STEM students should pay higher tuition fees

Announcements Posted on
Four things that unis think matter more than league tables 08-12-2016
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lh030396)
    Yes, well that's you isn't it? Others are going to think differently. Not everybody is doing a degree to vastly improve their employment prospects. Some people want to invest time and money into something they are passionate about.

    Yes, it's true that STEM degrees, on average, lead to better job prospects... that's why STEM students should pay higher fees. Supply and demand. I don't know why you think young people would be dissuaded from doing STEM if fees were higher than non-STEM subjects. Most people on here are obsessed with making a lot of money and most people see STEM as a way of getting a job that pays a lot of money. Therefore, most people would continue to apply for STEM degrees even if they were more expensive than non-STEM.
    Then they can do that on their own time and on their own money.

    And do go on, what is supply and demand about this? Because it's not just a catchphrase you can type and expect people to go "oooooh, he must be right". Explain it.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Vikingninja)
    Yes I definitely want to pay more for my degree than someone else because they CHOSE a degree knowing that employment rates are lower whilst taking on debt.
    How about you think about yourself, and stop worrying about what other people have chosen to do.
    This is never going to happen so stop getting your knickers in a twist.
    You're not paying for the tuition yourself, you're taking out a loan.
    The debt is written off if you can't pay it all back.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by yudothis)
    Then they can do that on their own time and on their own money.

    And do go on, what is supply and demand about this? Because it's not just a catchphrase you can type and expect people to go "oooooh, he must be right". Explain it.
    Nope, if government loan money is offered to them to use to fund their education they are entitled to it. They don't have to pay for anything.

    If there is higher demand among students to study STEM subjects then universities are entitled to increase study costs.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lh030396)
    Nope, if government loan money is offered to them to use to fund their education they are entitled to it. They don't have to pay for anything.

    If there is higher demand among students to study STEM subjects then universities are entitled to increase study costs.
    You misunderstood, I am not saying they are not under the current law. I am saying from a opinionated standpoint - I think people who go to uni for the fun of it should pay themselves. Of course this is hypothetical.

    And why do you assume there is a higher demand for STEM subjects than for non-STEM subject? And you talked about supply and demand. Why did you not mention supply?
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Stem subjects should be free because its beneficial to the economy and country.

    None Stem subjects are mostly unnecessary for most jobs except teaching so should not get any government support unless they become teachers and would get a refund for their fees.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lh030396)
    Yes, well that's you isn't it? Others are going to think differently. Not everybody is doing a degree to vastly improve their employment prospects. Some people want to invest time and money into something they are passionate about.

    Yes, it's true that STEM degrees, on average, lead to better job prospects... that's why STEM students should pay higher fees. Supply and demand. I don't know why you think young people would be dissuaded from doing STEM if fees were higher than non-STEM subjects. Most people on here are obsessed with making a lot of money and most people see STEM as a way of getting a job that pays a lot of money. Therefore, most people would continue to apply for STEM degrees even if they were more expensive than non-STEM.
    If people want to do a degree because they're passionate about it then that is absolutely fair enough, but why should they get a discount to do that? They can do it at their own expense. I might be passionate about hoola-hooping.. doesn't mean I'm entitled a discount on hoola-hoops :P

    Mentioning supply and demand is stupid as has been mentioned. The supply of STEM degree teaching is higher as a result of the increased demand.

    We should be encouraging people to do STEM degrees and other "good" degrees not punishing them for it. If someone wants to spend money learning how to take photographs then fine, but to charge them less for that is silly. So what happens if an individual does a degree for cheaper as its a "worse" degree and then goes on to do really well in life? Should they have to pay more money to the uni?

    What happens if someone does a STEM degree and then doesn't get a job? Should they be entitled to a rebate?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by evantej)
    The Conservative's position on tuition fees is that it is the person who benefits the most from their education so they should pay the fees not society. The fact STEM courses still receive government subsidies (i.e. costs above £9000 per year); students pay the same tuition fees as others; and students go on to work in higher paying jobs is inconsistent with this position. The fact STEM graduates earn more means there should be no government subsidy and their tuition fees should be higher than students in other areas.

    The difficulty is finding the sweet spot between the cost of delivering the course and putting off applicants as the higher earnings are only ever prospective. This is what has happened with teaching qualifications. The government have significantly increased the amount of tax-free bursaries to attract graduates to teach in certain subjects where there are shortages. This is now a perennial issue where it is presumably cheaper to deal with chronic shortages by offering a small number of individual financial incentives rather than improving the overall wage and working conditions of the profession to make it more appealing. I am not convinced everyone who does not go into teaching because it is 'underpaid'.

