stupid government

Oh, to be young and naive. Low rates of HE participation in certain neighbourhoods has been going on for much longer than student loans have. It has much more to do with poor areas tending to have poor schools, a lack of culture of going into HE and a lack of awareness that university is not just something that other people do.

Well in some ways isn't it good that in certain places people don't go to university? There are already way too many people going to university and way too many people doing soft degrees, the last thing we need is even more people.

I don't mean that all of those people who don't go should be from one place but if we're are being totally realistic that's just the way it'll work; if you live in a poor area and want to change you'll work hard at school.


Posted from TSR Mobile

I'm not sure if you mean it in the way I have understood it, but you are basically insinuating that higher education should be for the rich and privileged, regardless if they choose to do a soft degree or not. If a person from a lesser background applies, they should not be allowed to do a soft degree as there are too many places being taken up already and should only go for a harder one?

The only other reasoning I got from your post is that you basically say anyone from a lesser background doesn't work hard in comparison to the upper parallel because of that background. I am not from a privileged area; in fact, I believe I live in one of the crappier areas in the country. There were only a select few at my school who did not work hard, and that's normal for any school. Around two-thirds of my year applied and went to university as well, and no, a lot of them were not soft degrees.

While I do not wholly agree with the funding system I will never agree that places for university should be harder to achieve for unprivileged applicants purely because of their background in order to 'keep numbers down'.


This was posted from The Student Room's iPhone/iPad App

I'm not sure how you got that interpretation, maybe I articulated myself badly. I didn't say say only rich people should go and I also didn't say that all people from under privileged backgrounds do soft degrees.

I meant that usually you'll find that most of the soft degrees have students who are from under privileged backgrounds because of this culture that university means you'll get a great job. I think those degrees should be cut out and if that results in universities becoming more middle classed then so be it.

I'm not sure how you got that interpretation, maybe I articulated myself badly. I didn't say say only rich people should go and I also didn't say that all people from under privileged backgrounds do soft degrees.

I meant that usually you'll find that most of the soft degrees have students who are from under privileged backgrounds because of this culture that university means you'll get a great job. I think those degrees should be cut out and if that results in universities becoming more middle classed then so be it.



Posted from TSR Mobile

The only reason they are less likely to go is cos they don't understand the student loans system.

Last year my flatemate was just over the threshold and only got the basic amount, my other flat mate had divorced parents and lived with his mum who was on a low income and he got near enough 3 grand extra.

6 grand is more than enough to live off at uni, i don't understand where these significant financial challenges come from?

Why do you expect to be given the money for free?

people from poor backgrounds have an aboslute easy ride in terms of getting student finance. They get more loan and huge grants, i get just over 4k and about £200 in grants. My flatmate gets £6k for the year.

Show me where I wrote I expect money for free. We don't have an easy ride. We get more money because our parents can't afford (through no fault of their own) to give us money to help us out.

No.

What I mean is that people from less well off backgrounds are less likely to go to a good school. Less likely to get top grades and less likely to get into "top" universities. In short, less likely to get the encouragement and support that is necessary.

If you aren't aware of this then you are clearly blind the the advantage that having an affluent upbringing has.



People from less well off backgrounds can be more likely to have chronic medical conditions or have relatives with chronic medical conditions (and they may be a carer to this relative). If a carer they therefore might not have the amount of spare time needed to get a part-time job and earn any extra money that is needed. If they have a chronic medical condition themselves they may also have care and mobility needs that bring added expense, or means they are unable to work and earn money.

Just one example.

Even six grand isn't necessarily "more than enough to live off", at least in first year, considering some university owned accommodation can be 4.5 to 5k.

The whole idea of means checking our parents is stupid. At the end of the day we're over 18 and our parents dont have a legal responsibility over us and i know plenty of people from well off backgrounds whose parents give them next to nothing Secondly its not our parents who have to pay the loan back.
Poorer students get more money and have to pay back less how is that not an easier ride?

No.

What I mean is that people from less well off backgrounds are less likely to go to a good school. Less likely to get top grades and less likely to get into "top" universities. In short, less likely to get the encouragement and support that is necessary.

If you aren't aware of this then you are clearly blind the the advantage that having an affluent upbringing has.



People from less well off backgrounds can be more likely to have chronic medical conditions or have relatives with chronic medical conditions (and they may be a carer to this relative). If a carer they therefore might not have the amount of spare time needed to get a part-time job and earn any extra money that is needed. If they have a chronic medical condition themselves they may also have care and mobility needs that bring added expense, or means they are unable to work and earn money.

Just one example.

Even six grand isn't necessarily "more than enough to live off", at least in first year, considering some university owned accommodation can be 4.5 to 5k.

Where would the money come from to give people more money, if it was done on their income and not their parents?

Poorer students sometimes have to pay back more.

It's not an easy ride when you're having to lend your parents money because they're on such a low income.

I've always thought it should be based on the course you are doing by using average employment figures and salaries so effectively you're basing the loan amount on future ability to payback the loan.

Why should nursing students receive less money than medicine students? Without either our NHS would collapse, and it's not as though their living costs are any different during any given year of their studies.

nurses always expose flaws in my arguments :P. I actually think their are major flaws in how some medical/ health care courses are currently funded (they need more money).

However my main argument was to discourage people from doing degrees which are essentially worthless.

nurses always expose flaws in my arguments :P. I actually think their are major flaws in how some medical/ health care courses are currently funded (they need more money).

However my main argument was to discourage people from doing degrees which are essentially worthless.

I've always thought it should be based on the course you are doing by using average employment figures and salaries so effectively you're basing the loan amount on future ability to payback the loan.