Sheffield University To Charge Students Maximum Fees Allowed By The Government At ... £9,000
By interestrateripoff, April 12, 2011 in The off-topic forum
interestrateripoff
Carry on banking.....
Location:Ponzi Land
http://www.thestar.co.uk/news/sheffield_university_to_charge_students_maximum_fees_allowed_by_the_government_at_9_000_1_3277302
THE cost of studying at Sheffield University is set to soar as it announced it is tripling students' tuition fees to £9,000 a year.
Students starting next autumn will face fees of £27,000 for a three-year degree after the university's ruling body last night decided to charge the maximum amount, up from the current annual cap of £3,290.
Sheffield has followed the lead of other elite universities, including Oxford and Cambridge, which have also chosen to charge the top figure.
Mr Blunkett said: "The government have pulled 80 per cent of the funding for teaching and the only way they can maintain quality is by pulling in the fees from students.
"This in turn is being borrowed by the government to the tune of £10.6 billion. The merry-go-round is a ridiculous example of ideology over common sense."
He added: "To have to borrow that sort of money to hand to students who then have to pay what was previously funded through general taxation puts the universities in an impossible position."
"It's a complete catch-22. It becomes the given that the best universities charge the maximum, then you're on a spiral which individual universities can't get off."
Strange Leeds Met hasn't been included in the elite Universities in the article it's nearly charging he maximum, so therefore must be elite.
Although I think a bit of naughtiness in the article as they list full cost of a 3 year degree at £27k and then state the currently yearly fee is £3,290. Although it's a nice big inflation jump for students, nearly a 200% on fees charged for a 3 year degree.
So next week I'll bet we'll see everyone charging £9k a year.
Although I will be a little disappointed if don't have at least one VC who goes for less in an attempt to get bums on seats.
Location:North West
As with most of these set targets it merely sets the bar at a certain level. If the going rate is £9,000, everyone will be charging it.
Similar thing to schemes to help FTB or Housing Benefit, it merely raises the price by the level of the subsidy/incentive.
Not a surprise really.
Reck B
Will be interesting to see if the market comes into play here. ie
Lack of applications to sub standard full fee charging uni's forcing them to cut fee's to more competetive/attractive rates.
(or will they all be 'competing' at £9k per year?!)
tomwatkins
I would think a lot of people will say "stuff it"...shame but there you go. The country needs to get real and this is just one more example.
SHERWICK
i don't think we've ever had an argument/debate over whether taxpayers should, or shouldn't, fund University education.
Or even whether businesses (maybe over a certain size) should fund University education (and not leave it to individual taxpayers alone).
However, I think we should have that debate, with all the pros and cons coming out.
I've been through uni and work in Internet development/marketing. I got lucky and was able to earn a salary and learn a lot on the job but thinking back it was pretty inefficient.
£9k for 3 years VS working covering living costs by doing some coffee making/cleaning in a business where you can shadow experts and do real world work the rest of the time.
It'd be quite a decision to take the apprentice route for a traditionally degree oriented role but it would be rational.
+ 1 they all want to get as much as they can...they all think if they charge the highest rate they are the best of the best.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aIrCFrFpHvw
rantnrave
The problem of having to charge ever higher fees stems from trying to put more and more young people through university. Given that a significant number of graduates end up doing jobs they could have done without a degree, it must be asked whether the economy needs such a high percentage of the population with a degree in the first place. Find a balance there and the levels of funding needed becomes clearer. Government provision should also be made for top students to make sure they do go on to uni.
It's all going on wages.
They cannot charge less than £9k or their best bankers staff will leave to go where they charge £9k and can pay more
More top companies should be take promising 'A' level students from school, train them and mold them to their own ways...better to get paid to train than pay to train.
Whos wages?....teachers wages?
The dons (will receive offers they cannot refuse) and lechurers (some have affairs with students)
....there must be another, better and cheaper way to get educated.....education competition coming to a place near you.
Guest spp
So the money printers have found themselves a new bubble!
Students - You Are Exploited Debt-Serfs
wonderpup
Isn't the problem that any University that charges less is in effect saying they are offering poorer quality?
So their pitch amounts to 'come to us we are cheaper' if they try to compete on fees- but in some 'markets' this does not work- the negative impact of the lower price point overpowers the benefit of it.
Transpose this to the medical world- 'Come to St Barts- we operate on you for half the price!' Personally this would bother me.
Add to this the fact that- for the student- the cost is pushed into the future and you can see that the idea of Universities competing on a cost basis was never going to fly.
efdemin
It kind of shows how useless the Uni league tables are if they all feel the need to charge the maximum to uphold their prestige.
But I would say it also matches the British approach to buying stuff: basically more expensive == better. We just don't seem to be able to judge value/quality versus cost very well. Why else do we get gouged on all the 'premium' brands like german cars, kitchens, food (i.e. Waitrose), iThings, etc.
Why study in the UK anyway? There are better universities in continental Europe with low/no tuition fees, teaching in English.
Fondue NOT Raclette
Location:Zurich
given we happen to be going through one of these phases where globalisation is in trend, rather than protectionism which will take its turn at some point id tend to agree, any good calibre student is mad to miss out on the chance of taking the opportunity, in hindsight id loved to have studied elsewhere in europe but didnt really consider it at the time, it really is a two way street for anyone young and confident enough to take the opportunity, i cant really see the downside
The Ayatollah Buggeri
Location:Redlands, CA, USA (expat - formerly Yorkshire)
Leeds Met's decision to charge £8.5k has been the subject of heated discussion at its friendly rival further up Woodhouse Lane, the concensus of opinion being that they're barking. A £1,500 discount from a total debt of £27k will hardly be a deal-maker for an applicant who is qualified to go to a traditional university, especially one from a poorer background who won't be paying back a penny until they're on £21k anyway, and even then relatively small monthly payments. However, it does make it official that Leeds Met is a second-rate institution, with all the reputational implications that carries. Bizarre.
Location:Herefordshire
It struck me that there could be an unintended consequence of the idea that to charge the full £9k a uni has to have a significant intake from disadvantaged students from state schools.
The less prestigious places already do that. So the govt can't stop them charging the full fees. It's the Russel Group ones that could actually be stopped from charging full fees if the govt wants to show it meant what it said. So we could get an upside down system - expensive poor unis and slightly less expensive elite ones.
The less prestigious places already do that. So the govt can't stop them charging the full fees.
The government can't but the market can. If a well qualified candidate from a middle-class family can't get into a leading university, there is nothing to stop them going abroad rather than investing a huge amount of borrowed money in a degree from an institution that is regarded by employers as second-rate. The unintended consequence I can see is of European universities increasingly offering degree programmes taught in the English language. That is already starting to happen on a significant scale for master's degrees.
Just shows that 9k is a very artificial cap.
Wonder how high the universities would try to go if there were no cap?
catsick
Location:singapore
My guess is that with all the social engineering going on as well as the horrible repayment terms for those that can afford to pay, we are at the point where if you are not going to oxbridge and have parents with a reasonable amount of wealth then abroad is the best option already, there is a certain price level where the quality of what is in mast cases "comprehensive school" type education is not worth it and those with cash will look for the equivalent of a good private school and opt out of the system as they do at present with the current education system.
My view is 90% of the current universities are not fit for purpose and undermining them to the point where they have to start laying off vast numbers of staff can only be a good thing.
Open University? (even that can set you back 5 grand for a degree).
I got my degree from the University of Please Yourself, California.
It cost me $99, inc. shipping. Bargain!
I fancy a doctorate next.
Custom fake degrees online
There are about 120 universities and you have just said that 108 of them are essentially crap.