Your stance on fees

Beau

Hey,

I was just wondering what students here in Maynooth's opinion on the reintroduction of fees that is likely to happen very soon according to todays Independent. I've seen the banner on the bridge and several posters around campus. I also heard through here there was small attendance from our university for the march. So what is your opinion on them?

Personally I think fees have to be reintroduced due to the country's finances and that we all should have to pay personally to further our education. I quite like Fine Gaels proposal of paying 30% of your fees once you get into full employment, personally I don't think thats enough and should go above 50%.

What do people who are against fees propose? That we continue to pay the already high registration fee? That would seriously piss me off.

ontour

I wont be able to afford to pay the fee's, I hope to start college next year but really hope fees are not brought back.

banquo

I'm still undecided. It's a killer issue.

On one hand, I'm completely for free education for anyone that wants it.

On the other hand, I meet so many students who really couldn't give a balls about the subject they're studying and who treat college like an extension of childhood. Their main gaol is to barely pass exams, and don't give a damn about the content, they just wanted to go to college because it was 'safe'.

No statistics exist to back my argument up, it's just my experience. And it's certainly not all students who do this, just a significant minority. And the result of this is that they bring the standard of the courses down, and everyone else's degrees become worth less.

I was talking to a maths lecturer once (shall remain unnamed) and they told me that it was much much harder in their day, and that undergrads today just learn 'recipes'.

I think full fees is a bad idea. But I think that having to pay more - I'm not a FG supporter but their idea's a good one - would make people think twice about what course they pick.

It might also make people work for a year or so before they came to college. I was 20 when I came here and I was much better off for it - my past work experience meant I was able to get a job easier, my brain was a little more developed and I knew for sure that music was what I wanted to do.

Then again, you've got the problem of only those with money being able to go to college. I don't believe this problem exists. I had to pay full fees for first year and buy a piano (7,200e in total) which meant taking out a bank loan. I worked full time in a gay little newsagents before I came here to raise the money. Spent most of the money on being 18 and having fun, no regrets. In 2nd year I had to work 30-40 hours a week in Tesco to pay for food and rent, and on mondays I still did my 2 hours every week with Nala. As a result, I was at 22 lectures in the entire year. Got a high 2:2, and was so so close to getting a 2:1. It's possible if you work hard.

Truth is, even if you don't have to pay fees, college is still really expensive. Reg fee, books, transport, rent, food, photocopying, everything adds up. And even if you're not paying fees now, you will be in taxes for the rest of your life.

**** it, bring on the fees. The money isn't there anymore, there's no way around that. Most other countries have some element of fees and those who really and truly want to become an expert in their subject make it work somehow. And it may even lead to higher standards - and with it a more valuable qualification from - our universities.

allandanyways

I love my course, but I'll have to drop out if they re-introduce fees. No way around it, I've no job and my parents work enough so that they're over the grant belt but wouldn't be able to afford to send myself and another sister through university with fees and then put 2 other sisters through school. I'm not putting a loan on top of their heads and before anyone is smart and sugggests I just get off my arse and get a job so I could pay back a loan of my own, I can't at the moment for health reasons.

True, the money's not there for the government to do without fees but the money's not there for a lot of families who simply cannot fork out the money for fees when they're already just about managing to get me through the year, along with the costs of my other siblings.

Fees in = Students out, thats the way alot of people I know are seeing it, so even if I love my course, there is no way financially that I could afford to go to college. Pretty much sucks...

mp3guy

It's weird that no one in University seems to understand fees for them will not be brought in half way through their degree :rolleyes:

banquo

allandanyways wrote: »

I love my course, but I'll have to drop out if they re-introduce fees. No way around it, I've no job and my parents work enough so that they're over the grant belt but wouldn't be able to afford to send myself and another sister through university with fees and then put 2 other sisters through school. I'm not putting a loan on top of their heads and before anyone is smart and sugggests I just get off my arse and get a job so I could pay back a loan of my own, I can't at the moment for health reasons.

True, the money's not there for the government to do without fees but the money's not there for a lot of families who simply cannot fork out the money for fees when they're already just about managing to get me through the year, along with the costs of my other siblings.

Fees in = Students out, thats the way alot of people I know are seeing it, so even if I love my course, there is no way financially that I could afford to go to college. Pretty much sucks...

Aye. Therein lies the problem. It's a tough one to be sure. Also, even if you could work it mightn't be an option - Tesco Maynooth just cut 40 jobs, and we've seen some local businesses close down recently.

State = no money.
Students = no money.

If there was a way of making uni cheaper to run then fees wouldn't need to be so high.

