Lancashire TelegraphFees hike 'will put Lancashire teenagers off university’ (From Lancashire Telegraph)

When news happens, text LT and your photos and videos to 80360. Or contact us by email or phone.

Fees hike 'will put Lancashire teenagers off university’

Lancashire Telegraph: FEES FEARS: The UCLAN part of Burnley College, where staff fear a fees hike will deter students from poor backgrounds FEES FEARS: The UCLAN part of Burnley College, where staff fear a fees hike will deter students from poor backgrounds

LANCASHIRE education chiefs are predicting only wealthier people will be able to go to university if tuition fees double in cost.

Yesterday, Lord Browne’s review said that students could pay more than £6,000 a year to get university qualifications if the £3,290 cap is removed.

This has left many universities, colleges and schools fearing money worries will mean students will not go on to study at higher education levels.

Malcolm McVicar, University of Central Lancashire vice-chancellor, said: “Browne’s review has some startling implications for the Higher Education sector.

"Removing the cap on tuition fees will significantly increase the level of debt accrued by students and will deter thousands of people from all over England from going to university.

"Britain’s Higher Education sector is a global leader.

"If the government gets this wrong, not only will we damage our reputation globally, we will face an industry-wide brain-drain with our students seeking education and employment abroad.”

Anthony McNamara, headteacher at St Augustine’s RC High School, Billington, said the announcement was disappointing.

He said: “I was one of nine children and it was not possible for a family like ours to send children to university.

“So many people from my background could have a university education.

But this will close the door for so many young people who could make brilliant contributions to society.”

Yanina Williams, vice-principal for quality and development at Blackburn College, said: “We will honour our original agreement with our current students.

"This means that whatever Browne recommends, Blackburn College will not change the fee level until they complete their current qualification.”

What college students think

Raiven MacFarlan, 17, from Blackburn.

RAIVEN Is studying A-levels in media studies, film studies, sociology, and RE and hopes to study animation and illustration.

She applied to go to Dundee University but has reconsidered following yesterday’s proposals.

She said: “I really wanted to go to Dundee University but because they have put the prices up I won’t be able to go. I will have to study at Blackburn.

I am very, very disappointed that I’m not going to experience living in dorms and getting the whole university experience because I’ll be stuck in Blackburn.”

Jake Rooney, 18, from Lower Darwen.

JAKE is studying A-levels in film, media, history and English language. He has applied to study journalism in at the University of Central Lancashire.

He said: “It is outrageous. Not to stereotype Conservatives but it is making education too expensive for those who can’t afford it.

“I’m still going through with university though but some people wouldn’t be able to do it.

"Students will spend two years getting their A-levels and won’t be able to do anything with them. I don’t agree with it in the slightest.”

Stephen Doherty, 18, from Accrington.

STEPHEN plans to study business after completing his A-levels in business, English language and literature and media.

He said: “It wasn’t an unexpected announcement. "It is bad if you have experienced university at a low price.

"It wouldn’t stop me. I would just make sure that I would get a better job so I can pay off my debt.

“I wasn’t going to go because of money issues but you have to do it to be successful at the highest level.”

Danielle Razaq, 17, from Blackburn.

DANIELLE hopes to study forensic psychology. She is currently completing A-levels in sociology, psychology, film and media studies.

She said: “It is not good because university education is only going to be for the rich in the long run. It could stop a lot of people going.

“I am still going to apply but it is going to affect people’s decision to go or not.

"I think it is ridiculous.”

Comments (14)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

12:40pm Wed 13 Oct 10

frank says...

it shouldn't be a case of cutting back on funding everything it should also take into account the full impact.
if less students go to uni, then where do they go? jobseekers? that'll cost the country money.
if less are at uni then the uni will have to make cutbacks/ redundancies, resulting in more seeking benefits.
maybe if the rich, greedy and recklessly stupid bankers donated their 7 billion in bonuses and paid back the money they owe US for the bail out things wouldn't be as bad.
it seems we all have to make cutbacks except the people who caused the problem, they as usual just rub our noses n it.
it shouldn't be a case of cutting back on funding everything it should also take into account the full impact. if less students go to uni, then where do they go? jobseekers? that'll cost the country money. if less are at uni then the uni will have to make cutbacks/ redundancies, resulting in more seeking benefits. maybe if the rich, greedy and recklessly stupid bankers donated their 7 billion in bonuses and paid back the money they owe US for the bail out things wouldn't be as bad. it seems we all have to make cutbacks except the people who caused the problem, they as usual just rub our noses n it. frank
  • Score: 0

12:55pm Wed 13 Oct 10

midas says...

