Should tuition fees reflect course costs?
This poll is closed
Should tuition fees reflect their true cost?
Don't know 4%
No 53%
Yes44%
Total votes: 55
It has been said that arts/humanities degrees subsidise science/technology degrees, i.e. arts degrees cost less than the fee charged and science degrees costs more than the fees charged.
Should the cost of arts degrees be cut and science raised to reflect their actual costs?
Should the cost of arts degrees be cut and science raised to reflect their actual costs?
Scroll to see replies
Original post by OU Student
But should people on science degrees be penalised?
How are they being penalised? They would be paying the actual cost of their education.
Personally, I can see why a humanities student with maybe ten contact hours a week might be a bit pissed off at paying the same fees as a scientist in 9-5 most days.
Coming from someone who studies both chemistry and languages, my science lectures do seem to be far more generous with the free stuff (lecture slide print-outs, lab equpiment, cake... 
). They also have higher teaching costs and much nicer facilities.
I suppose you could argue that an arts degree usually involves more self-directed study, so you know what you're getting into when you sign up? On the other hand, I can understand why they may be a little bit miffed...
). They also have higher teaching costs and much nicer facilities.I suppose you could argue that an arts degree usually involves more self-directed study, so you know what you're getting into when you sign up? On the other hand, I can understand why they may be a little bit miffed...
(edited 11 years ago)
Depends really. If it was a standalone policy change, no. Some arts degrees cost more than some science degrees anyway. I do broadly agree with getting what you pay for though. I'm an arts student and my course seems very expensive if it's worked out on an hourly rate. Some arts first years I was speaking to last week are getting 5 hours of contact time per week, 22 weeks per year. For £9000 a year. I could take a flying lesson for the same price they pay for a lecture. That's very high.
However, it would potentially affect the quality of education on offer, so I'm slightly against it. Science degrees are beneficial to universities. The obvious way to tell is to look at the current courses offered and count the science ones. If they didn't have a non-financial benefit in prestige, reputation and whatnot, they simply wouldn't be offered if they really drained that much from the university.
I'll come down on the 'no' side but I do agree there could be some changes made if money were spent a little wiser.
However, it would potentially affect the quality of education on offer, so I'm slightly against it. Science degrees are beneficial to universities. The obvious way to tell is to look at the current courses offered and count the science ones. If they didn't have a non-financial benefit in prestige, reputation and whatnot, they simply wouldn't be offered if they really drained that much from the university.
I'll come down on the 'no' side but I do agree there could be some changes made if money were spent a little wiser.
(edited 11 years ago)
Original post by Norton1
How are they being penalised? They would be paying the actual cost of their education.
Because they're being left with more debt?
Original post by Norton1
How are they being penalised? They would be paying the actual cost of their education.
Personally, I can see why a humanities student with maybe ten contact hours a week might be a bit pissed off at paying the same fees as a scientist in 9-5 most days.
Personally, I can see why a humanities student with maybe ten contact hours a week might be a bit pissed off at paying the same fees as a scientist in 9-5 most days.
i do bio med and its 1 and a half days a week full time - hardly 9-5 five days a week
If anything I'd make science/maths/engineering courses etc cheaper to convince more people to go into it...read an article on the BBC a few days ago about how our economy is suffering because we're not producing enough of those type of graduates, and that it'll only get worse in the future.
Original post by OU Student
Because they're being left with more debt?
But the use of the word penalise suggests some form of punishment. If you were to use the word disadvantaged which is perhaps closer to the sense you were aiming at then surely it's fair because they cost more?
Original post by rattusratus
i do bio med and its 1 and a half days a week full time - hardly 9-5 five days a week
That's your timetable, I've known scientists who were in significantly more. Plus are you in first year?
Original post by CW12345
I personally think that science students shouldn't have to pay more (possibly less), mainly since we need more people taking these subjects, you always see articles in the news about a shortage of scientists causing problems. Raising their fees would make the problem even worse.
You mean there isn't a shortage of people studying Classical Civilisation?
Original post by CW12345
I personally think that science students shouldn't have to pay more (possibly less), mainly since we need more people taking these subjects, you always see articles in the news about a shortage of scientists causing problems. Raising their fees would make the problem even worse.
There is some doubt whether there actually is a shortage of scientists but leave that as it may, the issue is this.
One can argue it is reasonable that each student should pay the cost of his own degree; one can argue that it is reasonable that the cost of a degree should be paid by taxpayers as a whole and one can argue that the cost a degree should be shared between the student and the taxpayer; but it is nonsense to argue that that the cost of providing physicists should fall disproportionately on medieval historians.
Original post by Maker
It has been said that arts/humanities degrees subsidise science/technology degrees, i.e. arts degrees cost less than the fee charged and science degrees costs more than the fees charged.
Should the cost of arts degrees be cut and science raised to reflect their actual costs?
Should the cost of arts degrees be cut and science raised to reflect their actual costs?
Any statistics to back this up?
People seem to presume this based upon contact hours, but humanities and social sciences have a huge cost of journal subscriptions and academic books. We might not have many hours but the rest of our time is spent reading around the subject.
I don't really understand why even science degrees supposedly cost so much; I've heard it said that it costs £20k+ a year to teach most science students, but I cannot figure out how this is.
I mean obviously you have the staff salaries to pay, but given that the student:staff ratio at even the best institutions is between 10:1 and 20:1 (this is taken from the Guardian) even at the best institutions for these kind of subjects, this clearly isn't the main cost (last time I checked lecturers earn like £50k a year right?)
I can understand that, say, Physics departments may have to buy expensive scientific equipment, but surely this doesn't require tens of thousands per student per year to pay for? Even in subjects like Chemistry where there will be continuous costs of buying in new chemicals, I just cannot see a single student using £20,000 worth of chemicals every year?