/goes off for a think

Beau

allandanyways wrote: »

but I'll have to drop out if they re-introduce fees. No way around it,

ontour wrote:

wont be able to afford to pay the fee's, I hope to start college next year but really hope fees are not brought back.

Thats the thing, I would be shocked if any government will reintroduce fees so that people will have to take out loans and pay up front. Whats more likely is that you'll start paying back through a graduate tax once you can afford it. This has to be the fairest way, the current situation of people having to pay €1,500 each year (and higher taxes for everyone to subsidies 3rd level) is clearly is more of a deterrent for people not to go to college. It would also mean that more money could be reinvested into universities and would avoid any cuts in future budgets increasing the quality of our education.

However as Banquo says its important that any fees generated aren't lost in administration and not something useful.

banquo

I think colleges could save a whole wad of money by going more the Open University approach.

I'm not saying no lectures. You need tutorials and labs, etc to ask questions and clear up uncertainties. But there's a lot to be said for podcasts - iTunes U being a huge example - and for arranging affairs so that students could work from home.

To me, the idea that 'We'll tell you all about James Joyce, but you've got to be in this building in this room in Kildare between 9 and 10 on thursdays for it to happen' has always seemed a bit mad. People will say 'But that's what college is!', but it's only been that way in the past because there was no alternative.

It wouldn't be 'distance' education either. Distance is a problem of the past, and has to do with time taken, not distance covered. If I wanted to give Beau some good news (say), the problem wouldn't be the miles I'd have to travel to get to her, it would be the time it took to give her the news. Most lectures come down to the transfer of information. They could just publish notes and reading lists online with loads of past exam papers, have a few tutorials per semester, and then you turn up for exams.

Isn't that what scholarship is? You need to know about blah, here's a few books we recommend about blah, assignments are online. Your exam is at Christmas. Please turn up and pass.

For lectures, you could just have podcasts or whatever. It's not unprecedented either.

http://www.theage.com.au/news/home/technology/youtube-his-classroom/2009/03/04/1235842462189.html

http://www.eschoolnews.com/news/top-news/?i=57612

http://www.edu20.org/

They could also save money all over the place with just a few small innovations. Some of them are so glaring an obvious it makes me crazy they haven't yet (Hence running for Su office).

The majority of students here already have an email account before they come to college. Some don't. So instead of purchasing and allocating webspace and giving a whole email account to every single student (over 7,000 this year), just ask people at the start of the year if they need an nuim account. If they already have a hotmail, gmail, yahoo etc account then just set up forwarding. Like, upwards 80% of students wouldn't need college emails.

Instead of buying the MS Office software, just get a Google Docs account for everyone. Much cheaper and no compatiability issues. Some will say that matures etc won't be able to use it. The temptation to resort to the lower common denominator is always there, but the truth is that there will always be at least one student that will have special needs, be they computer illiterate or blind. You won't find it on the curriculum, but confident use of computers and office software is a skill that we're expected to learn while we're here - I for one would think it best to be ahead of the curve in this respect, if not every possible respect.



Country's out of money. Adapting to rational changes in student behaviour is no bad thing.

Ostrom

Completely in favour, position made known in various other threads....

Best way to address top end inequality in education, but useless without serious administrative reform.

Given the proven track record and political void in the SU (and the inexplicable cycles of student apathy to pop leftyism over the years), I'm not surprised there is neither the will to explore the issue, nor the restraint to jump at a good 'protest'.

Irony lost.... from what I have seen; fees, if properly managed, could be the very thing to keep those most at risk in.

mp3guy

banquo wrote: »

The majority of students here already have an email account before they come to college. Some don't. So instead of purchasing and allocating webspace and giving a whole email account to every single student (over 7,000 this year), just ask people at the start of the year if they need an nuim account. If they already have a hotmail, gmail, yahoo etc account then just set up forwarding. Like, upwards 80% of students wouldn't need college emails.

I think storing your college email on a big multinational owned webmail server is a bit out there, considering that most of google's services, including gmail, are still in beta, and they can close every single account and delete everything any time they want. Not to mention the fact there's already hundreds of other servers needed on campus for other services, throwing an email server in there as well isn't that much extra.

banquo wrote: »

Instead of buying the MS Office software, just get a Google Docs account for everyone. Much cheaper and no compatibility issues.

You've obviously never used MS Office for anything beyond typing a letter. Google Docs (Yes I've been using it for months) is a quick fix, for simple things, and has nowhere near the amount of features required to replace MS Office.

banquo

I use MS Office only when Google Docs is unavailable. I use Google Docs for the college stuff, Adobe inDesign for the complicated stuff.

Google Docs is fine for college work. Also, there's no version incompatibility. I have Office 2007. If you buy a laptop or computer today, it'll come either with that or with MS Works.

