Student loans

If it has its own ucas code, I'm guessing it probably is accepted as an exception in a similar way to medicine.

For ~£9k in fees for the foundation year, it makes more financial sense to simply redo some A-levels at a night school or community college.
 
Last edited:
Four ~£9k in fees for the foundation year, it makes more financial sense to simply redo some A-levels at a night school or community college.

Threads on the studentroom are suggesting the way funding works is

length of new course + 1 - previous years.

So a 1+4 degree is a 5 year degree in the SLC's eyes.
 
Four ~£9k in fees for the foundation year, it makes more financial sense to simply redo some A-levels at a night school or community college.

yup, and the same might well be applicable for the scenario the OP is describing
 
Threads on the studentroom are suggesting the way funding works is

length of new course + 1 - previous years.

So a 1+4 degree is a 5 year degree in the SLC's eyes.

The SLC also have rules for funding depending on the level of the course and what level you have previously studied at.

Debating it here and listening to narcissistic little silver-spoons is completely worthless. OP needs to pick up the phone on Monday and speak to the SLC and take it from there.
 
Yes we will contact the SLC.
It is my son I am talking about so I can kiss goodbye to the cash come what may, I'm just trying to get a feel for reality so that I don't have a heart attack.

Sometimes he reads these forums and I didn't want things to get out of hand.

Seems like my most pessimistic assumptions are going to be the correct ones.
 
Just make sure it is a good degree from a industry respected uni with genuinely good prospects and career progression then the money is a worthwhile investment.

Too many nicely titled useless degrees still which don't replace proper automotive / areospace / core engineering + design.
 
Last edited:
Just make sure it is a good degree from a industry respected uni with genuinely good prospects and career progression then the money is a worthwhile investment.

Too many nicely titled useless degrees still which don't replace proper automotive / areospace / core engineering + design.

If it's a hard difficult science like CS, Chem, Physics, etc. you're pretty much set in prospects outside of academia. Limiting it down just to engineering is a bit silly.
 
Well I don't want to be too specific, but it is automotive/transport design.

Has anyone any experience of this situation?

If it's a hard difficult science like CS, Chem, Physics, etc. you're pretty much set in prospects outside of academia. Limiting it down just to engineering is a bit silly.

I was relating my response to the specific course the op mentioned hence only being engineering focus......



If the course isnt proper engineering and just graphics / design focused then you can learn the key skills on a 12 month cad/design eng tech course and save a fortune in fees.

Most of these design style degree courses I have seen don't lead anywhere or teach the core skills you need.

Technical design at a job/level worth racking up 4+ years of uni costs either requires propper engineering or architecture degrees.

For everything else you can learn the cad/design skills through college /vocational /professional institution training and at home practice.

My cad techs are non grads but with relevant training / diplomas. The grad engineers are all from core engineering degrees.

For any technical, design or engineering careers and related degrees, you need to look at the professional industry accredited bodies offering memberships / charterships and make sure the degree and uni is an exempting/accredited route to chartered membership.

In engineering and technical design related disciplines there is a ceiling on progression without the professional qualifications/post nominals. Sure you can work in graphic/technical design with great design skills and a basic degree but the salary and prospects won't be commensurate to the financial and time investment. I know a fair few graphic / technical designers stuck on 16-23k pa with related but non accredited degrees even after several years, where the core subject grads are senior/principal levels in the same time frame.
 
Last edited:
Yes, I think it's more art than engineering, but its what he wants to do so as a dad I can't say no can I.
 
Yes, I think it's more art than engineering, but its what he wants to do so as a dad I can't say no can I.

Which uni/course is it, what does he want to do with it and what industry does he want to work in? Those are the most important questions really.

An art based design course won't readily give access to technical roles in automotive/transport design.
 
Last edited:
Well I don't want to be too specific, but it is automotive/transport design.

if there is a requirement for a foundation year then, as mentioned earlier, maybe see if that could be bypassed instead using some other course at a local college in order to meet the entry requirements for the degree itself.

Also consider if they'd let him do some OU modules and skip the foundation year and or possibly the first year?

(maybe some courses from this degree if they're relevant:

http://www.open.ac.uk/courses/qualifications/q61) alternatively if it is a proper engineering degree then consider some OU maths modules instead (or Maths & Physics A Level in the evening at a local college) to skip the foundation year?

Do they offer a year in industry - could he do the first two years with funding (plus work part time, work one summer) then do a paid placement year... and have saved enough to fund the third year and possibly have a job lined up too due to the year out.

Lastly - re: the year in industry - even if it isn't officially part of the course it can still be quite feasible to do one if organised yourself - you just get approval from the course director to take a year out.

So the final question (maybe) is in this persons first attempt at study, they came under the old tuition fee structure. Now obviously, they fall under the more expensive system. For some reason, which I don't buy, there is a feeling that because they started under the old system they would continue with those costs (say 4k tuition fees).

doubt it
 
Last edited:
It doesn't work that way. You have to self fund the initial year(s) rather than the ones at the end.

It is to make sure you don't again drop out once funding finishes, wasting money again.
 
It doesn't work that way. You have to self fund the initial year(s) rather than the ones at the end.

It is to make sure you don't again drop out once funding finishes, wasting money again.

Thanks for this information, makes sense.

Just had a chat with him and he doesn't seem to quite get it.

I can see a lot of trouble ahead.
 
Thanks for this information, makes sense.

Just had a chat with him and he doesn't seem to quite get it.

I can see a lot of trouble ahead.

Explain it to him bluntly. He's already had 2 years of funding which he now owes £xx,000. If he does 2 years again and drops, then SLC will be out of pocket further with £xx,000 + £yy,000 = a lot of money. By self-funding his first 2 years the SLC will have more faith in him completing the course and can then offer funding for his final years.

On another note, are there apprenticeship schemes in the area he's interested in? I think this could be worth looking into.
 
By self-funding his first 2 years the SLC will have more faith in him completing the course and can then offer funding for his final years.

What? SLC don't "fund" people different amounts depending on whether they think they are "a good investment" or not!

In engineering and technical design related disciplines there is a ceiling on progression without the professional qualifications/post nominals. Sure you can work in graphic/technical design with great design skills and a basic degree but the salary and prospects won't be commensurate to the financial and time investment. I know a fair few graphic / technical designers stuck on 16-23k pa with related but non accredited degrees even after several years, where the core subject grads are senior/principal levels in the same time frame.

The measure of a worthwhile education isn't dependant on how much you earn afterwards...............
 
What? SLC don't "fund" people different amounts depending on whether they think they are "a good investment" or not!

I suggest you get your reading glasses on, or get your eyes checked.

At which point did I say SLC fund people different amounts depending on whether they'd be a good investment?

Tbh, it would be a much better system if it worked like that, as it'd weed out the **** degrees that a lot of people are doing these days.
 
I suggest you get your reading glasses on, or get your eyes checked.

No need to get personal with the insults.

At which point did I say SLC fund people different amounts depending on whether they'd be a good investment?

What did you mean by this then:-

SLC will have more faith in him completing the course and can then offer funding for his final years

Tbh, it would be a much better system if it worked like that, as it'd weed out the **** degrees that a lot of people are doing these days.

What do you define as a **** degree? Anything non STEM? What's wrong with doing an art degree? Why does education have to be a way of increasing you're earning potential? What's wrong with learning for learnings sake? Do we only want to be a nation of scientists but lose our art, music, dance and plays?
 
Back
Top Bottom