    The icing on the cake is the fact that non-STEM students are routinely humiliated for their choice of subject when the reality is that they are the ones actually subsidizing STEM students to have better facilities, more contact time, and have better paying jobs when they graduate. You could not make it up.

    I do not see us moving back to a position where everyone studies for free. The fairest solution would be a significant reduction in the tuition fees for non-STEM students and STEM students paying higher fees. That would be consistent with Conservative policy.

    In reality, the real winners are STEM employers who contribute very little to the education and training of their employees yet reap all the benefits. Conservative cuts to corporation tax only make things worse.
    The funding position is more that 50% of the population, instead of about 10% in the old days, now go to university - and who ever said 50% of the population was "university material"?
    Ally that to the fact that many of these students are studying the equivalent of "Comparative Morris Dancing" and the State can no longer afford to uniformly subsidise degrees, particularly those whose economic or social utility is not obvious - to be polite - BSc in Applied Golf Course Management [Birmingham] anyone? A BSc for Goodness' sake!
    STEM degrees are however unquestionably useful, and therefore still attract indirect subsidy.
    It's all a matter of choice. The State chooses to subsidise certain courses it sees as socially or economically useful, if you choose to pursue one that is not viewed in that way that is an issue for you, but don't complain about it.
    Your argument that, because you choose to follow a course of study valued by neither society or employers, somebody else should help to pay your fees verges on the needy. It's £9000 a year, take it or leave it, if it's neither financially or emotionally worth it to you, go do something else.
    In terms of your comments on STEM employers, it's five or six years between an engineer graduating with a Masters and getting their Charter as a fully fledged, fully trained professional engineer - during which their sponsoring company has considerable input.
    Online

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Ringstone)
    the State can no longer afford to uniformly subsidise degrees, particularly those whose economic or social utility is not obvious - to be polite - BSc in Applied Golf Course Management [Birmingham] anyone? A BSc for Goodness' sake!
    Which has a 94.4% employment rate...
    http://www.birmingham.ac.uk/undergra...ployabilityTab

    ...and the typical salary range £16k-£26k is almost exactly the same as Maths at Birmingham £16k-£27k - oh, and Maths has a higher unemployment rate
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jneill)
    Which has a 94.4% employment rate
    http://www.birmingham.ac.uk/undergra...ployabilityTab

    Typical salary range £16k-£26k is almost exactly the same as Maths at Birmingham £16k-£27k - and Maths has a higher unemployment rate
    How many of those jobs are actually as golf course managers?
    Online

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by yudothis)
    How many of those jobs are actually as golf course managers?
    Destinations of AGMS graduates up to 6 months after their course
    Assistant Golf Professional
    Coach
    County Development Officer
    Development Coach
    Event Manager
    Golf Associate
    Golf Coach
    Intern
    Golf Professional
    PGA Golf Professional
    PGA Teaching Professional
    Promotions Assistant

    Further study
    1 x Sports Coaching qualification

    Examples of current employers:
    Ryder Cup 2018 (France)
    Titleist
    TaylorMade-adidas golf
    Professional Golfers’ Association
    Motocadddy
    GolfBreaks
    IMG
    Faldo Series
    PGAs of Europe
    Colt Mackenzie McNair
    European Golf Association

    Golf clubs and resorts across 17 other countries across the world (See FAQs for more details)

    Alumni profiles: http://www.birmingham.ac.uk/schools/...-profiles.aspx
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jneill)
    Destinations of AGMS graduates up to 6 months after their course
    Assistant Golf Professional
    Coach
    County Development Officer
    Development Coach
    Event Manager
    Golf Associate
    Golf Coach
    Intern
    Golf Professional
    PGA Golf Professional
    PGA Teaching Professional
    Promotions Assistant

    Further study
    1 x Sports Coaching qualification

    Examples of current employers:
    Ryder Cup 2018 (France)
    Titleist
    TaylorMade-adidas golf
    Professional Golfers’ Association
    Motocadddy
    GolfBreaks
    IMG
    Faldo Series
    PGAs of Europe
    Colt Mackenzie McNair
    European Golf Association

    Golf clubs and resorts across 17 other countries across the world (See FAQs for more details)

    Alumni profiles: http://www.birmingham.ac.uk/schools/...-profiles.aspx
    That is not bad actually!
    Online

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by yudothis)
    That is not bad actually!
    Which is exactly the point.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Gatewaymerge)
    Another thing is that STEM students have 30 hour contact times while humanities have around 5 hours max. We got to standardise the price of lectures.
    Different subjects have different amounts of independent-learning perhaps. (Though I'm not implying more contact time is worse; simply that different subjects have different approaches.)

    For example in a joint language degree like German and Arabic. I imagine there'd be less contact time than medicine or something, but I don't think a degree in this is less valuable to the economy than a degree in medicine specific to those languages.

    (I work on the premise that contact hours are the amount of face-to-face hours you have with a lecturer etc; say if I'm wrong.)

    (Original post by Lh030396)
    Yes, I do think that the more prestigious the university the higher the fees. Clearly Oxbridge should be charging more than Anglia Ruskin...
    And I'm sorry but I have to disagree with the notion that 'a degree is a degree.' That's just not the case these days. I wish that it was, but in this day and age of economic hardship more importance is placed on the practical scientific and mathematical subjects than the philosophy-type degrees...
    What about languages?
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by chazwomaq)
    And yet you're paying it...
    Lol tru
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jneill)
    Destinations of AGMS graduates up to 6 months after their course
    Assistant Golf Professional
    Coach
    County Development Officer
    Development Coach
    Event Manager
    Golf Associate
    Golf Coach
    Intern
    Golf Professional
    PGA Golf Professional
    PGA Teaching Professional
    Promotions Assistant

    Further study
    1 x Sports Coaching qualification

    Examples of current employers:
    Ryder Cup 2018 (France)
    Titleist
    TaylorMade-adidas golf
    Professional Golfers’ Association
    Motocadddy
    GolfBreaks
    IMG
    Faldo Series
    PGAs of Europe
    Colt Mackenzie McNair
    European Golf Association

    Golf clubs and resorts across 17 other countries across the world (See FAQs for more details)

    Alumni profiles: http://www.birmingham.ac.uk/schools/...-profiles.aspx
    How many of those students were already in the golf industry and wanted a degree for career enhancement?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    If anything it should be the other way around. A degree the country will benefit from as a whole should be cheaper then those it won't. STEM subjects add to the economy. Anyone taking a degree that is fluff should pay more. It'll encourage more degree level on the job training for jobs that frankly don't require four years study to do.

    I only went thought the first page here but to be clear the "fluffy" degrees aren't things like history that can transfer to good professions like law. I'm talking the very clearly useless ones.

    The rest should be priced the same. If your earning potential is less then you have picked the wrong subject. That's on you.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Well in a way we already do have a system where you pay back an appropriate amount depending on how good a job you get afterwards - that's how the student loan system works, just like a 'graduate tax'. If you study a mickey mouse degree and get a rubbish job, you probably will end up paying the equivalent of a couple of thousand pounds a year in tuition fees max, because the loan will get wiped off before you pay it back...
    Online

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Maker)
    How many of those students were already in the golf industry and wanted a degree for career enhancement?
    I've no idea. Ask them...

    (It doesn't counter the point that this degree has economic utility.)
    Online

    3
    ReputationRep:
    I am not going to get pulled into this debate on whether a degree in golf course management does or does not have economic utility. In all honesty because I have no idea about whether it does or does not.

    The thing that I speak of is statistical probability and generic trends. Which shows that prestigious universities and stem subjects pay more.

    obviously their will be some none stem subjects that Pay well and some non prestigious universities that via whatever means help their graduates get into higher paying or more promising job roles.

    however this just detracts from the central points. The fact is that overall university prestige and stem subjects earn their graduates more and are also more rigorous then their counter parts.

    I guess the advice would be to research whatever you want to do know the facts and the figures, and make a sensible choice from there.

    Salary and economic future is not everything but if your decisions are not sensible in terms of economics don't try to expect others to give you discounts or subsidize you.
    Online

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Luke7456)
    The fact is that overall university prestige and stem subjects earn their graduates more and are also more rigorous then their counter parts.
    The best predictor of your future earnings is your parents earnings. Students from wealthier backgrounds tend to go on to earn more... and wealthier students also tend to be over-represented at "prestigious" universities.

    Be careful with your cause and effect...
 
 
 
Write a reply… Reply
Submit reply

Register

Thanks for posting! You just need to create an account in order to submit the post
  1. this can't be left blank
    that username has been taken, please choose another Forgotten your password?
  2. this can't be left blank
    this email is already registered. Forgotten your password?
  3. this can't be left blank

    6 characters or longer with both numbers and letters is safer

  4. this can't be left empty
    your full birthday is required
  1. Oops, you need to agree to our Ts&Cs to register
  2. Slide to join now Processing…

Updated: October 31, 2016
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Poll
Do you think you'll achieve your predicted A Level grades?
Useful resources
Uni match

Applying to uni?

Our tool will help you find the perfect course

Articles:

Debate and current affairs guidelinesDebate and current affairs wiki

Quick link:

Educational debate unanswered threads

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Quick reply
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.