The benefits will incluse better quality Universities, students seriously considering whether they should be going to Uni at all - its easy to do a 3 year media studies course if someone else is paying, increasing the lower threashold for repayment from £15k to £21k and allowing the top tier of Unis to maintain their positions as world leaders.
.
There is already a multi tiered system. Do employers consider a degree in business studies from Wolverhampton the same quality as one from Durham? Some of the smaller Unis will now be able to specialise in niche areas and improve their performance and the quality of education they receive.
.
Those leaving the top tier of Unis will be able to pay back thier loans. If you are good enough to go to Oxford will an extra £15k loan deter you? When you starting salary could easily be £30k +
.
Labour encouraged the proliferation of "mickey mouse" degrees to massage unemployment figures.
The benefits will incluse better quality Universities, students seriously considering whether they should be going to Uni at all - its easy to do a 3 year media studies course if someone else is paying, increasing the lower threashold for repayment from £15k to £21k and allowing the top tier of Unis to maintain their positions as world leaders. . There is already a multi tiered system. Do employers consider a degree in business studies from Wolverhampton the same quality as one from Durham? Some of the smaller Unis will now be able to specialise in niche areas and improve their performance and the quality of education they receive. . Those leaving the top tier of Unis will be able to pay back thier loans. If you are good enough to go to Oxford will an extra £15k loan deter you? When you starting salary could easily be £30k + . Labour encouraged the proliferation of "mickey mouse" degrees to massage unemployment figures. midas
  • Score: 0

1:29pm Wed 13 Oct 10

nelson claret says...

No, it's ridiculous, universities are by no means free now, students have been contributing towards their further education for years, I'm not saying that is wrong, but the taxpayer should also continue to make a contribution, it makes a valued contribution to our society, as do graduates. Average graduate starting salaries are way below what is reported, if you get a starting salary of £15k pa thats high! Pricing people out of further education is just wrong and goes against everything that this country is about. I myself have a 2:1 in Economics and under this proposed regime I wouldn't have achieved that because incurring £30k of debt by the age of 21 is unsustainable and my parents are factory workers who worked hard to make the £1k pa contribution towards my university education that they had to make 4 years ago before these fees were even introduced. Why should a bright and intelligent person miss out on that further education and potentially being one of our next generation of leaders because they come from a poor background? The government need to start applying common sense to the cuts they make, although I am in no way surprised that a middle class party wants to make further education only for the middle class. We spend billions every year in houses, benefits, education, and healthcare amongst other things for foreign nationals when no other nation on earth affords these same benefits to foreign nationals. Universities in Scotland are still free if you're Scottish, and we pay college students £30 a week, not for passing their course but just for turning up! Also, why give student loans to foreign nationals in the first place? Who then, surprise surprise pack their bags as soon as they've passed their course; punishing successful graduates for the failings and ridiculous policies of the student loans companies is not the way forward. Because under these proposals, it is only those successful graduates who will be punished.
No, it's ridiculous, universities are by no means free now, students have been contributing towards their further education for years, I'm not saying that is wrong, but the taxpayer should also continue to make a contribution, it makes a valued contribution to our society, as do graduates. Average graduate starting salaries are way below what is reported, if you get a starting salary of £15k pa thats high! Pricing people out of further education is just wrong and goes against everything that this country is about. I myself have a 2:1 in Economics and under this proposed regime I wouldn't have achieved that because incurring £30k of debt by the age of 21 is unsustainable and my parents are factory workers who worked hard to make the £1k pa contribution towards my university education that they had to make 4 years ago before these fees were even introduced. Why should a bright and intelligent person miss out on that further education and potentially being one of our next generation of leaders because they come from a poor background? The government need to start applying common sense to the cuts they make, although I am in no way surprised that a middle class party wants to make further education only for the middle class. We spend billions every year in houses, benefits, education, and healthcare amongst other things for foreign nationals when no other nation on earth affords these same benefits to foreign nationals. Universities in Scotland are still free if you're Scottish, and we pay college students £30 a week, not for passing their course but just for turning up! Also, why give student loans to foreign nationals in the first place? Who then, surprise surprise pack their bags as soon as they've passed their course; punishing successful graduates for the failings and ridiculous policies of the student loans companies is not the way forward. Because under these proposals, it is only those successful graduates who will be punished. nelson claret
  • Score: 0

