Tuition fees.

 

 Telegraph Education Editor, Graeme Paton, today reports that the Adam Smith Institute – an independent think-tank – believes that the cap on university fees has “distorted universities by restricting competition and artificially inflating the demand for courses.”

 The cost to go to university has risen steadily year after year and so has the demand for university places. This, you could argue, does not suggest that the “cap” on fees is causing the “artificial” inflation and demand for courses.

 What happened to the Government wanting more people to go to University? Surely removing the cap will increase the price and less people will be able to afford to go on to higher education, and there is nothing artificial about the demand for courses; especially when the Government is planning to cut budgets and university places next year.

 Most University courses are priced at the higher-end of the cap, about £3,200 a year. It is fair to say that all courses at a degree level should not be priced at the high-end of the cap – how can you justify spending £3,200 a year on a course with 15 hours teaching a-week, when some-one else gets double and more, for the same price?

 The cap is to be raised to £3,290 next year. This is not a significant amount to pay, however, what is the point in paying an extra £90? Who is that going to help in the long-run?

 There was once a time where people didn’t have to pay for their Degree, I am sure of it and I am even surer that, at that time, a Degree wasn’t in demand as much as it is now.

 If there was no fee, then students may not have appreciated their education – just like in school – and, the Adam Smith Institute thinks that this causes students to “choose inappropriate courses or not work as hard.”

 This could be true but, even with the fees as “low” as they are, there are still hundreds of students at universities all over the country killing time on ‘Mc Degrees’ and not really knowing what they are going to do with their future – they are wasting their time and money. Surely Government doesn’t want people wasting time and money?

 When people, and this includes young people, go to university, generally their decision is their own and their responsibility.

 The Study, The Broken University, suggests that there should be no set fees, thus, creating a “free market”. This would mean that the best institutions could charge as much as £20,000+ like they do in the States.

 However, this wasn’t the only suggestion the study made: what about only giving the full loan amount to students who are desperately in need, i.e. base it on their parents income. How?

 It shouldn’t be down to the parents, it should be a choice that is made by the student and they should have to, in the end, pay for that choice. Sounds brutal but, this could be the way people end-up appreciating their Degree.

 There is something which is being overlooked though; students aren’t seen, by society or universities, as “paying customers.”

 Tom Clougherty, executive director of the Adam Smith Institute believes that, ending the “direct subsidy” from the Government would “empower” students, because universities will have to look at them as “paying customers.”

 When the fee letter comes through a student’s door, telling him or her how much he or she is paying for a years tuition, what do they think; that they aren’t paying for anything? When did they ever stop being paying customers?

 If Government abolishes the “cap” then they will have to set-out standards and price brackets. A vocational course shouldn’t cost the same as a theory or a reading course and a practical science based course shouldn’t be the same either.

 How would the price bands look?

 Who is to justify whether or not a vocational course is worth more or less than a theory or a reading course?

 Perhaps it would work on the basis of “contact” tuition.