Most students do their printing on campus. The version of Office on campus PCs won't open either of these files. With Google Docs, everyone has the same version by default.

It does just about everything a college student would need.

mp3guy wrote: »

You've obviously never used MS Office for anything beyond typing a letter.

I'm sorry it took me so long to reply in this thread. I confused my computer with my toothbrush again. Being a typical college student, it is naturally likely that I have never used MS Office beyond typing a letter. I've obviously never had to write an essay. I just write letters to my lecturers explaining that I am an imbecile.Assignments are done in MS Paint. Having edited a small music magazine for 18 months, I wouldn't really know anything about formatting, or what the industry standard programs are. This sure is a nice serif font I'm typing in, nice humanist angle of stress.

Let's take things back off the offensive, shall we?

I am very, very familiar with both programs. Some students might need MS Office. So we don't need to go deleting it.

Google Docs is much cheaper. Think it's a bad idea? Right. I'll just go inform the University of Munich, Yale, and the entire District of Columbia that they're doing it wrong.

There's no money left. We need to start doing things on the cheap, but at the same time this could be an opportunity to re-evaluate what works and what doesn't. Whether it's about Google Docs or not, the uni can start looking at what's a good use of money, what can be improved, and what's a total waste.

Christo

In my mind fees=less students=lower educauted workforce=less multinational companies=even less money for the government from corporation tax, etc

mp3guy

banquo wrote: »

I use MS Office only when Google Docs is unavailable. I use Google Docs for the college stuff, Adobe inDesign for the complicated stuff.

Google Docs is fine for college work. Also, there's no version incompatibility. I have Office 2007. If you buy a laptop or computer today, it'll come either with that or with MS Works.

Most students do their printing on campus. The version of Office on campus PCs won't open either of these files. With Google Docs, everyone has the same version by default.

It does just about everything a college student would need.

Now lets not go jumping to conclusions :rolleyes:

banquo wrote: »

I'm sorry it took me so long to reply in this thread. I confused my computer with my toothbrush again. Being a typical college student, it is naturally likely that I have never used MS Office beyond typing a letter. I've obviously never had to write an essay. I just write letters to my lecturers explaining that I am an imbecile.Assignments are done in MS Paint. Having edited a small music magazine for 18 months, I wouldn't really know anything about formatting, or what the industry standard programs are. This sure is a nice serif font I'm typing in, nice humanist angle of stress.

Let's take things back off the offensive, shall we?

I am very, very familiar with both programs. Some students might need MS Office. So we don't need to go deleting it.

Google Docs is much cheaper. Think it's a bad idea? Right. I'll just go inform the University of Munich, Yale, and the entire District of Columbia that they're doing it wrong.

Yeah, because all those complex excel functions are just hidden away in special google docs commands.

There's no comparison, it's not a viable money saving solution to strip every pc on campus of MS Office and then post the licenses back to Microsoft.

If they really wanted to do this, they have had the option of OpenOffice all along, which is even more compatible than Google Docs.

JBoyle4eva

I'm sorry, but I'm putting this two cents of mine in here before I read most of the replies.

I'm the last remaining dependant of a single mother, and getting the grant for me was a lifeline. I had no hope of being able to stay through college if I didn't get financial support, and the fact that my county council have decided to award me the top-up grant this year due to my circumstances was the best thing that ever happened to me.

I'm extremely interested in my course. I had a few problems last semester and during the Jan exams that made me fail a good chunk of the first semester, but I'm still 110% committed to my course. I want to get a good degree and to persue a postgrad course in Sociology.

However, if I had to start a postgrad and begin paying tuition fees, I would have to pull out to find work to fund for my masters. But with unemployment at an ever increasing high number, employment is scarce to be found unless you have experience....experience I cannot get by being unemployed.

There's a very high possibility that if, in the hypothetical situation, I don't qualify in 2010 for a grant for my postgrad, that I will be stuck with my BA degree, which in today's economy is good to have, but I'm gonna be told I'd be over-qualified for jobs I would be applying for, as happened to my boyfriend this year and he is now doing a FETAC course trying to persue other things in life.

I can see that third level institutions, and in particular NUIM, are in dire needs of finances. I personally coult not pay fees at all. Even if they were to introduce 10-25% tuitions for grant students, it wouldn't be feasible for me to pay it.

I do think that those that can afford it should pay it, but that's quite a social situation to put ourselves in: "Give to the poorer what we take from the wealthy". I could see this system being quite hierarchial, with fee payers gaining better respect by their academic peers.

