‘Forgive my sense of deja vu’
George, 21, politics and sociology student at the University of Bristol
I’m sceptical at best about the review. When the fees were increased to £9,000 we were all told only a handful of institutions would actually be offering courses at that price. What happened? Nearly every institution is offering courses at the maximum £9,250.
From what I can tell the prime minister intends to let some universities increase prices once the current “freeze” on fees is lifted, while others will have to reduce them according to whichever metric the government decides upon. Who gets to decide which courses are worth more than others? Forgive my sense of deja vu.
Why now?
It has been on the cards since the Conservatives promised a major review of funding across tertiary education in their election manifesto. With graduate debt running at £50,000 upwards, there has been growing concern about the cost of going to university and whether it represents value for money. Fees in the UK are among the highest in the world, and some doubt there will be a return on such a huge investment in terms of graduate earnings.
What will the review look at?
The government is promising a wide-ranging review of the whole of post-18 education and funding, including the divide between vocational and academic qualifications and the decline in lifelong and part-time study. Most of the interest will be in undergraduate tuition fees, which stand at a hefty £9,250 a year at all but a handful of universities.
What are the options?
The government will not seek to match Labour’s promise to axe tuition fees altogether, which the Conservatives regard as unaffordable and regressive. The review could recommend cutting or freezing fees. One of the most controversial options is the introduction of variable fees for different courses, depending on the cost of putting a course on, potential graduate earnings and the economic value to the country. So some universities might for example cut their fees for social science and humanities courses, which generally attract lower graduate earnings than engineering or maths.
Will that make the system fairer?
Many fear it will result in the most disadvantaged students applying for cheaper courses with the poorest graduate outcomes, hindering rather than boosting social mobility. Senior Tories would prefer to see alternative measures including a cut in interest rates on student repayments, which currently stand at 6.1%, and increased financial support for disadvantaged students. There is widespread support for the return of maintenance grants for poorer students, which were scrapped in favour of loans by the Tories, making it even more expensive for those students to go to university.
How quickly are things likely to change?
Not very. With the review set to run for a year, reporting in early 2019, the government has been accused of kicking the issue into the long grass. If you are applying to start university this September, nothing will have substantially changed.
I don’t think my course is worth the money at all. We’ve been under the impression in our department that social science fees cross-subsidise the more expensive courses such as medicine and engineering. There was even a protest about this at our university. However, I found out yesterday that course fees for these subjects are “topped-up” by the government directly. Which makes me wonder, if my £9,000 a year is not fully paying for my course, nor the courses of more expensive subjects … then where’s my money going?
I went to a state school where most students either don’t go to university or go to “newer” universities with generally lower entry requirements. Few students from my cohort made it into Russell Group universities. A £3,500 maintenance loan that barely covered my extortionate rent in university-managed halls resulted in me spending my last few months commuting between Swindon and Bristol. The discrepancies between different students’ financial situations can really become apparent at university.
‘The barrier is not the fees, it is the living costs’
Jess, 21, engineering student at Durham University
The idea of reducing fees for humanities does not add up. We have a shortage in skills in Stem [science, technology, engineering and maths] subjects and nursing, midwifery etc, so in my view, if fees are to be reduced then doing so in those areas will be what encourages new students.
From my experience and that of my friends, the barrier is not the fees, it is the living costs. Next year Durham will be charging over £8,000 for most first-year accommodation, which most people I know would have struggled to afford. And given the way the loans are repaid, the size of the final loan for most graduates is not an issue; the government would be better looking into helping students afford the cost of living if it truly wants to help low income students access higher education.
Personally I feel my course is value for money due to the contact hours (25-30 a week in the first three years) and the resources available. However, the value of living accommodation here is very poor. The accommodation is low quality, small and expensive, with even shared rooms costing only £250 less per term than single. Those with middle incomes seem to fare worst of all. My friends with parents on very low incomes still received significant grants so could afford university, and those with wealthy parents similarly had no issues as their parents can contribute. Those in the middle whose parents earn over the threshold for maximum loans but who cannot afford to give their children thousands of pounds a year seem to have the most difficulty affording things.
‘I’m not holding my breath for a better system’
John Robinson, 25, graduated with a BSc in biomedical science from Sheffield Hallam University in 2013
I can see the need for a review, though I think it’s perhaps focused in the wrong place if student decision-making is in mind. I’m not against the idea of a fund, as laid out by Justine Greening (as someone who likely won’t ever pay my loan off, perhaps that’s easy for me to say) but I don’t think it’s likely to change a prospective student’s mind.
My greatest concern was, and would be today, how I lived on the maintenance loan of £3,500 (which barely covered my rent) compared with others who received double that, predominantly in grants. I burned through some savings and worked twice a week at a fast-food restaurant, but even with that, and £25 a week off my parents, I needed to work full-time during summer holidays. Most accommodation options were still outside my price range, unless I wanted to work several days a week alongside my studies.
I also want to know whether this prospective system flattens maintenance loans, or even potentially reduces them? I didn’t move into the same field as my degree, but the lessons learned were probably worth the £3,200 a year I paid for them. I don’t know if I would agree to £9,000, though. The review is welcome, but that doesn’t mean I’m holding my breath for a better system.
