Kids getting ripped off at Uni

[Sebastian Tombs]

I'm not sure if this has been mentioned, but the student fees don't go directly to the university. They go to the Treasury. Universities are funded according to the quality of their research and student satisfaction. I doubt the scores next year are going to be high!

Unis make direct money from gifts, grants, research income, and rents. Its the need for the latter that was the main driver for them demanding the students physically go there. Most unis are currently loss-making. The unis knew in advance that all teaching was going to be online, because there wasn't the physical space to actually teach and maintain social distancing. Despite considerable pressure the lecturers refused to teach in person, on practicality and then health & safety grounds, and the unions backed them. By this time students had been made to turn up of course, and most went straight into lockdown, because many brought Covid with them.

My wife is a university professor, and she is working all day every day, running herself into the ground, trying to give her best to the students and the uni.

Incidentally, it may annoy some Dozy people to know that I did a politics degree, which was mostly a mix of theory or history, and I used it only to argue my way into a career in web development, which allowed me to contribute to all sorts of things from selling chocolate bars, records, cars, or sports tickets to keeping the people of the UK safe from criminals and terrorists.

[egor110]

IroningMan said:

OpulentBob said:

Because everyone MUST have a university degree.

I wonder how much the kids really do want it, and how much is "you must have a degree" stamped in to them by their parents.

I left school in 1985. Anyone at my school who didn't go on to University was looked at very strangely by the rest of us and, I presume, by their parents.

And in hindsight?

Must of been quite a few who learnt a trade and done quite nicely or gone into the armed forces and left with a decent pension.

[Shnozz]

Sebastian Tombs said:

My wife is a university professor, and she is working all day every day, running herself into the ground, trying to give her best to the students and the uni.

My partner is also a uni professor and has been working flat out during the pandemic, including over the summer months when she normally has a big chunk of down time. Instead, this was the transitional period to really up the game when it became clear that at least the first semester of the new academic year was going to be online. Being brutally honest, her working hours pre-pandemic were certainly a lot better than mine (lawyer) but the hours that have been committed during this have matched mine or been greater.

[Shnozz]

leef44 said:

Lotobear said:

In my son's case he was doing a worthwhile science degree which would have guaranteed him professional chartered status and a well paid job for the rest of his life but I agree, if it's media studies, equestrian studies, events management, drama, sports studies or golf course design I don't have a lot of sympathy.

It's not a door closed. Some would consider that these next two years is not the best time to be going to uni due to all the lockdowns and less effective learning.

The case could easily be argued the other way to be fair. The job market is going to prove testing for new entrants over the next few years IMO. Travel is difficult for any young person that might have taken that route in the past.

If you cannot travel/gap year and you cannot get a job, doing a degree, whether (partly) online or otherwise might be the only decent use of your time as an 18 - 21 year old.

[IroningMan]

egor110 said:

IroningMan said:

OpulentBob said:

Because everyone MUST have a university degree.

I wonder how much the kids really do want it, and how much is "you must have a degree" stamped in to them by their parents.

I left school in 1985. Anyone at my school who didn't go on to University was looked at very strangely by the rest of us and, I presume, by their parents.

And in hindsight?

Must of been quite a few who learnt a trade and done quite nicely or gone into the armed forces and left with a decent pension.

I joined the Army after University - graduate entry Officers were (just) in the majority and were granted two years' seniority plus an accelerated course at Sandhurst. By the time my contemporaries were being put through Staff College - a pre-requisite for advancement beyond the rank of Major - a degree was essential and a Masters not unusual. In-service degrees at Shrivenham or out at Universities were available to non-graduates who were identified as having the potential to go on to senior careers.

I don't know of anyone who my school to take up a trade. In 1985 the school's fees were north of £10k a year and they're now something like £40k: the point being that private schools have operated a culture in which University is the default next step for more than 40 years - what's changed over the last 20 is an effort to bring that same kind of culture back into the state system; when we had Grammar Schools, for all their faults, that was the culture they operated, too.

[Roofless Toothless]

Sebastian Tombs said:

I'm not sure if this has been mentioned, but the student fees don't go directly to the university. They go to the Treasury. Universities are funded according to the quality of their research and student satisfaction.

I'm not sure this is true.

If a student takes out a Student loan, the student loan company reimburses the university directly during the time that that student is there.

https://www.sheffield.ac.uk/finance/staff-informat...

https://www.ucas.com/finance/student-finance-engla...

Of course, universities can make money independently through research and services, and through bequests and investments. Last time I looked, direct government grants only covered about a quarter of teaching costs, and the student fees about 45%

[survivalist]

Roofless Toothless said:

Sebastian Tombs said:

I'm not sure if this has been mentioned, but the student fees don't go directly to the university. They go to the Treasury. Universities are funded according to the quality of their research and student satisfaction.

I'm not sure this is true.

If a student takes out a Student loan, the student loan company reimburses the university directly during the time that that student is there.

https://www.sheffield.ac.uk/finance/staff-informat...

https://www.ucas.com/finance/student-finance-engla...

Of course, universities can make money independently through research and services, and through bequests and investments. Last time I looked, direct government grants only covered about a quarter of teaching costs, and the student fees about 45%

This is what I though. Used to a flat £1000 a year regardless of what course and quality of uni.

Now it’s just a rate cap, but allows the government to contribute considerably less.

[Taita]

C4ME said:

Here is an example of the way one particular university is currently treating its students regarding accommodation in the halls of residence

1) The university communicated in mid January that the planned return of students to campus at the end of January was cancelled.
2) The university also communicated that all teaching will be remote online for the rest of the academic year.
3) Students are allowed to cancel their accomodation contract for the remainder of the current term and get a refund against the full fee paid at the start of term.
4) Students cannot though cancel their contract until they have emptied their room.
5) Students are not allowed to travel to the university and empty their room as university policy is that this does not qualify as essential travel.

Who cares if they think if it essential (no law for this). They're a business not the law.
Jump in car, empty room, cancel. Bosh.

Eta: not a pop at you, it's a personal bugbear of gold plating / creeping excellence because 'covid' by organisations who have no business to do so.

[Electro1980]

Sebastian Tombs said:

I'm not sure if this has been mentioned, but the student fees don't go directly to the university. They go to the Treasury. Universities are funded according to the quality of their research and student satisfaction. I doubt the scores next year are going to be high!

Tuition fees are paid directly to universities (except in two cases, Oxford and Cambridge, where technically the colleges are the education institution who then buy services from the university. Sort of. It’s very complicated).

The government do pay grants to universities, which are based on various calculations. For undergraduate teaching this is based on calculations of the quality of the teaching and is about 1/4 the value of fees.

Government research funding is separate and apportioned according to the research excellence framework (REF). This is a complex (and much criticised) way of measuring the quality and impact of research.

Sebastian Tombs said:

My wife is a university professor, and she is working all day every day, running herself into the ground, trying to give her best to the students and the uni.

I think this is a point that deserves repeating. Few people realise how hard university staff work and how poor the pay can be, especially for academics, more so for early career academics. Lots of people have some odd ideas about the world of academia. My wife is looking for a job in a commercial company and keeps being told she doesn’t have the recent commercial experience and “things move quickly in the commercial world”. They seem to think it is all long lunches and little work.