The Staggers

The New Statesman’s rolling politics blog

You want a good degree? Pay up

The only universities not charging the maximum amount for top-up fees are among the worst in the cou

By Duncan Robinson Published 25 March 2011 18:55

The trickle of universities that plan to charge £9,000 from September 2012 has become a stream. It will undoubtedly turn into a flood over the coming weeks.

In the past few days, University College London, Surrey, Aston and Essex have all confirmed that they will charge the maximum amount. As have Birmingham and Lancaster. The universities minister, David Willetts, had previously stated that he expected £9,000 fees to be charged only in "exceptional circumstances". Far from the exception, £9,000 fees are proving the norm – except in a few cases.

One university that will not charge full whack is London Metropolitan University. London Met has a less-than-exemplary reputation. It dropped out of the Times's university rankings (£) after nearly coming last five years ago (it will reappear in them next year, however). In 2009, LMU was in the bottom four of the student satisfaction survey. In this year's Guardian rankings, the university came rock bottom. LMU will charge "between £6,000 and £7,000" per place from 2012. Another university set to charge less than £9,000 is Liverpool Hope University. It, too, dropped out of the Times university rankings after coming bottom.

This sets a grim precedent. The only universities to announce that they will charge less than £9,000 are among the worst in the country. This might sound harsh and dismissive of the efforts of staff and students at these institutions, but sadly it is true. League tables may have their faults, but by practically every indicator, these universities come near the bottom.

Yet these are the institutions that students who fear debt will be drawn towards. Indeed, that is the only reason these universities are willing to charge less than the maximum for undergraduate tuition fees. If you have low standards, you have to have low prices.

The public message, then, is depressingly simple: pay top rate, or get a second-rate degree.

Special Offer: Get 12 issues of New Statesman magazine for just £12

More from Duncan Robinson

View the discussion thread.

21 comments

Sat, 2011-03-26 10:31 — YMT (not verified)

So you go to a top university, this will imply your chance of achieving some of the higher salaries is greatly increased, you pay for that. It's a win win situation isn't it? The university gets the money it wants, the students get a first rate education, and late on pay back a higher rate of tax. Not all universities are created equal.

Mon, 2011-03-28 18:21 — Andy Mitchell (not verified)

Its true to say that LMU has been near the bottom of the tables, but to compare it with many other Universities is, in my opinion, unfair. Its role within the sector is much different than many others, catering as it does to the widening participation agenda in such a big way. For many courses its teaching is actually considered to be excellent and this is backed up by the positive audits it has received for some subjects.

It does fall short in other areas but from what I have seen of the new VC and senior managers, are areas they are trying to address with the modular system being updated and with the types of degree on offer being changed. I think some people will be pleasantly surprised by the institution, now and in the future. I hope so anyway.

Sat, 2011-03-26 16:17 — Nilsey105

"The message, then, is depressingly simple: pay top-rate, or get a second-rate degree."

Why bother with an English university at all?
Germany has just decided,after a three year period, to drop their University fees,in total, from the coming year onwards.

Fees at Dutch Universities are,for EU residents, between one and three thousand £s per year. And are taught in English.

Maybe our children should consider a move to another EU country. Quality of course matters so a little research will have to be undertaken to discover the best value.

There are other things to take into account if studying in a foreign country. Learning a different language and culture are always of benefit no matter what.

Sat, 2011-03-26 16:27 — Nilsey105

There are no tuition fees in France for a university education.

http://hubpages.com/hub/Comparison-of-cost-of-higher-education-around-th...

Sat, 2011-03-26 18:17 — Hugh Markey (not verified)

All the examples given relate to European institutions of learning.
A poisoned chalice for any Tory imbiber. Forget the influence wielded by the Cons very junior partners.
These chosen few, once elected, couldn't give a continental damn.
However, there is a choice. Apprenticeships! We' re sure the government and its members of parliament will set an example. Just let's see how many of their issue take up this offer. Counting.

Greasy Rag

Sat, 2011-03-26 20:26 — Stephen Gosling (not verified)

Why not send all qualified candidates who want to go to university for free. What a superb investment in the future of the country that would be.Education like Healthcare should be funded by government out of taxes. Seems like a just and fruitful idea to me. Used to be the consensus among civilised people in this country. Oh Well

Sat, 2011-03-26 21:08 — kenny jenkins

Just about everything in this country is run by Oxbridge graduates.
Just about everything in this country is run spectacularly badly.
Maybe there's a conclusion to be drawn about the quality of education at these places.

Fri, 2011-03-25 20:08 — KSawhney

Is this really a surprise?

It was always obvious that the top universities would continue to charge the maximum possible, whilst the worse institutions use lower fees as an incentive to attract students with lower standard.

What this article does not mention is the positive effect these higher fees can actually have - in terms of social mobility at least.

I study at the University of Oxford and they have been incredibly generous with their bursaries. After the rise, these bursaries will increase substantially - possibly to the point where (for truly impoverished students) the cost of an Oxford degree becomes cheaper than it is now!

Fri, 2011-03-25 20:32 — mcquade (not verified)

Tripling fess can only have a negative impact on social mobility, as erecent JRF study has shown, as it disincetivises students.

