University Tuition Fees In The UK

as i understand it, UK students are now or soon will be paying 3K per year to attend uni. So over 3 yrs that's 9K, excluding living expenses. Very soon, (according to an MSN Money report discussing a UK gov't report dated circa Jan 1 2005) a UK grad can expect to leave uni at least 15K in debt - that's approx. $27,000 US! That's for a 3 yr undergrad (bachelor's level) degree.

meanwhile, despite the high fees charged by the dozen or so top US unis, on average, US students finish 4 yrs of undergrad approx. $26,500 in debt.

Graduate school? A year at a UK law school, on average, costs 8-10K for tuition alone i.e $15,000-20,000. US law schools (outside the top 10 or so and ivy leage, where starting salaries are well over 100K anyway) a student pays on average $8,000-14,000 per year for 3 yrs, so $24,000-42,000 in total.

so, it appears that within the next few yrs the costs (and debt) of an average US and average UK education will be more or less the same.

questions:

with this much money being pumped privately into UK unis, will they become as good as US unis? what do you think? that is the government's plan i believe.

also, why would such fees deter students from poor backgrounds in the UK while not in the US - in the US they get loans and/or scholarships or grants. Cannot UK students from non wealthy backgrounds do the same?


perhaps the one disadvantage i see is that US grads enjoy a higher strating salary in dollar terms than a UK grad and are therefore in a better position to repay any debt. Grads from my US uni started on an average of $55,000, and that is not in a large expensive city or on the coast.  i think UK grads start on something like 20K on average (about $38,000 US) and that salary increases are not as big or frequent as in the US - that's fine when your eductaion was free or cheap, but not if you have over 15K in debt.

I work at a university and have sat through a number of presentations related to this subject and have spent many an hour discussing this with my colleagues.

I think by and large universities in the UK are already as good as US universities, there just aren't as many of them.

The real problem facing UK (and all European universities) is the decline of British students (they are all over Europe) so universities depend heavily and will begin to depend even more on overseas students. It is likely that universities in coming years will merge and some may even close. I don't believe that this decline has anything to do with quality or money, but just the increased opportunities available to people to get an education.

This is a very different situation from the US where there are not enough seats for the demand.

I don’t think fees will deter anyone from going to university. If someone wants an education, they will get one. Students here have no problems taking out loans and living on their overdraft. I think more students will start going to universities close to home and living with their parents. Additionally, a lot more will start working and programmes are going to have to change and offer more part time opportunities as that is going to become increasingly popular.

I think more students will start going to universities close to home and living with their parents. Additionally, a lot more will start working and programmes are going to have to change and offer more part time opportunities as that is going to become increasingly popular.

I agree!  We're already seeing this in the university where I work.

I think the government target of 50% of the population being university educated is silly.

Especially when there is also a shortage of skilled trades and professionals. 

University is NOT the have all to end all, and in the US a degree is so watered down it's now a pre-requisite for tons of jobs that any person of average intelligence can do.

Already, a lot of our grads - humanities - are doing jobs that don't particularly require a degree b/c they can't get anything else and need to pay their debts and bills.

I think there needs to be an expansion of vocational programmes and apprenticeships BIG TIME, especially to so-called 'mature' students, many of whom are only in their late-20s and early 30s and have a potential 40-50 years of working life ahead of them, but find themselves shut out of many skilled trades b/c they are considered 'too old'.  How daft is that?

There's a big push to attract overseas students. 

This has its pluses, but we now also have quite a few students w/significant language barriers as a result.

Sadly though, my experience has been that UK universities are happy to take your huge international fees but give you very little in return. This may be the luck of the draw with the Uni I attended, but I've heard similar stories elsewhere. In my dept, we had to fight for postgrad desks and space to work in. We were second fiddle in terms of time allocated as there were no dedicated post-grad staff. There was minimal funding pools for travel, conferences, etc. And all of this in a building that was built as a temporary hospital during WW2 (i.e it should have been knocked down after the war!). Yes, you'll get a great education, but you'll pay for it in more ways than one.

