Britain's Bankrupt Universities Are Hunting For Cheaper Models (economist.com) 64
British universities face mounting financial pressures with four in ten institutions running deficits, according to the Office for Students regulator. Half have closed courses to save money, while Durham and Newcastle each shed 200 staff members. Lancaster's cost-saving plan could eliminate one in five academic positions. The crisis, writes Economist, stems from frozen tuition fees for English students, which will rise by only a few percent in August for the first time in eight years.
Cheaper models? (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Page three.
Is that where we find the naked campus “administrators” tenured by the dozen? ‘Cause I have an idea as to why costs are so pointlessly high..
Re: (Score:3)
In California, the number of administrative staff at state-funded colleges has tripled since 1980.
Some of the increase, but not all, is due to unfunded federal mandates.
No Tenure (Score:2)
Is that where we find the naked campus “administrators” tenured by the dozen?
Not in the UK because UK universities no longer have tenure. Unless something has changed since I left the government forced universities to employ lecturers on fixed term contracts that do not have to be renewed when they expire.
Re: (Score:1)
I'm still available, if they need a balding, dying cancer patient for some hot photo sessions.
Given my situation, I am afraid I'm going to need to have cash payment up front, and all expenses paid.
Economist's analysis is a bit trite (Score:5, Interesting)
I have a friend who worked for Jo Johnson (ex higher ed minister under the Tories) and who was an exuberant backer of tuition fees and student loans. I pointed out to him that the administrative costs and profits of the loans model, plus the timeshifting effects of costs being incurred by unis immediately but revenues taking years to generate, inevitably meant that the system would come under immense financial strain, all for the nominal moral principle of introducing a user-pays element that was clearly done to satisfy nasty old cunts who never went to uni themselves and resented paying into a general taxation pot for anyone else to go. He insisted that the model was sound, and made clear that he thought the Scandi model of just funding three years of tertiary education via general taxation the same way the previous 13 years of education is funded was totally ridiculous.
Well, I was right, and he was wrong, despite his giant brain. This has been a cluster of massive proportions, and proves that once you break certain types of thing, it's an enormous pain to fix them. And New Labour and the Tories absolutely broke higher ed, and I won't forgive them for that. My son's at Durham, and in common with almost every other British uni, he had virtually no teaching at all in his third term. It's a fucking joke.
Re:Economist's analysis is a bit trite (Score:4, Interesting)
What the fuck are you talking about? Who says I fell or voted for any of this? I certainly didn't, so how about you take your twattery and shove it up your arse, you delusional prick. I don't own higher education policy, and I literally have related a story to you in which I tried to persuade someone who was actually in a position to influence policy to change his mind, which is pretty fucking active for a member of joe public, and a damn sight more than you've ever done, I'll warrant
Re: Economist's analysis is a bit trite (Score:1)
I rarely post. But Shelley, you are right on the money. Moving to pay for education has killed our once elite universities. Unless of course you have a spare silver spoon and go to oxbridge. You summed up the situation well and the AC above can do one.
Re: (Score:2)
People repeating that prejudice and discouraging applications are a bigger problem for Oxbridge access than lack of silver spoons.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Virtually no teaching = a single lecture and a couple of seminars in the third term, plus a single exam.
Re: (Score:2)
Virtually no teaching = a single lecture and a couple of seminars in the third term, plus a single exam.
Are they doing a sandwich course?
Re: Economist's analysis is a bit trite (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
"Oh but electricians will be treated by doctors who studied at university" goes the tired argument
The argument for funding universities used to be that they were funded by the increased tax rate that higher earners pay because, with very few exceptions, higher earners have either benefited from a university education themselves or have benefitted from the works of others with university educations.
The great thing with that system was that those who needed a university education but who ended up in a lower paying job like teacher or nurse were not saddled with massive debts and instead had their educ
Re: (Score:2)
Huh? What's next? As the road using standards become more and more, shall we say, "democratic", it becomes difficult to justify building and maintaining public roads. Especially when people with no cars are effectively subsidising the ones that have them. (etc)
Public education is an intellectual infrastructure, just like the public road system is a physical infrastructure, and the public hospital system is a service infrastructure. When one's civilization privatizes and removes its public infrastructure
Re: (Score:2)
Going to university somewhere in Europe was a great option for British kids that would have trouble affording university in the UK. Pick the right university and the tuition was free, the teaching was in English, and there was help with living costs. Brexit put a stop to that though.
Re: (Score:2)
This is another Brexit dividend! International students used to make up a significant amount of uni funding here. That dropped off a lot after the right-wing cunts (Tories mostly, new labour include) made the UK hostile to our best-paying students.
