Decades ago when dinosaurs stalked the earth and I was in my late teens, the UK had a tertiary education system where places were very restricted (to single digit percentage of the population) but if you were lucky and or able enough to secure a university place then your tuition was paid for and if your parents weren't particularly well off, you got a grant to help with living expenses.
Then someone far smarter than I looked and determined that people who go to university earn considerably more over their career on average than people who do not. They determined that if everyone went to university then everyone would earn more (an example of cargo-cult culture if ever I've seen one but i don't set government policy). The number of places at university were expanded but in order to pay for them, a fee of £3,000 per year was introduced to help pay for the additional places. Student could borrow to help to afford to pay for their tuition and living expenses with subsidised loans.
This was successful and more and more people were going to university, £3,000 a year wasn't enough to pay for the tuition so the government allowed universities to charge up to £9,000 a year (strangely enough most charge this maximum figure making a mockery of government claims of increased competition - if a university is worth going to, they can charge the maximum). This would mean that going to university could cost £50,000+ which would be prohibitively expensive for the less well off. To mitigate this, the government proposed a system where you only had to start paying back your student loans when you were earning enough to do so, and the amount you paid was dependent on salary and anything left unpaid after 30 years was written off.
I was skeptical about this system and thought it was a fudge and that the problems of paying for tertiary education were just being kicked down the road. It looks like this is going to be a problem.
http://ift.tt/1tsyvfU
Personally I'm not sure that we need so many people going to expensive universities to do courses of marginal benefit. If we're going for a fee-based model then government and industry need to provide a bursary scheme to help fund participation in strategically important courses (some sciences, engineering and other skills in high demand and low supply) to enable the less well off to take these courses and to manage demand for popular but less "useful" courses.
The current funding model is unsustainable IMO.
Then someone far smarter than I looked and determined that people who go to university earn considerably more over their career on average than people who do not. They determined that if everyone went to university then everyone would earn more (an example of cargo-cult culture if ever I've seen one but i don't set government policy). The number of places at university were expanded but in order to pay for them, a fee of £3,000 per year was introduced to help pay for the additional places. Student could borrow to help to afford to pay for their tuition and living expenses with subsidised loans.
This was successful and more and more people were going to university, £3,000 a year wasn't enough to pay for the tuition so the government allowed universities to charge up to £9,000 a year (strangely enough most charge this maximum figure making a mockery of government claims of increased competition - if a university is worth going to, they can charge the maximum). This would mean that going to university could cost £50,000+ which would be prohibitively expensive for the less well off. To mitigate this, the government proposed a system where you only had to start paying back your student loans when you were earning enough to do so, and the amount you paid was dependent on salary and anything left unpaid after 30 years was written off.
I was skeptical about this system and thought it was a fudge and that the problems of paying for tertiary education were just being kicked down the road. It looks like this is going to be a problem.
Quote:
The student loan system has been so inaccurate in forecasting the cost to the taxpayer there must be an "urgent review", says a report from MPs. There are so many problems that its "continued existence" is under threat, says a report from the Business, Innovation and Skills Select Committee. The government loses 45p on every £1 of loans to students, says the report. |
http://ift.tt/1tsyvfU
Personally I'm not sure that we need so many people going to expensive universities to do courses of marginal benefit. If we're going for a fee-based model then government and industry need to provide a bursary scheme to help fund participation in strategically important courses (some sciences, engineering and other skills in high demand and low supply) to enable the less well off to take these courses and to manage demand for popular but less "useful" courses.
The current funding model is unsustainable IMO.
via JREF Forum http://ift.tt/1yUuTGw
Aucun commentaire:
Enregistrer un commentaire