According to Oxford University website, someone from the poorest household of under £16k annual income and eligible for the maximum amount of non-refundable help with fees and living costs, will still end up owing £27 125 for a three year course.

Fri, 2011-03-25 20:42 — elrob

What this article does not mention is the positive effect these higher fees can actually have - in terms of social mobility at least.

-------
How did you get into Oxford?

Fri, 2011-03-25 21:21 — Hugh Markey (not verified)

Geoffrey Bing, barrister and Labour MP and Junior Whip in Atlee's government used to host a television programme with a format something like BBC Radio 4's 'The Moral Maze'. In one of these debates, Robert Baker, former BBC news-reader and Proms presenter, dismissed the usefulness of a university degree. "Ah yes, but you have one!' - Bing retorted. To be fair, other people appearing on the programme claimed to be unimpressed by their own academic qualifications.
Summing up the gist of the argument, not word-for-word, Bing explained that university degrees did not seem to be important to those who had been to Oxbridge and were vastly over-rated by the general public.
Admittedly, Richard Baker came to higher education via the grammar school route but this effortless dismissal of academic qualifications as useless baubles is now back in fashion. Forget the politics of envy. So boring!

Elitist

Sun, 2011-03-27 00:19 — Reginald-Fah-fah

Universities should be free and open to anyone who wants study a degree.

Universities would have to enterprise and may be Great Britain will make growth!

Fri, 2011-03-25 22:45 — Jake (not verified)

Well done, Dave.
I know this is cliche - but a two tier education system in which the rich will be incentivised and the non-rich decentivised has been created.
The very people on whom this won't have an effect are the only people the Tories think are worth bothering about.
This is not cliche - this is fact. Anything supposedly done for the poor is nothing more than a political scam.
We are being conned - and Clegg and his poxy little cronies are only too happy to go only with it for the sake of a bit of power.

Fri, 2011-03-25 23:01 — Unimpressed!

It's not at all reassuring. Money does not make brains. A country needs brains. The result of brains helps that country hold its head up high in the big world. Not everybody has the level of brains needed at university. Brains and their power don't fit "democracy". No amount of sweat, blood and money can produce results from morons or semi-morons with a hell-bent ambition to obtain a degree. Thus, should such a semi-moron obtain a degree by paying money or by a combination of sweating all hours and paying money, this will only serve to downgrade degrees, universities and countries. It is the truth.

Sat, 2011-03-26 00:43 — yoctobarryc

I've never understood the fuss about fees. Let them be unlimited! In fact, the Browne review's idea of a 'taper' - the more a university charges, the less it gets back - was a pretty clever idea that the government pulled back from in an act of crass political manoeuvring.

I would qualify that by saying I have no problem with unlimited fees so long as the education remains free at the point of use.

Sat, 2011-03-26 02:06 — fredtheshred (not verified)

If David, as 'two brains Willetts', had been going up to Christ Church now would he have been stumping up £18k or would he have been 'economical' with the truth and declared only one small, average sized brain?

Or maybe he could have been going up
with that other intellectual powerhouse Gove, (Lady Margaret Hall), and brokered a 3 for 2 deal

Sat, 2011-03-26 04:13 — Ivan Miletitch

Anyone with half a brain could have predicted this. If universities CAN charge up to 9k ...why on earth wouldn't they ?? But this is typical on the Tories attitude to money...the cabinet is full of millionaires who have no idea what real life is about (I mean life for the vast majority of the population). Remember the Tory MP last year who publicly declared that the fuss over his expense claim was due to jealousy ??
What depresses me is the fact that they never made a secret about what they would do once in power - they were elected regardless & now their rating has dropped right back!!! It would appear that the electorate has learnt nothing from the Thatcher years...

Sat, 2011-03-26 09:05 — swatantra

Even Universities will be ranked and find their natural place in the market. What we have to ensure is that students of all backgrounds have the opportunity to go to those of their choice with extra financial support, bursuries and scholarships.
Talent and intellgence is spread uniformally across the population, not just confined to the wealthy.

Sun, 2011-03-27 12:43 — mike cobley (not verified)

There really is only one course of action - hit the reset button and reinstate the pre-Thatch student grant system. It may have had its flaws but by christ its massively more progressive than the current elitist shambles.

Sun, 2011-03-27 21:55 — C.K (not verified)

Can I say that London Metropolitain mat be one of the lowest but it is because they are taking in student who have lower grades coming from poorer backgrounds and offering them loads of choices. I don't agree that they should be known as getting a second rate degree at all. If someone attends that university and comes our with a 1st then they should not be treated any differently than thoughs who come out of higher ranked universites with a 1st too.

And the government will never ever make universities free because they are all greedy. The government make me so angry

Sat, 2011-03-26 10:10 — jie4v7i14

Hard to believe they have to pay rent and living/beer costs on top of this £9000 per year. God help those who choose London Universities - £60,000 debt at end of course will be rife for those without wealthy parents. Crazy way to go about things and treating our future.

And then getting on the housing ladder for these people? Forget it.