A government-commissioned survey has concluded that University students would be willing to pay higher tuition fees for degree courses that prepare them to enter the highest-earning jobs.
The research, carried out by the Institute for Employment Studies (IES), interviewed 81 students, and found that the majority would be “sold on the idea”.
Such a system exists in Australia, where students can pay twice as much for a degree in law, accountancy, economics and nursing.
The research found that students from the poorest homes were particularly supportive of the idea, although students from east London, Nottinghamshire, and south Yorkshire were far less willing to accept the idea of the most prestigious universities, such as Oxford and Cambridge, charging higher fees than other institutions.
Thomas Usher, a research fellow at IES and one of the authors of the study, said: “Across the board, but particularly among students from non-traditional backgrounds, there was a willingness to pay differential fees for different subjects. But when asked whether they would be prepared to pay higher fees for a particular kind of university, the majority were reflectively against this.”
The research will feed into an independent review of tuition fees which is being led by Lord Browne of Madingley, the former head of BP. The study’s findings were announced as the first public hearing for Browne’s review was held. Universities used the opportunity to argue for higher tuition fees.
Universities UK, the umbrella group for vice-chancellors, said the extra £1.3bn income they had received from top-up fees, introduced in 2006, had mainly been used to hire more staff and address a long-term fall in lecturers’ salaries.
This poll of 58 university leaders showed that a quarter of the fee income had gone on bursaries for the poorest students, while some had helped improve the student-staff ratio. Universities said the income had been desperately needed because the number of students had risen from 1.86m to 1.92m between 2005 and 2008.
Universities UK said: “A common message is that the additional investment from fees has made a real difference to the financial sustainability of universities, allowing them to invest for the long term, reverse backlogs in maintenance, improve environmental performance, and go some way towards meeting rising student expectations.”
However, student leaders have branded the scheme “elitist”, and said it would limit career opportunities for the poor. Wes Streeting, NUS President, said: “We believe allowing different institutions to charge different fees risks providing an elite system for the few that can afford it and a second-class experience for the many who cannot.
“Such fee differentials could see poorer students priced out of more prestigious universities and therefore consigned to the bargain basement. It is clear that earnings profiles for different subjects vary significantly, but it is also clear that earnings profiles vary significantly within certain subject areas.
“Any individual financial contribution should be based on genuine earnings after graduation and not hypothetical course prices based on unreliable and misleading estimates of earning power which amount to guess work.”
We asked these students what they thought about paying higher fees for degree disciplines promising them a future in the highest-paid jobs….
Annie Miles, 2nd-year Politics student, said:
“This study is ridiculous! How can they argue a study of 81 students reflects the general opinion of the whole student population in the UK? I completely disagree with its findings, and would in no way be prepared to pay more for a degree which would apparently guarantee you a job at the end.
It completely conflicts with the governments’ rhetoric that university should be open to more ‘financially challenged’ individuals. University life would go back to being purely for the rich and upper class! Of course if we all had a bottomless pot of money we would pay whatever it takes to do the degree of our choice, but applicants should continue to be judged on their academic and all-round ability rather than their bank balance!”
Siobhan Newman, 3rd-year Journalism, Media and Film student, said:
“In my opinion it wouldn’t be right for students to have to pay higher fees for courses that are ‘believed’ to guarantee a successful job in the future. It raises more questions as to how we can then measure the courses? Who decides which courses are sure to guarantee the highest-earning jobs? I don’t believe there is any certainty of getting the highest-earning jobs with any courses.
I believe this is extremely elitist, and would exclude individuals that cannot pay. Yes, we have loans, but surely you shouldn’t have to be in more debt when you finish University because someone has decided that your degree ‘might’ secure you a high paid job. What happens if you can’t get a high paid job? Tough luck?”
James Fooks, 2nd-year Spanish and Italian student, said:
“I’d be happy to pay more for a better taught degree with a guaranteed job. Our society is currently sending so many people to university and with drop-out rates at their highest ever (mentioned somewhere in this week’s gair rhydd), such a system would make people think seriously about taking on a degree such as law or engineering – it would be the dedicated few doing the course rather than having a ton of people scraping the 40% barrel.
I don’t think it’s an elitist idea – the people who are serious, passionate and determined will pay the extra money for the course, and these people will be the best people for the jobs – it’s not snobby, merely commonsense in order to get the best people doing the course.”
Emily Wickens, 3rd-year Social Science student, said:
“I think that the idea to charge different amounts for degree schemes is ridiculous. It would lead to decisions regarding life choices and future occupations being made on the basis of the cost of degree schemes rather than interest and passion in certain fields. It is almost embarrassing that this has been suggested.
To put a price tag on different degree schemes and to commodify education even further is shameful. The middle classes are already the main consumers of Higher Education, and this proposal would segregate the population even more. We would simply be paying for greater inequality in our society.
Saying that, if we had to pay more then I would because my future is important to me.”
