Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

TSR's 2012 Tuition Fees Tracker - how much are universities charging in 2012? Watch

    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by nulli tertius)
    Manchester always was.

    Much more interesting will be Salford, Manchester Met, Bolton, LJM, and Edge Hill. There are a lot of universities in south Lancashire.

    Also what will Chester do with Glyndyr sitting seven miles down the road?
    Announced officially on 24/3/11.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by nulli tertius)
    On the contrary, it is generally the research universities that rely heavily on graduates for teaching.
    :ditto:

    Actually, in one of my departments at Durham tutors were usually academics (some being Readers) and this was the larger of the two departments (albeit more short staffed). But I know this was an exception. In my other department tutors were usually postgrads.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by KayteeKaytee)
    Announced officially on 24/3/11.
    Sorry, what was?


    AFAIK Manchester and LJM have announced.

    Moreover there was one university missing from my list. I had a nagging feeling there was another university on Merseyside and when I posted I couldn't remember what is was. It is Liverpool Hope.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ajp100688)
    I've been to an ex poly's library (Plymouth) and it was pretty lacking compared to what we have at QMUL library and the main UOL library.
    So you're using one ex-poly to draw a generalisation? Awesome.

    The cost of teaching is comparable across universities and it is usually the teaching intensive universities rather than research intensive universities who have academics teaching both lectures and tutorials. What's more you also need to take other factors into account. Take student support for example (disability support in particular) this is one area which, generally speaking, is more of a priority amongst the post-1992s who invest money not just maintaining such services and creating a more cohesive support system but also in making attempts to deliver information to students. This isn't a teaching cost but you were suggesting former polytechnics give their students a raw deal.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by JayTeeKay)
    University has become a brilliant means of social mobility. Considering my grandfather made barrels for a living (the son of a miner from rural Poland) and the other was a tradesman in the shipyard, the system we had was working perfectly. When I graduate, I have the prospects of office work, financial work, work in industry, law, engineering, or research. Without access to higher education, I would not have these opportunities, and I'd be stuck here.
    Although it is increasingly difficult to enter professions without a degree there are still a number of professions one is able to enter without a degree. Law and journalism being two examples. With law you'd need to go through the Legal Executive route. A number of regional newspapers offer training schemes for those with only A-levels although the pay is modest.

    This does not mean that someone who has the academic ability shouldn't have the choice of whether to go to university or not.

    The poorest students will have access to grants. Some won't need to pay tution fees at all.

    Then consider that in reality, it's only vocational degrees (Medicine, Engineering, Law etc.) and science/technical degrees that pay off.
    Wow, someone on TSR who doesn't cream over economics :p:

    If you're on an arts degree and you're facing the prospect of £9'000 a year for your tuition, chances are it wont pay off.
    Not necessarily. Science and engineering graduates, whilst in demand and often command higher starting salaries, cannot fill every single graduate position. Civil Service, Diplomats, Journalists, Solicitors and Barristers (still possible to enter with an arts degree although the conversion course is required), Curators, Archivists, Media Buyer, Retail manager...

    One can graduate from university and have very reasonable prospects. But dossing around for three years or more, and coming away with a 2:1 or lower, isn't sufficient.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by River85)

    Not necessarily. Science and engineering graduates, whilst in demand and often command higher starting salaries, cannot fill every single graduate position. Civil Service, Diplomats, Journalists, Solicitors and Barristers (still possible to enter with an arts degree although the conversion course is required), Curators, Archivists, Media Buyer, Retail manager...

    One can graduate from university and have very reasonable prospects. But dossing around for three years or more, and coming away with a 2:1 or lower, isn't sufficient.
    Research by Lancaster University in 2005 found that a male arts graduate could expect to earn on average £22458 more than a non-graduate.

