Sliding Scale University Subsidies
Discussion
The riots today at Millbank made me think a bit about University funding. The consensus on here seems to be that the current system is trying to fund too many people. I agree and my main issue is that subsidies for further education are split roughly evenly per person rather than focussing on those with the most proven potential. I was trying to come up with a way to to use market forces to cut-back the number of people and courses rather than some appointing some quango to do it.
My idea is that UCAS points get turned into course fee credits; lots of UCAS points and you get a big subsidy, then a sliding scale down to low UCAS points giving no subsidy; you fully fund the course yourself if you still want to do it (still through the student loan system).
Courses that offer good prospects (and by that note are probably good for the future economy) will likely be fully subscribed, courses that do not offer good prospects are under-subscribed and either cut their costs to attract more students or close.
Government gets to reduce the number of courses it funds, but the courses that go are weeded out by market principles rather than bureaucrats = no complaints about unfairness.
Funding is targeted at those who have proven themselves academically capable and are most likely ready for an academic course, but the door is not closed on those who wish to take out a loan to still follow this route.
Are there any fundamental problems with this approach?
My idea is that UCAS points get turned into course fee credits; lots of UCAS points and you get a big subsidy, then a sliding scale down to low UCAS points giving no subsidy; you fully fund the course yourself if you still want to do it (still through the student loan system).
Courses that offer good prospects (and by that note are probably good for the future economy) will likely be fully subscribed, courses that do not offer good prospects are under-subscribed and either cut their costs to attract more students or close.
Government gets to reduce the number of courses it funds, but the courses that go are weeded out by market principles rather than bureaucrats = no complaints about unfairness.
Funding is targeted at those who have proven themselves academically capable and are most likely ready for an academic course, but the door is not closed on those who wish to take out a loan to still follow this route.
Are there any fundamental problems with this approach?
[
Are there any fundamental problems with this approach?
[/quote]
Yes, little Chesney,Chantel, Chardonney. didn't do well at school but its their right to spend three years knobing each other whilst doing football management or beauty therapy because labour told them so. You are cruel and heartless to suggest a student Doctor or scientist should be given special treatment whilst learning skills which will benefit the population, Ugly women need help too you know!
Are there any fundamental problems with this approach?
[/quote]
Yes, little Chesney,Chantel, Chardonney. didn't do well at school but its their right to spend three years knobing each other whilst doing football management or beauty therapy because labour told them so. You are cruel and heartless to suggest a student Doctor or scientist should be given special treatment whilst learning skills which will benefit the population, Ugly women need help too you know!
Both of my parents were teachers and my father went on to s become a lecturer and eventually a proffessor. The last two generations of my family have all been to university.
Here is the truth:
Grants worked. The only reason to abandon them was to try to save a few quid while expanding the higher education system to hide youth unemployment. There is also the very cynical and dishonest motive of using "increased numbers getting degrees" as evidence that your meddling with education has been "a huge success".
The solution is extremely simple. Restore grants without any means testing (part of going to university is learning to be independent and we are dealing with adults at this age, mummy and daddy shouldn't have their wealth considered for this). Cut the numbers in higher education to (1) those who will benefit the nation by virtue of going and (2) those who will benefit personally from it.
Note that those two aren't always the same and also note that having a degree does not always benefit anybody at all except the student loan companies.
Slashing the 30 percent of the population currently going to higher education to 3 percent would be in line with what we got by perfectly well on in the past. The savings would pay for restoring grants.
Here is the truth:
Grants worked. The only reason to abandon them was to try to save a few quid while expanding the higher education system to hide youth unemployment. There is also the very cynical and dishonest motive of using "increased numbers getting degrees" as evidence that your meddling with education has been "a huge success".
The solution is extremely simple. Restore grants without any means testing (part of going to university is learning to be independent and we are dealing with adults at this age, mummy and daddy shouldn't have their wealth considered for this). Cut the numbers in higher education to (1) those who will benefit the nation by virtue of going and (2) those who will benefit personally from it.
Note that those two aren't always the same and also note that having a degree does not always benefit anybody at all except the student loan companies.
Slashing the 30 percent of the population currently going to higher education to 3 percent would be in line with what we got by perfectly well on in the past. The savings would pay for restoring grants.
No change will be accepted if it means that somebody who will be earning more once in a job (Doctor, Solicitor)* is asked to pay less for their training, so basing it on UCAS points won't work.
The whole system is upside down and it's been caused by Labour insisting that the stupid and the poor should have as much spent on them as the talented and the highly taxed.
The whole system is upside down and it's been caused by Labour insisting that the stupid and the poor should have as much spent on them as the talented and the highly taxed.
- Despite the fact they will also be paying 2x to 10x the tax of a lower paid person over the next 40 years.
I'd go further than UCAS points, and let the individual universities decide which pupils to admit (akin to a job interview for a company) and provide a grant towards. The driving process behind this being that universities will attract the best students to improve their rankings etc.
Edited by fido on Thursday 11th November 11:47
Was thinking along similar lines myself.
If we need Engineers, Scientists etc. to build up our manufacturing base again, then we need to give financial incentive for people to take up degrees in these subjects.
If you just want to doss around for a couple of years doing a subject that will be of no use to yourself or the country in the future, then you should pay for it.
If we need Engineers, Scientists etc. to build up our manufacturing base again, then we need to give financial incentive for people to take up degrees in these subjects.
If you just want to doss around for a couple of years doing a subject that will be of no use to yourself or the country in the future, then you should pay for it.
markh1973 said:
Blue Meanie said:
Subjects such as science, maths, etc, should be given more financial aid. Klingon studies, or feminist crap should be paid for in full!
I'm not sure that the study of theoretical maths is much more useful than the study of Klingon. Blue Meanie said:
markh1973 said:
Blue Meanie said:
Subjects such as science, maths, etc, should be given more financial aid. Klingon studies, or feminist crap should be paid for in full!
I'm not sure that the study of theoretical maths is much more useful than the study of Klingon. Albert Einstein, stated that "as far as the laws of mathematics refer to reality, they are not certain; and as far as they are certain, they do not refer to reality."
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff