University isn’t as good as it used to be?

I went to a RG uni- University of Edinburgh. Whilst the facilities e.g. libraries were good the teaching lacked any originality or enthusiasm and lectures were rather monotonous. Of course my degree might be the odd exception you would think? But not really, I had friends from all sorts of courses and they agreed that the uni wasn’t that good for a “prestigious uni”. It’s almost as if the uni just uses its prestige to hide the low student satisfaction. Anyway, are most unis these days bad now? I’m honestly not sure if it’s worth the money anymore. Our parents generation could secure jobs immediately after graduating but now so many graduates struggle to get jobs. I know that in the long run a degree probably is worth it but I do wonder if that’s just drummed into younger generations because university is a business that makes so much money. I personally know lots of successful adults that didn’t go to uni and don’t regret not going…just a curious student

Thanks

Reply 1

PQ

Clearing and Applications Advisor

21

It’s a russell group university. That means the focus for staff is research activity. Teaching in RG universities is commonly considered a poor relation.

Did you look at NSS results before you started your course? They’re not hidden.

Reply 2

hotpud

18

I quite agree. I think most red brick unis done out on their status and go down the route that students are there to "read" their subject. That said most lecturers are also researchers and when all is said and done unis earn way more money from research than undergrads.

But back to the point I do believe many of the newer unis distinguish themselves by offering better teaching, better pastoral support and more flexibility in modules taken.

Reply 3

PQ

Clearing and Applications Advisor

21

Original post by hotpud

I quite agree. I think most red brick unis done out on their status and go down the route that students are there to "read" their subject. That said most lecturers are also researchers and when all is said and done unis earn way more money from research than undergrads.

But back to the point I do believe many of the newer unis distinguish themselves by offering better teaching, better pastoral support and more flexibility in modules taken.

Technically universities don’t earn more money from research. They have high amounts of income but research grants from research councils are deliberately paid at 20% below the estimated cost of the research being “funded”. Universities have to take income from other sources (like tuition fees) to cover those costs.

for research intensive universities like the Russell group this amounts to millions of pounds from tuition fees subsidising research costs.

Reply 4

hotpud

18

Original post by PQ

Technically universities don’t earn more money from research. They have high amounts of income but research grants from research councils are deliberately paid at 20% below the estimated cost of the research being “funded”. Universities have to take income from other sources (like tuition fees) to cover those costs.

for research intensive universities like the Russell group this amounts to millions of pounds from tuition fees subsidising research costs.

Are you sure? There was an internal proposal at Manchester a while ago to sack of undergrads and just focus on research.

Reply 5

PQ

Clearing and Applications Advisor

21

Original post by hotpud

Are you sure? There was an internal proposal at Manchester a while ago to sack of undergrads and just focus on research.

yep I'm sure. It's the russell group's dirty little secret and even the research councils don't always put it in plain sight: https://www.ukri.org/councils/epsrc/guidance-for-applicants/costs-you-can-apply-for/principles-of-full-economic-costing-fec/

If they got rid of undergraduates they'd still have tuition fee income from postgrads to subsidise research grants.
From https://documents.manchester.ac.uk/display.aspx?DocID=64821 they got £215m from government or charity grants which would be subject to FEC rules - so they're taking £43m from other income sources to cover the costs of the associated research. They had £356m from international tuition fees that year and £226m from home tuition fees - the total income from research grants and contracts was £270.5m - so I doubt anyone suggesting getting rid of undergrads had any real understanding of the finances of the university :biggrin:

Reply 6

hotpud

18

Original post by PQ

yep I'm sure. It's the russell group's dirty little secret and even the research councils don't always put it in plain sight: https://www.ukri.org/councils/epsrc/guidance-for-applicants/costs-you-can-apply-for/principles-of-full-economic-costing-fec/

If they got rid of undergraduates they'd still have tuition fee income from postgrads to subsidise research grants.
From https://documents.manchester.ac.uk/display.aspx?DocID=64821 they got £215m from government or charity grants which would be subject to FEC rules - so they're taking £43m from other income sources to cover the costs of the associated research. They had £356m from international tuition fees that year and £226m from home tuition fees - the total income from research grants and contracts was £270.5m - so I doubt anyone suggesting getting rid of undergrads had any real understanding of the finances of the university :biggrin:

This might have been back in the day when tuition fees were only £3k and the idea would have no doubt been to double or more the amount of research they do. I guess under grad income is pretty much free money these days?

Reply 7

SoonToBeExpat

16

I have many opinions on this subject...
I study up in Sweden but have a brother who is studying engineering up at Newcastle. We both stated at the same time, now entering our 3rd year - between us the experiences have been completely different. From day 1, I can count on a single hand the weekdays where I've not physically gone to the university for some sort of scheduled activity across the whole academic year. Comparatively, he has had largely remote teaching, with in-person scheduled activity being very VERY rare. A lot of lectures are pre-records from the pandemic era. Apparent past opportunities like visiting factories or the like have been absent for his year group. He has also been subject to the delays in assessment grading due to the strike action - something which would be unimaginable in Sweden and you would have individual students, as well as all the student unions taking legal actions. It seems that in the UK there are next to no student rights when it comes to legal mechanisms in overseeing and upholding the quality of your education... All this whilst you're expected to pay £9250 in tuition fees.

If this sort of thing is commonplace across most British universities, then academia has a serious problem because this sort of stuff is not happening elsewhere. I am perhaps ignorant since I myself have never gone to the UK for higher education but I've met students from across the globe and see how they do things in Scandinavia; the UK will be overtaken (at least at the prestige at undergraduate level) if this keeps for much longer... How on earth can we justify the quality of education being equivalent or better than our neighbours if we don't even have on-site teaching as a norm for most subjects post-pandemic? And some universities have the audacity to be asking undergraduate fees for home students to be raised closer to that of international students!? It's a complete rip-off! Particularly when British nationals could go many counties in Europe, pay their international tuition fee rates and for many it would be cheaper annually than the UK home rate!

And then their is the argument of job availability and increased prospects after graduation... this has changed alot, even in the last decade. But starting salaries have gone down and more "general jobs" are asking for a degree as a basic entry requirements. Things are most definitely not what they used to be, maybe I'm being cynical but if things are as bad as I hear them to be then thing's are going to get worse as the prestige that the universities are running on might just start to wear thin.

What do others think?

University isn’t as good as it used to be?

Quick Reply

Related discussions

Latest

Trending

Trending

Articles for you