2:04pm Wed 13 Oct 10

SoapBox says...

These young adults should be encouraged to go onto further education but they should also be made to pay back into the system once they have graduated and become high earners.
They could also help themselves by getting part time jobs to help finance their time at Uni (maybe working in a bar instead of drinking in it) rather than expecting mum & dad (many of whom were never given the chance of further education and have in many cases already worked hard to support their children for the first 16/17 years of their lives) to pay the bills.
Graduates do quite obviously stand a higher chance of getting a decent job with a degree behind them but as the latest episode of The Apprentice highlights not all young graduates can find work as the young unemployed fella on their demonstrates jobs are getting fewer and far between.
These young adults should be encouraged to go onto further education but they should also be made to pay back into the system once they have graduated and become high earners. They could also help themselves by getting part time jobs to help finance their time at Uni (maybe working in a bar instead of drinking in it) rather than expecting mum & dad (many of whom were never given the chance of further education and have in many cases already worked hard to support their children for the first 16/17 years of their lives) to pay the bills. Graduates do quite obviously stand a higher chance of getting a decent job with a degree behind them but as the latest episode of The Apprentice highlights not all young graduates can find work as the young unemployed fella on their demonstrates jobs are getting fewer and far between. SoapBox
  • Score: 0

2:04pm Wed 13 Oct 10

midas says...

The loans aren't paid back until you earn over £21k.
.
The taxpayer will still be making a contribution.
.
What (or who) are "foriegn nationals"?
.
Overseas students pay around £10,000 for their course, subsidizing home students!
.
Not every Uni will be able or want to charge £7k+. Some may even have to drop the price of their course if they want to attract enough students.
.
If you are good enough and confident about your future these increases will not deter you.
The loans aren't paid back until you earn over £21k. . The taxpayer will still be making a contribution. . What (or who) are "foriegn nationals"? . Overseas students pay around £10,000 for their course, subsidizing home students! . Not every Uni will be able or want to charge £7k+. Some may even have to drop the price of their course if they want to attract enough students. . If you are good enough and confident about your future these increases will not deter you. midas
  • Score: 0

2:36pm Wed 13 Oct 10

nelson claret says...