IMO, we should being into affect a system into the UK, where you don't pay your fees until you leave college, but you only pay them once in employment and earning enough so that you can afford to. I know, it would be a debt hanging over you, but I'm already in debt from a student loan I had to get to pay for last year as I only got the grant this year (V. long story).

Therefore, I think if we introduce a system where does who graduate, find employment and can afford to pay back their uni/IT, then they should. It's the only way I think it would work, but of course this situation leads to college's waiting for a long while before they get their fees....but to me, it's the only way it should be done.

Ostrom

Christo wrote: »

In my mind fees=less students=lower educauted workforce=less multinational companies=even less money for the government from corporation tax, etc

Not necessarily, I think fees would go a long way toward addressing falling standards and degree delivery quality. Having worked on the other side of the desk for the past two years now it astounds me how bad things are becoming in some places (not as much so in Maynooth fortunately, although take a look at the recent restructuring of senior admin and you will find a few hundred thousand right there).

It worries me to see presentations being given by the various 'VPs' with topics such as 'measuring research output'. Liverpools' case is particularly worrying, as were the slight hints of internal reform at Trinity (cutting arts departments).

It is clear that the entire administration needs a serious overhaul from the bottom up for this to work at all. It is worrying to see potentially very real concerns such as two-tiered admissions and prestige bias left out of the debate, and even more worrying to see absolutely no mention of reform in grant administration.

The significance of fees goes beyond revenue potential and to the very way our universities are run. I am hopeful that fees could put us in a position of greater accountability, with a student body of paying families; less exposure to market-oriented measures of departmental performance and output, demand for direct investment in alternative teaching formats, and a closer eye on the current trend toward 'adjunct faculty'

In this repect, it is saddening to see both sides of the argument glossing over what could be a great opportunity.

On Jboyle's point, I am hopeful that, provided the money remains specifically within higher education (which should be the focus of future protest action), and there is some serious thought put into changing the applications, vetting and eligibility criteria currently in place, the whole system becomes a little bit more accessible.

Beau

Christo wrote: »

In my mind fees=less students=lower educauted workforce=less multinational companies=even less money for the government from corporation tax, etc

To be honest I think it'll have to opposite effect if introduced properly, as has been said already; you pay back when in employment and can afford it and there are still support for people that need extra help through grants or whatever. It couldn't be more attractive. With the registration fee at €1500 it just hinders people from disadvantaged backgrounds getting into college (I realise they can claim it back but if you can't pay it up front).

ontour

Beau wrote: »

To be honest I think it'll have to opposite effect if introduced properly, as has been said already; you pay back when in employment and can afford it and there are still support for people that need extra help through grants or whatever. It couldn't be more attractive. With the registration fee at €1500 it just hinders people from disadvantaged backgrounds getting into college (I realise they can claim it back but if you can't pay it up front).

I would have absolutely no problem with paying higher taxes or repaying the cost when I have the money. I think it would be way fairer then the way it is now, I am 24 and will have to struggle to even find the 1500 euro fees and with the way the critera is now for the grant unless my father does his account for this year I won't get it although I am 24 and clearly won't be recieving money off him. Anyway rant over. College will be a big struggle financially for me so I think if they changed the system fairly it might be fairer. :rolleyes:

pisslips

Why isn't there more scholarship?

Why is there not a scheme for free fees if you finish in the top 10% of your class in every University course and some well respected IT courses?

Surely that would obviously give a fair oppertunity to get free fees and also increase competition.

Also though it must be remebered that college education is not supposed to be vocational or results driven, it's supposed to be an opertunity to gain academic freedom with some direction. It's not actually about job prospects either but I guess there's a trade-off.

And basically they need a better form of means testing, i.e. some 18 year olds are financially idependant of their parents. Also, distance from the institution should be taken into account.

ana ng

banquo wrote: »

I use MS Office only when Google Docs is unavailable. I use Google Docs for the college stuff, Adobe inDesign for the complicated stuff.

Adobe inDesign - is this free now then?:p

LeixlipRed

I'm not a student so I'm obviously slightly removed from the discussion. In my opinion, if full fees are reintroduced it must include an increase in the cut-off point for grants. I'm all in favour of fees for those who can well afford to pay it. The working class and lower middle class should not suffer or there's no bloody point to it all. But any fee change has to be coupled with a complete revamp at admin level. I know from personal experience that there's a hell of a lot of money pissed down the sink in 3rd level institutions. If reform isn't included in this change then nothing will have been achieved and 3 years down the line the universities will be back again with cap in hand looking for top up fees and all sorts of rubbish like that.

barleybooley

Silly banquo posting off topic again

I'm totally for the reintroducing fees. Like, so many people drink away their grant, f**k up in exams, end up going in to some so-called counselor in the college and claims they're depressed, wham, bam have another drink fuelled year courtesy of the college and state. I think some people use college for a bit of craic. Fair enough, some people don't have the sponds to send their sprogs to third level. So many people get grants and they totally don't deserve it, tbh, in my experience some of the best off people in college tend to be ones on a full grant...