    Research by PWC in 2007 put the figure at £35,000

    Unfortunately those aren't figures per year. Those are the figures for a working life.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by River85)
    Although it is increasingly difficult to enter professions without a degree there are still a number of professions one is able to enter without a degree. Law and journalism being two examples. With law you'd need to go through the Legal Executive route. A number of regional newspapers offer training schemes for those with only A-levels although the pay is modest.
    This does not mean that someone who has the academic ability shouldn't have the choice of whether to go to university or not.
    The poorest students will have access to grants. Some won't need to pay tution fees at all.
    Wow, someone on TSR who doesn't cream over economics :p:
    Not necessarily. Science and engineering graduates, whilst in demand and often command higher starting salaries, cannot fill every single graduate position. Civil Service, Diplomats, Journalists, Solicitors and Barristers (still possible to enter with an arts degree although the conversion course is required), Curators, Archivists, Media Buyer, Retail manager...
    One can graduate from university and have very reasonable prospects. But dossing around for three years or more, and coming away with a 2:1 or lower, isn't sufficient.
    In reality, without getting a degree, your only hope is to go in right at the bottom on the workshop floor and try and build your way up to the higher positions. It has happened -my grandfather finished in the yard in a lower management position, and my dad has lucked his way up from soap factory production line grunt to being an auditor for Glaxo Smithkline. It's not the way to do it though. My dad says he's made it to where he should be 30 years too late.
    Considering, he's from a generation ago, how hard would it be for a current soap factory production line grunt to work his way up? In reality, unless you are prepared to settle for meagre pay, the only way is to get a degree.
    In my case, a degree is the only real way to escape the bubble I live in. The kids that don't choose the academic route will either:

    a) end up on an apprenticeship scheme at the shipyard, one of the smaller local engineering firms or have to travel for an hour on the train every morning for an apprenticeship scheme at the nuclear reprocessing plant. None of them offer much more than £90 a week, none of them come with a guarantee of employment upon completion and places are limited.
    b) go to the local FE college because they have decided the academic route isn't for them and they cannot get onto an apprenticeship. Most kids here do things like hairdressing, motor vehicle studies, social care studies or engineering. Teaching is poor, the qualifications are pretty much meaningless and they either drop out, or use it as a step up to uni (as in the university of Cumbria, UCLAN, Liverpool Hope etc.). The only way it pays of is with a degree at the end of it, and the new £9000 fees are going to cripple the prospects of students taking this route.
    c) Some find employment. Mostly it's because people know the right people -if you have an uncle in the right place, you can get a job pretty easily. Some other manage to get a job with the police, some do a trade apprenticeship, sometimes places like travel agents will ask for staff. None of it is particularly glamorous and with the exception of the trade apprenticeships (once completed) none really pays that well.

    I'd say probably around half of the school leavers go onto further education of some kind. If (when) the new fees come in, that number will decrease and there'll be even more competition for the work available. Considering that the yard takes on less apprentices each year and the Glaxo plant has all but shut down, there's nowhere for the majority of these people to go. University is a necessity to escape the bubble, and the raised fees will completely cripple that.

    See nulli tertius' post about arts degrees -enough said. The benefit barely covers the cost of university education with the current system.

    As for the poorest students not having to pay much, brilliant for them. But who the government deems poor doesn't cover everyone who will be out-priced by the higher fees. I never qualified for EMA, yet I have never been on a family holiday abroad, cannot afford to insure, buy or run a car and I can't afford to buy clothes every other weekend, yet my peers on EMA can. Government policy will help those at the very extreme of the spectrum, but there will be far more who will be out-priced by this.

    I'm sure a 2:1 is a good degree? For instance a first class honours degree in Law, Physics or Engineering can be relatively rare. Firsts are rare in these subjects but they are at the top in terms of starting salary and lifetime earnings? Hmmm.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British...classification
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by JayTeeKay)
    In reality, without getting a degree, your only hope is to go in right at the bottom on the workshop floor and try and build your way up to the higher positions. It has happened -my grandfather finished in the yard in a lower management position, and my dad has lucked his way up from soap factory production line grunt to being an auditor for Glaxo Smithkline. It's not the way to do it though. My dad says he's made it to where he should be 30 years too late.
    Considering, he's from a generation ago, how hard would it be for a current soap factory production line grunt to work his way up? In reality, unless you are prepared to settle for meagre pay, the only way is to get a degree.
    In my case, a degree is the only real way to escape the bubble I live in. The kids that don't choose the academic route will either:

    a) end up on an apprenticeship scheme at the shipyard, one of the smaller local engineering firms or have to travel for an hour on the train every morning for an apprenticeship scheme at the nuclear reprocessing plant. None of them offer much more than £90 a week, none of them come with a guarantee of employment upon completion and places are limited.
    b) go to the local FE college because they have decided the academic route isn't for them and they cannot get onto an apprenticeship. Most kids here do things like hairdressing, motor vehicle studies, social care studies or engineering. Teaching is poor, the qualifications are pretty much meaningless and they either drop out, or use it as a step up to uni (as in the university of Cumbria, UCLAN, Liverpool Hope etc.). The only way it pays of is with a degree at the end of it, and the new £9000 fees are going to cripple the prospects of students taking this route.
    c) Some find employment. Mostly it's because people know the right people -if you have an uncle in the right place, you can get a job pretty easily. Some other manage to get a job with the police, some do a trade apprenticeship, sometimes places like travel agents will ask for staff. None of it is particularly glamorous and with the exception of the trade apprenticeships (once completed) none really pays that well.

    I'd say probably around half of the school leavers go onto further education of some kind. If (when) the new fees come in, that number will decrease and there'll be even more competition for the work available. Considering that the yard takes on less apprentices each year and the Glaxo plant has all but shut down, there's nowhere for the majority of these people to go. University is a necessity to escape the bubble, and the raised fees will completely cripple that.

    See nulli tertius' post about arts degrees -enough said. The benefit barely covers the cost of university education with the current system.

    As for the poorest students not having to pay much, brilliant for them. But who the government deems poor doesn't cover everyone who will be out-priced by the higher fees. I never qualified for EMA, yet I have never been on a family holiday abroad, cannot afford to insure, buy or run a car and I can't afford to buy clothes every other weekend, yet my peers on EMA can. Government policy will help those at the very extreme of the spectrum, but there will be far more who will be out-priced by this.

    I'm sure a 2:1 is a good degree? For instance a first class honours degree in Law, Physics or Engineering can be relatively rare. Firsts are rare in these subjects but they are at the top in terms of starting salary and lifetime earnings? Hmmm.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British...classification
    You are wanting a university education in a very traditional sense as a way out.

    Someone with decent A levels who couldn't be parted from the Lakes (or the nuclear waste tip) might join a local firm of chartered accountants as a trainee. Within 10 years, if it all works out, he is going to be a partner in the firm.

    That is a very different life but a successful one.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by nulli tertius)
    Research by Lancaster University in 2005 found that a male arts graduate could expect to earn on average £22458 more than a non-graduate.

    Research by PWC in 2007 put the figure at £35,000

    Unfortunately those aren't figures per year. Those are the figures for a working life.
    Yes, I got that :p:

    As mentioned, I'm aware that arts graduates do earn significantly le. It would be interesting to find figures based on those who had a clear direction, were able to do volunteering or internships during the holidays, and didn't just piss their degree away. But this is not possible :p:

    I place great value in my degree as being a personal achievement, especially given some of the challenges I've faced, but I realise this does not provide adequate compensation for those who will face three to six times the debt I'll face (which, by the way, is still more than probably anyone I went to school with).

    (Original post by JayTeeKay)
    In reality, without getting a degree, your only hope is to go in right at the bottom on the workshop floor and try and build your way up to the higher positions. It has happened -my grandfather finished in the yard in a lower management position, and my dad has lucked his way up from soap factory production line grunt to being an auditor for Glaxo Smithkline. It's not the way to do it though. My dad says he's made it to where he should be 30 years too late.
    Considering, he's from a generation ago, how hard would it be for a current soap factory production line grunt to work his way up? In reality, unless you are prepared to settle for meagre pay, the only way is to get a degree.
    In my case, a degree is the only real way to escape the bubble I live in.
    I'm not saying you, or your contemporaries, were able to do this. Keep in mind that I went to a school on Tyneside, with most students living within six miles of Newcastle/Gateshead, so they had the benefit of a major conurbation benefit ing from economic growth and government investment (they weren't out in the sticks) though still, in parts, a deprived area. Anyway, those who didn't go to university ended up as the following: -

    Spoiler:
    Show


    One took up a trainee retail management position (large department store in Newcastle) although, after about five years, she decided to go to university.