Re: Economist's analysis is a bit trite (Score:2)
right-wing cunts (Tories mostly, new labour include) made the UK hostile to our best-paying students.
2nd best paying students. Those from outside the EU pay more as they were not entitled to treatment equal to that of UK citizens.
I wholeheartedly agree with the name-calling though.
Re: (Score:2)
Brexit didn't just make the UK hostile to EU students, the impact followed through to a drop in all international registrations, not just those from the EU. We also lost quite a lot of good staff who didn't want to live outside the EU (there were pension and professional registration impacts).
More admin staff vs instructors = financial crisis (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Once administration is put in control the first thing they always do is expand the administration department.
Ontario, Canada, has the same issue (Score:1, Insightful)
If that'
Staff (Score:3)
The large university near me has a 10-1 staff to faculty ratio. Not administrators, or academic staff. Janitors, groundskeepers, support, librarians, maintenance workers, aides to the higher-ups, etc.. This seems a bit excessive.
Fun story. I have friends who work for a smaller, though still quite big, local university. When a new president came on board, his wife was dismayed that he only had one personal aide and a secretary, and she didn't get one (at the larger university, the president has something li
Re: (Score:3)
After ~5 weeks, I got pissed off, and walked to the office of the assistant dean, the second or third person in charge. I didn't schedule an appointment, I didn't email anyone, I just walk
Re: (Score:1)
She didn't happen to want a crowbar upside her head did she?
Cause I don't think anyone would have a problem funding that.
Re:Ontario, Canada, has the same issue (Score:5, Interesting)
Most of your post is repeating false propaganda. While classes like "The Music of Taylor Swift" etc do exist, they are the equivalent of the inter mural sports program - they cost very little money, have small classes, and are add-ons that attract attention and students rather than loss leaders. What you call the 'side programs' do wonders to educate the students again at low cost. They do not cost the university money.
The STEM classes are the expensive ones that many people join and then quit the program. Everyone and their uncle wants to be one of the 'smart, valuable students', but most don't have what it takes. All those people trying to make the cut but failing cost the university far more money for far less return.
The atriums etc that you dislike, they are usually gifted by the wealthy. People give 50 million and demand an atrium to have their name.
Similarly, the licensed software is often gifted by the corps. They want people to learn how to use their license stuff, not the free-ware which is just as/almost as good.
There is no "better not be white service", and your inclusion of that indicates that you are prejudiced. You and the snide comments you make are why we need those services. Yes, these things are expensive. The easiest way to deal with that cost is to just kick anyone out that thinks like you. Stop coddling racist and prejudiced shmucks rather than paying for therapy for everyone else.
The real costs problems tend to be 1) administrative, 2) failed students, 3) healthcare is growing.
Re: (Score:2)
Healthcare was a shit show at the school. The school required you to have insurance, and if you didn't have private insurance, you had to buy the school's insurance.
Re: (Score:2)
When you're paying thousands of $$$ to attend University because HR drone says thou must - and you see your money being horribly wasted - how is that a personal gripe?? Universities are losing money and ultimately customers - why? more and more people see them as no longer worth the money/debt - and this is a great deal of why. Luckily I'm old enough to have gone to University for free (UK poster here and our crooked Govt even took that away from us, no lowering of taxes to compensate though!) - I'd ha
Re: (Score:2)
I mostly agree, but I have to press the point that I mention to all kids wary about the cost of university in the UK - you don't come out of university with a debt, the government does. What you've agreed to is paying a higher effective rate of tax when you earn above a threshold. The loan doesn't impact your eligibility for other loans, and it gets written off after time. So don't worry about the size of the loan, think about whether you think that paying that higher rate of tax is a fair exchange for goin
Re: (Score:3)
I'd add that higher education is where corporations outsourced their training programs to, which is why people don't get out of uni with an education, but with a training.
I saw this on myself: from the 1st year it was always "in preparation for your future job" . No, fuck you, I want to learn stuff, and gain critical thinking, not become a trained monkey for corpos.
I am a monkey now though.
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe post secondary institutes wouldn't be broke, if they focused on education
Actually, focusing on sports is more profitable.
The classes are a money sink. Why have them at all?
Re: (Score:2)
money (Score:2)
UK here. When I went to uni in 2005, it was £1300 a year (I did four years), when I did my masters in 2009 it was £3000. My younger brother started his degree in 2010 and it was £9000 a year. Did he get 7x as good an education as me. I DOUBT IT.
You can always tell whatever the UK equivalent of a boomer is when they talk about 'the grant', where they lived in a crazy fantasy world that existed up to 1998 where the state supported its students. "Oh don't you have the grant" "but you've got t
Re: (Score:2)
The old fuck over the young. It's an old tale. And the young are so fucking stupid, they don't vote.