Don't be ridiculous, leaving university with a minimum of £30,000 of debt (providing you have passed all 3 years of your course first time) at 21 years old would not put you off going; are you for real? How is someone who is saddled with that much debt ever going to be able to own their own home, regardless of how good a job they gain afterwards? Those who have no regard for this factor are not necessarily confident and good enough, but perhaps lax enough to not actually care whether they are able to pay it back? Loans are being paid back now by graduates in work, they always have been, increasing the threshold has no relevance against a backdrop of DOUBLING FEES OVERNIGHT; is £3,000 per year not significant? Why is there even a need to double it to £6,000 per year? Because the taxpayers contribution is, quite clearly, going to significantly reduce. Graduates do pay back something into the system after they graduate; they make student loan repayments (which already have ridiculous amounts of interest accruing on them) and on average, pay more tax into the system over their working life than non-graduates do, they are also potentially the leaders of tomorrow, therefore how and why are they being deemed to not be "paying something back"?
Midas, dear god, FOREIGN NATIONALS, pretty pathetic picking out one spelling mistake over a legitimate argument, some of us do not have the time to triple check our typing for type-o's.
They DO NOT subsidise home students, they take as many loans as home students do, sorry, the loans company GIVE them; I was not entitled to an emergency loan in my first year as a student because all the money for the year had already, by January, been distibuted around all the foreign students. One complaint later and hurrah, I got an emergency loan!
Just because universities won't all charge the same actually makes it a worse situation; pricing some universities out of the market, are top students going to want to go to cheaper universities which are then deemed inferior because of the cheaper rates they charge? This creates a two/three/four tier system of high education.
And on a final note, most students do actually have part time jobs to contribute toward their living expenses; a £4,000 student loan is not sufficient to live off for a year especially when you bear in mind that their rent for the year will be c£2,500; just because you get a part time job does not mean that you will be able to get away with not requiring a student loan to live off.
Don't be ridiculous, leaving university with a minimum of £30,000 of debt (providing you have passed all 3 years of your course first time) at 21 years old would not put you off going; are you for real? How is someone who is saddled with that much debt ever going to be able to own their own home, regardless of how good a job they gain afterwards? Those who have no regard for this factor are not necessarily confident and good enough, but perhaps lax enough to not actually care whether they are able to pay it back? Loans are being paid back now by graduates in work, they always have been, increasing the threshold has no relevance against a backdrop of DOUBLING FEES OVERNIGHT; is £3,000 per year not significant? Why is there even a need to double it to £6,000 per year? Because the taxpayers contribution is, quite clearly, going to significantly reduce. Graduates do pay back something into the system after they graduate; they make student loan repayments (which already have ridiculous amounts of interest accruing on them) and on average, pay more tax into the system over their working life than non-graduates do, they are also potentially the leaders of tomorrow, therefore how and why are they being deemed to not be "paying something back"? Midas, dear god, FOREIGN NATIONALS, pretty pathetic picking out one spelling mistake over a legitimate argument, some of us do not have the time to triple check our typing for type-o's. They DO NOT subsidise home students, they take as many loans as home students do, sorry, the loans company GIVE them; I was not entitled to an emergency loan in my first year as a student because all the money for the year had already, by January, been distibuted around all the foreign students. One complaint later and hurrah, I got an emergency loan! Just because universities won't all charge the same actually makes it a worse situation; pricing some universities out of the market, are top students going to want to go to cheaper universities which are then deemed inferior because of the cheaper rates they charge? This creates a two/three/four tier system of high education. And on a final note, most students do actually have part time jobs to contribute toward their living expenses; a £4,000 student loan is not sufficient to live off for a year especially when you bear in mind that their rent for the year will be c£2,500; just because you get a part time job does not mean that you will be able to get away with not requiring a student loan to live off. nelson claret
  • Score: 0

3:16pm Wed 13 Oct 10

midas says...

I wasn't correcting a spelling mistake, what do you mean by foriegn nationals - EU students, students from Scotland, students from countries outside the EU? all pay different rates and are eligible for different typoes of assistance.
.
Its a loan that is repayable once you are in a position to afford it. Not quite the same as getting a loan from the bank is it?
.
There is already a tiered system, you may as well acknowledge it.
.
If overseas students are paying £10,000 a course how is that not subsidising home students who are paying £3,000?
I wasn't correcting a spelling mistake, what do you mean by foriegn nationals - EU students, students from Scotland, students from countries outside the EU? all pay different rates and are eligible for different typoes of assistance. . Its a loan that is repayable once you are in a position to afford it. Not quite the same as getting a loan from the bank is it? . There is already a tiered system, you may as well acknowledge it. . If overseas students are paying £10,000 a course how is that not subsidising home students who are paying £3,000? midas
  • Score: 0

4:02pm Wed 13 Oct 10

nelson claret says...

