Oxord vice-chancellor says fee for Oxford University should be £16k a year, thoughts?

Scroll to see replies

Reply 20

Buk_Lau

If Oxford increase fee, the others will also soon follow. What stupidity.

Reply 21

ukmed108

Original post by DarthVador

It is pretty ridiculous that an education at Cambridge or Imperial costs the same as an education at an ex-poly.
Something needs to be done to redress this, otherwise top institutions will continue to favour international students over british students.

I'm pretty sure though that English students are going to have an advantage now that they pay 9k fees. At least for Oxford, they have a lower acceptance rate for international students than for home students.

Reply 22

lol_wut

does anyone know how they arrived at this figure? is there any publicly available report or is it just an internal calculation?

Reply 23

ChemistBoy

Oxford have been clear for a number of years that they want to operate as a private institution in a free higher education market with the sop of a few bursaries thrown in to keep up the appearance that they give a fig about social mobility (i.e. the US system). I remember when fees were £1,000, Oxford were arguing for £3k because they are 'special'.

I suspect that the budgets that the V-C is wheeling out are created in such a way that the full cost of anything associated with teaching undergraduates is put on the tab rather than the reality where a number of funding sources are used to pay for such things (as buildings, lab facilities, libraries, etc.).

My humble suggestion is that the V-C look at some of the archane and inefficient processes that his university has and look to cut costs by getting rid of them. Is it really cost-effective for every don to have at least two offices (one in department and one in college) when most don't live in university accomodation? This must add a significant cost for teaching for no real benefit to quality (as tutorials held in a departmental office are no less effective). What about the administrative duplication caused by the collegiate system? Why can't this be rationalised as well?

Reply 24

J2013

Well, we have to something to stop the proles getting in!

Reply 25

Arbolus

You know, I'm pretty sure that Oxford and Cambridge must be less concerned about the financial shortfall than most other universities are. They can afford to be generous, as they both get massive regular incomes from their land holdings and endowments.

If there were no restriction on fees, and if government funding were ended, I reckon universities like UCL, Imperial, Warwick and St. Andrews would actually end up charging more than Oxbridge. The demand for their places is just as high, but they don't have the wealth needed to be able to afford to keep fees low while still providing a world-standard education.

Reply 26

ChemistBoy

Original post by Arbolus

This won't happen. Oxford and Cambridge will always charge the highest amount as doing anything else would risk damaging their global reputation as the UK's leading universities and potentially deter applicants. They may be in the position to offer more bursaries though, but that is only speculation. My understanding of Oxford and Cambridge's endowments is that they are not that liquid and can't easily be diverted from their current use.

Reply 27

Apocrypha

Original post by nulli tertius

Dear Vice-Chancellor,

Very interesting speech. Perhaps you would elucidate a few things:

1 Is the cost of providing a degree in English literature the same as providing one in engineering? If not, why do you believe it is appropriate for English literature students (rather than the University, taxpayers or engineering students) to bear part of the cost of providing engineering degrees.

2 For the past 800+ years people have been giving money to Oxford University. If you consider that present students (or those who lend to them) should pay the full cost of providing their own education, what do think all these benefactions, and the income derived from them, were for? Providing the dons with really good port perhaps?

3 I appreciate that Oxford University provides a very good education. Can you please provide a cost/benefit analysis demonstrating that it provides a £7,000 per annum better education than say UCL or Newcastle?

Yours sincerely

Nulli Tertius

The answer to the first one is easy. If they gave individual costs for each degree, the expensive ones, and probably better degrees would most likely be extremely under subscribed, we'd have less space engineers and more poets! God i hate poetry..

Reply 28

TheHolubowskyj

It might also be worth mentioning that not only do international students have to pay more, but in Oxford there's also a college fee (another £6,000) on top that's flat for all colleges that home students don't need to pay. International students and those unfortunate enough to be in the grey area (myself included) end up paying around £22,000 per annum for a degree at Oxford (not a particularly specialist degree either). While the £9,000 fee for home students may not cover they're entire costs, the fees from international students balance it out a little.

Reply 29

nulli tertius

Original post by Apocrypha

That provides a reason why space engineers should be subsidised; not why it should be poets doing the subsidising.

Reply 30

username1221160

While campaigning for the previous increase in student fees, the former Vice Chancellor of Oxford, John Hood, told MPs that it cost as much as £8,000 to educate an undergraduate at Oxford. That was in 2009.

http://www.theguardian.com/education/2009/mar/31/oxford-degree-worth

Has the cost of education really doubled in 4 years, or do these VCs just use whichever figure they feel they can get away with?