Re: (Score:2)
Vote for who?
Re: (Score:3)
Better candidates in primaries.
Re: (Score:2)
U.S. defaultism...
Re: (Score:2)
The lesser evil.
It sucks, but it's better than the alternative.
Not voting only leads to the shittier candidate winning by default and the slightly better candidate ignoring you since you're not a voter. The loser's faction will move to the middle since that's where the people who actually vote seem to be. The winner's faction will push further toward their side, since they can afford to. Democracy takes a long time, but look what the conservatives have accomplished by sticking together and voting, year afte
Re: (Score:3)
Unfortunately it does not look like "the loser's faction will move to the middle". Witness what Democrats are getting the biggest buzz. It is obvious that extremism on one side makes the other side say "hey we can be just as extreme in the opposite direction!". This is despite the fact that the stupidest person working for either party knows that if they just put out a MODERATE candidate that they would wipe the floor with the opponent.
I voted against Trump. But I am seriously afraid what we are going to ge
Re: (Score:2)
Vote for any of the smaller parties. I've voted for small far-left parties, right wing parties, joke parties, single issue parties. Anyone who votes for the Big 2 (or 2.5 in the UK) in my opinion is an idiot and is directly resonsible for the state the UK is in now. Maybe go so far as to call them a Traitor to the People of the UK.
People say "muh wasted vote" - half of it is about showing the big parties they aren't invulerable. If enough people went out and voted for the smaller parties the large ones mi
Re: money (Score:2)
No, in general, they don't.. The old tend to try and look out for the young, and help where they can.. That's been my experience anyway..
Re: (Score:2)
Not when it comes to politics.
They'll help out when needed, but voting for the interests of the young, potentially against theirs, that ain't happening, and we have the entire world to prove that.
To prove my point: has there been a US GenX president?
Re: (Score:2)
https://rugbyoldbloke.wordpres... [wordpress.com]
Never ever forgive.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
And I'd be proud to contribute... Wrong country though.
Re: (Score:2)
The Lib Dems should maybe have gone for a confidence and supply arrangement rather than full coalition, but the point of coalition is that both parties have to compromise, and the junior party/-ies have to compromise more. Compare the 2010-2015 parliament to the 2015-2019 one and tell me that the Lib Dems didn't have a moderating effect.
I am Jack's complete lack of surprise (Score:2)
Wow, who could have predicted that trebling fees back in 2012 [wikipedia.org] would cause a problem?
Re: (Score:3)
??
I think you're missing something. That caused a problem for the students. What caused a problem for the universities was that the newly trebled fees were meant to cover the entire course. Then the fees stayed the same through Brexit and Trussnomics, leaving the universities with very little money.
We need far less undergraduates (Score:3)
Being a graduate is now of little real world use, but has become a positional good which employers use to reduce the number of applicants to a reasonable amount. So more and more kids are taking Masters, for the same reason. This is a self destructive arms race that merely advantages those employed in the tertiary education sector. Stop it now - with a 25% cut in the number of undergraduate loans available, with the cuts focused towards those subjects that have graduates earning less 20 years down the line.
FTFY (Score:3)
We need far fewer undergraduates.
Re: (Score:1)
Oh, I dunno.
I think having a better chance, or ANY CHANCE, of getting a decent job is a pretty good "real world use".
raise prices (Score:2)
They can go to the US student loan system (Score:2)
They can go to the US student loan system
No real surprises. (Score:2)
The courses used to be fully funded by a grant here in the UK. All you needed was to have the academic credentials to get in, and that was the tough part. About 15% of people went on to higher education (in the early 80s); the theory was that over your working life, you'd more than repay to the government in taxes what was spent on your training for your reasonably "high flying" job. Which was fairly true.
The wonderful thing about that was that selection was entirely on how academically competent you we
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The only note I'd add is that "selection was entirely on how academically competent you were" should be replaced with "selection was entirely on how well coached you'd been to pass exams". There were certainly people there based just on how academically gifted they were. There was also a large cohort there based on how much money had been thrown at tutors and private schools, or who had happened to live near a sixth-form college skilled at getting people into university.
It's not a trivial exercise to design
Baumol's Cost Disease (Score:2)
Aside from the regularly cited (and very real) bloat in administration in education, there's another important factor [wikipedia.org] driving up education costs: productivity gains in areas like manufacturing and technology tend to drive up prices in services sectors like education and healthcare. When productivity rises in some parts of the economy wages ultimately end up rising across the board, but for sectors (particularly in services) where productivity can't rise as fast, those wage increases turn into real value pr