I honestly just don't understand it. Can anyone enlighten me?
I mean obviously you have the staff salaries to pay, but given that the student:staff ratio at even the best institutions is between 10:1 and 20:1 (this is taken from the Guardian) even at the best institutions for these kind of subjects, this clearly isn't the main cost (last time I checked lecturers earn like £50k a year right?)
I can understand that, say, Physics departments may have to buy expensive scientific equipment, but surely this doesn't require tens of thousands per student per year to pay for? Even in subjects like Chemistry where there will be continuous costs of buying in new chemicals, I just cannot see a single student using £20,000 worth of chemicals every year?
I honestly just don't understand it. Can anyone enlighten me?
Original post by Domeface
I don't really understand why even science degrees supposedly cost so much; I've heard it said that it costs £20k+ a year to teach most science students, but I cannot figure out how this is.
I mean obviously you have the staff salaries to pay, but given that the student:staff ratio at even the best institutions is between 10:1 and 20:1 (this is taken from the Guardian) even at the best institutions for these kind of subjects, this clearly isn't the main cost (last time I checked lecturers earn like £50k a year right?)
I can understand that, say, Physics departments may have to buy expensive scientific equipment, but surely this doesn't require tens of thousands per student per year to pay for? Even in subjects like Chemistry where there will be continuous costs of buying in new chemicals, I just cannot see a single student using £20,000 worth of chemicals every year?
I honestly just don't understand it. Can anyone enlighten me?
I mean obviously you have the staff salaries to pay, but given that the student:staff ratio at even the best institutions is between 10:1 and 20:1 (this is taken from the Guardian) even at the best institutions for these kind of subjects, this clearly isn't the main cost (last time I checked lecturers earn like £50k a year right?)
I can understand that, say, Physics departments may have to buy expensive scientific equipment, but surely this doesn't require tens of thousands per student per year to pay for? Even in subjects like Chemistry where there will be continuous costs of buying in new chemicals, I just cannot see a single student using £20,000 worth of chemicals every year?
I honestly just don't understand it. Can anyone enlighten me?
This. I've often wondered about this myself.
fee hikes and there's more and more threads regards value for money and sciences v humanities.
the fact that we gotta pay for what we wanna do aint gonna change but, fgs, can we not at least keep it that if ppl wanna go study *insert subject of choice* they just can?
we're on a forum of students and HE courses are being seen as a commodity that needs to justify itself...who needs cameron?
the fact that we gotta pay for what we wanna do aint gonna change but, fgs, can we not at least keep it that if ppl wanna go study *insert subject of choice* they just can?
we're on a forum of students and HE courses are being seen as a commodity that needs to justify itself...who needs cameron?
Original post by Maple
This. I've often wondered about this myself.
http://www.hefce.ac.uk/media/hefce1/pubs/hefce/2010/1024/10_24.pdf
See paras 74-92
These figures are for a couple of years ago. Since then all funding for the lower price groups has been cut off. This is still the methodology by which HEFCE prices courses however.
Original post by Politics Student
Any statistics to back this up?
People seem to presume this based upon contact hours, but humanities and social sciences have a huge cost of journal subscriptions and academic books. We might not have many hours but the rest of our time is spent reading around the subject.
People seem to presume this based upon contact hours, but humanities and social sciences have a huge cost of journal subscriptions and academic books. We might not have many hours but the rest of our time is spent reading around the subject.
Yes, but we have to fund many of those ourselves!
Over the year I'm paying £37 per hour of contact time... (assuming next semester's timetable has the same amount of stuff as this semester)
It would be more, but I have 2 hours extra of 'free' German per week.
Original post by RibenaRockstar
Yes, but we have to fund many of those ourselves!
I have no idea what you are talking about? I had institutional log ins for electronic journals and while I did buy quite a few books while I studied, but they were books I either used frequently or I wanted to keep copies of.
I would imagine the library costs are far greater for social sciences than the sciences due to the expensive institutional access for the wider range of journals needed.
Over the year I'm paying £37 per hour of contact time... (assuming next semester's timetable has the same amount of stuff as this semester)
It would be more, but I have 2 hours extra of 'free' German per week.
The thing is we are meant to be independent learners. However, I would keep that cost per contact hour in mind to stop you skipping lecturers.
I enjoyed only having 10 hours a week contact time (it was 5 hours in my final year which was made up of a 2 hour lecture and a 3 hour lecture). I did not go to uni expecting 9 to 5 lectures. I was most looking forward to having the time to find my research interests and follow those.
Quick Reply
Related discussions
- Should international students carry on subsidising UK students?
- Cambridge Trust Financial Guarantee: I don’t have enough money
- Total cost for Dual LLB/JD with the Chinese Uni of Hong Kong (M127)
- Top universities ‘will turn away more UK students’
- Thoughts on going to University
- Accelerated Medicine
- Tuition Loan for Year 1 but not Year 2
- SFE funding for extra year
- Seeking Advice on Student Finance Refusal for Second Degree Funding
- BSc Nursing Adult (Hons)
- Tuition Fee Loan For Accelerated Healthcare Degree (MSC)
- Postgraduate maintenance loan?
- Will I be able to get the course funded and maintenance loan?
- Postgraduate student finance: what you need to know
- Postgraduate pre - registration funding after PGCE
- Graduate entry medicine funding
- Home fee status but living in England
- Home fee status help
- Bonn vs Oxford vs Cambridge vs UPenn Mathematics Masters
- 2 years of previous study can I get funding for Midwifery?
Latest
Trending
Last reply 3 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 3 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?Trending
Last reply 3 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 3 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?