There used to be ways and means around the whole fees

1) Work hard academically and earn a scholarship, I know everyone can't but then again not everyone needs their fees paid

2) Take out a loan. I believe, and am open to correction on this, that in England, people are taxed when they start earning to pay back for being in college, apparently it goes on for a few years.

3) GET A JOB! You're 17/18 for crying out loud, time is definitely on your side

I'm lucky enough that my parents pay for everything for me, like, I really don't have to do anything but they factored this into their budget and there are FIVE of us, two gone through the system, one still there (me) and two coming up who are twins so it's a bit of a double whammy for them for when the time comes.

Point I'm making is where there's a will there's a way.

Suck it up, the money has to come form somewhere

mp3guy

barleybooley wrote: »

3) GET A JOB! You're 17/18 for crying out loud, time is definitely on your side

:rolleyes:

You really think this is the time to get a job?

Tristram

I'm in favour of fees run along lines of Swedish/Dutch/Oz system.

barleybooley

mp3guy wrote: »

:rolleyes:

You really think this is the time to get a job?

Sure do, if, unlike most, you're willing to be a minimum wager. Those shelves won't stock themselves you know and I think for you mp3guy opportunity knocks.

mp3guy

I know plenty of people who've been laid off (I was myself in February). There's not enough jobs for everyone in University I'm afraid.

banquo

mp3guy wrote: »

:rolleyes:

You really think this is the time to get a job?

I think it's almost always time to get a job. Whether or not you can get one is a different story, but it's no reason not to try.

Rozabeez

Sadly, he's right. Apparently those shelves CAN stack themselves, for a much cheaper price than staff.

banquo

I worked in Tesco here. It's true, I've seen it happen. The only rule is that you're not allowed to see it happen. You wheel a trolley full of toasters and kettles, park it beside the relevant shelf, and then nip back around the corner and shut your eyes. Magic.

I was sorry to hear that they'd cut 40 jobs. Dunnes cut a bunch as well when they limited their opening hours. That men's clothes shop beside Manor Mills closes for good today (iirc).

On the plus side, Ffragrance (two Fs, not my misspelling) opened there a few days ago. Fingers crossed for them.

Apparently there's a new Londis opening up in Maynooth over the summer.

I also notice that Bank of Ireland keep keeping my money. Recently, every time I lodge a cheque or get paid by direct debit it it takes 4 or 5 days longer for the cash to appear in my account than it used to. Seems they just want it in their account a little longer. Or else the Gardai are watching my account...

<_<
>_>

Either way, Barleybooley is still waiting to be taken out for dinner. She's been very patient

I'm hoping to do an M.Litt here next year (unexpected, I know!) and just can't find any info out there about course fees. Anyone got a link?

Rozabeez

Londis is already open, overpriced ****ers.

LeixlipRed

When I started college in 2002 getting a part time job was simple. You went to Liffey Valley or town or whatever. Wandered around for the day throwing out a few CVs and then you got a job. That is no longer the case. Ridiculous point really. There are jobs out there but certainly not at the frequency and wage level of previous part time student jobs.

barleybooley

Ergo, get a loan, be it from a bank or family member or whatever. It CAN be done. Maynooth gives out thousands in loans, you just apply for one and state your reasons why I believe. Point is it can be done.

pisslips

barleybooley wrote: »

Silly banquo posting off topic again

I'm totally for the reintroducing fees. Like, so many people drink away their grant, f**k up in exams, end up going in to some so-called counselor in the college and claims they're depressed, wham, bam have another drink fuelled year courtesy of the college and state. I think some people use college for a bit of craic. Fair enough, some people don't have the sponds to send their sprogs to third level. So many people get grants and they totally don't deserve it, tbh, in my experience some of the best off people in college tend to be ones on a full grant...

There used to be ways and means around the whole fees

1) Work hard academically and earn a scholarship, I know everyone can't but then again not everyone needs their fees paid

2) Take out a loan. I believe, and am open to correction on this, that in England, people are taxed when they start earning to pay back for being in college, apparently it goes on for a few years.

3) GET A JOB! You're 17/18 for crying out loud, time is definitely on your side

I'm lucky enough that my parents pay for everything for me, like, I really don't have to do anything but they factored this into their budget and there are FIVE of us, two gone through the system, one still there (me) and two coming up who are twins so it's a bit of a double whammy for them for when the time comes.

Point I'm making is where there's a will there's a way.

Suck it up, the money has to come form somewhere

The money does not have to come from somewhere. There are people ,surprisingly(not me), who work 40 hours a week and attend full-time education and then get stuck in the viscious loop of failing, repeating and working more to pay for fees.

If you think a little bit about it, obviously ,you're 'experience' is wrong, that the most well off people get grants, in fact I would say you are completely wrong and the opposite is true in fact. There are always some exceptions of course.

The scholarships? Where are they?
I know people who entered college with 600 points in their CAO, finished top of their class every year and never ahieved less than a first in an exam. They didn't recieve scholarhips, just a few prizes. Don't they deserve a free education?
Wouldn't it make economic sense to give them scholarships?

17/18......why is this a reason to put off education?
More importantly why does someone should someone with money have better access to education than someone without?

Finally as previous posters have said, jobs are not easy to get.

pisslips

barleybooley wrote: »

Ergo, get a loan, be it from a bank or family member or whatever. It CAN be done. Maynooth gives out thousands in loans, you just apply for one and state your reasons why I believe. Point is it can be done.

The loans the college give out, I think are emergency loans and definitely are not near enough to get someone through one year let alone 3-4 that are required to complete a degree.

The bank will give you a loan if you can get a person with good credit history to gaurantore(sp?) it I think.

Sure it's doable everythings doable but should people attempting to improve their potential contribution to society and Ireland be treated like that.
I mean we don't need motorways either or libraries.

mp3guy

barleybooley wrote: »

Ergo, get a loan, be it from a bank or family member or whatever. It CAN be done. Maynooth gives out thousands in loans, you just apply for one and state your reasons why I believe. Point is it can be done.

Loans suck. I don't know why people are happy having something like that looming over them.

Beau

mp3guy wrote: »

Loans suck. I don't know why people are happy having something like that looming over them.

+1

nothing

Am I right in thinking that when the fees were originally aboloished, there was an agreement struck that students would get free fees but would not be able to get the dole? Surely if this is the case, then if they bring back fees, then they would have to allow students to get the dole again?? Esp considering how hard it is to get a job these days.

I'm kind of on the fence on this issue, I can see why the gov think it would be a good idea to reintroduce fees, but it won't do the colleges any good, since they won't gain any other monies, just replace fees paid by the gov with fees paid by the students, and probably less students, so in actuality they'll have less incoming funds...

banquo

mp3guy wrote: »

Loans suck. I don't know why people are happy having something like that looming over them.

Best of luck getting a car/mortgage.

mp3guy

banquo wrote: »

Best of luck getting a car/mortgage.

Do you genuinely think that I didn't know the average working class person needs a loan for those?

banquo

I think most people need a loan at some stage or another to invest in something, be it a car, property or - in many countries - advanced education.

Not just working class or average people either. Who the hell buys a house in cash.

Some countries have great student loan schemes. Country is out of money, we may have to bring them in. Also, you'd know what you were getting into so you'd be able to plan for it. Very few 17/18yos are going to have a bad credit record.

If a mature student with a few dings on their credit rating wants to apply then they can work for a few years - as they probably already are doing - and save the money, or most of it and get a small loan.

Mature students with a terrible credit history probably wouldn't get the loan they'd need for college, which is no different from not getting a car or a house that they can't afford.

Having said that, the credit crunch is upon us. If banks can't give out more loans then the Govt might have to do it, which I wouldn't be wild about. Though it works well enough in Canada.

I still don't think that having to pay more for college is entirely a bad thing. It could make students think twice about what they want to do - the state pays a lot for all the first-year dropouts who manage to swing a free year in another course. I think that it could also raise the standard of education by attracting students who really and genuinely want to do the course. As I've said I'm in music here and there are a lot of people who had the attitude of 'I've loads of CDs, reckon I'll do music', but who have no real heart in it. Friends in DIT tell me the same thing about their course. With fees come scholarships, and we can start rewarding hard work and brains from a younger age.

I agree with Efla too. It could make Universities much more accountable as to where they spend their money. To get the students and their money, they've to offer better facilities and do better by word of mouth. A little competition never hurt any industry.

banquo

pisslips wrote: »

There are people ,surprisingly(not me), who work 40 hours a week and attend full-time education and then get stuck in the viscious loop of failing, repeating and working more to pay for fees.

I worked 40 hours a week in Tesco last year. Worked my ****ing ass off. I had a massive chart on my kitchen wall with every lecture and marks gotten in assignments so I always knew exactly where I was. I couldn't even afford to take time off work to do my christmas exams, so I had to repeat them in autumn. I was paying 105 a week rent, 100 on food and other expenses and 100 for my two bank loans (one for full tuition fees, one for a piano).

On top of that, I study music. The music dept here doesn't 'do' moodle. Almost no notes, or even assignments or essay dates. We had 16 lectures a week in 2nd year - I was at 22 in the whole year and still got a 2:1. So even though it's tough if you really want it you can put in the work somehow.

If you think a little bit about it, obviously ,you're 'experience' is wrong, that the most well off people get grants, in fact I would say you are completely wrong and the opposite is true in fact. There are always some exceptions of course.

pisslips wrote:

If you think a little bit about it, obviously ,you're 'experience' is wrong, that the most well off people get grants, in fact I would say you are completely wrong and the opposite is true in fact. There are always some exceptions of course.

I don't think she was saying that the most well off people get grants, but rather those who get grants are the most well off!

Also, what are you basing your opinion on when you say that she's completely wrong? She has some experience with it. I can also vouch that she knows at least one student who gets the full whack grant of 6,700e *points rapidly at self* and doesn't waste it on booze. I'm grateful for my grant - I wouldn't be here today without it, and the same is true of a lot of people reading this - but the truth is there are so many who abuse it openly.

pisslips wrote:

The scholarships? Where are they?
I know people who entered college with 600 points in their CAO, finished top of their class every year and never ahieved less than a first in an exam. They didn't recieve scholarhips, just a few prizes. Don't they deserve a free education?
Wouldn't it make economic sense to give them scholarships?

AFAIK there aren't any real scholarships since education is already free. A few colleges give out a few treats and prizes in return for CAO points. I know DCU give out free accommodation for athletic scholarships.

pisslips wrote: »

17/18......why is this a reason to put off education?
More importantly why does someone should someone with money have better access to education than someone without
Finally as previous posters have said, jobs are not easy to get.

Best thing I ever did was not go to college straight away. Got a full time job in a crummy little newsagents instead to save the money. Also, I got all the partying, drink and random sex that would have happened in college out of my system. I was a responsible little bugger in 1st year

17/18 is so so young, and a lot of people don't know what they want to do in life. They might have a vague idea but yet they feel like they ''should'' go to college straight away because it's the safe thing to do. Also they're so young that they're not ready for it yet. Not everyone, a large minority. That's why the first year drop out rate is so high.

pisslips wrote:

The money does not have to come from somewhere.

Heh. I'll, eh, assume that was a typo

tomister

ok i decided to give my two cents on this,

first off i get half a grant from my county council a year because my dad is permanently out of work due to illness, my sister has a disability and there are a total of 9 in my family. i currently hold down a job and have one loan (for my car), if fees were introduced i would have to either;

• sell the car (which is requird to get to work)
• take on another job
• take money off my parents (my mother works a ton of overtime as it is)
• drop out

i think that if fees were introduced then it should be done by paying it back once we start earning enough to pay it back through tax but once its paid that tax should be stopped because we all pay for our own but thats it.

I know its hard to get a job at the moment but if people could get one and save what they earn because i can see the fees being reintroduced in 2010 as forecasted and it would mean that some people wouldn't have to drop out!

P.S. sorry about the elections Banquo i voted for you

pisslips

banquo wrote: »

I worked 40 hours a week in Tesco last year. Worked my ****ing ass off. I had a massive chart on my kitchen wall with every lecture and marks gotten in assignments so I always knew exactly where I was. I couldn't even afford to take time off work to do my christmas exams, so I had to repeat them in autumn. I was paying 105 a week rent, 100 on food and other expenses and 100 for my two bank loans (one for full tuition fees, one for a piano).

On top of that, I study music. The music dept here doesn't 'do' moodle. Almost no notes, or even assignments or essay dates. We had 16 lectures a week in 2nd year - I was at 22 in the whole year and still got a 2:1. So even though it's tough if you really want it you can put in the work somehow.

If you think a little bit about it, obviously ,you're 'experience' is wrong, that the most well off people get grants, in fact I would say you are completely wrong and the opposite is true in fact. There are always some exceptions of course.




I don't think she was saying that the most well off people get grants, but rather those who get grants are the most well off!

Also, what are you basing your opinion on when you say that she's completely wrong? She has some experience with it. I can also vouch that she knows at least one student who gets the full whack grant of 6,700e *points rapidly at self* and doesn't waste it on booze. I'm grateful for my grant - I wouldn't be here today without it, and the same is true of a lot of people reading this - but the truth is there are so many who abuse it openly.




AFAIK there aren't any real scholarships since education is already free. A few colleges give out a few treats and prizes in return for CAO points. I know DCU give out free accommodation for athletic scholarships.



