The choice for Higher Education

Education is not free. It has a cost. With anyone who wants to going to University who can argue that the user (an adult) should pay something towards that?

The simple fact is the state – which actually means the taxpayer, cannot afford to fund the current system. So essentially there are two choices. You continue with mass Higher Education, with some courses that will have no value in terms of getting you a better job, and students take the hit if and when they earn £21,000 ad over by paying back their tuition, or you scale back the University sector,going back to selecting on academic merit, with the top going to top Universities (which would see lesser institutions close or back to teaching vocational courses) and the state pays.

The choice for the NUS and for students is there. Which would you prefer?

About these ads

4 Responses to The choice for Higher Education

  1. keynesianism says:

    On a similar point: Why should I subsidise rail travel as I never travel on a train? Nor do I claim benefits so why should I subsidise that? Etc Etc. If all public sector provision is to be judged in this way you might as well privatise the lot, including MP's who can charge for their services. Just hope they are not in desperate need of my money as Iv'e never used one of them either.

  2. editor says:

    Fine.. we adopt a PAYG system for everything. As a double income no kids family unit I suspect I will be much better off. No libraries, social services, schools, to pay for. Let those who hav two three ad four kids pay.

    But far be it for me to be that selfish. Back in the real world. The argument here is whether the state has an obligation to provide education free for the end user irrespective of quality of course, suitability of candidate and more importantly with no end in sight for when the end user should consider contributing. There is free state education until 18. At that point users can make a rational choice. To pay (is it of vaue) or not.

  3. keynesianism says:

    Higher education has in effect been privatised. In your day it was part of government spending. That of course suited you back then and the privatision of it suits you now! I agree with you that higher education perhaps needs to be more elitist and maybe then it would still be affordable by the taxpayers. The problem is what do you then do with the mases who don't make it? The reality is that provision for them in terms of vocational training, job prospects etc is dire!

    • editor says:

      Though the current choice (and the students seem happy with the status quo) is still paying fees as introduced under Labour for what often is a bad course where they will not get a better job because of it, and will be burdended with the debt.

      It is not about what may have suited me. Frankly it didnt suit me to pay or do an MA but even towards the end of the 90s I recognised suddenly everyone was getting a degree so I had to do something to differentiate myself in the jobs market.

      The fact is whether they like it or not, some degrees are really not worth the paper they are written on.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 21,442 other followers

%d bloggers like this: