Help needed! The cost of sending your kids to University.

ToneControl

Sleepyscholar said:

I was aware that they were not Eton boys. The 'privilege' I referred to was not inherited privilege.

'Do they say that kind of thing?' is a more interesting question, although better phrased as 'Do they say that?', as they certainly say that 'kind' of thing. You may be right that I was caricaturing them, which was why I used the phrase 'people like'.

My message was more one of sympathy for today's less well-off students -- and those who attack them -- than an overt attack on the specific individuals in question.

I'm not really clear on your point
Students from poor families will get a full maintenance loan, only kids from average or wealthier families will receive a reduced loan, and some of those will have parents who refuse to contribute.  
Therefore, today's "less well-off students" will not be from unprivileged families

I suppose it's up to any parent to decide whether to refuse to fund their kids past the age of 18, I'm not sure how many do that.

Sleepyscholar

ToneControl said:

I'm not really clear on your point
Students from poor families will get a full maintenance loan, only kids from average or wealthier families will receive a reduced loan, and some of those will have parents who refuse to contribute.  
Therefore, today's "less well-off students" will not be from unprivileged families

I suppose it's up to any parent to decide whether to refuse to fund their kids past the age of 18, I'm not sure how many do that.

Yeah, I could have been clearer. But I did write 'less well-off students'. Not parents. And you are still using the word 'privilege' as a synonym for 'wealthy', which wasn't how I was using it when I (rather unnecessarily, as you've demonstrated) launched into a sideswipe at tabloid bullies.

As you say, it's up to parents. Maybe this is a sore issue for me, because although I'm prepared to fund my son, my wife is increasingly making noises about how she doesn't want to (not that she has any money: the funding comes from me, and her mother), as she thinks he's undeserving.

ToneControl

Sleepyscholar said:

ToneControl said:

I'm not really clear on your point
Students from poor families will get a full maintenance loan, only kids from average or wealthier families will receive a reduced loan, and some of those will have parents who refuse to contribute.  
Therefore, today's "less well-off students" will not be from unprivileged families

I suppose it's up to any parent to decide whether to refuse to fund their kids past the age of 18, I'm not sure how many do that.

Yeah, I could have been clearer. But I did write 'less well-off students'. Not parents. And you are still using the word 'privilege' as a synonym for 'wealthy', which wasn't how I was using it when I (rather unnecessarily, as you've demonstrated) launched into a sideswipe at tabloid bullies.

As you say, it's up to parents. Maybe this is a sore issue for me, because although I'm prepared to fund my son, my wife is increasingly making noises about how she doesn't want to (not that she has any money: the funding comes from me, and her mother), as she thinks he's undeserving.

 I told my kids that I would be reluctant to contribute to living away from home if they wanted to take a course that would not increase their employment chances (e.g. non-vocational non-STEM courses at poorly rated universities).

Sleepyscholar

ToneControl said:

 I told my kids that I would be reluctant to contribute to living away from home if they wanted to take a course that would not increase their employment chances (e.g. non-vocational non-STEM courses at poorly rated universities).

I teach a non-STEM course which can only peripherally be regarded as vocational, at a poorly rated university. Funnily enough, though, all my seminar students rapidly got jobs starting this year, and the university apparently has the highest number of its graduates as company CEOs in the area. Now granted, Japan-UK may be Apples-Oranges, but all the same I'd be wary of getting sucked into the instrumentalist propaganda being used to try to close down the arts and social sciences. Still, I notice and respect your use of the word 'reluctant': if my son was aiming for a poorly rated university -- near home or far -- I'd be looking seriously at alternatives to university education altogether.

ToneControl

Sleepyscholar said:

ToneControl said:

 I told my kids that I would be reluctant to contribute to living away from home if they wanted to take a course that would not increase their employment chances (e.g. non-vocational non-STEM courses at poorly rated universities).

I teach a non-STEM course which can only peripherally be regarded as vocational, at a poorly rated university. Funnily enough, though, all my seminar students rapidly got jobs starting this year, and the university apparently has the highest number of its graduates as company CEOs in the area. Now granted, Japan-UK may be Apples-Oranges, but all the same I'd be wary of getting sucked into the instrumentalist propaganda being used to try to close down the arts and social sciences. Still, I notice and respect your use of the word 'reluctant': if my son was aiming for a poorly rated university -- near home or far -- I'd be looking seriously at alternatives to university education altogether.

In the US and UK there's statistics showing that many degrees from less-well rated Unis actually reduce salaries below the level of those who did not go to Uni. I feel we should provide more vocational courses for students with lower A level grades

I agree with your point about alternatives, in the absence of enrolling on a course that would give a clear advantage when looking for jobs after Uni, we were thinking of apprenticeships, or being based at home rather than miles away in expensive accommodation -  thus reserving more "bank of Mom+Dad" cash for future assistance when needed.

Ideally we should all be able to do one or several interesting courses at Uni during our lives, but the trouble is deciding who should pay. I'd like to do some more part time learning, but the prices are stupidly high.

Adey

I haven't read the whole thread, but these days university is overrated I think. Many people are better off with some of the excellent "modern apprenticeships" that are being provided.

Sleepyscholar

Adey said:

I haven't read the whole thread, but these days university is overrated I think. Many people are better off with some of the excellent "modern apprenticeships" that are being provided.

I think the problem is that 'these days', university is spread so thinly. When I went to university, I was one of 18% of the population. University was seen as just one option among others. Extremely bright friends of mine dropped out of university to do other things that worked out well for them -- no one thought they were mad. When university became 'necessary' -- how many go now? 50%? -- it also became so many different things that it undermined itself.

The problem is that we face this as individuals, but it's actually a policy issue. And unfortunately politics is no longer concerned with policy, only power.

Axe_meister

Well I'm now facing this dilemma a year earlier than thought. My son wants to leave college after resitting his GCSEs this year and now wants to do a foundation year at BIMM or other music school. Unfortunately the foundation year I believe does not fall under LEA funding if he is over 18, but the 3 degree years afterwards fall under UCAS so he can get a student loan. 
A pain in the butt as this was the year for me to finally get out of debt so I can afford his uni years.