Jesus it's not rocket science, anyone who is not a British citizen is therefore a foreign national; I don't know where you get this £10k pa from but it's far from the truth; so much money has been lost from making student loans to foreign nationals that they have to find some way of recouping it i.e. penalising those students who will be paying back into the system. At the time I went to university student loans were advertised as being made at beneficial rates of interest; is approx 17% pa a beneficial rate? Even banks are lending below that so no, it is not; and just because you don't repay it until you earn £15k pa does not mean it doesn't go against you when trying to obtain credit; who would be able to get a £100k mortgage on a salary of £25k pa when they already have £30k of debt? No-one, the figures matter not, it's the principle of the matter; higher education should be accessible to all, and everyone good enough to go should be able to without having to incur tens of thousands of pounds of debt in their teenage years; it stinks of hypocrisy from the government - constantly complaining that the level of personal debt is far too high but then in the next breath encourage teenagers into this. "We have to make the cuts to fund the deficit" - yeah well how about making the cuts to the amount of taxpayers money we spend on the foreign nationals either temporarily or permanently residing in this country instead of penalising the hard working taxpayer and our next generation of leaders?
Jesus it's not rocket science, anyone who is not a British citizen is therefore a foreign national; I don't know where you get this £10k pa from but it's far from the truth; so much money has been lost from making student loans to foreign nationals that they have to find some way of recouping it i.e. penalising those students who will be paying back into the system. At the time I went to university student loans were advertised as being made at beneficial rates of interest; is approx 17% pa a beneficial rate? Even banks are lending below that so no, it is not; and just because you don't repay it until you earn £15k pa does not mean it doesn't go against you when trying to obtain credit; who would be able to get a £100k mortgage on a salary of £25k pa when they already have £30k of debt? No-one, the figures matter not, it's the principle of the matter; higher education should be accessible to all, and everyone good enough to go should be able to without having to incur tens of thousands of pounds of debt in their teenage years; it stinks of hypocrisy from the government - constantly complaining that the level of personal debt is far too high but then in the next breath encourage teenagers into this. "We have to make the cuts to fund the deficit" - yeah well how about making the cuts to the amount of taxpayers money we spend on the foreign nationals either temporarily or permanently residing in this country instead of penalising the hard working taxpayer and our next generation of leaders? nelson claret
  • Score: 0

4:22pm Wed 13 Oct 10

eddie the head says...

I don't think we need as many people with degree's anyway. Computers do many of the technical jobs we have and any other big developments are already being done by companies from other countries anyway. We don't make anything or build anything ourselves anymore(Wembley-Auss
ies, Nuclear power stations - French, ship building and Cars- every bugger else) and if we do, we just get somebody from Europe/India to do it. We are a washed up country so why waste time and money educating people for jobs at McDonalds?
I don't think we need as many people with degree's anyway. Computers do many of the technical jobs we have and any other big developments are already being done by companies from other countries anyway. We don't make anything or build anything ourselves anymore(Wembley-Auss ies, Nuclear power stations - French, ship building and Cars- every bugger else) and if we do, we just get somebody from Europe/India to do it. We are a washed up country so why waste time and money educating people for jobs at McDonalds? eddie the head
  • Score: 0

4:29pm Wed 13 Oct 10

midas says...

