University tuition fees, and top-up fees?

14-10-2005, 02:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bellatrix

Quote:

Originally Posted by Andrew

What are UKIP's policies on university tuition fees and top-up fees?

Personally I cannot see why there is such opposition to university tuition fees and top-up fees. Personally I believe that Cameron and Osborne were right to say we were wrong to oppose Labour on the issue.

Really? You been to university and racked up a huge debt, honey?

The UKIP policy on this is that the whole argument would be made pointless if you removed this social engineering target of trying to get 50% of 18 year olds INTO phpbb_university, which is counter productive for students themselves. Because we have the intelligence to see that not everyone can and should go to university, and that spending three years doing a course which is unlikely to help you get a job at the other end, we can say things like this. We're also not so socially retarded that we think that being a manual labourer is a good thing, and doesn't make you a lesser being. In fact, given my time again I'd be a plumber.

So, fewer people in university, more people on vocational courses filling the huge gaps in the L market and more vocational courses throughout schooling life. Then you don't need to have this huge crisis over funding, because a smaller percentage of the population will be going to university, and there will be a better distribution of jobs at the other end of it.

Spot on!

I would add that the 50% social engineering aspect also diminishes the value of a degree also.

Furthermore, it would not surprise me if some of our social problems are due to the over-stressing of higher education, which can give many people the impression that they are not worth as much. There are many ways to alienate people and not having a balanced perspective on life is one.

Imagine if the constant message from schools and Governments was 'sports, sports, sports' and you were below average in sports? How would you feel? How does it feel for many with the way things are now?

Christina

Agent Provocateur · 15-10-2005, 03:16 PM

The main reason top up fees were proposed is due the silly target of 50% of 18 year olds going to university. As Christina says, that will result in degrees being made easier, thus reducing their worth. 50% of people includes too many people of mediocre ability.

Harrism · 16-10-2005, 08:00 AM

This is just my opinion; but why force someone with an IQ less than 70 to uni. Someone with an IQ with less than about 70 probably wouldn't make it to uni anyway but you see my point, why send someone who wasn't meant to be there, wouldn't it be better to send him INTO phpbb_the manual labour working class? Carpenter, Plumber, Electrician, a job of the trade? Keep them from entering factory work; keep this for foriengers who cannot or will not speak english. You don't really need to talk in these jobs.

You simply cannot send someone to uni who wasn't meant to be there. Would it be better to say right top50 universities get government funding the rest have to find their own money. Put a full stop on it somewhere. (I was told by one of my six form teachers that if you couldn't make it to one of the top100'ish uni's don't bother going at all) Isn't this a point? Anyway it's only my opinion.

Shouldn't you have uni's teaching proper qualifications like Physics Mathemathics, Sciences rather than qualifications which could be learnt on the job instead? I really don't see the point in going to uni for a company when you could be learning the work experience on the job instead. Companies don't want qualifications they want experience. That's it. Why not give it to them?

Quote:

Imagine if the constant message from schools and Governments was 'sports, sports, sports' and you were below average in sports? How would you feel? How does it feel for many with the way things are now?

They why try? Find something else your good at!

C_steam · 16-10-2005, 10:14 AM

Quote:

I was told by one of my six form teachers that if you couldn't make it to one of the top100'ish uni's don't bother going at all

Probably top 50. Bear in mind that graduate recruiters used to do a thing known as a milk round - they went to a number of the top UNi's and recruited. Either they have now stopped doing it altogether - since it is impossible to cover them all and don't want to be accused of elitism, or they still do, quietly, to their 'chosen' uni's.

For those employers in the first case, it's impossible to compare a 2:1 from Southbank with a 2:1 from Durham. Therefore the degree HAS NO BEARING on recruitability. Obviously you can't test all applicants, hence you then have to paper screen or on-line screen using some other factors, typically A levels but now, more and more, GCSE scores also. Which - suprise suprise - gives generally the same results you would get if you just selected by university, which would be easier, wouldn't it? so no suprise that some are now using the university name as part of their screen (they won't admit it though!) because the university selection system is based on academic ability, in the form of those self same A level scores.

For those who still quietly milk round, the vast majority of their recruitment is done from those Uni's.

Net result, the top 10% of jobs that are graduate level still go to those in the best Uni's. For graduates of other universities - congratulations, you've been hired to do a job which hitherto only required A levels or good GCSE's - which successive gov'ts have destroyed.

Oh, and guess what - you also wasted 3 years and £000's along the way........

I hate this Government.

John Carter · 16-10-2005, 12:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Harrism

This is just my opinion; but why force someone with an IQ less than 70 to uni.

Because someone's got to fill the political science classes.

Cyburn · 16-10-2005, 12:27 PM

Apparently ex-Polytechnic Unis like APU or Bristol UWE, have higher employment rates for graduates compared to typical universities

C_steam · 16-10-2005, 12:34 PM

True. It does not state what sort of employment though. There are only 10% of jobs, approximately, that are 'true' graduate level. Many of the rest are the old jobs where previously you needed just A levels or good GCSE's to get into.

Ths is the market that the new Uni's supply - not the 'true' graduate jobs.

see http://www.timesonline.co.uk/pdfs/finalunitable2.pdf

Harrism · 16-10-2005, 12:40 PM

I don't see the point in getting a qualfication which is the equalivant to a degree in plumbling. You can either plumb or you cannot, your either a skilled carpenter or you are not. If your good enough to be taking those exams in the first place you shouldn't be in that manual labour job.

If you should take an exam it should mean something not just give them to every tom dick and harry to do.

spaman · 17-10-2005, 01:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Harrism

I don't see the point in getting a qualfication which is the equalivant to a degree in plumbling. You can either plumb or you cannot, your either a skilled carpenter or you are not. If your good enough to be taking those exams in the first place you shouldn't be in that manual labour job.

If you should take an exam it should mean something not just give them to every tom dick and harry to do.

Indeed .!

labour have made such a mess of qualifications........ time to start from the bottom up and put a touch of common sense INTO phpbb_this area ....... and reintroducing on the job apprenticeships is not a bad idea

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

15-10-2005, 03:16 PM	#12 (permalink)
Agent Provocateur Member Join Date: Sep 2005 Posts: 101	The main reason top up fees were proposed is due the silly target of 50% of 18 year olds going to university. As Christina says, that will result in degrees being made easier, thus reducing their worth. 50% of people includes too many people of mediocre ability.

16-10-2005, 12:27 PM	#16 (permalink)
Cyburn Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: Kilburn, London Posts: 523	Apparently ex-Polytechnic Unis like APU or Bristol UWE, have higher employment rates for graduates compared to typical universities

16-10-2005, 12:34 PM	#17 (permalink)
C_steam Super Moderator Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: Paddling up 5hit creek..... Posts: 7,797	True. It does not state what sort of employment though. There are only 10% of jobs, approximately, that are 'true' graduate level. Many of the rest are the old jobs where previously you needed just A levels or good GCSE's to get into. Ths is the market that the new Uni's supply - not the 'true' graduate jobs. see http://www.timesonline.co.uk/pdfs/finalunitable2.pdf

16-10-2005, 12:40 PM	#18 (permalink)
Harrism Member Join Date: Oct 2005 Posts: 113	I don't see the point in getting a qualfication which is the equalivant to a degree in plumbling. You can either plumb or you cannot, your either a skilled carpenter or you are not. If your good enough to be taking those exams in the first place you shouldn't be in that manual labour job. If you should take an exam it should mean something not just give them to every tom dick and harry to do.