    One is a musician and part time college lecturer. Another studied an HND in musical theatre and is now a singing coach and singer.

    One is a sound engineer and freelance DJ earning over 30k

    One, my former best friend actually, is an actor. No idea how he's doing on the pay front. Has been an extra in a few relatively succesful films and some major roles in a few indendent films. That's all I know.

    One is an Aircraft Maintance technician (earning 40k within four years) - My brother, an electronic engineering graduate, needed a degree and two years experience before he reached close to this figure.

    One worked as a shop assistant for for 3.5 years, now a lab assistant (so,yeah, modest pay though he was never academic - or at least had severe dyslexia and I don't think he every got the sufficient support). Most have worked for average salaries in software companies, banks or other companies. Usually as things like customer sales advisors.I'm not denying that these are the bulk of people. But these people usually had no aspirations for a career and were married with kids by their early to mid 20s.

    There will be other successful people it's just that I don't know what they're up to now.

    I'm 26, still in university, and never had a real job in my life :p:


    Opportunities are still there for most people in many professions. Accountancy, Law, Surveying, Journalism...They just need the application and quality and it may take slightly longer to reach full professional status but is a perfectly respectable route to take.

    The kids that don't choose the academic route will either:

    a) end up on an apprenticeship scheme at the shipyard,
    What are those :p:

    As for the poorest students not having to pay much, brilliant for them. But who the government deems poor doesn't cover everyone who will be out-priced by the higher fees. I never qualified for EMA, yet I have never been on a family holiday abroad, cannot afford to insure, buy or run a car and I can't afford to buy clothes every other weekend, yet my peers on EMA can. Government policy will help those at the very extreme of the spectrum, but there will be far more who will be out-priced by this.
    I agree and it is a concern for many students, especially those from lower-middle backgrounds (as I was). Relatively comfortable but not particularly well off. I thought you were referring to those at the more extreme end of the spectrum.

    I'm sure a 2:1 is a good degree? For instance a first class honours degree in Law, Physics or Engineering can be relatively rare. Firsts are rare in these subjects but they are at the top in terms of starting salary and lifetime earnings? Hmmm.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British...classification
    Don't know what you're getting at there? Or I think I do, I just don't agree. Besides, I also don't think firsts in the sciences are particularly rare. At my university around 10- 20% of students get firsts in maths and physics, with 90% getting a first or 2:1. They are more rare in the arts.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    UCL NOOOOO
    So devastated when I saw this.
    Can't say I'm surprised though ... wondering if a Masters is actually worth it now.

    Edit: Just read for UCL that people starting in 2011 will no pay £9,000 next year just the normal £3,500 for their whole degree course yayyyyyyyyyyyyyyy
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    Opportunities are still there for most people in many professions. Accountancy, Law, Surveying, Journalism...They just need the application and quality and it may take slightly longer to reach full professional status but is a perfectly respectable route to take.

    I agree and it is a concern for many students, especially those from lower-middle backgrounds (as I was). Relatively comfortable but not particularly well off. I thought you were referring to those at the more extreme end of the spectrum.

    Don't know what you're getting at there? Or I think I do, I just don't agree. Besides, I also don't think firsts in the sciences are particularly rare. At my university around 10- 20% of students get firsts in maths and physics, with 90% getting a first or 2:1. They are more rare in the arts.[/QUOTE]

    It is an acceptable route to take, but the route through university is quicker/easier and I think that route should be available to everyone. It would be a sad thing if it wasn't a question of ability or motivation but finance.
    The opportunities are there I agree, and I suppose my little town is a bit different from a large city or highly populated area, but no good can come of the fee raise. There will be a displacement into the pool of young people waiting to find work and youth unemployment is quite high as it is. I suppose there may be a plus side in that there will be less graduates in the graduate jobs market?
    I think the root of this problem is the ridiculous number of people going through university to take jobs that shouldn't need a degree but do due to the "degree inflation" that's happened. Why Aldi need graduates for management positions, I do not know. Surely a hard-working and reliable current employee would be more qualified? http://www.graduates.aldirecruitment...akes/index.asp