nelson claret wrote:
Jesus it's not rocket science, anyone who is not a British citizen is therefore a foreign national; I don't know where you get this £10k pa from but it's far from the truth; so much money has been lost from making student loans to foreign nationals that they have to find some way of recouping it i.e. penalising those students who will be paying back into the system. At the time I went to university student loans were advertised as being made at beneficial rates of interest; is approx 17% pa a beneficial rate? Even banks are lending below that so no, it is not; and just because you don't repay it until you earn £15k pa does not mean it doesn't go against you when trying to obtain credit; who would be able to get a £100k mortgage on a salary of £25k pa when they already have £30k of debt? No-one, the figures matter not, it's the principle of the matter; higher education should be accessible to all, and everyone good enough to go should be able to without having to incur tens of thousands of pounds of debt in their teenage years; it stinks of hypocrisy from the government - constantly complaining that the level of personal debt is far too high but then in the next breath encourage teenagers into this. "We have to make the cuts to fund the deficit" - yeah well how about making the cuts to the amount of taxpayers money we spend on the foreign nationals either temporarily or permanently residing in this country instead of penalising the hard working taxpayer and our next generation of leaders?
It obviously is rocket science because you palpably fail to understand the difference between students from EU countries who have a right to be educated in an EU country and overseas students who don't and therefore pay the going rate. Perhaps once you grasp that concept we can move on to understanding why a £3000 limit on fees is neither workable or effective.
[quote][p][bold]nelson claret[/bold] wrote: Jesus it's not rocket science, anyone who is not a British citizen is therefore a foreign national; I don't know where you get this £10k pa from but it's far from the truth; so much money has been lost from making student loans to foreign nationals that they have to find some way of recouping it i.e. penalising those students who will be paying back into the system. At the time I went to university student loans were advertised as being made at beneficial rates of interest; is approx 17% pa a beneficial rate? Even banks are lending below that so no, it is not; and just because you don't repay it until you earn £15k pa does not mean it doesn't go against you when trying to obtain credit; who would be able to get a £100k mortgage on a salary of £25k pa when they already have £30k of debt? No-one, the figures matter not, it's the principle of the matter; higher education should be accessible to all, and everyone good enough to go should be able to without having to incur tens of thousands of pounds of debt in their teenage years; it stinks of hypocrisy from the government - constantly complaining that the level of personal debt is far too high but then in the next breath encourage teenagers into this. "We have to make the cuts to fund the deficit" - yeah well how about making the cuts to the amount of taxpayers money we spend on the foreign nationals either temporarily or permanently residing in this country instead of penalising the hard working taxpayer and our next generation of leaders?[/p][/quote]It obviously is rocket science because you palpably fail to understand the difference between students from EU countries who have a right to be educated in an EU country and overseas students who don't and therefore pay the going rate. Perhaps once you grasp that concept we can move on to understanding why a £3000 limit on fees is neither workable or effective. midas
  • Score: 0

4:48pm Wed 13 Oct 10

nelson claret says...

Sorry, you're right it is fair to do this, fair on those whose parents are minted, and if they're not then tough you will have to incur £30,000 of debt before you even reach your mid twenties if you want to better yourself and continue to learn after college regardless of the fact that you may indeed be far far brighter than any of the rich people who can afford to go to uni are; great idea is that, lets have the youngsters of our richest people running our country in the next generation even if they don't have two brain cells to rub together; oh and we'll continue to have the english taxpayer fund university places for the scottish whilst we're at it; and continue to pay college kids £30 a week just for turning up and not for passing their course. Oh and I also didn't realise that China had become part of the EU; seeing as a vast proportion of foreign national students to whom I refer are chinese. Balls to fairness, lets price the poor out and keep them where they should be because thats fairer on the taxpayer and then we can continue to throw their money down the drain on the rest of the world. How much do you think it costs the taxpayer just for the healthcare of foreign visitors to this country, as in people on holiday? Billions I should imagine, but thats perfectly acceptable even though our citizens are required by law to hold travel insurance when they leave the country. Get a bit of common sense people this is ridiculous; and to say we don't need graduates is nonsense, just because we don't make anything does not mean we have no skills; shall we just allow people to become accountants, doctors, solicitors, nurses etc etc because they ask to be and have no requirment for qualifications then?
Sorry, you're right it is fair to do this, fair on those whose parents are minted, and if they're not then tough you will have to incur £30,000 of debt before you even reach your mid twenties if you want to better yourself and continue to learn after college regardless of the fact that you may indeed be far far brighter than any of the rich people who can afford to go to uni are; great idea is that, lets have the youngsters of our richest people running our country in the next generation even if they don't have two brain cells to rub together; oh and we'll continue to have the english taxpayer fund university places for the scottish whilst we're at it; and continue to pay college kids £30 a week just for turning up and not for passing their course. Oh and I also didn't realise that China had become part of the EU; seeing as a vast proportion of foreign national students to whom I refer are chinese. Balls to fairness, lets price the poor out and keep them where they should be because thats fairer on the taxpayer and then we can continue to throw their money down the drain on the rest of the world. How much do you think it costs the taxpayer just for the healthcare of foreign visitors to this country, as in people on holiday? Billions I should imagine, but thats perfectly acceptable even though our citizens are required by law to hold travel insurance when they leave the country. Get a bit of common sense people this is ridiculous; and to say we don't need graduates is nonsense, just because we don't make anything does not mean we have no skills; shall we just allow people to become accountants, doctors, solicitors, nurses etc etc because they ask to be and have no requirment for qualifications then? nelson claret
  • Score: 0

5:07pm Wed 13 Oct 10

Noiticer says...

