4 ms·

"Limited"? UK tuition used to be much, much cheaper: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tuition_fees_in_the_United_Kingdom#History https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tui

"Limited"? UK tuition used to be much, much cheaper: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tuition_fees_in_the_United_Kingdom#History https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tuition_fees_in_the_United_Kin...

LatteLazy 6y ago
Yeah, it used to be that the government paid that and students went for free or got a grant. Starting back in 2002 they cut the amount the government paid and increased what students paid. So the unis didn't get any more money, the government just saved cash. Total BS imho, but don't get me started...
- throwaways885 6y ago
  It would be less of an issue if there was an actual free market, instead all unis just max out the student loan and still complain there's not enough money. I'd happily go to a shack if there's good teaching. The US are even more innovative in ripping off students.
  - LatteLazy 6y ago
    I'm always surprised their aren't more US schools that are just academics. They all seem to have football teams and sports stadiums and up market dorms. I went to Exeter. I picked the cheapest accommodation. I was more than happy with the on site sports centre. I wouldn't want to pay double for gold taps and an arena. I think it would be interesting to see how places fared if tuition was linked to rankings. Top 10 can charge full wack, Next 10 80%, etc. But that would force people to make hard decisions...
    - username90 6y ago
      The Principal leaves money on the table if they only do academics. You get paid based on the budget of the organisation you run, and just doing academics for 1000 students obviously needs a smaller budget than doing academics, sports, entertainment, lodging etc for 1000 students.
    - kevin_thibedeau 6y ago
      There are more of these schools than the big names with athletic programs. You just never hear about them.
  - KaiserPro 6y ago
    I don't think a free market would help that much. It would have been better if they'd just actually made "tuition fees" an actual proper graduation tax, rather than a tax for the poor and a loan for the rich.
- username90 6y ago
  UK just wanted to stop funding EU students, since EU disallowed paying for your own students and not others. The problem is that English universities are inherently more attractive so UK has way more EU students than EU had UK students making UK support a disproportionally large number of students.
  - LatteLazy 6y ago
    One of the craziest things is that we still fund EU students 100% as long as they go home after graduation. I actually considered doing the same but I was to wedded to my UK friends and family.
  - mietek 6y ago
    > The problem is that English universities are inherently more attractive so UK has way more EU students than EU had UK students making UK support a disproportionally large number of students. The English evidently agree this is a problem and have been doing their part to make UK universities less “inherently” attractive.
- hogFeast 6y ago
  Just to say, there are two sides to this problem. The UK govt had spent two or three decades before it brought in fees attempting to get universities to reduce costs...this was unsuccessful. The idea was: we can do literally nothing about this problem, so students will pay for it (and btw, the debt is a fairly soft one), and hopefully universities will cut back when students get angry at them...which has basically happened after the wave of Chinese money started running out a few years ago (and has now gone completely). Universities are digging their own graves, and hopefully something better will come out of it. This issue is, btw, basically identical to the one for council funding. It is a very tricky area with no easy answers but, funnily enough, always ends up with the same solution (council funding in the UK is basically regressive, like university funding because there is literally no way to pressure these institutions to be responsible without user paying).

"Limited"? UK tuition used to be much, much cheaper: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tuition_fees_in_the_United_Kingdom#History https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tuition_fees_in_the_United_Kin...

LatteLazy 6y ago

Yeah, it used to be that the government paid that and students went for free or got a grant. Starting back in 2002 they cut the amount the government paid and increased what students paid. So the unis didn't get any more money, the government just saved cash. Total BS imho, but don't get me started...

throwaways885 6y ago
It would be less of an issue if there was an actual free market, instead all unis just max out the student loan and still complain there's not enough money. I'd happily go to a shack if there's good teaching. The US are even more innovative in ripping off students.
- LatteLazy 6y ago
  I'm always surprised their aren't more US schools that are just academics. They all seem to have football teams and sports stadiums and up market dorms. I went to Exeter. I picked the cheapest accommodation. I was more than happy with the on site sports centre. I wouldn't want to pay double for gold taps and an arena. I think it would be interesting to see how places fared if tuition was linked to rankings. Top 10 can charge full wack, Next 10 80%, etc. But that would force people to make hard decisions...
  - username90 6y ago
    The Principal leaves money on the table if they only do academics. You get paid based on the budget of the organisation you run, and just doing academics for 1000 students obviously needs a smaller budget than doing academics, sports, entertainment, lodging etc for 1000 students.
  - kevin_thibedeau 6y ago
    There are more of these schools than the big names with athletic programs. You just never hear about them.
- KaiserPro 6y ago
  I don't think a free market would help that much. It would have been better if they'd just actually made "tuition fees" an actual proper graduation tax, rather than a tax for the poor and a loan for the rich.
username90 6y ago
UK just wanted to stop funding EU students, since EU disallowed paying for your own students and not others. The problem is that English universities are inherently more attractive so UK has way more EU students than EU had UK students making UK support a disproportionally large number of students.
- LatteLazy 6y ago
  One of the craziest things is that we still fund EU students 100% as long as they go home after graduation. I actually considered doing the same but I was to wedded to my UK friends and family.
- mietek 6y ago
  > The problem is that English universities are inherently more attractive so UK has way more EU students than EU had UK students making UK support a disproportionally large number of students. The English evidently agree this is a problem and have been doing their part to make UK universities less “inherently” attractive.
hogFeast 6y ago
Just to say, there are two sides to this problem. The UK govt had spent two or three decades before it brought in fees attempting to get universities to reduce costs...this was unsuccessful. The idea was: we can do literally nothing about this problem, so students will pay for it (and btw, the debt is a fairly soft one), and hopefully universities will cut back when students get angry at them...which has basically happened after the wave of Chinese money started running out a few years ago (and has now gone completely). Universities are digging their own graves, and hopefully something better will come out of it. This issue is, btw, basically identical to the one for council funding. It is a very tricky area with no easy answers but, funnily enough, always ends up with the same solution (council funding in the UK is basically regressive, like university funding because there is literally no way to pressure these institutions to be responsible without user paying).