Best thing I ever did was not go to college straight away. Got a full time job in a crummy little newsagents instead to save the money. Also, I got all the partying, drink and random sex that would have happened in college out of my system. I was a responsible little bugger in 1st year

17/18 is so so young, and a lot of people don't know what they want to do in life. They might have a vague idea but yet they feel like they ''should'' go to college straight away because it's the safe thing to do. Also they're so young that they're not ready for it yet. Not everyone, a large minority. That's why the first year drop out rate is so high.



Heh. I'll, eh, assume that was a typo

First of all, I'd like to point out that eventually you will reach a point where you find your academic limitations where things are no longer mostly intuitive(probably in final year or postgrad) and then working 40 hours a week won't be viable anymore.

By, 'the money does not have to come from somewhere', I meant that, this confident attitude is not well-founded anymore. It is entirely possible that ,surprisingly, someone will not have access to funds not even through a loan or a family member or a job. Surprisingly, it is possible to be genuinly broke and only have enough money to eat and sleep and not be elligible for a loan, therefore,''the money does not have to come from somewhere".

As far as your personal experience goes, well done etc...

However, it should not be the case that 17/18 yr olds should take a couple of years out to work before college. It must be remembered here that we are in competition with every other country in the world in a global knowledge economy. This more than anything else will make Ireland prosper.

So, John Godel and John Hamilton and John Dirac, go to Princeton, Trinity and Cambridge respectively. Unfortunately young hamilton has to go and work in a shop for 3 years because he can't afford to go to college and there's no scholarships either. Who loses out?......Ireland.

Why should a 17/18 year old have to go out and see what it's like to work, to start at the bottom. This is archaic in my opinion, it's not nessasary at all.

hypersquirrel

If they don't introduce fees then they will have to make cut backs in the quality of the courses. Personally I would prefer to pay for a degree that is of a high quality then go through a course that has made cut backs in quality leaving me with a degree that is completely worthless. My fees were €5,000 this year and I've coped by working my ass off in a dreadful job. I got held up in three aremd robberies but I did it because I needed the money. My Dad is self-employed and has found himself with no work anymore but I'm just above grant level. They can't afford to bail me out but I want to keep my education going and I will find a way regardless. It's not as hard as everyone makes out. You just can't afford to go out and get hammered, you buy whatever food you can get on budget.

PrivateEye

If they don't introduce fees then they will have to make cut backs in the quality of the courses

http://www.independent.ie/education/latest-news/bestpaid-university-president-gets-836460000-more-than-others-1428003.html

^Money problems....
*Old report, in some cases things have changed (By which I mean Presidents, not practices)

They keep raising the registration fee and at the same time they cutback services. They've got huge rises in recent years, its no secret theres backroom mayhem at the minute across the board. UCD workers going on strike shows this (Along with TCD, NCAD and DCU) Money is going to the wrong places.

They can't afford to bail me out

Three armed robberies? Maybe if you were a bank instead of working in one (just presuming :pac:) , Fianna Fail might be nicer on the bail out front. I understand completely where you're coming from on the Dad front too. My Da is 20 years in the Fire Service and instead of seeing a single pay rise, he's actually losing 10% of his income to an unfair levy. Saying 'they dont want to bail me out' doesn't justify it at all though. Its unfair that why should pay for the mistakes of others. Making it harder for families like yours (JUST above a grant) is not the solution, these are the families already under attack.

...and as for paying it back, when you work- you pay tax. The more you earn, the more you pay (Not a Leaving Cert economics lesson,promise) A well educated workforce pays for itself over time. Paying a graduate tax ON TOP of the tax I'm paying on my income from the job I got/am doing as a result of my third level degree? No thanks.



----

Fair play to you though, I see where you're coming at it from and I've great respect for anybody like yourself who works their way through (currently doing it myself!)

PrivateEye

On a sidenote, USI are actually 'doing stuff'

"The advice states clearly that students who have already applied for and accepted a place this coming September are deemed to be doing so under the existing free-fees policy" said USI president Shane Kelly.


"We will take legal action if necessary to ensure that students enrolling in September will not be penalised."

This would take the form of an injunction or, if necessary, a test case in the courts next year.

In the meantime, the union is stepping up its campaign against the ending of free third-level education for all. Further demonstrations are expected.

-Indo.

http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/ideygbeygb/
^USI occupation at Dept. of Environment.

The USI stepping things is a more than welcome development me thinks. Was nice to see their banner on the ICTU march too.

hypersquirrel

PrivateEye wrote: »

Three armed robberies? Maybe if you were a bank instead of working in one (just presuming :pac:) , )

God I wish. No I just work in a corner shop. But we have a reputation for being an easy target.