The public schools will be rubbing their hands with glee as a result of the Browne proposals as the chances of their rich pupils getting places at Oxbridge will be greater again after recent years of more places being offered to non-public school pupils. Those children from poorer backgrounds or even many middle class homes who might have applied to Oxbridge will now bw put off by the astronomical tuition fees. This government is simply looking after its own.
The public schools will be rubbing their hands with glee as a result of the Browne proposals as the chances of their rich pupils getting places at Oxbridge will be greater again after recent years of more places being offered to non-public school pupils. Those children from poorer backgrounds or even many middle class homes who might have applied to Oxbridge will now bw put off by the astronomical tuition fees. This government is simply looking after its own. Noiticer
  • Score: 0

9:43pm Wed 13 Oct 10

time.team says...

You will always need people to produce an idea. People to design from an idea. People to organise the production of the idea and people who will produce the final result. All groups are specialised to carry out there own specific task and all need each another no matter what that product may be?
-
Unfortunately the current educational thinking is to enable everyone to be the high achiever but unfortunately have forgotten about the other people within our society. Not everyone has the capabilities of being a high flyer and thankfully not everyone wants to be so. Hard for some to realise but everyone is born with different capabilities but unfortunately our educational ‘snobbery’ is getting in the way and thinking itself to be above all else simply because they were born the fortunate ones.
Again, we are all born with different capabilities recognised as being the great lottery of life!
-
So, lets have the academically talented educated to do just that. The studious, skilful and artistic to be educated to fulfil there own specific capabilities that only they can do. Skilled apprentice schemes are not taken seriously and equal opportunity should be available to all. The last government wanted to provide everyone with the means of attaining a university status and to do so have made our exam status lighter to make this happen. Unfortunately I’m sorry to say there are now not enough salaried positions available for those high performers and also no serious apprentice schemes available for those who want to achieve something using there own particular skills.
-
Education for life has now become a complete shambles!
You will always need people to produce an idea. People to design from an idea. People to organise the production of the idea and people who will produce the final result. All groups are specialised to carry out there own specific task and all need each another no matter what that product may be? - Unfortunately the current educational thinking is to enable everyone to be the high achiever but unfortunately have forgotten about the other people within our society. Not everyone has the capabilities of being a high flyer and thankfully not everyone wants to be so. Hard for some to realise but everyone is born with different capabilities but unfortunately our educational ‘snobbery’ is getting in the way and thinking itself to be above all else simply because they were born the fortunate ones. Again, we are all born with different capabilities recognised as being the great lottery of life! - So, lets have the academically talented educated to do just that. The studious, skilful and artistic to be educated to fulfil there own specific capabilities that only they can do. Skilled apprentice schemes are not taken seriously and equal opportunity should be available to all. The last government wanted to provide everyone with the means of attaining a university status and to do so have made our exam status lighter to make this happen. Unfortunately I’m sorry to say there are now not enough salaried positions available for those high performers and also no serious apprentice schemes available for those who want to achieve something using there own particular skills. - Education for life has now become a complete shambles! time.team
  • Score: 0

5:53pm Thu 14 Oct 10

Squeegy72 says...

A hike in fees would certainly deter me from attending university.

However I am not your run of the mill layabout student as Soapbox is indicating they can be. I am a mature student, single parent who is working part time to continue supporting my children as well as aiming for a first class honours degree.

After the 3 years of my course I will be £20000 in debt already, which is bad enough for me as I have never been in debt in my life. I have always worked hard to provide for my family and the decision to become a full-time student was not an easy one. The increase in tuition fees would have made my dream completely impossible.
A hike in fees would certainly deter me from attending university. However I am not your run of the mill layabout student as Soapbox is indicating they can be. I am a mature student, single parent who is working part time to continue supporting my children as well as aiming for a first class honours degree. After the 3 years of my course I will be £20000 in debt already, which is bad enough for me as I have never been in debt in my life. I have always worked hard to provide for my family and the decision to become a full-time student was not an easy one. The increase in tuition fees would have made my dream completely impossible. Squeegy72
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree