The UK Politics and EU Referendum thread - merged

[david3103]

All that'll happen is those degrees that are free will be hugely over subscribed.

Yes, possibly but that would be a good thing until it isn't and then you modify emphasis to continue to benefit society as a whole on an ongoing basis.

That is way too sensible a suggestion.

[AlunB]

Question of the day

Should University education be free? Or should students pay back for their education afterwards?

I think it is ridiculous we are sending 50% population to university, a lot of those people degrees are not helping get a job afterwards. As a country we simply do not need people academically educated to that point, it would lot more useful in a lot of cases to vocational train people to fill gaps in the workforce.

I would go back to sending 20% ish and then we could look at bringing back grants. Of course this is electoral suicide because the demographic of floating voters is often people with children who have been told they should now be aspirational to send their children to university, when they probably didn't have that opportunity.

where do you get 50% from? Grants? There are still grants available for most students also.

I don't think University education should be free - But the reality is that the price of education is still too much. The £9k cap is in place in many Universities these days & even in "second" universities too. £9k = far too much.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-22280939 And that was from two years ago. As far as I'm aware it's still rising.

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/university-application-rate-at-record-high-for-18-year-olds That's just for 18 year olds. A lot of people take gap years or go at a later date.

Also I'm not sure you get what we mean by grants. Unless the rules have changed dramatically it's still incredibly hard to get a grant for living costs. As in money you don't have to pay back. 30/40 years ago this was available to a large chunk of students with parent's on lower income.

[AlunB]

I'd like to see things where there is a massive unmet need supported and other things fully priced or more to pay for people to be trained to meet the real needs of society.

So, a nursing degree = free of charge. Vocational courses in trades where there are skills shortages - FOC.  A degree in classics fu, pay me, a degree in travel and tourism, fu pay me,  a degree in sports science fu pay me etc.

I don't want to be too philistine about this but, the lets all go to Uni model is flawed and it should be priced to actually achieve something worthwhile.  If people have hobbies they want to study then there's easy, cheap access to research just about any hobby these days

Politics is all about choices and I'd choose not to bother with trivia that people can do for themselves

The problem with that model is that it doesn't really appreciate what a degree 'can' show.

The model of making everyone go will include plenty of people just doing 'hobby' degrees like Media Studies and the like and I agree there's very little intrinsic value to those. But if you can get a 2:1 or higher in a rigorous classics degree (or maths/physics/ several other examples) it shows you have the capacity for learning - it doesn't matter what you've learned. i.e. if you can do that - you can definitely learn how to run your own department/team/company - it's irrelevant what they actually do, you've shown you can pick it up anyway.

The problem is still just people who shouldn't be there because they're the ones doing the worthless degrees.

Totally agree with Jon here. The point of university isn't just to learn vocational skills. In fact it's almost exactly the opposite of that in some respects.

[AlunB]

I think I was one of the first generation of the 'mickey mouse' degrees. Some of the thickest most unmotivated people I know have gone to university and the fact that there is estimated to be one graduate level job for every six graduates is pretty clear evidence that too many people go to university.

I personally consider university to have been the biggest opportunity cost in my life. It's easy saying with hindsight, but I think I would have been much better off just working for free for a year in an industry I wanted to work in. Most uni students will get in lots of debt, get no relevant experience in their chosen sector, learn stuff they will never use and leave after three years with ludicrously high expectations that can never be met.

Even worse, it seems that universities are becoming some of the most censorious and coddling environments in western society, which again is ill preparing students for the "real world".

But Longy is spot on, this is a harsh reality that no electorate will take.

Is there any actual evidence of this beyond a few Daily Mail headlines? Would be interested to read it. In my experience the type of people popping up on the Germaine Greer type of thing are outliers who are generally ignored by the wider populace.

[nirvana]

I'd like to see things where there is a massive unmet need supported and other things fully priced or more to pay for people to be trained to meet the real needs of society.

So, a nursing degree = free of charge. Vocational courses in trades where there are skills shortages - FOC.  A degree in classics fu, pay me, a degree in travel and tourism, fu pay me,  a degree in sports science fu pay me etc.

I don't want to be too philistine about this but, the lets all go to Uni model is flawed and it should be priced to actually achieve something worthwhile.  If people have hobbies they want to study then there's easy, cheap access to research just about any hobby these days

Politics is all about choices and I'd choose not to bother with trivia that people can do for themselves

The problem with that model is that it doesn't really appreciate what a degree 'can' show.

The model of making everyone go will include plenty of people just doing 'hobby' degrees like Media Studies and the like and I agree there's very little intrinsic value to those. But if you can get a 2:1 or higher in a rigorous classics degree (or maths/physics/ several other examples) it shows you have the capacity for learning - it doesn't matter what you've learned. i.e. if you can do that - you can definitely learn how to run your own department/team/company - it's irrelevant what they actually do, you've shown you can pick it up anyway.

The problem is still just people who shouldn't be there because they're the ones doing the worthless degrees.

Totally agree with Jon here. The point of university isn't just to learn vocational skills. In fact it's almost exactly the opposite of that in some respects.

We all know that that's notionally the point but I think it's time that was challenged as it's so abstract. Arguably it's absolutely no point at all. If we sent everyone away to learn life skills, be good citizens etc then fine. But just to prove you can learn when we actually all can seems to be proving next to nothing

[DaveShoelace]

I think I was one of the first generation of the 'mickey mouse' degrees. Some of the thickest most unmotivated people I know have gone to university and the fact that there is estimated to be one graduate level job for every six graduates is pretty clear evidence that too many people go to university.

I personally consider university to have been the biggest opportunity cost in my life. It's easy saying with hindsight, but I think I would have been much better off just working for free for a year in an industry I wanted to work in. Most uni students will get in lots of debt, get no relevant experience in their chosen sector, learn stuff they will never use and leave after three years with ludicrously high expectations that can never be met.

Even worse, it seems that universities are becoming some of the most censorious and coddling environments in western society, which again is ill preparing students for the "real world".

But Longy is spot on, this is a harsh reality that no electorate will take.

Is there any actual evidence of this beyond a few Daily Mail headlines? Would be interested to read it. In my experience the type of people popping up on the Germaine Greer type of thing are outliers who are generally ignored by the wider populace.

Allow me to open a pandora's box for you, some starter material to bring you up to speed:


http://www.spiked-online.com/free-speech-university-rankings/results#.Vj-eF67hDVo

http://www.spiked-online.com/free-speech-university-rankings/findings

https://www.thefire.org/

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Unlearning-Liberty-Campus-Censorship-American/dp/1594037302/ref=asap_bc?ie=UTF8

http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2015/09/the-coddling-of-the-american-mind/399356/


These two particular stories are doing this rounds this week, one from UK and one from the US. They are not outliers, they are depressingly common:

http://www.freerangekids.com/mob-of-yale-students-scream-profanities-about-halloween-costume-insensitivity/#.Vj91NOBejsE.twitter

http://blogs.new.spectator.co.uk/2015/11/why-are-student-union-officials-censoring-criticism-of-islamic-state/


I could go on, it's a subject I've been reading about quite solidly for the last year. In part because I think free speech is one of the most important things we have in modern society, and in part because I find it interesting how all of us don't realise how much of a bubble we live in when it comes to differing opinions.

[AlunB]

I think I was one of the first generation of the 'mickey mouse' degrees. Some of the thickest most unmotivated people I know have gone to university and the fact that there is estimated to be one graduate level job for every six graduates is pretty clear evidence that too many people go to university.

I personally consider university to have been the biggest opportunity cost in my life. It's easy saying with hindsight, but I think I would have been much better off just working for free for a year in an industry I wanted to work in. Most uni students will get in lots of debt, get no relevant experience in their chosen sector, learn stuff they will never use and leave after three years with ludicrously high expectations that can never be met.

Even worse, it seems that universities are becoming some of the most censorious and coddling environments in western society, which again is ill preparing students for the "real world".

But Longy is spot on, this is a harsh reality that no electorate will take.

Is there any actual evidence of this beyond a few Daily Mail headlines? Would be interested to read it. In my experience the type of people popping up on the Germaine Greer type of thing are outliers who are generally ignored by the wider populace.

Allow me to open a pandora's box for you, some starter material to bring you up to speed:


http://www.spiked-online.com/free-speech-university-rankings/results#.Vj-eF67hDVo

http://www.spiked-online.com/free-speech-university-rankings/findings

https://www.thefire.org/

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Unlearning-Liberty-Campus-Censorship-American/dp/1594037302/ref=asap_bc?ie=UTF8

http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2015/09/the-coddling-of-the-american-mind/399356/


These two particular stories are doing this rounds this week, one from UK and one from the US. They are not outliers, they are depressingly common:

http://www.freerangekids.com/mob-of-yale-students-scream-profanities-about-halloween-costume-insensitivity/#.Vj91NOBejsE.twitter

http://blogs.new.spectator.co.uk/2015/11/why-are-student-union-officials-censoring-criticism-of-islamic-state/


I could go on, it's a subject I've been reading about quite solidly for the last year. In part because I think free speech is one of the most important things we have in modern society, and in part because I find it interesting how all of us don't realise how much of a bubble we live in when it comes to differing opinions.

Can't actually read all those now, but I promise I will take a look before replying properly. My heart sank a lot when seeing Spiked was one of your sources mind. Also to be clear are we talking about UK or US universities here because there is a BIG difference.

[AlunB]

I'd like to see things where there is a massive unmet need supported and other things fully priced or more to pay for people to be trained to meet the real needs of society.

So, a nursing degree = free of charge. Vocational courses in trades where there are skills shortages - FOC.  A degree in classics fu, pay me, a degree in travel and tourism, fu pay me,  a degree in sports science fu pay me etc.

I don't want to be too philistine about this but, the lets all go to Uni model is flawed and it should be priced to actually achieve something worthwhile.  If people have hobbies they want to study then there's easy, cheap access to research just about any hobby these days

Politics is all about choices and I'd choose not to bother with trivia that people can do for themselves

The problem with that model is that it doesn't really appreciate what a degree 'can' show.

The model of making everyone go will include plenty of people just doing 'hobby' degrees like Media Studies and the like and I agree there's very little intrinsic value to those. But if you can get a 2:1 or higher in a rigorous classics degree (or maths/physics/ several other examples) it shows you have the capacity for learning - it doesn't matter what you've learned. i.e. if you can do that - you can definitely learn how to run your own department/team/company - it's irrelevant what they actually do, you've shown you can pick it up anyway.

The problem is still just people who shouldn't be there because they're the ones doing the worthless degrees.

Totally agree with Jon here. The point of university isn't just to learn vocational skills. In fact it's almost exactly the opposite of that in some respects.

We all know that that's notionally the point but I think it's time that was challenged as it's so abstract. Arguably it's absolutely no point at all. If we sent everyone away to learn life skills, be good citizens etc then fine. But just to prove you can learn when we actually all can seems to be proving next to nothing

Sorry yeah to be clear, I pretty much agree with you as regards funding and agree with Jon as regards the value of university.

Contrary to what seems to be the new group think on it I think it can, and often does, have a hugely beneficial effect on those who go through the process in terms of their ability to think more broadly and opens their minds up to ways of thinking, learning and understanding both society and other people that simply diving headlong into work is not guaranteed to do (obviously this will vary enormously depending on chosen career path).

[DaveShoelace]

I think I was one of the first generation of the 'mickey mouse' degrees. Some of the thickest most unmotivated people I know have gone to university and the fact that there is estimated to be one graduate level job for every six graduates is pretty clear evidence that too many people go to university.

I personally consider university to have been the biggest opportunity cost in my life. It's easy saying with hindsight, but I think I would have been much better off just working for free for a year in an industry I wanted to work in. Most uni students will get in lots of debt, get no relevant experience in their chosen sector, learn stuff they will never use and leave after three years with ludicrously high expectations that can never be met.

Even worse, it seems that universities are becoming some of the most censorious and coddling environments in western society, which again is ill preparing students for the "real world".

But Longy is spot on, this is a harsh reality that no electorate will take.

Is there any actual evidence of this beyond a few Daily Mail headlines? Would be interested to read it. In my experience the type of people popping up on the Germaine Greer type of thing are outliers who are generally ignored by the wider populace.

Allow me to open a pandora's box for you, some starter material to bring you up to speed:


http://www.spiked-online.com/free-speech-university-rankings/results#.Vj-eF67hDVo

http://www.spiked-online.com/free-speech-university-rankings/findings

https://www.thefire.org/

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Unlearning-Liberty-Campus-Censorship-American/dp/1594037302/ref=asap_bc?ie=UTF8

http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2015/09/the-coddling-of-the-american-mind/399356/


These two particular stories are doing this rounds this week, one from UK and one from the US. They are not outliers, they are depressingly common:

http://www.freerangekids.com/mob-of-yale-students-scream-profanities-about-halloween-costume-insensitivity/#.Vj91NOBejsE.twitter

http://blogs.new.spectator.co.uk/2015/11/why-are-student-union-officials-censoring-criticism-of-islamic-state/


I could go on, it's a subject I've been reading about quite solidly for the last year. In part because I think free speech is one of the most important things we have in modern society, and in part because I find it interesting how all of us don't realise how much of a bubble we live in when it comes to differing opinions.

Can't actually read all those now, but I promise I will take a look before replying properly. My heart sank a lot when seeing Spiked was one of your sources mind. Also to be clear are we talking about UK or US universities here because there is a BIG difference.

Both. US universities are much more extreme, but UK ones are following in their footsteps.

I have a love/hate relationship with Spiked. They are needlessly contrarian most of the time, but they are brilliant advocates of free speech. Not sure I've ever agreed with anything they write except for what they write about free speech. I actually stopped looking at it though just because most of their day-to-day stuff was starting to annoy me.

[AlunB]

I think I was one of the first generation of the 'mickey mouse' degrees. Some of the thickest most unmotivated people I know have gone to university and the fact that there is estimated to be one graduate level job for every six graduates is pretty clear evidence that too many people go to university.

I personally consider university to have been the biggest opportunity cost in my life. It's easy saying with hindsight, but I think I would have been much better off just working for free for a year in an industry I wanted to work in. Most uni students will get in lots of debt, get no relevant experience in their chosen sector, learn stuff they will never use and leave after three years with ludicrously high expectations that can never be met.

Even worse, it seems that universities are becoming some of the most censorious and coddling environments in western society, which again is ill preparing students for the "real world".

But Longy is spot on, this is a harsh reality that no electorate will take.

Is there any actual evidence of this beyond a few Daily Mail headlines? Would be interested to read it. In my experience the type of people popping up on the Germaine Greer type of thing are outliers who are generally ignored by the wider populace.

Allow me to open a pandora's box for you, some starter material to bring you up to speed:


http://www.spiked-online.com/free-speech-university-rankings/results#.Vj-eF67hDVo

http://www.spiked-online.com/free-speech-university-rankings/findings

https://www.thefire.org/

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Unlearning-Liberty-Campus-Censorship-American/dp/1594037302/ref=asap_bc?ie=UTF8

http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2015/09/the-coddling-of-the-american-mind/399356/


These two particular stories are doing this rounds this week, one from UK and one from the US. They are not outliers, they are depressingly common:

http://www.freerangekids.com/mob-of-yale-students-scream-profanities-about-halloween-costume-insensitivity/#.Vj91NOBejsE.twitter

http://blogs.new.spectator.co.uk/2015/11/why-are-student-union-officials-censoring-criticism-of-islamic-state/


I could go on, it's a subject I've been reading about quite solidly for the last year. In part because I think free speech is one of the most important things we have in modern society, and in part because I find it interesting how all of us don't realise how much of a bubble we live in when it comes to differing opinions.

Can't actually read all those now, but I promise I will take a look before replying properly. My heart sank a lot when seeing Spiked was one of your sources mind. Also to be clear are we talking about UK or US universities here because there is a BIG difference.

Both. US universities are much more extreme, but UK ones are following in their footsteps.

I have a love/hate relationship with Spiked. They are needlessly contrarian most of the time, but they are brilliant advocates of free speech. Not sure I've ever agreed with anything they write except for what they write about free speech. I actually stopped looking at it though just because most of their day-to-day stuff was starting to annoy me.

I always think of US and UK universities being almost completely different in nature. Would be awful if UK ones became more like US ones, but I can imagine that could happen.

The trouble with free speech is it allows dickheads to say annoying things endlessly

[DaveShoelace]

I think I was one of the first generation of the 'mickey mouse' degrees. Some of the thickest most unmotivated people I know have gone to university and the fact that there is estimated to be one graduate level job for every six graduates is pretty clear evidence that too many people go to university.

I personally consider university to have been the biggest opportunity cost in my life. It's easy saying with hindsight, but I think I would have been much better off just working for free for a year in an industry I wanted to work in. Most uni students will get in lots of debt, get no relevant experience in their chosen sector, learn stuff they will never use and leave after three years with ludicrously high expectations that can never be met.

Even worse, it seems that universities are becoming some of the most censorious and coddling environments in western society, which again is ill preparing students for the "real world".

But Longy is spot on, this is a harsh reality that no electorate will take.

Is there any actual evidence of this beyond a few Daily Mail headlines? Would be interested to read it. In my experience the type of people popping up on the Germaine Greer type of thing are outliers who are generally ignored by the wider populace.

Allow me to open a pandora's box for you, some starter material to bring you up to speed:


http://www.spiked-online.com/free-speech-university-rankings/results#.Vj-eF67hDVo

http://www.spiked-online.com/free-speech-university-rankings/findings

https://www.thefire.org/

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Unlearning-Liberty-Campus-Censorship-American/dp/1594037302/ref=asap_bc?ie=UTF8

http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2015/09/the-coddling-of-the-american-mind/399356/


These two particular stories are doing this rounds this week, one from UK and one from the US. They are not outliers, they are depressingly common:

http://www.freerangekids.com/mob-of-yale-students-scream-profanities-about-halloween-costume-insensitivity/#.Vj91NOBejsE.twitter

http://blogs.new.spectator.co.uk/2015/11/why-are-student-union-officials-censoring-criticism-of-islamic-state/


I could go on, it's a subject I've been reading about quite solidly for the last year. In part because I think free speech is one of the most important things we have in modern society, and in part because I find it interesting how all of us don't realise how much of a bubble we live in when it comes to differing opinions.

Can't actually read all those now, but I promise I will take a look before replying properly. My heart sank a lot when seeing Spiked was one of your sources mind. Also to be clear are we talking about UK or US universities here because there is a BIG difference.

Both. US universities are much more extreme, but UK ones are following in their footsteps.

I have a love/hate relationship with Spiked. They are needlessly contrarian most of the time, but they are brilliant advocates of free speech. Not sure I've ever agreed with anything they write except for what they write about free speech. I actually stopped looking at it though just because most of their day-to-day stuff was starting to annoy me.

I always think of US and UK universities being almost completely different in nature. Would be awful if UK ones became more like US ones, but I can imagine that could happen.

The trouble with free speech is it allows dickheads to say annoying things endlessly

But it's good that the dickheads are allowed to expose themselves as such.

[Jon MW]

Question of the day

Should University education be free? Or should students pay back for their education afterwards?

I think it is ridiculous we are sending 50% population to university, a lot of those people degrees are not helping get a job afterwards. As a country we simply do not need people academically educated to that point, it would lot more useful in a lot of cases to vocational train people to fill gaps in the workforce.

I would go back to sending 20% ish and then we could look at bringing back grants. Of course this is electoral suicide because the demographic of floating voters is often people with children who have been told they should now be aspirational to send their children to university, when they probably didn't have that opportunity.

where do you get 50% from? Grants? There are still grants available for most students also.

I don't think University education should be free - But the reality is that the price of education is still too much. The £9k cap is in place in many Universities these days & even in "second" universities too. £9k = far too much.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-22280939 And that was from two years ago. As far as I'm aware it's still rising.

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/university-application-rate-at-record-high-for-18-year-olds That's just for 18 year olds. A lot of people take gap years or go at a later date.

Also I'm not sure you get what we mean by grants. Unless the rules have changed dramatically it's still incredibly hard to get a grant for living costs. As in money you don't have to pay back. 30/40 years ago this was available to a large chunk of students with parent's on lower income.

Less than 70% of students get 5 A* - C grades - does it seem 'likely' that 50% get through to university?

The government link says about 35% of 18 year olds apply - there may be a number of students who take a year out, but it's a lot less than those who go straight on (and mature student applications have completely collapsed since fees came in) so I'd guess the total figure is really not much different to 35%.

http://www.theguardian.com/higher-education-network/blog/2013/jun/04/higher-education-participation-data-analysis

There is still too little selection for university for it to 'work' as it should - but a lot of the figures used seem to be pretty misrepresentative.

Also, I was surprised - but apparently they must have brought back some form of grant as we knew it, my fiancee knows at least a couple of people who get it.

[AlunB]

Question of the day

Should University education be free? Or should students pay back for their education afterwards?

I think it is ridiculous we are sending 50% population to university, a lot of those people degrees are not helping get a job afterwards. As a country we simply do not need people academically educated to that point, it would lot more useful in a lot of cases to vocational train people to fill gaps in the workforce.

I would go back to sending 20% ish and then we could look at bringing back grants. Of course this is electoral suicide because the demographic of floating voters is often people with children who have been told they should now be aspirational to send their children to university, when they probably didn't have that opportunity.

where do you get 50% from? Grants? There are still grants available for most students also.

I don't think University education should be free - But the reality is that the price of education is still too much. The £9k cap is in place in many Universities these days & even in "second" universities too. £9k = far too much.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-22280939 And that was from two years ago. As far as I'm aware it's still rising.

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/university-application-rate-at-record-high-for-18-year-olds That's just for 18 year olds. A lot of people take gap years or go at a later date.

Also I'm not sure you get what we mean by grants. Unless the rules have changed dramatically it's still incredibly hard to get a grant for living costs. As in money you don't have to pay back. 30/40 years ago this was available to a large chunk of students with parent's on lower income.

Less than 70% of students get 5 A* - C grades - does it seem 'likely' that 50% get through to university?

The government link says about 35% of 18 year olds apply - there may be a number of students who take a year out, but it's a lot less than those who go straight on (and mature student applications have completely collapsed since fees came in) so I'd guess the total figure is really not much different to 35%.

http://www.theguardian.com/higher-education-network/blog/2013/jun/04/higher-education-participation-data-analysis

There is still too little selection for university for it to 'work' as it should - but a lot of the figures used seem to be pretty misrepresentative.

Also, I was surprised - but apparently they must have brought back some form of grant as we knew it, my fiancee knows at least a couple of people who get it.

I'd guess it was a chunk higher than 35%, but probably closer to 40% than 50% maybe. But I would have thought 50% would eventually be the number.

I did actually check and could only seem to find hardship grants awarded by specific universities. May well have been missing something though.

[Jon MW]

Question of the day

Should University education be free? Or should students pay back for their education afterwards?

I think it is ridiculous we are sending 50% population to university, a lot of those people degrees are not helping get a job afterwards. As a country we simply do not need people academically educated to that point, it would lot more useful in a lot of cases to vocational train people to fill gaps in the workforce.

I would go back to sending 20% ish and then we could look at bringing back grants. Of course this is electoral suicide because the demographic of floating voters is often people with children who have been told they should now be aspirational to send their children to university, when they probably didn't have that opportunity.

where do you get 50% from? Grants? There are still grants available for most students also.

I don't think University education should be free - But the reality is that the price of education is still too much. The £9k cap is in place in many Universities these days & even in "second" universities too. £9k = far too much.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-22280939 And that was from two years ago. As far as I'm aware it's still rising.

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/university-application-rate-at-record-high-for-18-year-olds That's just for 18 year olds. A lot of people take gap years or go at a later date.

Also I'm not sure you get what we mean by grants. Unless the rules have changed dramatically it's still incredibly hard to get a grant for living costs. As in money you don't have to pay back. 30/40 years ago this was available to a large chunk of students with parent's on lower income.

Less than 70% of students get 5 A* - C grades - does it seem 'likely' that 50% get through to university?

The government link says about 35% of 18 year olds apply - there may be a number of students who take a year out, but it's a lot less than those who go straight on (and mature student applications have completely collapsed since fees came in) so I'd guess the total figure is really not much different to 35%.

http://www.theguardian.com/higher-education-network/blog/2013/jun/04/higher-education-participation-data-analysis

There is still too little selection for university for it to 'work' as it should - but a lot of the figures used seem to be pretty misrepresentative.

Also, I was surprised - but apparently they must have brought back some form of grant as we knew it, my fiancee knows at least a couple of people who get it.

I'd guess it was a chunk higher than 35%, but probably closer to 40% than 50% maybe. But I would have thought 50% would eventually be the number.

I did actually check and could only seem to find hardship grants awarded by specific universities. May well have been missing something though.

lol just mentioned this and she had a rant - they're getting rid of them for next year anyway. (EDIT: maybe why you can't find anything about them now)

If you put together this government source:
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/university-application-rate-at-record-high-for-18-year-olds   which says there were 580,000 applications in 2014

and this source which shows freedom of information requests
https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/number_of_17_year_olds_in_uk_200
which says there were a total of approximately 1.5 million 17 year olds in 2012 and 2013 (representing the A level students for 2014 and the ones for 2013 who took a year out)

If they represented 100% of the applications then that 580,000 would equal the same percentage of total university applicants (about 35%) - it's actually about 40% - I think that means that the total is somewhere between 35 and 40% but as the Guardian article suggested, it pretty much just depends on what data set you use.

[nirvana]

I'd like to see things where there is a massive unmet need supported and other things fully priced or more to pay for people to be trained to meet the real needs of society.

So, a nursing degree = free of charge. Vocational courses in trades where there are skills shortages - FOC.  A degree in classics fu, pay me, a degree in travel and tourism, fu pay me,  a degree in sports science fu pay me etc.

I don't want to be too philistine about this but, the lets all go to Uni model is flawed and it should be priced to actually achieve something worthwhile.  If people have hobbies they want to study then there's easy, cheap access to research just about any hobby these days

Politics is all about choices and I'd choose not to bother with trivia that people can do for themselves

The problem with that model is that it doesn't really appreciate what a degree 'can' show.

The model of making everyone go will include plenty of people just doing 'hobby' degrees like Media Studies and the like and I agree there's very little intrinsic value to those. But if you can get a 2:1 or higher in a rigorous classics degree (or maths/physics/ several other examples) it shows you have the capacity for learning - it doesn't matter what you've learned. i.e. if you can do that - you can definitely learn how to run your own department/team/company - it's irrelevant what they actually do, you've shown you can pick it up anyway.

The problem is still just people who shouldn't be there because they're the ones doing the worthless degrees.

Totally agree with Jon here. The point of university isn't just to learn vocational skills. In fact it's almost exactly the opposite of that in some respects.

We all know that that's notionally the point but I think it's time that was challenged as it's so abstract. Arguably it's absolutely no point at all. If we sent everyone away to learn life skills, be good citizens etc then fine. But just to prove you can learn when we actually all can seems to be proving next to nothing

Sorry yeah to be clear, I pretty much agree with you as regards funding and agree with Jon as regards the value of university.

Contrary to what seems to be the new group think on it I think it can, and often does, have a hugely beneficial effect on those who go through the process in terms of their ability to think more broadly and opens their minds up to ways of thinking, learning and understanding both society and other people that simply diving headlong into work is not guaranteed to do (obviously this will vary enormously depending on chosen career path).

Yep I don't think we're arguing really