Students, any negative views towards the constant talk of making Univeristy "More accessible"?

[SiD the Turtle]

I completely see where the OP is coming from, but is it true in all cases the loans would cover everything?

I went to uni from 2002-2005 and back then you got a loan of roughly £3k per year and no help with tuition fees. That 3K didn't cover rent, let alone the fees, living expenses, books etc. I was lucky in that my parents paid the fees and I covered the remainder with summer jobs. If I didn't have the financial support of my parents I wouldn't have been able to afford it.

 

[gropingmantis]

University isn't for everyone and I wish they would stop saying this.

I'm at uni now and in my third year so far I've hated the learning side. Whoever thought that lectures were a good way to learn engineering needs a slap so now I've pretty much wasted three years of my life and a shedload of money that I need to pay back and looks like no degree.
I've been accepted on to an apprenticeship now which is great news I just wish my teachers had not poopooed the idea when I came to the end of my A levels.

Also by getting more people to have degrees they are devaluing degrees so you need to do way more to stand out even for lower level jobs just having a degree is no longer enough.

Yeah make uni more accessible to the poor by making it harder to get in so it cost them less and only the best get degrees. Then force companies to set up loads of apprenticeships which should draw loads of jobless into employment and give them decent qualifications.

What I'm trying to say is WHAT THE HELL WAS SO WRONG WITH THE 11+ SYSTEM.

 

[Westyfield2]

Instead of giving some cash to students with poorer parents why not instead spend that cash on lowering the fees for all students!

not every person from a rich background have parents who will pay for uni or for their kids after 18 or whatever.

Nail. Hit. Head.


This is what people don't seem to understand. My parents income has diddly squat to do with the amount of cash in my pocket... as by the time of university I'm grown up enough to not expect them to pay for me. I'm sure that if I got myself royally screwed and needed a few £K to tide me over they'd help, but I'm a responsible adult and intend to act like one.

 

[el chombo]

There are a number of problems that lie with the higher education system;

a) what if your parents have an income of >36k but don't financially support you? my housemate's parents were minted but a bunch of tightarses so he was on the absolute breadline. not cool.

b) WE ARE NOT ENTITLED TO HIGHER EDUCATION. if you're poor and you want a car, you have to buy a cheap one. you can't demand that ferrari lower their prices just because you want it.

c) higher education for the elite unis will still be cheap after the rise. the best private schools in the country cost >10k per term, and the students who will study there most probably won't be in a position to worry about how much they're spending.

d) every man and his dog can go to university, and just because your friends went to uni for the sake of it doesn't mean that you have to.

 

[skippy2421]

Completely see where the OP is coming from, even if you are from a poor background the funds are still there should the poor bother to stop moaning and actually look. I also agree with the sentiment that we're letting any old muppet into university. I know various people on silly "ology" degrees who are as thick as two planks and do no work, yet they still pass each year.

I suppose the question is what can you do about it, make A-levels harder? Perhaps. Or do what my university did, they made first year (Mathematics) bloody hard to weed out the weaklings. Ironically it was a lot of people with A-grades at A-level that fell foul to this, just goes to show how many students are taught to pass exams and not to do the subject.

 

[DAnDan]

The way the extra funding is set out at the moment really does leave a lot to be desired, those from poorer backgrounds can get so much extra money that they've got thousands to spend on what they want, after they've paid for living and all the course related costs, wheareas those whose parents may earn above the threshold, but not help them out substantially are left with abosolutely no money at all, having to work on top of their uni hours, just to afford rent, let alone anything for themselves.

 

[Dinomania]

I was speaking to a guy who worked at the University of Bristol admissions office last Saturday night.

He was fairly clear that someone from a rougher school (often implying poorer background) is worth as much (in final degree level) as someone from a private school whose A-Level grades are as much as two higher (so from C to A).

In my eyes that's enough to make university more accessible to these kids - even if all it is, is the perception of cost.

Not everyone is suited to university - that's true - and I think slowly teachers will come around to that idea. I just about got through my engineering degree - but I'm glad I've got it - it's allowed me to get the level of expertise needed to go back to school and be that teacher.

 

[RomanNose]

I was speaking to a guy who worked at the University of Bristol admissions office last Saturday night.

He was fairly clear that someone from a rougher school (often implying poorer background) is worth as much (in final degree level) as someone from a private school whose A-Level grades are as much as two higher (so from C to A).

In my eyes that's enough to make university more accessible to these kids - even if all it is, is the perception of cost.

Not everyone is suited to university - that's true - and I think slowly teachers will come around to that idea. I just about got through my engineering degree - but I'm glad I've got it - it's allowed me to get the level of expertise needed to go back to school and be that teacher.

I wish this could be clarified though , do state schools ALWAYS get priority over private schools? For example I go to a reasonably good state college ( it is ranked #1 in the country) and we have a fair share of oxbridge applicants, just because we are from a state school does that mean that we will have a significant advantage over private schools?
Mediocre independents are hardly better than state ( I served 10 years), I would say that it has favoured me massively by changing from private to state. I can do subjects that are not traditional such as Electronics and computing, it would be pretty hard to shoot blind at a field that one cannot study at most Private schools ( such as electronics) and get it right the first time.

Both sectors have a fair share of advantage but it is not a clear cut line, unlike what most of the public feel.

 

[Dinomania]

Oops it had a hiccup and double-posted. Please ignore.

 

[Dinomania]

Well indeed. There are some wonderful state schools out there - I think I went to one of them.

I'm not sure how it works with other subjects - but I was interviewed at every University I applied to. I doubt very much they'd just lower all grade offers to all state schools, it would depend on how the interview went.

Somehow I impressed them - my offer was lowered from AAB to BBB. Cue Sara slacking off - never quite got my work ethic back after that, sadly.... Well, apart from now.

 

[UK-AL05]

I wish this could be clarified though , do state schools ALWAYS get priority over private schools? For example I go to a reasonably good state college ( it is ranked #1 in the country) and we have a fair share of oxbridge applicants, just because we are from a state school does that mean that we will have a significant advantage over private schools?
Mediocre independents are hardly better than state ( I served 10 years), I would say that it has favoured me massively by changing from private to state. I can do subjects that are not traditional such as Electronics and computing, it would be pretty hard to shoot blind at a field that one cannot study at most Private schools ( such as electronics) and get it right the first time.

Both sectors have a fair share of advantage but it is not a clear cut line, unlike what most of the public feel.

Private schools do get spend a lot more money per student than state schools. That has to have effect on final grades. I'm guessing they really push you, if you fall behind at a private school.

 

[Dinomania]

Private schools do get spend a lot more money per student than state schools. That has to have effect on final grades. I'm guessing they really push you, if you fall behind at a private school.

I'm currently doing a teacher-training placement at a very expensive private school (one of the most expensive ones in this country).

The progress of every pupil is kept in check, reports happen every half term, a 'B' is not considered 'good' (let's face it, their parents are paying >£9k a term, what's the point if their kids don't get A/A*s?), extra-curricular activity is pushed /hard/ as well as tons of homework.

The school day runs from 0820 to 1640, with clubs running until 6pm. They have allocated homework ('prep') time every evening. There is school on Saturday mornings.

Most of the pupils (if not all) have aspirations to university - the 'good' ones - and to becoming doctors, lawyers, etc. If they don't have these aspirations themselves - their parents sure do.

20 pupils per class is considered a lot. Most vary between 15 and 18 - with classes getting smaller (sometimes much smaller) in 6th form - which gives you time to speak to pupils individually within a lesson - impossible when you have 30+ kids in one room for an hour.

So, they do squeeze each pupils of everything they can give BUT... that doesn't mean state schools don't also do a lot of the above.

AND, many have burned out by 6th form. I've seen the ones that have had enough - they're tired, their eyes are glazed-over, concentration and application to their subjects drops off.

You'd be amazed at how often a teacher or two will have had a conversation about you specifically - whatever kind of school you're at - worrying about your progress, comparing notes, trying to work out how best to motivate you. They care, these people - they wouldn't do it if they didn't.

 

[RomanNose]

Private schools do get spend a lot more money per student than state schools. That has to have effect on final grades. I'm guessing they really push you, if you fall behind at a private school.

Not completely true, there are quite a lot of overheads usually because of massive sites and incredibly old buildings that burn through fuel like no tomorrow . The pushing did have a negative effect on me though, they made most students do 11 or 12 GCSE's. I was forced due to limited options to do two languages as well to make it tougher. Went away with average grades but in a excessive quantity where I could have focused my time on subjects that I actually enjoyed.
The work ethic has passed on though, they pretty much brainwash you to behave incredibly formally and put a lot of effort in.I had to wear blazers from the age of 7, it was incredibly strict as well.

 

[Dinomania]

Made you do 11 or 12 GCSEs? Is that not standard?

I did 9 full GCSEs, plus 3 short-course GCSEs, so I suppose that adds up to 10.5 in all. I would have taken triple science too, had the option been open to us at the time (I did double-award instead).

This was finish GCSEs in year 2000. It was a good school - but still a state mixed comp.

 

[goujon945]

Made you do 11 or 12 GCSEs? Is that not standard?

I did 9 full GCSEs, plus 3 short-course GCSEs, so I suppose that adds up to 10.5 in all. I would have taken triple science too, had the option been open to us at the time (I did double-award instead).

This was finish GCSEs in year 2000. It was a good school - but still a state mixed comp.

Mine were the same although mine were in 2003

EDIT: Well the same apart from the 'good school' bit

 

[RomanNose]

Nope most schools cap at around 10 or so that I have heard, one of these was additional maths GCSE ( equivalent difficulty to as maths) and I did that in a year.
Average in the u.k is ~ 8, don't take my word for it though.