How is £9000 per year worked out?Watch
- In university for approximately 6-7 months.
- Approxiametly 20 contact hours a week. (Lectures, tutorials, Labs)
This works out at each student paying £17.31 per hour, which is 29p per minute, by taking the middle ground of 6.5 study months per year.
There are 36 students on my course, 36 x 9k is £324,000 they are collecting off my class per year... We discussd this in class and have no idea what we are paying for. The lecturer told us he is on £42,000 per year which is a highly paid job paying the top end of tax. We have to buy all the other things that go along with studying like text books, which are pricey.
I sit in my lectures and lecturers read powerpoints to the class, realistically I could do that at home and not go into class. If I got stuck I could use youtube for help. How does this equate to £346.2 per week. Theres a few that never turn up to class and just collect the notes from blackboard, see whats going to be on exams and then study with youtube tutorials and online content.
As a side note
The minimum wage is £6.50 for over 21s and £5.13 for 18-20. £11700 per year on min wage for a full time job at 37.5hours per week.
£17.31 per hour works out to be around the value of £31,153 per year for someone working a full time job at 37.5hours per week. Which is a considerable amount, how many parents are on that much? Not vast sums.
Im curious about how the 9k a year is worked out because I ask for a itemised receipt when I paid my tuition fee and was told they dont do it. This is my way of thinking.
You pay £27k for a degree entitling you to a piece of paper and the right to put it on your CV. A huge majority of people will never use any degree specific knowledge in their future working life.
How you reach the point of receiving the degree is pretty irrelevant as universities all have different amounts of teaching hours and content.
Still, if you're studying for a degree in the arts or social sciences and are not at Oxbridge then the likelihood is that the unit cost for providing the degree isn't £9000 per year. For proof of this we can see that masters degrees in these subjects go for about £6000, and that for a 12 month year.
Also, most universities take part in a lot of research, which requires money to go ahead. Ultimately, you choose to go to a university with the knowledge of how much it costs to go there. You can get a degree at the end of it, and if you make the most of your experience you can get a lot from your tuition fee. I have a psychology degree and the tutors were always more than willing to let us get involved with their research, including plenty of lab time (which again is expensive) so you really can make it worth it. Make the most of the people you have available to you as well. You could use their expertise to help grow your own knowledge.
Go on, improve your research skills.
Design/engineering degrees need access to expensive software like SolidWorks, CATIA ... licences cost money.
Even in a maths degree I used computers for statistics workshops, wave tanks for fluid dynamics and other practical equipment for mecahnics modelling.
£9000 doesn't cover the whole cost ...
Why shouldn't universities pass the maximum charge onto you? The other alternative is that the tax payer must foot a higher percentage of the bill.
Just because charges were capped at a lower amount doesn't mean that the courses were cheaper.. just that the tax payer had to fund a larger percentage of the cost.
£9000 per year isn't a problem as long as you have a degree from universities that are worth it. I wouldn't pay £9000 per year for something like London Met or UEL. Better to not go university if I had to.
Posted from TSR Mobile
When I went to uni for the first time in the early 80s, tuition was completely covered by government funding, and student finance came in the form of a non-repayable grant. Too many people go to uni now. We can't turn the clock back to any of the previous funding systems without barring uni to some students who would be capable of getting a degree. Whilst that might be a pragmatic approach, it's scarcely a vote-winner - which is ultimately all any political party cares about.