And Expat is right, there's a huge push to attract the international fees but little pre-screening of English ability. We had tons of foreign students and the staff despaired of their English. Much as they'd like to help, they don't have the time or skills to teach Uni level English to these students. And these students are supposed to be held to the same level of writing as native English speakers - but it never works out that way.

All that said, I have no idea why tenthplanet is suggesting that UK universities are inferior. What on earth would make you think that?

And Expat is right, there's a huge push to attract the international fees but little pre-screening of English ability. We had tons of foreign students and the staff despaired of their English. Much as they'd like to help, they don't have the time or skills to teach Uni level English to these students. And these students are supposed to be held to the same level of writing as native English speakers - but it never works out that way.

Tell me about it!

Comparing these figures is tricky, of course, but I'm not sure that the numbers you've used are comparable, especially given that the average cost of a university year in the US at a research (public or private) institution has now reached 30,000 dollars. If a US BA costs $120,000 (4 years), then a British one still costs about 40% of that. British students end up with more debt because the British educational culture hasn't factored in working while studying (a rarity until about 7 or 8 years ago), parental contributions (few parents see higher education as something that they are personally responsible for contributing to), and university-derived schoarships (since few unis have large endowments).

Starting salaries are also volatile. Graduates from your university start at 50K? Surely that can't be for undergraduates? Then starting salaries themselves are only part of the picture, since UK grads don't pay health insurance costs (the NHS), get twice as much holiday time, and, unless one lives in London, probably face lower cost of living than in the US.

a US 4 yr undergrad ed doesn't cost $120K! 4 yrs of undergrad and then 3 yrs at harvard law school maybe. but the average debt after undergrad is much not higher than $30K. and yes, average starting salary for grads from my school (not ivy league by any means, but good) is circa $50K. most high school drop outs around here easily earn $10-15/hr, so about $30K/yr. i saw an ad in a tiny taco bel the other day for a shop asst manager, paying $38K to start! i don't know anyone who earns less than $10/hr. the only people i've met who earn less than that are teenage parttime workers.

and UK students do pay for health care, and quite a bit too. when i was in the UK the government stole approx. 100 pounds from my pay check every month in order to pay for it!!! that's $180, more than what i pay in monthly insurance premiums right now for great private fast health care.

anyway, i digress. my point is that given the lack of facilities, resources etc at most UK unis, and given that the salaries one can expect on graduation are not comparable with US starting salaries, that UK students should not have to end up in comparable debt and hence i'm against 3K per year, esp. when it's considered just a mere contribution and a top up fee!! 3K is a hell of a lot of money in the UK.

when i was in the UK the government stole approx. 100 pounds from my pay check every month in order to pay for it!!!

how dare they?! 

anyway, i digress. my point is that given the lack of facilities, resources etc at most UK unis, and given that the salaries one can expect on graduation are not comparable with US starting salaries, that UK students should not have to end up in comparable debt and hence i'm against 3K per year, esp. when it's considered just a mere contribution and a top up fee!! 3K is a hell of a lot of money in the UK.

Have you been voting whilst you were away?

It's a done deal at any rate.

Are you planning to come back and resume studying?

a US 4 yr undergrad ed doesn't cost $120K! 4 yrs of undergrad and then 3 yrs at harvard law school maybe. but the average debt after undergrad is much not higher than $30K.

You could be right, but the College Board (the group that makes the SAT and Advanced Placement tests) says that "the average total tuition, fee, room, and board charges at private four-year colleges and universities are $30,367," and "tuition and fees represent only a fraction of the total cost of attending college. When living costs and other education-related expenses are considered, tuition and fees constitute 67 percent of the total budget for full-time students enrolled in four-year private colleges and universities."
http://www.collegeboard.com/press/releases/150634.html

so they're really saying that it costs about 40,000 a year total.

And one year (out of three) at Harvard Law (tuition plus living costs) comes to slightly less than 60,000, according to Harvard's own information, see http://www.law.harvard.edu/admissions/jd/HLSfaqs.php

so 9,000 pounds is still pretty cheap, no?

Thanks Tina, I was just going to say that I paid $26k for one year at a private university back in 1999. The same university is not $34k.

I think we are comparing apples and oranges. University here is a lot different, and it is funded a lot differently. There are not big pushes by universities here for fundraising from their alumni and companies. Universities in the UK rely on the money they get from the RAE, Higher Education Funding Councils, the EU, and surprise surprise, the NHS.

hiya!

my niece has just gotten herself into Uni up in Leicester to study Medicine, as far as I understand it from her she is eligible for a grant of around 2grand per year. Yes, she does have to pay the £3000 course fees plus £130 per week in meals catered (rather spanking brand new!) halls of residence. So halls is around £3900 per academic year (if am I right in thinking 10 weeks each semester and 3 semesters per year?). On top o fthat comes living expenses such as books, stationary, clothes, travel, etc - so I'd estimate each year will be a grand total of around £8-8500 - 2grand grant so around £6-6500 (ish). Multiply that by 5 years = £30000-32500 ish! - i've NOT taken into consideration that she'll need a car in her 3rd year, I've not taken into consideration her mobile phone and possible other personal expenditure, I've not taken into account her partying and drinking (so far she 'seems' as though shes not constantly partying !) so worst case is that for her first 2 years we could add on say £1500 extra. 3rd - final year add on a good £3000 for a car and its assocated expenses (we'll buy her a reliable cheapy) then total estimate for her education will be around £35000-37500 ish ($66500 USD).

In some parts of the country, that's a debt equivalent to a mortgage!! - then of course she has to start out on rather crap pay - I think another cousin who's just graduated in medicine and has just started in High Wycombe general is on around 19K(which apparently is very good for a 1st job!) - so she'll be paying back that large debt and TRYING to get herself on the housing ladder (I hope she'll at least want to !!) and living life -

Basically I worry about the about of debt in those first few years of coming out of uni she'll be already in and of course adding to compared to the amount of pay she'll be getting.

Moving on - I don't think the major and mainstream universities are 'badly' equipped as has been suggested in this thread, also as yet more of my cousins (yes ..  yet more medical doctors and what not!!) are at unversity in the USA you need to compare like fo rlike universities. You can't compare top league private US Uni's to the mainstream UK universities. Some of my other family members put themselves through a university in Manhattan called 'Baruch' (i think!) and paid something like $3-4500 for the year (maybe they had some grants or special funding i cant remember right now) where as some others who are currently at StonyBrook (long island I think?)  & Tufts in boston are paying something like 50-70,000 a year (by dad of course!!) - I've certainly not heard that Uni's here are down on equipment, facilities etc - maybe im missing something?!

Either way, I hope my niece decides to go convert her UK Medicine qualification to a US one and go live/work there (shes a US ciitizen by birth) as the pay levels are ALOT better. Yet more relatives are in their 1st year residency in a San Fran hospital (hubby and wifey) and each being paid around $42,000 (£23K), which granted isn't much in SF apartment with a view of the Golden Gate and the Pacific but I think they'll head back to Michigan after residency - but $80K USD is enough for both of them, and looking to see what they'll be earning in 3-10 years time, well lets just say 6 figure sums abound!

Overall, in the UK, it's the Financial and Legal sectors which 'hold up' the UK economy or have a large slice of the total economics of the country. Even Doctors and medical people traditionally seen as tier 1 earners have fallen off the radar (and I cant find the report I read this in recently right now!)

So, my advice would be to study Law or something financial related to stand the best chance of getting a decent return on studying investment in the UK!

Sorry for the long post and if it's slightly digressed!

Cheers! Dennis! West London & Slough UK!

Well, your daughter will be eligible for the new key sector employee scheme where the government pays for, I think, 25% of the mortgage.

Also keep in mind that the average debt for a US medical school education (not counting the undergraduate debt, since the US separates the degrees, is more than $110,000, according the American Medical Student Association. See http://www.amsa.org/meded/studentdebt.cfm

Carrying the average 25,000 from undergraduate, that leaves interns in the US with about $135,000 dollars of student debt. So for income/debt level, using your figures of £19/35 and $40/135,  a UK intern has slightly less debt!

What we're not taking into account, though, is the much, much higher cost of medical malpractice insurance in the US, which can run, depending on specialty, several tens of thousands of dollars per year.

JMO, But I think that the raising of uni fees from 1100 to 3k is outrageous. I think the UK government wants to make money off of student loan interest, like in the US. They have re-introduced grants, which is good, but the income level required to receive a grant is so low that it makes it very very difficult for average/ middle income parents to help with tuition costs. I think it is a bad idea for the government to set people up with major debt. It is not serving the best interests of the people.

I went for 1 year to a state uni in the US. None of the people I met were there to learn (Well actually there was ONE, but that's it). I ended up doing an associates from a community college, where everyone was actually there to learn! The 3 year degree from the community college I got was worth way more education wise than the bachelor's I could have gotten from the state uni. The point is, most people in the US go to uni because it is the thing to do; it is what is required to have any modicum of success and a decent job.

I personally believe that uni should either be "free" (paid for by taxes) or at least heavily subsidised but limited to serious students. Others who have no interest in education but just want a decent paying job should be able to find vocational programs.

So, here is how I see it work: The government loans out money that didn't exist before they decided to create it in some computer program, and in turn the borrower of this "money" is enslaved for years, because it is the only way they could get a decent wage. The governments gets back twice as much money as what they lent out, when they started with nothing. It is scandalous.

I agree that higher education is a basic human right and that public universities shouldn't charge tuition. But it's not completely fair to say that the government is loaning out fictitious capital as if higher education is like wire fraud or a ponzi scheme. The government pays for universities to run: lecturer's salaries, plant costs, library purchases, etc. These are real costs. They get the money to do this from the citizenry through taxes.

In a larger sense, the introduction of tuition fees relocates who is increasingly paying for the cost, or rather under what identity we pay. No longer as "citizens", we pay as "students". Or rather we pay twice over, as "citizens" and "students".

That said, I do think the new scheme, where all tution costs are deferred after graduation (this is for UK/EU students only, of course), is much fairer than the old one, where you had to pay tuition upfront.

The problem of student debt has been exacerbated by two trends. Firstly, changing consumption patterns in UK student culture as a reflection of a larger British shift from a "saver" to a "debtor" society. It used to be that personal debt was an anathema to Brits (remember Maggie's claim that you can't spend money that you don't have). That all changed, very rapidly somewhere in the 1990s.

This impacted student culture. It used to be that students lived very frugally and had few possessions. Now students are at the forefront of shopping with plastic and buying gadgets that are expensive (ipods) or have monthly fees (mobiles). It's not only tuition fees that create student debt, but also the new consumerism.

The second problem is the runaway housing market, which is driving up inflation and salary demands by lecturers, hence increasing the cost of running a university. The old Labour model was that a large percentage of the population would be emplyed by the State and accept low wages in return for cradle-to-grave welfare, housing, etc. The Tories and New Labor broke from this model, let housing be increasingly privatized, according to the marketplace. These costs have to be externalized onto someone, and in commercial society, the ones who pay are the weak and those who have little power because they are a fragmented voting bloc - students.

I agree with everything you said, Llama, but I am unclear about where the money from student loans comes from. You said,

I agree that higher education is a basic human right and that public universities shouldn't charge tuition. But it's not completely fair to say that the government is loaning out fictitious capital as if higher education is like wire fraud or a ponzi scheme. The government pays for universities to run: lecturer's salaries, plant costs, library purchases, etc. These are real costs. They get the money to do this from the citizenry through taxes.

If the costs of higher education are already subsidised through taxes, where is the money being lent out for student loans coming from? Everyone is eligible for a student loan, and it is not based on the amount of reserves available. What I am saying is that I don't think the money is presently "there"; but this in the end, people who want to go to uni trade their future earnings for education now. It will eventually be worth it, but students must be wage slaves for several years to attain the same thing that their parents got at a much more reasonable cost.

Essentially I agree with you. I didn't mean to imply that higher education is a scam! It isn't. I just think the lending system and new higher fees for students is not beneficial. I mean, if the state pays for 18 years of education for its citizens, why not finish the job. Higher education admission should be tied more to merit, intelligence, skills and desire to learn than to ability to pay. JMO.