 1993 they pay back three times as much as those born before August 31st of that year? Doesn't that seem a tiny bit arbitrary to you?
Cieran, that works on the assumption that it is a single-income household, there are likely to be two earners in the household in your example. Additionally, if you did have a family, you would be in receipt of child tax credit, child benefit and working tax credit which would likely make you better off than the single bus driver. It's therefore a bit misleading to make such a direct comparison with the "single bus driver".
What's more is that the single bus driver (no qualifications) will also have much more problems if they found themselves in the same situation as the first person. You have to compare like with like and graduates who on average earn £12,000 per year more than non-graduates will always be better off than someone in their situation without a degree.
And whilst I do agree that it is arbitrary, you have to have a cut off somewhere. A lot of students will be better off under the new arrangements (particularly part-time and low income students). It must also be pointed out that they won't necessarily pay back three times more. Only the top 25% of earners will pay back the full amount, and even then the total loan amount won't even double (as the maintenance loan isn't increasing).
You must log in to submit a comment.
Report