    I was just going from what I read on wikipedia. A 2:1 degree is a good degree isn't it? At least I know it's the minimum requirement for Ph.D. applications.
    And surely it depends on what university you got the degree from? I was told at Warwick (by a chemist who did her undergrad degree at Strathclyde) that getting a first in physics there is probably quite hard compared to some other places. Is it not relative to the standard of the course you're on?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by woods.vanessa)
    UCL NOOOOO
    So devastated when I saw this.
    Can't say I'm surprised though ... wondering if a Masters is actually worth it now.

    Edit: Just read for UCL that people starting in 2011 will no pay £9,000 next year just the normal £3,500 for their whole degree course yayyyyyyyyyyyyyyy
    It's not just UCL, it's every student at every uni. Assuming you don't change course then you are in a legal contract with the university to pay the same fee each year of your course (ignoring inflation). If the universities tried to charge continuing students with the new price they would be in some serious trouble.

    That being said, and you reaction before realising this fact, is why so many of the protests that occured for the last however many months haven't been taken seriously. Quite a few people were protesting over the increased fees because they thought they were directly affected but were just massively misinformed.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    It may have already been posted (I didn't check every single page in this thread) but the BBC have a table detailing all the latest fee announcements. You can find it here.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    The Vice-Chancellor has recently announced that Bath will be charging a flat fee of £9,000 for undergraduate programmes from 2012/13.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Uni in the UK)
    It's not just UCL, it's every student at every uni. Assuming you don't change course then you are in a legal contract with the university to pay the same fee each year of your course (ignoring inflation). If the universities tried to charge continuing students with the new price they would be in some serious trouble.

    That being said, and you reaction before realising this fact, is why so many of the protests that occured for the last however many months haven't been taken seriously. Quite a few people were protesting over the increased fees because they thought they were directly affected but were just massively misinformed.
    I don't think the students were misinformed; just because it doesn't affect our year directly, it will still effect years to come.
    So much for the gvt saying that most universities won't charge £9,000 when clearly most of them will (or at least the 'top' unis that alot of students aspire to go to).
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    on the bright side at least the high fees might stop the kids going who only go for the nightlife and doss for 3 years
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by woods.vanessa)
    I don't think the students were misinformed; just because it doesn't affect our year directly, it will still effect years to come.
    So much for the gvt saying that most universities won't charge £9,000 when clearly most of them will (or at least the 'top' unis that alot of students aspire to go to).

    A lot of students that I spoke to thought they were going to be charged the new fee despite already being at university. Obviously this doesn't mean all protestors thought this was the case, but a lot of students do/did not understand the fee rise and how they are affected by it
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Uni in the UK)
    A lot of students that I spoke to thought they were going to be charged the new fee despite already being at university. Obviously this doesn't mean all protestors thought this was the case, but a lot of students do/did not understand the fee rise and how they are affected by it
    Fair enough that's true. I do feel sorry for those who applied for 2011 entry who have no offers or took a gap year not realising about the fee increase.
    One quick question - I have an offer for a Masters course so does that mean I pay 4 x 3,500 or the new 9,000 fee for my Masters year?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by woods.vanessa)
    Fair enough that's true. I do feel sorry for those who applied for 2011 entry who have no offers or took a gap year not realising about the fee increase.
    One quick question - I have an offer for a Masters course so does that mean I pay 4 x 3,500 or the new 9,000 fee for my Masters year?
    4 x 3,500 if it is an integrated masters. If its a seperate postgrad thing it will be 9 grand.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by spidergareth)
    4 x 3,500 if it is an integrated masters. If its a seperate postgrad thing it will be 9 grand.
    Postgrad fees are independent of undergrad fees and will vary according to university and programme. So, if by separate you mean master's on its own, then it won't necessarily be 9k.

    But it this case it's an integrated masters, classed as an undergraduate for all four years, so yes, it will be 3.5k (or so) for all four years.
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Brexit voters: Do you stand by your vote?
    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
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • 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

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